tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9615048.post8888564243684862721..comments2024-03-28T14:19:33.056-04:00Comments on Southern District of Florida Blog: "If there is a verdict for her and she is ordered to be released, how can the verdict be changed so suddenly!!!!!!!!!"David Oscar Markushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18386723948607633980noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9615048.post-29867600441038728302008-05-07T18:01:00.000-04:002008-05-07T18:01:00.000-04:00I hate to defend a prosecutor, but I think we may ...I hate to defend a prosecutor, but I think we may be missing some important facts. According to the prosecutor's Motion, he and the defense attorney agreed to a plea -- acceptance, minor role, low end, etc. At the change of plea hearing, the defense attorney, without prior notice to the prosecutor, asked to go directly to sentencing. The prosecutor claims that he told the judge that he was unaware that they could go straight to sentencing or that the defense attorney was going to ask for that and wasn't really prepared. The Judge went ahead anyway. The defense attorney and the probation officer said that the BOL for the charge was 14, and after reductions based on the plea agreement, the defendant was in the 0-6 range. The defendant had been in for 4 and a half months. So the Judge gave her CTS. The prosecutor went back to his office, did some research and according to him, the correct BOL was 26, not 14.<BR/><BR/>Having said that, it sucks to get CTS, then have that rug pulled out from under you. And, of course, the guidelines are only supposed to be advisory -- one of many factors to consider. In this case, it seems like there were some compelling reasons why the guidelines were too high. Why is it that 99% of the time, it turns out that the Judges think that the guidelines are right on the money. Those guys at the USSC must be geniuses to be exactly correct with such uncanny frequency.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9615048.post-24216988249880860502008-05-07T16:52:00.000-04:002008-05-07T16:52:00.000-04:00mike walleisamike walleisaAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9615048.post-7449439296779383212008-05-07T14:48:00.000-04:002008-05-07T14:48:00.000-04:00Who was the prosecutor - that is NOT HOT, Bush Lea...Who was the prosecutor - that is NOT HOT, Bush League Crap.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9615048.post-55702101264212024742008-05-07T14:04:00.000-04:002008-05-07T14:04:00.000-04:00Prosecutor agreed to time served. He then turned ...Prosecutor agreed to time served. He then turned around and asked for a reesentencing because he made a mistake about the guidelines.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9615048.post-16230343789155050922008-05-07T13:05:00.000-04:002008-05-07T13:05:00.000-04:00Did the prosecutor request the new sentence or did...Did the prosecutor request the new sentence or did the judge, sua sponte, state that "time served" was a mistake and he really meant 29 months? What does the sentencing trascript say? I'm a bit confused about the procedural history . . .Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9615048.post-9389863574652318502008-05-07T11:54:00.000-04:002008-05-07T11:54:00.000-04:00The prosecutor cannot be trusted. Who is it?The prosecutor cannot be trusted. Who is it?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com