Arpaio wanted a jury trial, his right under the Bill of Rights. She denied him that and decided the case herself. If he had had a jury trial, it’s likely he would not have been convicted.
Arpaio wanted a jury trial, his right under the Bill of Rights. She denied him that and decided the case herself.
**************
That is true but read the entire process and she has that right where sentences for conviction are 6 months or less. That was the max sentence that Apraio could receive. So she followed the legal guidelines and heard the case minus a jury.
Trump jumped in and issued a pardon before the process was complete. Had the appeals process been completed in Apraio’s favor then it would have been wiped off his record. But with the Pardon the conviction now stays.
That’s my understanding, I’m not a legal scholar and I may be totally wrong. Take care.
That issue goes beyond this case. I believe Federal courts typically do not require jury trials for what they describe as “petty” offenses — which are legally defined as offenses that have a maximum sentence of six months in jail. That’s why Arpaio’s sentence in his case was going to be six months at most.