Welcome to the Prison Talk Online Community! Take a Minute and Sign Up Today!






Go Back   Prison Talk > RESOURCE CENTER > Prison Legislation & Laws
Register Entertainment FAQ Calendar Mark Forums Read

Prison Legislation & Laws Discuss and learn about pending legislation or changes in laws that affect various prisons and institutions

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 12-03-2016, 12:01 AM
Ib1/2's Avatar
Ib1/2 Ib1/2 is offline
Registered User
 

Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: TN
Posts: 72
Thanks: 2
Thanked 50 Times in 29 Posts
Default ""He got life without parole for pot. And was just denied for clemency" """

"""Ferrell Scott was sentenced to life in prison for possession and conspiracy to distribute marijuana, a drug that’s now legal in many states and turning a handsome profit for the (primarily white) pot industry. Scott, like many nonviolent drug offenders serving long sentences, is black. Without any chance at parole, despite an exemplary behavior record, he appealed to President Obama for clemency. He found out that his bid for clemency had been denied when he got an email about “bad news” from a friend. Thinking something bad had happened to his 93-year-old mother, he called home. His daughter answered, crying, and told him the news.

Read the entire article HERE.

Edited by Admin to conform with PTO's Copyright Rules

Last edited by patchouli; 12-03-2016 at 07:28 AM.. Reason: Copyright Rules
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
  #2  
Old 12-03-2016, 05:54 AM
CenTexLyn CenTexLyn is offline
Registered User
 

Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: TX-US
Posts: 14,165
Thanks: 524
Thanked 9,881 Times in 5,550 Posts
Default

I hate how all of these touchy-feely stories leave out important elements of WHY clemency or parole denials likely occurred, such as the fact that Scott was NOT a first-time drug offender but instead actually has history related to drugs dating back to the 80's.

He had a State sentence for multiple counts of cocaine-related conduct out of Dallas County (possession with intent to deliver). He got fifteen years on each count, which back then meant less than two calendar years would be served prior to release.

In 1995, he gets picked up in Dallas on a weapons charge (you know, that pesky little law that says felons shouldn't have firearms that Scott chose to ignore, especially while still on a supervised status). The court actually gave him the gift of a deferred disposition that he would later screw up.

In 2000, he decides to jump bond in Lamar County. It appears that might have been associated with a misdemeanor pot charge that stemmed from a routine traffic stop by DPS.

He had a federal case in 2000 when he entered VA premises under the influence of alcohol. He got the gift of a conditional dismissal, with the condition being that he commit no similar offenses.

During 2002, he got charged with a federal theft offense and received a 30 month federal sentence.

In 2007, he AGAIN gets popped with a weapon and did so in a County that actually uses enhancement paragraphs...he got 50 years out of Williamson County when he stupidly went to the jury on punishment.

Count I of the federal indictment related to the present sentence discusses an amount in excess of 1000 kg of pot...more than a ton. LET THAT SINK IN FOR A MOMENT! This is not a simple non-violent offense nor is it even remotely consistent or analogous to those who are licensed in States where it has been legalized. Oh, and about that life sentence...again it came from a jury. He CHOSE to reject a plea offer.

I could have sympathy for someone in this situation if it was 1) a first-time offense and 2) a quantity that did not openly display a disdain for the rule of law. But this is not a case of someone with no criminal history trying to take the product of one or two plants to a medical patient. Instead it is a career felon who has a lengthy history of drug and weapons charges and who will still owe the State of Texas supervision for many more years as a result of his Williamson County weapons charge.

But I guess facts don't make for a good story...
Reply With Quote
The Following 18 Users Say Thank You to CenTexLyn For This Useful Post:
coachy1 (12-12-2016), D.Sullivan (09-29-2017), Dobbie_Elf (12-03-2016), hamsa (12-03-2016), JJReed (02-04-2017), kathyradellvn (12-17-2016), kevscousin (12-12-2016), Lordbew/us (10-27-2017), MizzyMuffling (12-12-2016), NewTexGal (12-03-2016), nimuay (12-12-2016), priceam (12-12-2016), Revenwyn (12-13-2016), safran (12-04-2016), Sarianna (12-04-2016), Texasflower08 (09-30-2017), WG406 (12-04-2016), yourself (12-03-2016)
  #3  
Old 12-03-2016, 10:40 AM
yourself yourself is offline
attorney
 

Join Date: May 2010
Location: around
Posts: 11,443
Thanks: 4,015
Thanked 19,877 Times in 7,143 Posts
Default

Here's the other thing, especially when it comes to the fact that many states are legalizing, if not for medical uses, then for recreational uses - it was still illegal at the time. He knew it was illegal at the time, and he chose to do it.

