Archive for June 5, 2007
Amero defense files Motion for New Trial
Jun 5th
Just posted to the Norwich Bulletin online is this story about Julie Amero’s attorneys filing a Motion for a New Trial.
Amero’s attorney, William Dow III, based today’s motion for a new trial on “evidence discovered after the verdicts and now in possession of the state and the defense.” In light of the new evidence, Dow said the jury reached inaccurate conclusions about Amero’s alleged Web surfing.
The judge is expected to rule on the Motion prior to tomorrow’s sentencing. I’ll have more as I know more.
Technorati Tags: julie amero, connecticut
Why don’t we have jury sentencing in non-capital criminal cases?
Jun 5th
Prof. Berman asks this question (using better language) here. My initial reaction is that there are a few reasons for this. Jury trials in non-capital cases do not usually involve mitigation evidence (neither do they in capital cases, but there are distinct phases of that trial), which would normally be presented during the sentencing hearing. In order to have a jury qualified to sentence, there would need to be another hearing (or maybe even trial) at which jurors are selected, seated and presented with whatever mitigation evidence the defendant wishes to introduce and the state wishes to rebut.
The jury would also need to be informed of the law, the mandatory-minimum sentences and the “going rate” of similar crimes in that jurisdiction. More often than not (and I am assuming a jurisdiction that does not have strict sentencing guidelines) the judge takes only the facts of the case into account, but also personal history, the wishes of the victim and the severity of the offense into account. These are not factual determinations, which are properly left to the jury.
By comparison, in the penalty phase of a capital case (as with any guilt phase), the jury is charged with the task of evaluating the evidence and applying it to the elements of a statute to find aggravating factors. The same with the guilty phase – evaluate the evidence and determine whether the elements of an offense have been proved. Their role, while paramount, is also limited.
Personal opinions and biases have no role in guilt deliberations, but are often strong factors in sentencing a defendant.
I haven’t thought about this much, so I may be way off in my perception. Thoughts?
New Haven approves municipal ID card
Jun 5th
New Haven, CT’s board of alderman voted Monday night to approve a scheme that will make available municipal ID cards to all residents, making the city the first in the country to issue such documents.
The Elm City Resident Card, originally designed to help undocumented immigrants avoid getting robbed or assaulted, will be a combination of identification, debit card, library card, and a way to pay the parking meter, for all city residents young and old. The city plans to roll out the new cards in July.The city will also start working towards the ID card’s main public safety goal — allowing immigrants to use the ID to open bank accounts and therefore not get robbed while carrying around large amounts of cash — by reaching out to area banks.
While this can be framed in terms of illegal immigration (and certainly, some have done that), I think the more important goal achieved is safety.
“It brings tears to my eyes,” said Marieah Viviel, who at this hearing told a harrowing tale of how her El Salvadoran housekeeper, Elena, and her son were robbed in their Fair Haven apartment by people who knew they were undocumented and stored large amounts of cash. Viviel found them lying on the kitchen floor, bound by electric cords, their home plundered.
recent comments