i thought in order to be convicted of a felony you have to serve penitentiary time is that true?
No, not true. You were convicted of a crime for which a sentence of greater than one year in prison was a sentencing option. Therefore the offense of conviction was a felony. That you were treated more leniently than you could have been does not change the nature of the offense of which you were convicted.
So you have a felony conviction, and properly so.See question
I understand the early release of federal inmates is due to changes in sentencing but I can't find any other information on it. My fiancé is currently serving a federal sentence for a nonviolent drug offense and we're trying to see if he qualifie...
There has been an announcement that approximately 6000 prisoners serving long drug sentences who are eligible for earlier release under 2014 sentence reductions will be released toward the end of this month. I assume that is what you heard about.See question
I have won my case for a few million dollars and my lawyer has recently moved back to Florida so of course the defense appealed my case so just need some references
I would begin by contacting your trial attorney. It may be that there is provision in your retainer agreement addressing the responsibilities of counsel in the event that a favorable verdict is appealed. Given that personal injury attorneys generally accept cases on a contingent fee, percentage of recovery, basis while appellate attorneys generally do not accept that type of fee arrangement, there will have to be at least some level of coordination between trial and appellate counsel.See question
A one year federal investigation involving myself and 13 other people led to a conspiracy to drug trafficking soley obtained through CRI mouths. Then plea offer is a possession of controlled substance. I was never arrested with possessing anything...
I agree with Mr. Richman's observations, particularly with his conclusion that this sounds like a trial issue, not a suppression issue.
My experience has been that the federal prosecutor is well aware of the questionable credibility of CI evidence and will work very hard to find corroboration for the CI's testimony wherever possible. Where the government is able to find such corroboration that testimony of a CI can become very persuasive to a jury. And often the evidence uncovered by a government investigation is strong enough that the prosecutor does not need the CI's testimony at all and does not call the CI as a witness at trial.See question
I was convinced of rape. No D.N.A. , no rape kit . Just her word . Years later reading the paper work , found there was evidence!! Only one hair in rape kit. That test showed was not mine or hers . Lawyer never said anything to me or jury ab...
Nothing in your posting suggests that the attorney's statement was necessarily incorrect and certainly nothing suggests that the attorney "lied." As to whether the information you found is exculpatory, I have seen many cases in which hairs showed up in rape or murder cases that clearly did not come from the either the victim or the defendant, and they did not prevent a conviction. Same with fingerprints, DNA, etc. It may or may not have been helpful to your case. It is unlikely that it would have gotten you off. By all means consult an attorney familiar with post-conviction proceedings and other collateral review remedies in Illinois, but don't assume that you have a winning case or anything close to it.See question
I am currently involved in a criminal case where text messaging is a central part of the state's case. However, the state provided a incomplete report of a cell phone (the report was missing a number of text messages my carrier said I sent as well...
The rule might or might not persuade the judge to order some additional material admitted, and that might be good, bad, indifferent or devastating for you. Evidentiary questions are intensely case- and fact-specific and the trial judge enjoys considerable discretion in applying the rules in light of the details of the case. And just because the law permits you to do something does not mean that you should do it. Discuss this issue with your attorney. Nobody else can tell you anything useful.See question
Once the appeal has been given to the courts for grounds of appeal, can evidence be entered in afterward towards proving reason for appeal prior to it going to the appellett court?
It is hard to tell from that rather challenging sentence just what it is that you are asking. The court hearing an appeal confines its review to the record of proceedings before the trial court. The world of the appellate court is bounded by (1) the common-law record (i.e., the clerk's file that includes all documents submitted to the trial court), (2) the report of proceedings (that is, transcripts of actual in-court proceedings), (3) exhibits admitted into evidence by the trial court, and sometimes also (4) exhibits which have been offered as evidence but refused. The briefs submitted by the parties must confine their arguments to matters which can be addressed and decided entirely on the basis of the record. Nothing will be considered that cannot be found in one part or another of the record as I described it. I hope that addresses and answers your question.See question
Def has a OK license and CDL, which is 0 tolerance. CDL and job lost due to DUI, is regular license from OK suspended?
You might want to report your question using an Oklahoma address so that Oklahoma attorneys will notice it. They are the ones who can help you because it is Oklahoma law and practice that will control.See question
If there is an incident of strangulation in a domestic brawl, and the victim becomes unconscious as a result, is it attempted murder? Is there any means by which strangulation would become attempted murder? Also, if threats were made moments prior...
Strangulation might support a conviction for attempted murder and then again it might not. Same as any other potentially deadly attack, with or without a weapon. If the jury determines on the basis of the evidence that the act was done with the intent to kill, then it would return a verdict of guilty on an attempted murder charge. On the other hand, if the jury was not satisfied that there was an intent to kill, then there would be a not guilty verdict on that charge. Keep in mind, however, that there are other very serious charges that presumably would also be filed, and that an acquittal on a count charging attempted murder would not preclude a conviction on a count charging, for example, aggravated battery.
The important thing to understand is that a real-world criminal case is not an examination in Criminal Law 101. A law student applies legal concepts to dictated and accepted facts. A lawyer does not. In a real case the facts are seldom clear and the outcome depends on a jury's best-guess reconstruction of what happened. That is one of many reasons why no competent defense attorney will make a serious decision in a case in reliance on a client's recital of the facts.See question