Elliot Ness, the DEA dude responsible for bringing down a lot of Chicago alcohol during prohibition was once asked what he'd do if Prohibition was overturned. He said that he'd probably go out and get a drink. The law is pretty black and white, especially back then when there was a significant war on drugs. He knew he was moving massive amounts of pot. To handle a ton of pot is a huge industry. We're not talking about what fits in your pocket, or your glove compartment, or even your trunk (that's around 55 lbs of pot). We are talking about a warehouse.

Now, if the guy were an advocate for the legalization of marijuana the same way that Dr. Kevorkian was an advocate for physician assisted suicide, and he was growing and harvesting that massive amount and moving it to lower level distributors (he was not the on the street salesman), then he knew he was going to get hit with a ton of charges and do a ton of time. Then there's some validity to his argument. But he was a mid to high level distributor who was living the high life off the proceeds of his distributions. He was doing the whole thing for the money, not the political statement which, back then, was never persuasive as there was no traction for the issue. We are talking the "war on drugs" in the 90s and 00s, and he was playing hard through those years.

If he wanted to be involved in marijuana distribution back then, he could have gone and lived in Amsterdam and sent money to his favorite PAC dealing with pot legalization. But that wouldn't have paid near as much. He could have moved after his first bust. He could have rolled over when he was busted with an amount he knew would be a life sentence. Instead, he had a trial, rolled the dice, and came up with craps (easy to do when that's all you have to begin with).

Now he wants us to buy the politics card. Yeah. Right. Let him out, and let's see how long it is before he is caught with a gun or pot, in a jurisdiction where pot still isn't legal. While the amount of violence associated with pot isn't as much as it used to be, it's still there. So are his contacts, his drug routes, and everything else necessary to bring him back to the life he obviously prefers.

If he wants a joint, he should have moved to Amsterdam. Or waited two decades or more until it was legal.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 12-03-2016, 10:41 AM
yourself yourself is offline
attorney
 

Join Date: May 2010
Location: around
Posts: 11,443
Thanks: 4,015
Thanked 19,877 Times in 7,143 Posts
Default

And if you can't get clemency for pot from Obama, there's something really messed up in your background
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to yourself For This Useful Post:
CenTexLyn (12-03-2016), MizzyMuffling (12-12-2016)
  #5  
Old 12-03-2016, 11:19 AM
Minor activist Minor activist is offline
Registered User
 

Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: WA USA
Posts: 1,289
Thanks: 798
Thanked 1,088 Times in 604 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by yourself View Post
And if you can't get clemency for pot from Obama, there's something really messed up in your background
I've read that the clemency bureaucracy isn't working smoothly enough for everyone to get decisions on the merits. I don't actually know. It's plausible.

BTW it's not just Federal. Dale Wayne Green is set to grow old and die in Angola. There is something messed up in his background. He has priors for simple robbery and attempted possession of cocaine. So he was vulnerable to Lousisana's habitual criminal law.

He was arrested, prosecuted as a career criminal, and given a pine box sentence for introducing an undercover cop to a weed dealer. He got a $10 cut from the transaction. The dealer walked.
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Minor activist For This Useful Post:
fbopnomore (12-03-2016), marie8899 (12-26-2016)
  #6  
Old 12-03-2016, 06:30 PM
CenTexLyn CenTexLyn is offline
Registered User
 

Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: TX-US
Posts: 14,165
Thanks: 524
Thanked 9,881 Times in 5,550 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Minor activist View Post
I've read that the clemency bureaucracy isn't working smoothly enough for everyone to get decisions on the merits. I don't actually know. It's plausible.
There are no merits to clemency for Scott here. Multiple incarcerations for drugs, weapons and interstate theft dating to the 80's plus the balance of a 50-year sentence on the State-level weapons charge and even the most staunch liberal is unable to find a rational basis to commute the federal sentence.

Let's face reality...if the POTUS *DID* commute the sentence, he wasn't going to be breathing fresh air. He would be going to Huntsville to be processed back into TDCJ where he would likely be in custody for AT LEAST another decade before the Board seriously considered a release. And then he remains on supervision until close to 2060 (although a revocation would undoubtedly occur long before then if the past is a predictor of his future). Some people simply cannot stand life in the real world.

I did find it ironic that he had a Minutes entry showing on PACER from prior to the federal trial that he was going to commit suicide if he got life. Yet he is still amongst the breathing...

Perhaps the time for him to have thought about the things he is missing with his kid was BEFORE he got wrapped up in a major drug smuggling operation...

As to the Louisiana example, I again have little sympathy. Once you have gone to prison and yet STILL choose to commit more felony offenses, especially of a different nature of offense, then you were begging for consequence to attach. Amount of potential profit on the drug transaction is a moot point...
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to CenTexLyn For This Useful Post:
Dobbie_Elf (12-03-2016), Texasflower08 (09-30-2017)
  #7  
Old 12-03-2016, 09:58 PM
Dobbie_Elf Dobbie_Elf is offline
Banned
 

Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Reality of a Female Felon
Posts: 221
Thanks: 322
Thanked 170 Times in 102 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ib1/2 View Post
"""Ferrell Scott was sentenced to life in prison for possession and conspiracy to distribute marijuana, a drug that’s now legal in many states and turning a handsome profit for the (primarily white) pot industry. Scott, like many nonviolent drug offenders serving long sentences, is black. Without any chance at parole, despite an exemplary behavior record, he appealed to President Obama for clemency. He found out that his bid for clemency had been denied when he got an email about “bad news” from a friend. Thinking something bad had happened to his 93-year-old mother, he called home. His daughter answered, crying, and told him the news.

Read the entire article HERE.

Edited by Admin to conform with PTO's Copyright Rules
I'm sorry..but, why is it *by certain people* ok to always point out that a crime was committed by a black person just to satisfy a white. So,therefore the black person who is somehow IMO BTW always purportedly an angel unless selling those "darn drugs" to the white people?. I'm sorry that is because that excuse is old and a quite frankly? Its wrong,morally,ethically and most of all LEGALLY.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 12-11-2016, 07:46 PM
rick57 rick57 is offline
Registered User
 

Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Illinois
Posts: 8
Thanks: 0
Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Default

And to think

If instead of dealing in a large amount of Pot he instead shot someone he probably would have gotten a lighter sentence.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 12-11-2016, 09:02 PM
CenTexLyn CenTexLyn is offline
Registered User
 

Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: TX-US
Posts: 14,165
Thanks: 524
Thanked 9,881 Times in 5,550 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rick57 View Post
And to think

If instead of dealing in a large amount of Pot he instead shot someone he probably would have gotten a lighter sentence.
And to think...

If he was not a career criminal and had taken the plea offer, he probably, nay WOULD have gotten a lighter sentence.

Pro-Tip: when you CONTINUE to commit felony offenses, then you are, at some point in time, likely going to get the invitation to spend the rest of your life in a custodial status.
Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to CenTexLyn For This Useful Post:
coachy1 (12-12-2016), MizzyMuffling (12-12-2016), nimuay (12-12-2016)
  #10  
Old 12-11-2016, 10:01 PM
rick57 rick57 is offline
Registered User
 

Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Illinois
Posts: 8
Thanks: 0
Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Default

If only the world was that black and white we wouldn't need lawyers.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to rick57 For This Useful Post:
Juniesgal (04-29-2017)
  #11  
Old 12-11-2016, 10:10 PM
CenTexLyn CenTexLyn is offline
Registered User
 

Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: TX-US
Posts: 14,165
Thanks: 524
Thanked 9,881 Times in 5,550 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rick57 View Post
If only the world was that black and white we wouldn't need lawyers.
Don't be an idiot with multiple arrests for large quantities of narcotics and weapons and you won't need one either...

In case you missed it, his criminal history is summarized above...he had MULTIPLE occasions to have had something other than a life sentence.
Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to CenTexLyn For This Useful Post:
coachy1 (12-12-2016), kathyradellvn (12-17-2016), MizzyMuffling (12-12-2016)
  #12  
Old 12-11-2016, 10:28 PM
rick57 rick57 is offline
Registered User
 

Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Illinois
Posts: 8
Thanks: 0
Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Default

From what I am reading from your posts you are taking a narrow perspective on my comments. I am only pointing out the disproportionate sentencing on drug charges relative to violent crimes, many individuals are serving a life sentence on similar drug charges without the criminal background that Mr. Scott has. And contrary to what you may believe you absolutely have to have a lawyer to defend you in a criminal trial it would be nonsensical to believe otherwise.
If this has confused you I am sorry. But I am not on here to to back and forth with anonymous poster that seems to have a need to drive a point home even to the level of being negative. So you take care of yourself and have a nice evening.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to rick57 For This Useful Post:
Juniesgal (09-28-2017)
  #13  
Old 12-12-2016, 08:43 AM
yourself yourself is offline
attorney
 

Join Date: May 2010
Location: around
Posts: 11,443
Thanks: 4,015
Thanked 19,877 Times in 7,143 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Minor activist View Post
I've read that the clemency bureaucracy isn't working smoothly enough for everyone to get decisions on the merits. I don't actually know. It's plausible.

.

There's been an ABA associated project dealing with these types of cases since 2014, when Obama indicated he was interested in reviewing the most egregious variation on the over sentencing for drugs thing. While getting volunteer lawyers to commit to a case or two hasn't always been easy, the project has managed to get thousands of petitions before the president for review and clemency.

It's the smoothest system we've had ever.

(oh, and I've posted links before for the attorneys you know - all it takes is a couple more attorneys to take a case or two and that's a couple more lives lived outside the walls of federal prisons. The cases aren't complex, the time required is minimal, you get continuing ed for the training, so win win)

As a result thousands of clemency petitions have been heard and granted by Obama. He may hit 10,000 before he leaves the white house.

It's just too bad the apparatus for this will go the way of the dodo when Obama does leave and the few Clemencies granted by Trump will be to big business guys who got caught, or he may sell clemency. The Obama type of review and clemency - nope. Not from a guy who thinks the Central Park 5 are guilty despite DNA. Not when his goal will be to lock as many people up as possible to increase the use of private prisons
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to yourself For This Useful Post:
marie8899 (12-23-2016), MizzyMuffling (12-12-2016)
  #14  
Old 12-12-2016, 08:54 AM
yourself yourself is offline
attorney
 

Join Date: May 2010
Location: around
Posts: 11,443
Thanks: 4,015
Thanked 19,877 Times in 7,143 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rick57 View Post
From what I am reading from your posts you are taking a narrow perspective on my comments. I am only pointing out the disproportionate sentencing on drug charges relative to violent crimes, many individuals are serving a life sentence on similar drug charges without the criminal background that Mr. Scott has. And contrary to what you may believe you absolutely have to have a lawyer to defend you in a criminal trial it would be nonsensical to believe otherwise.
If this has confused you I am sorry. But I am not on here to to back and forth with anonymous poster that seems to have a need to drive a point home even to the level of being negative. So you take care of yourself and have a nice evening.
I love it when defendants decide they can do a better job defending themselves.

I also love it when a defendant, despite all the advice and evidence you give him, decides to roll the dice, take it to trial, and then find himself at the bad end of a stacked sentence for every single charge the State threw at him.

Look, the guy didn't get caught with a small amount of pot. He didn't get caught with a small amount of pot once or twice. He didn't do what a lot of guys do when they get caught with life sentence quantities and beyond of drugs.

Yes, sentencing isn't fair. At the time the guy was sentenced, it was pretty mandatory pursuant to the sentencing guidelines what he was going to get. It has only been subsequent to that that judges have been given the discretion to depart from the sentencing guidelines, taking into account mitigating factors. But back then, pot was considered a gateway drug, and marketed that way to the average citizen to get those extreme penalties.

Look, we're talking the Obama administration. We're talking Obama's clemency policy in the federal system. We're talking a ton of lawyers working on clemency packets for those who meet the basic requirements for the clemency program - long term sentenced people serving an much longer (ridiculously longer) sentence for drugs with no write-ups for years who want to give clemency a shot. There are investigators and paralegals going through decades of court records and prison records finding these cases. There are volunteer attorneys dealing with these cases, getting them in front of Obama. This effort has been unprecedented. Pot cases, crack cases (especially when the disparity between crack cociane and powder cocaine was huge in sentencing, and mostly race based), and a variety of other drug cases are going before Obama, and he's actually looking. He's looking to grant clemency, not deny it. Again, if it was denied by Obama, there was good reason.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to yourself For This Useful Post:
joybubby (02-07-2017)
  #15  
Old 09-28-2017, 08:39 PM
Juniesgal Juniesgal is offline
Registered User
 

Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: green Bay, wi
Posts: 42
Thanks: 30
Thanked 38 Times in 17 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by yourself View Post
I love it when defendants decide they can do a better job defending themselves.

I also love it when a defendant, despite all the advice and evidence you give him, decides to roll the dice, take it to trial, and then find himself at the bad end of a stacked sentence for every single charge the State threw at him.

Look, the guy didn't get caught with a small amount of pot. He didn't get caught with a small amount of pot once or twice. He didn't do what a lot of guys do when they get caught with life sentence quantities and beyond of drugs.

Yes, sentencing isn't fair. At the time the guy was sentenced, it was pretty mandatory pursuant to the sentencing guidelines what he was going to get. It has only been subsequent to that that judges have been given the discretion to depart from the sentencing guidelines, taking into account mitigating factors. But back then, pot was considered a gateway drug, and marketed that way to the average citizen to get those extreme penalties.

Look, we're talking the Obama administration. We're talking Obama's clemency policy in the federal system. We're talking a ton of lawyers working on clemency packets for those who meet the basic requirements for the clemency program - long term sentenced people serving an much longer (ridiculously longer) sentence for drugs with no write-ups for years who want to give clemency a shot. There are investigators and paralegals going through decades of court records and prison records finding these cases. There are volunteer attorneys dealing with these cases, getting them in front of Obama. This effort has been unprecedented. Pot cases, crack cases (especially when the disparity between crack cociane and powder cocaine was huge in sentencing, and mostly race based), and a variety of other drug cases are going before Obama, and he's actually looking. He's looking to grant clemency, not deny it. Again, if it was denied by Obama, there was good reason.
I know this is a very old post, but i just stumbled upon it- Just to clarify some facts here- according to Neil Eggleston, White House Council to Obama, only 2 clemencies were granted to marijuana- only lifers. The other drug related clemencies were given to ppl focused on meth, heroin , crack and coke. And Not just 1st time offenders. It was a random "lottery"-even tho he was vetted for the program, assigned a CP14 atty and had a letter of support from one of his prosecutors, theres no proof this even went on Obamas desk. So to say, " if it was denied by Obama , there was a good reason" is your own opinion, as the WH Council cant even confirm it was seen by Obama. - Unless you were high profile like Chelsea Manning, your case was basically pulled out of a box, from the hundreds of thousands that were vetted for a "yay" or a "ney"..

I dont "love it" when defendants decide that they can do a better job defending themselves then an atty. I think when that happens, the majority of the time, its because they have, or know someone tht has been represented by an atty that was crappy.
I dont "love it" when a defendant, despite all the advice and evidence given to him, decides to roll the dice, take it to trial, and find themselves at the bad end of a stacked sentence for every single charge the state has thrown at them.

I would "love it" if all accused had excellent lawyers tht they trust. But they dont.

Was he a career criminal? yes. Was he a danger? sounds like it. Should he have received life? Not my decision to defend or protest. Yet, I can still feel empathy for his family.

