Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Supreme Court Lets Stand 55-Year Jail Term
AP & Newsday ^ | 12/4/06 | n/a

Posted on 12/04/2006 2:25:37 PM PST by kiriath_jearim

WASHINGTON -- The Supreme Court on Monday let stand a mandatory 55-year prison sentence, condemned as excessive by the federal judge who imposed it, for a man convicted of carrying a handgun during three marijuana deals.

Record producer Weldon Angelos received the minimum sentence under the law -- a harsher sentence than a child rapist or a terrorist who detonates a bomb aboard an aircraft would receive, according to his attorneys. The justices, without comment, left the prison term undisturbed.

Angelos was convicted of 16 counts of violating federal firearms, drug and money laundering laws in 2003. The charges stemmed from his sale of three 8-ounce bags of marijuana to an undercover informant.

He had a gun but never brandished or used it. Nevertheless, the three counts of possession of a firearm in a drug transaction required the mandatory minimum sentence.

Four former attorneys general and 145 former prosecutors and judges wrote in support of a lighter sentence for Angelos. Even the sentencing judge, U.S. District Judge Paul Cassell, an appointee of President Bush, called the sentence "unjust, cruel and irrational." But he said the law left him no choice.

Prosecutors said the sentence was appropriate and an appeals court agreed.

The case is Angelos v. U.S., 06-26.

(Excerpt) Read more at newsday.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Government
KEYWORDS: banglist; eighthamendment; excessivepunishment; govwatch; judicary; mandatorysentencing; scotus; wod; wodlist
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120121-138 next last
To: NCLaw441
Harsh penalty? Yes. Avoidable? Yes.

Every penalty is avoidable, so why not make the sentence for EVERY felony and misdemeanor death?

81 posted on 12/04/2006 3:58:00 PM PST by Strategerist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

To: Lx
Remember how we got to this point? Mandatory sentence legislation was enacted because liberal judges took a dislike to punishing felons and were pushing them through a hand-slap turnstile back into society.

Perhaps legislatures have overreacted and will revisit the issue. Just as soon as they do, you can bet liberal judges will return to dumping felons unpunished back into society.

82 posted on 12/04/2006 3:59:40 PM PST by JCEccles
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Libertarianize the GOP

I think the trend here is to be lenient on crimes against people but to get strict on crimes against the state. Five years from now people might get life in prison for the new crime of having tobacco products and a gun while murderers will be given a few months of self-esteem councelling and sent free.


83 posted on 12/04/2006 3:59:56 PM PST by Wilhelm Tell (True or False? This is not a tag line.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Lx
Drugs are drugs to me. I don't care what form it is in. The point is drug laws are not too "harsh".
The people in this country using it are in fact supporting terrorism in one way or another.
They also support a number of drug related deaths of our children every years, and drug related crimes every year.

So, smoking pot or using any recreational drug use isn't as harmless as you may think. And it doesn't matter where it comes from, it all leads to the same thing.

Pot use is not harmless, it isn't good for you, in fact smoking pot is just as bad as smoking cigarettes, many of the same chemicals are the same, it often leads to other drug abuses and alcoholism. It leads to crime, it leads to failure in life in general. And it leads to death.

There is no good argument for pot.

Dealers, as this guy was, deserve what they get.
84 posted on 12/04/2006 4:01:28 PM PST by Nathan Zachary
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: Strategerist
"Every penalty is avoidable, so why not make the sentence for EVERY felony and misdemeanor death?

It will be, as soon as sharia law is established. Meanwhile, keep smoking shooting up or whatever, they need more bullets.

85 posted on 12/04/2006 4:07:52 PM PST by Nathan Zachary
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: Lexington Green
Tyranny, plain and simple.

Absolutely. When the sentences become draconian, the alternative of just shooting your way out and taking as many as possible with you becomes a little more likely.

55 years is a death sentence.

86 posted on 12/04/2006 4:11:14 PM PST by glorgau
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: CGTRWK
"A pound and a half of pot is not a big deal."

Yes it is. It's felony possession for the purposes of trafficking.

fel·o·ny (fĕl'ə-nē)


1. One of several grave crimes, such as murder, rape, or burglary, punishable by a more stringent sentence than that given for a misdemeanor.
2. Any of several crimes in early English law that were punishable by forfeiture of land or goods and by possible loss of life or a bodily part.

Maybe they should chop his wee wee off instead, and let him go.

87 posted on 12/04/2006 4:19:50 PM PST by Nathan Zachary
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: taxesareforever
The evidence presented by the government at trial clearly established that Angelos was a known gang member who had long used and sold illicit drugs.

Many cases where people are sentenced for multiple counts of a crime having been caught once yield nonsensical results; this is more properly a subject for legislatures to address than judges, but somebody needs to create some logical standards.

