Typo in Verdict Changes Man's Sentence

JCamb5

02:13 PMJun 23 2009

this is amazing that it is was even considered, benefit of a doubt went out with his prior convictions wouldn't you think, this country is going so far backwards it is scary, the judges are the culprits, they are damn sure that we can't have prayer in school but they don't know if a grown man 3 or 4 or 5 times convicted of the same crime "drugs"oh man it's not even worth talking about anymore, political correctness overides the right of the people, right ?

Screaddc

02:05 PMJun 23 2009

BLongn 01:49 PMJun 23 2009 "we give the benefit of the doubt to the defendant"....to a REPEAT, known drug offender??? Please!! ENOUGH of this nonsense. Three strikes, you're out. THrow him in the slammer and LOSE THE KEY!!! WE don't need this loser lose in society!......................... I suppose we can depend on you to pay a little exttra in taxes to cover the 36,000 dollors a year price tag to hold this trash.

RUDYMELENDEZ

02:01 PMJun 23 2009

Just shot the son-of-a-%$#@&, end of story. Quit wasting tax payer money.

KGerig33

01:59 PMJun 23 2009

He's guilty. They are always trying to bully people around. Always trying to get out of something!!!!! I am sick of it!!!!!

WTIBBS5

01:53 PMJun 23 2009

the NI66ER is G U I L T Y ! PERIOD, Next Case!!!

BLongn

01:49 PMJun 23 2009

"we give the benefit of the doubt to the defendant"....to a REPEAT, known drug offender??? Please!! ENOUGH of this nonsense. Three strikes, you're out. THrow him in the slammer and LOSE THE KEY!!! WE don't need this loser lose in society!

bs00000016458919

01:41 PMJun 23 2009

This is why I think 99% of defense Lawyers are slimeballs.

SmilinEyes13440

01:40 PMJun 23 2009

I dont understand. Didnt the jury HEAR the evidence, and base their decision on the evidence they HEARD at the hearing. It seems like the typo came after the verdict, no? If the jury based their decision soley on what they read, then yes, he should have a reduced sentence. Sounds like this gentleman has a long history of drug and other offenses, so maybe that accounted for the lengthy sentence. Whats BS, is the man sentenced to one year for sexually assulted a child, in the news a few days ago.

KnowWhatIWant

01:39 PMJun 23 2009

The guy was convicted of possessing more than 100 grams of cocaine. The word "TEN" was just an extra word. It was not meant to be there. It is not to be interpreted as 10-100's or 10-100th's....however since it does give the appearance of an ambiguity the court must look at what the least is, because the error goes to the defendant. What should have been argued harder is the words that followed the type......"as charged in the indictment"...producing the indictment which obviously said that he was charged with possession of more than 100 grams of cocaine. I don't understand why all of you are splitting hairs of how to interpret the extra word TEN....it was an EXTRA word.... put there not by the jury but by a clerk typing up many verdicts that day probably.

DeverAddis

01:37 PMJun 23 2009

The system yould have been clear in the reading and typing of the verdict. Dont hate the player people hate the game. The guy according to the typing of the verdict got an unjust sentence therefore he should serve the time the type error dictates. Say if he was wrongly accused he would get sentenced and have to fight his way out of prison...right??? He has other charges in another stae anyway, he will go to jail there as well, so he is recieving his fate regardless. Do understand that constant law breakers are bound by the laws of attraction, meaning you break the law you are asking to go to prison, thats where they end up. Let him walk into his own fate. trust me he wont be free for a long time.