Just my opinion....
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 09-28-2017, 10:35 PM
yourself yourself is offline
attorney
 

Join Date: May 2010
Location: around
Posts: 11,443
Thanks: 4,015
Thanked 19,877 Times in 7,143 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Juniesgal View Post
I know this is a very old post, but i just stumbled upon it- Just to clarify some facts here- according to Neil Eggleston, White House Council to Obama, only 2 clemencies were granted to marijuana- only lifers. The other drug related clemencies were given to ppl focused on meth, heroin , crack and coke. And Not just 1st time offenders. It was a random "lottery"-even tho he was vetted for the program, assigned a CP14 atty and had a letter of support from one of his prosecutors, theres no proof this even went on Obamas desk. So to say, " if it was denied by Obama , there was a good reason" is your own opinion, as the WH Council cant even confirm it was seen by Obama. - Unless you were high profile like Chelsea Manning, your case was basically pulled out of a box, from the hundreds of thousands that were vetted for a "yay" or a "ney"..

I dont "love it" when defendants decide that they can do a better job defending themselves then an atty. I think when that happens, the majority of the time, its because they have, or know someone tht has been represented by an atty that was crappy.
I dont "love it" when a defendant, despite all the advice and evidence given to him, decides to roll the dice, take it to trial, and find themselves at the bad end of a stacked sentence for every single charge the state has thrown at them.

I would "love it" if all accused had excellent lawyers tht they trust. But they dont.

Was he a career criminal? yes. Was he a danger? sounds like it. Should he have received life? Not my decision to defend or protest. Yet, I can still feel empathy for his family.

Just my opinion....
Do you have any idea how many thousands of clemency applications we put together? How many volunteer attorneys worked for more than a year to put clemency applications together? How quickly we worked? How much we were paid? (That last one is simple - nothing. Those of us in MCLE states got credit for the training for these petitions, but that's about it, and that's only for those of us in mandatory reporting states).

Now, if you have a problem with a particular lawyer, take it up with the lawyer. Mostly, people who decide to roll the dice or decide to defend themselves do it because they want to. They think they can do better than any attorney out there, no matter how good. And they do this even though they didn't get through the 10th grade.

And if you have particular knowledge of what it's like to be assigned to a defendant who has decided to represent himself, then you know they don't go into court without an attorney. They go to court with an attorney sitting behind them, ready, willing, and able to advise the Defendant on points of law, how to make an objection, how to perfect a record, and how not to totally shoot themselves in the ass. Most don't bother with the attorney assigned to help them because they think they know better.

And if you can't detect the sarcasm in the "I love it" statements, you need to take a step back and re-examine this thread, and maybe in the context of the last two years of President Obama's tenure in the White House. and if you understood the problems Manning was posing to Leavenworth, you'd understand that even the prison barracks wanted her out of there.

But, that all seems to be lost on you.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 09-28-2017, 11:57 PM
Juniesgal Juniesgal is offline
Registered User
 

Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: green Bay, wi
Posts: 42
Thanks: 30
Thanked 38 Times in 17 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by yourself View Post
Do you have any idea how many thousands of clemency applications we put together? How many volunteer attorneys worked for more than a year to put clemency applications together? How quickly we worked? How much we were paid? (That last one is simple - nothing. Those of us in MCLE states got credit for the training for these petitions, but that's about it, and that's only for those of us in mandatory reporting states).

Now, if you have a problem with a particular lawyer, take it up with the lawyer. Mostly, people who decide to roll the dice or decide to defend themselves do it because they want to. They think they can do better than any attorney out there, no matter how good. And they do this even though they didn't get through the 10th grade.

And if you have particular knowledge of what it's like to be assigned to a defendant who has decided to represent himself, then you know they don't go into court without an attorney. They go to court with an attorney sitting behind them, ready, willing, and able to advise the Defendant on points of law, how to make an objection, how to perfect a record, and how not to totally shoot themselves in the ass. Most don't bother with the attorney assigned to help them because they think they know better.

And if you can't detect the sarcasm in the "I love it" statements, you need to take a step back and re-examine this thread, and maybe in the context of the last two years of President Obama's tenure in the White House. and if you understood the problems Manning was posing to Leavenworth, you'd understand that even the prison barracks wanted her out of there.

