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

To: crazyshrink
agree that in his mind he believes that this alien broke the law by crossing the border illegally but no by being here (illegally in my opinion).

In his mind, and according to the precedent set by a 50 year old US Supreme Court decision. The latter is the governing consideration in his opinion.

It sounds like what you really want, is for the judge to take an activist role, rather than what he actually did, which was to interpret the law according to its actual wording, and previous precedent.

Count me out.

112 posted on 08/23/2007 9:00:19 AM PDT by r9etb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 111 | View Replies ]


To: r9etb

I am not in favor of activist judges unless you consider judges who follow activist judges and overturn their rulings to be activist as well.

I do see your point of view in the appellate judges decision. I do see “compelling” circumstances with the situation with the illegal alien which should be allowed to be considered as they often are in other cases.

The problem seems to me to be that in this case the prosecution had already agreed to probation for the drug smuggling of which the judge felt he could not agree. The jail term was still within the specified sentencing guidelines for the crime(s).

Judges are allowed to set aside plea agreements. In this case, the judge felt compelled to give reasons for the set aside which caused his ruling to be overturned by the appellate judge. The proposed sentence was not questioned, just the rationale.

And no, I agree with you, deportation is preferable to trials for most cases innvolving illegals.


113 posted on 08/23/2007 9:52:13 AM PDT by crazyshrink
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 112 | View Replies ]

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