If someone throws a rock through a window, that's one act of vandalism. If on the next day the person throws another rock through someone else's window, that's clearly a second act of vandalism. Suppose, though, the person had instead thrown two rocks through the same window, thirty seconds apart, with the second rock knocking off some more glass. Would that be one act or two? Should someone who throws 70 rocks through one window in a short time be punished ten times as harshly as someone who threw one rock through a different person's windows every day for a week?

88 posted on 12/04/2006 4:19:58 PM PST by supercat (Sony delenda est.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: JCEccles
Remember how we got to this point? Mandatory sentence legislation was enacted because liberal judges took a dislike to punishing felons and were pushing them through a hand-slap turnstile back into society.

I remember where lazy people figured it was too much trouble to research and elect decent judges, and to goto the polls to vote out judges that were unjust, and opportunistic politicians made hay out of it.

Next thing we knew were were in bizarro world where a guy can kill 10 innocent people, including infants, with his car (George Russell Weller), be found guilty of vehicular manslaughter and face only 18 years maximum, and another guy can sell a pound of weed to an undercover and receive 55 years minimum.

89 posted on 12/04/2006 4:22:33 PM PST by Smogger (It's the WOT Stupid)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: Wilhelm Tell
"Five years from now people might get life in prison for the new crime of having tobacco products and a gun while murderers will be given a few months of self-esteem councelling and sent free."

That's within reality in Islamic countries. Kill an infidel, well, that's ok. But how dre you have a bottle of whiskey! Actually, chopping off body parts is the first step, unless it'sa real serious crime, like tossing a candy bar wrapper on mosk property, or saying something bad about Mohammad. Chopping wee-wee's off pot heads, dealers or otherwize might be better than 55 year sentences, they are useless on pot heads anyways.

90 posted on 12/04/2006 4:25:40 PM PST by Nathan Zachary
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: dead

Ya, but it facilitates his profession, and could potentially facilitate the transaction, even if it in fact did not in this instance. I am not saying the distinction is dispositive and one that will or should necessarily float your boat, I am just saying it exists.


91 posted on 12/04/2006 4:25:45 PM PST by Torie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: Smogger
"Next thing we knew were were in bizarro world where a guy can kill 10 innocent people, including infants, with his car (George Russell Weller), be found guilty of vehicular manslaughter and face only 18 years maximum, and another guy can sell a pound of weed to an undercover and receive 55 years minimum."

Yes, lets keep omitting the felony weapons charges and the money laundering charges, maybe they will go away. Try remember that his sentence is for a combination of felonies, not just one.
No doubt his past record has some bearing on the matter as well.

92 posted on 12/04/2006 4:30:08 PM PST by Nathan Zachary
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: dead
" If the gun is not used or even shown, as was the case with this guy selling pot, it doesn't facilitate the transaction at all.
I assume it was found during the arrest.

16 times?

93 posted on 12/04/2006 4:35:46 PM PST by Nathan Zachary
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: Nathan Zachary

The only reason he received a mandatory minimum sentance is because of three times sold drugs to the undercover officer (three counts of posession of a firearm during drug transaction.) None of the other counts were responsible for a minimum sentance.


94 posted on 12/04/2006 4:36:01 PM PST by Smogger (It's the WOT Stupid)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies]

To: Nathan Zachary

The only reason he received a mandatory minimum sentance is because of three times sold drugs to the undercover officer (three counts of posession of a firearm during drug transaction.) None of the other counts were responsible for a mandatory minimum sentance.


95 posted on 12/04/2006 4:36:23 PM PST by Smogger (It's the WOT Stupid)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies]

To: Nathan Zachary
Tell that to the family who lost their son from an IED in Afghanistan this week.

The only reason that terrorists are making money off drugs is that they are illegal. So that son who lost his life is on you, not a pot smoker. Also the 3K or so who die in Mexico every year are 100% the responsibility of the Drug Warriors like your self. You are also responsible for over 2 million refugees from Columbia due to your Plan Columbia.

Do not make a bunch of insane laws and then blame it on others. This is all on you Drug Warriors.

Prior to 1930, pot was legal. Now you do 55 years for the same thing that was legal 75 years ago? Insane is being too kind for anyone who believes this picture is OK.
96 posted on 12/04/2006 4:48:06 PM PST by microgood
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: Nathan Zachary

Yes, just chop his genitals off. I am not spending any more time debating someone who is making a game of being intentionally obtuse.


97 posted on 12/04/2006 4:53:24 PM PST by CGTRWK
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]

To: Smogger

I'm talking about felons. Double all of their sentences, and it's still not enough.


98 posted on 12/04/2006 6:03:14 PM PST by Brilliant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: Torie

I don't mind paying for more prisons if it gets these thugs off the street.


99 posted on 12/04/2006 6:04:07 PM PST by Brilliant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: Smogger

>The sentence should should be in proportion to the crime. This sentence clearly is not. Unjust sentencing like unjust laws foster disrespect for the law.<


Word.


100 posted on 12/04/2006 6:08:33 PM PST by jaime1959
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120121-138 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson