Posted on 06/25/2024 9:17:23 AM PDT by Red Badger
The Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) delivered two precedent-setting rulings that could significantly impact former President Donald Trump’s criminal convictions.
In a decisive 6-3 decision in the Erlinger vs United States case, the Supreme Court ruled that juries must be unanimous on each criminal count, a standard not met in Trump’s New York case, where the jury returned a 4-4-4 verdict on the underlying crime.
This ruling underlines that Trump’s conviction was unconstitutional and must be overturned. During Trump’s New York trial, the judge had instructed the jury that unanimity on the specific crimes was unnecessary, as long as they agreed that a crime had taken place.
Additionally, SCOTUS ruled that sentencing enhancements cannot be arbitrarily implemented by judicial fiat, further solidifying the protections against unjust legal procedures.
These rulings have profound implications for Trump’s legal battles, particularly the controversial case led by Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg, and the bogus J6 1512(c) charges and sentencing enhancements that corrupt federal judges have announced they will implement if the Supreme Court nukes 1512(c).
The Supreme Court’s decisions underscore the necessity for unanimous jury verdicts in criminal convictions and proper judicial processes in sentencing enhancements, casting doubt on the validity of current and future proceedings against Trump.
Good news.
Thanks.
This was decided last week. How was this not front page news?
So Alvin Bragg lost big time. His conviction is kaput.
I take that to be a rhetorical question.
“The greatest power the media has is The Power To Ignore.”....Chris Plante................
Who put, “scouts,” in the keywords?
LOL!
I don’t think it will stop the Democrats from calling him a convicted felon.
I guess. I was watching the threads last week and dont recall the case or certainly the implications during last fridays case dump. Usually some good Freeper analysis would have headlined this sooner.
It runs counter to the narrative.
WIKI
Paul Erlinger was charged and convicted of being a felon in possession of a firearm in 2018. He was sentenced to 15 years and sought post-conviction relief. The District Court found that Erlinger had committed three separate burglaries, making him eligible for the ACCA enhancement. Erlinger objected, arguing that the burglary question should have been found by a jury.
The Supreme Court held in Apprendi v. New Jersey that:
“[o]ther than the fact of a prior conviction, any fact that increases the penalty for a crime beyond the prescribed statutory maximum must be submitted to a jury, and proved beyond a reasonable doubt.”
— Justice Stevens, Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 490 (2000).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erlinger_v._United_States
The Wikipedia page has not been updated to reflect the Supreme Court decision.
I can’t stand these so-called articles that get the facts wrong. The jury did not make a 4-4-4 decision, the jury was not asked to identify what the underlying crime was at all.
Front page?!
How bloody old are you dude? Even I quit using that term a decade ago and I AM an old fart!
Oh no! Does this mean Biden is robbed of his joy of calling Trump a convicted felon in the debate on Thursday? Darn, darn darn darn DARN!
Don't be going all Eeyore on us. His conviction was overturned.
Don’t get excited. This is simply an old case that may or may not be relevant. SCOTUS did not rule Trump’s conviction unconstitutional.
Excellent. Looks like we have 3 Justices that support violating the Constitution.
Not sure of the source here.
But very good news if true.
The judge’s jury instructions were very strange.
I’ve never heard of a case in which a conviction didn’t have to be unanimous.
“I don’t think it will stop the Democrats from calling him a convicted felon.”
Juries can award big money for defamation.
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.