But, that all seems to be lost on you.
NO, none of it is lost on me. I am sorry you took it like that. Yes, I am very aware of how many hours ppl worked, how many thousands and thousands of clemency applications were put forth, and that no one was paid. I am aware, as my husband is an atty. I know how much he does- on his own time. I am sorry but I disagree, not every person tht tries to defend themselves does it because they want to. Some feel like they need to, some dont understand that a PD is an actual attorney ( and some of the best around). They don't understand that in some places ( like where we live) every PD is also a private practice atty that is taking their rotation. I dont need to re-examine the thread, I have a right to my opinion. I was just stating some facts, that not every app was received by Obama. Thousands upon thousands that were vetted, were not seen by him. I found tht comment " If it was denied by Obama, there was good reason" to be discouraging. You dont know if it was denied by him, none of us know. And the person that posted the link, maybe it was a family member or friend, and they were looking for support, not a lecture on the subject. Isnt this a supportive forum? Yes, there are harsh realities, this is a prison, criminal issues forum that we are dealing with, and helping each other deal with. I was showing some empathy. The sarcasm wasn't lost on me. But it may have been on someone else. Manning was a high profile case that got "singled out" attention. For lots of reasons. The majority of apps for clemency were not high profile cases. They were everyday people, in prison. I'm sorry you took my response, my opinion, so personally. As someone whos worked in prison, and someone that has a LO in prison, I felt just fine voicing my opinion on those topics. If thats lost on you, then thats you.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 09-29-2017, 11:12 AM
yourself yourself is offline
attorney
 

Join Date: May 2010
Location: around
Posts: 11,443
Thanks: 4,015
Thanked 19,877 Times in 7,143 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Juniesgal View Post
NO, none of it is lost on me. I am sorry you took it like that. Yes, I am very aware of how many hours ppl worked, how many thousands and thousands of clemency applications were put forth, and that no one was paid. I am aware, as my husband is an atty. I know how much he does- on his own time. I am sorry but I disagree, not every person tht tries to defend themselves does it because they want to. Some feel like they need to, some dont understand that a PD is an actual attorney ( and some of the best around). They don't understand that in some places ( like where we live) every PD is also a private practice atty that is taking their rotation. I dont need to re-examine the thread, I have a right to my opinion. I was just stating some facts, that not every app was received by Obama. Thousands upon thousands that were vetted, were not seen by him. I found tht comment " If it was denied by Obama, there was good reason" to be discouraging. You dont know if it was denied by him, none of us know. And the person that posted the link, maybe it was a family member or friend, and they were looking for support, not a lecture on the subject. Isnt this a supportive forum? Yes, there are harsh realities, this is a prison, criminal issues forum that we are dealing with, and helping each other deal with. I was showing some empathy. The sarcasm wasn't lost on me. But it may have been on someone else. Manning was a high profile case that got "singled out" attention. For lots of reasons. The majority of apps for clemency were not high profile cases. They were everyday people, in prison. I'm sorry you took my response, my opinion, so personally. As someone whos worked in prison, and someone that has a LO in prison, I felt just fine voicing my opinion on those topics. If thats lost on you, then thats you.
And as somebody who takes cases on rotation who has a brother in prison, I'm sorry you think that I'm lacking in understanding of the situation.

We are talking clemency packages - very different than representation in court.

Clemency and post conviction relief beyond the direct appeal (not including death row cases), are largely handled by inmates, usually as a result of funding issues. The Obama clemency for lifers issues was different. It was a concerted effort to work with the Obama administration to right the wrongs caused by federal mandatory minimum drug laws. No, i don't know that Pres. Obama actually laid eyes on the clemency petition of this one person. That's not how it worked. All the clemency packages went to the administration and a group of attorneys looked over every ap, forwarding the ones that met the requirements laid out by Obama to Obama for signature. Unlike our current president, Obama is an attorney and a former con law professor. He laid out his requirements for signature. His administration actually went through all of the apps received and weeded them down accordingly, sometimes sending requests back for more information before the decision to act was made.

