Another boring legal case LOL

[richalisoviejo]

40 years suspended license or 5 years in prison? Which sentence is more harsh?

(Leaving the name out) walked into the District Court with a Supreme Court ruling that said her 40-year loss of driving privileges from a negligent homicide conviction was too onerous. She walked out in handcuffs, with a five-year prison term tacked onto her original sentence.

(Blank) had admitted guilt for the deaths of four members of a family from So. Cal. in a car collision on Dec. 28, 2008. District Court Judge (Blank) gave her a 40-year suspended sentence for the four counts of felony negligent homicide, along with 2,000 hours of community service, $200-a-month restitution payments for 20 years and supervised probation. He also suspended her driving privileges for the entire 40 years.

(Blank) appealed the driving suspension to the Supreme Court. In April, the justices ruled 5-2 that the distict judge had exceeded his discretion in crafting a sentence that didn't reflect her law-abiding nature and would hurt her ability to make a living and pay restitution. The high court sent the case back to the District Judge for resentencing.

Issue: No jail time was originally imposed. Upon winning an appeal and going back before the trial court for resentencing, the defendant is now sentenced to 5 years in prison. How can the judge justify imposing a term of imprisonment when no term of imprisonment was imposed the first time he sentenced her? Is the judge being vindictive? Do you think the new sentence will stand up on appeal?

 

[Candy]

One question....Was she driving under the influence? I'm surprised that they got a 5-2 vote on that at all.

 

[dmmj]

while I am all for punishing idiot drivers to the fullest extent and beyond, I honestly dont see how the judge can do this to her, make no mistake I think she deserves a very very harsh sentence, but I dont see how the judge can do this. makes no sense to me.

 

[desertsss]

What makes me mad.....is that my "uncle" had a hit and run, and he got nothing. DUI, drunk as a skunk, and they gave him probation. Lost his license for 2 years. I think he served like 3 months or something (because wasn't first strike). This guy is the biggest peice of crap, hit a little girl who was riding her bike ON THE SIDE OF THE ROAD! As of now, he stays at home, drinking and doing drugs, mooching off my aunt. And they are gonna give this lady 5 yrs.
I assume the judge thought 5 yrs in jail was better than 40 yrs without driving. That's crazy rich.

 

[Jas2Cats]

Well, she did kill 4 people. You indicate she admitted guilt to felony negligent homicide. Looking at that, I'd say 5 years is not enough.

But, I think what you are pointing out, is that there was no jail time initially, so, is it fair to put it on when the drivers license part is overturned, and, will it hold up? Unfortunately, I doubt that it will be upheld.

I think the jail sentence is more harsh, because, there is really no way to stop her from driving for 40 years (how many people are out there driving without a license now anyway?), and, unless her field of work requires driving, it won't stop her from working.

 

[richalisoviejo]

To answer Candy’s question:

Yes she was driving under the influence and also on prescription medication that was not to be taking with alcohol.

In my opinion, the sentencing judge is vindictive and unreasonable and acting in an unconstitutional manner.

Imposing a more severe sentence may only occur in cases wherein newly acquired objective information that was not presented during the previous proceeding justifies an increased sentence. Case law, different situations but the judicial analysis remains the same; North Carolina v. Pearce, 395 U.S. 711, 725 (1969); United States v. Goodwin, 457 U.S. 368, 374 (1982). Isn't the imposition of 5 years in prison when no prison sentence was previously imposed an increased sentence? What new, objective information did the trial court have at the resentencing that justified the increased sentence?

Here's what the judge said:

"The harm here is much deeper and continues beyond the expectations of the family, and frankly, the court," Judge” said in pronouncing the new sentence. "In the span of my life, I do not recall accidents as serious as this that take away four members of a family. It appears in this instance to require more punishment."

The judge knew that four people were killed by the defendant's negligence and that their loss was substantial to their friends and family the first time he sentenced the defendant. That same fact is suddenly worse the second time he sentences her? What new, objective information justifies an increased punishment?

Putting aside any moral condemnations you or I may have against the defendant; do you think the judge is acting in a constitutional manner by giving the defendant more punishment upon resentencing? Can’t happen, she will however remain in prison 4 to six month until this goes back to court, then she will be a free woman.

 

[Candy]

Rich, could you please explaing how it's unconstitutional? What were the guildlines in sentencing?

 

[richalisoviejo]

Rich, could you please explaing how it's unconstitutional? What were the guildlines in sentencing?

Rulings by the Supreme Count: North Carolina v. Pearce, 395 U.S. 711, 725 (1969); United States v. Goodwin, 457 U.S. 368, 374 (1982).

Citation of Authority:

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=395&invol=711

Applying the holding in Pearce, due process of law requires that vindictiveness against a defendant for having successfully appealed an unreasonable condition on a suspended sentence must play no part in the sentence he receives upon resentencing. Due process of law requires that a defendant be freed of any apprehension of retaliatory motivation on the part of the sentencing judge. Accordingly, the reasons for imposition of a more severe sentence upon resentencing must affirmatively appear in the record and must be based on new and objective information concerning the defendant's identifiable conduct that was not available at the original sentencing proceeding.

The judge never followed the guidelines for felony negligent homicide. Which could have landed her 5 to 10 years in prison. Instead he continued the 40-year prohibition on driving in Ca.

 

[Candy]

So let me get this straight. #1 The judge issued a sentence outside of the guildlines which are 5-10 years? #2 How do you show or prove vindictiveness on the part of the judge when he gave her five years which is on the low end of the sentencing guildlines? #3 It seems the judge should have recused himself to advoid any controversary and future legal hassle at the tax payers expense.

 

[richalisoviejo]

The jury was instructed to come back with the a guilty or not guilty verdict, of course she was guilty, Obviously the judge no matter how elevated his motives broke the law and this sentence will also be overturned.

Should the defendant be penalized for exercising her due process right to appeal an unreasonable condition placed upon her? If the high court ruled the sentence unconstitutuinal. The distinction that the court during the same term may amend a sentence so as to mitigate the punishment, but not so as to increase it, is not based upon the ground that the court has lost control of the judgment in the latter case. Punishment for the same offense is in violation of the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution. Double jeopardy? The ban on double jeopardy has its roots deep in the history of occidental jurisprudence.

 

[Candy]

So, how is returning to the original parameters of the sentencing conditions unreasonable and how does it constitute double jeopardy, if her guilt was not rescinded. Lastly, how do we know she is being penalized for her appeal vs. her guilt, especially if the amended sentence was or would have been appropriate under the original sentencing guidelines. How can you compare an illegal sentence to a sentence that is within the guidelines? I am not being critical, just want to know the legal logic or is that an oxymoron (sorry, just couldn't resist entertaining myself).

 

[richalisoviejo]

A right to rescind must be exercised promptly or within a reasonable time after the discovery of the facts that authorize the right. A reasonable time is defined by the circumstances of the particular case. She was penalized by the sentence by the judge and not in a reasonable time.

How would the defendant precious to improve her opportunity, or for that matter to pay restitution, when she is precluded from driving from her remote home to any prospective place of employment?

How does the reversal of an unreasonable condition placed upon a suspended sentence justify the imposition of a jail sentence? On resentencing, the trial court not only imposed a jail sentence of 5 years that it did not originally impose, the supreme court revised the unreasonable condition.

If a lower court trys the defendant and the imposed sentenced is overturned by a higher court “Supreme court” the defendant cannot be retired under the same offence that’s where double jeapody comes into play. Now CA supreme court sent the defendant back to the lower court for resentencing, however prison time was not an option the judge proposed to the jury.

Now can I go to bed now. I’m tired. LOL
Candy you do know how to debate.

 

[Candy]

A right to rescind must be exercised promptly or within a reasonable time after the discovery of the facts that authorize the right. A reasonable time is defined by the circumstances of the particular case. She was penalized by the sentence by the judge and not in a reasonable time.

How would the defendant precious to improve her opportunity, or for that matter to pay restitution, when she is precluded from driving from her remote home to any prospective place of employment?

How does the reversal of an unreasonable condition placed upon a suspended sentence justify the imposition of a jail sentence? On resentencing, the trial court not only imposed a jail sentence of 5 years that it did not originally impose, the supreme court revised the unreasonable condition.

If a lower court trys the defendant and the imposed sentenced is overturned by a higher court “Supreme court” the defendant cannot be retired under the same offence that’s where double jeapody comes into play. Now CA supreme court sent the defendant back to the lower court for resentencing, however prison time was not an option the judge proposed to the jury.

Now can I go to bed now. I’m tired. LOL
Candy you do know how to debate.

Thank you.

 

[Stazz]

Aha thats interesting - good one Candy haha.

I love your stories Rich! This one is a weird one - I can't understand how the judge could be allowed to add to her already given sentence of her license revoked, community service etc etc.