This is quite different than past administrations where the flurry of federal clemencies hand down at the end of the administration struck mostly white collar friends or favors to legislators, usually with something of a stink of cronyism or worse about them.

But hey, federal clemency cannot touch on state law and state inmates, it is one of the interesting things that makes the current administration interesting - with the clemency of Arpaio, it has placed more of a working relationship between some federals and some states (mainly New York) to ensure that once a person who trump deems a friend gets convicted, that conviction is in state court. It is only in this way that such convictions stand and the rule of law is not thwarted by the whim of the executive.

It's just too bad the clemency process started by Obama has been shut down. Again, we go to an arbitrary (and imho capricious) clemency process by the executive without a real sense of justice to the process. Because trump has not been touched by the mandatory minimums of the drug laws of the 90's (and other truly unfair laws), he pardons Arpaio. Gotta wonder if there are a few Enron and WorldComm felons on his list for pardon....

But, you want to call me out and my post out on this, you are going to get backlash. You want to talk about this, I'm more than willing to talk. I participated. I worked to procure more attorneys to the cause.

Btw, yuor jurisdiction sounds about as small as some of mine. Btw, you do know that in larger jurisdictions in towns and cities with a law school, there are PD clinics that send third year law students to the PD (and both the city and state's attorney) as students allowed to practice in those offices. Such people are not licensed, but their work is overseen by licensed attorneys. And, some courts have interns and clerks who work under the auspices of judges, writing their opinions. Such people are not attorneys, though most are lawyers. So, not all PDs are licensed attorneys. My first job was working for a federal judge. I was hired before I even scheduled my bar exam, and you know how that works - bar exams are given twice a year, usually with months after the exam before the results are published, and there can be months in some states before licensure. And from there, it can be six months or more before you qualify for the federal bar. So yes, there is a whole slew of people working in the courts as attorneys and as those writing the judge's opinion, who are not attorneys.

But most of us are licensed attorneys. And we will tell a client how to fire us and get new counsel if they so desire. And we are scrupulous in our own ethics and will seek to have new counsel appointed should the case arise.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 09-29-2017, 11:54 AM
fbopnomore fbopnomore is offline
Site Moderator

PTO Site Moderator Staff Superstar Winner 

Donation Award 
 

Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 25,005
Thanks: 35,266
Thanked 17,348 Times in 10,466 Posts
Default

Many times when the US Attorney indicts someone in federal court with a pending State case, the State often drops out for a better use of available resources. So State prosecutors would have to agree to continue prosecuting their case to keep an Arpaio result from happening again and again.

Federal prosecutions have usually meant much harsher sentences for the exact same "crime", so that is another thing that has been turned upside down. Who would have guessed that a federal criminal prosecution would result in a "get out of prison", before ever getting into prison in the first place.

If there was anything like Karma, Joe the sheriff would be serving a long sentence in his own tent city, with his new replacement running around with a thermometer showing 140 degree F temperatures inside the tent (and yes Arpaio did just that with the assistance of MSNBC's Lockdown producers).
__________________
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Terminology - Use of the term "inmate", "prisoner" and "convict" Mike General Prison Talk 14 03-17-2017 09:03 PM
What does "next control review" "close custody" & "gain time" mean? Trantham North Carolina General Prison Talk, News, Introductions & Chit Chat 2 01-13-2013 01:05 PM
"Friedrich Nietzsche" or "Philosophy of Truth, Life and Death" by Timothy Greenl soulmate Letters & Stories from Inmates & X-Cons 7 11-02-2012 10:23 AM
Federal Judge calls BOP actions "abysmal," sloppy" and "unjustifiable" Zelda50 Federal System News, Events and Legal Issues 2 03-19-2011 11:07 AM
"Malfeasance", "Revenge" and "The Tour" (Timothy's Diary) soulmate Letters & Stories from Inmates & X-Cons 2 09-19-2003 05:31 PM


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:31 PM.
Copyright © 2001- 2017 Prison Talk Online
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Website Design & Custom vBulletin Skins by: Relivo Media
Message Board Statistics