Author: Kent Scheidegger

SCOTUS Orders Monday

by · May 3, 2021 8:20 am

The U.S. Supreme Court released its regular Monday orders list today. Not surprisingly, there were several wake-of-Jones orders in cases that had been on hold for that decision. Oklahoma v. Johnson, No. 19-250, and United States v. Briones, No. 19-720, were sent back for reconsideration. These were cases where the lower court decided in an under-18 murderer’s favor based on a broad interpretation of Montgomery v. Louisiana. Cases where the lower court ruled against the defendant based on a narrow interpretation of Montgomery were simply denied, including Newton v. Indiana, No. 17-1511, and Garcia v. North Dakota, No. 19-399. Continue reading . . .

Dumping a Dishonest Precedent Less Than Honestly — Part I

by · Apr 30, 2021 3:56 pm

Last week the U.S. Supreme Court decided the case of Jones v. Mississippi, regarding the constitutional requirements to sentence an under-18 murderer to life in prison without parole (LWOP). The majority opinion claims to “carefully follow[] both Miller [v. Alabama] and Montgomery [v. Louisiana].” The dissent claims “the Court guts” both decisions. Neither statement is completely right. Neither could be, given that Montgomery contradicts both Miller and itself.

About all that is left of Montgomery is its bare holding that Miller is retroactive. That holding will soon be essentially moot, as nearly all the murderers who killed before their 18th birthday who qualify for reconsideration under Miller will either have had a new decision in their cases (see footnote 6 of Jones, last sentence) or have lost their right to seek it by delay. The holding stands like the chimney of a house that burned down, useless but still standing.

There is a certain poetic justice in Montgomery being largely relegated to the dustbin in a less-than-honest decision, as Montgomery itself is among the most dishonest decisions in recent Supreme Court history. Continue reading . . .

Seeing the Light on Crime and Disorder

by · Apr 27, 2021 3:49 pm

The WSJ has this editorial:

A well-known politician on Friday denounced “self-described anarchists who engage in regular criminal destruction” and want to “burn,” “bash” and “intimidate.” He called for “higher bail” and “tougher pretrial restrictions” on rioters. And he pleaded with the public to cooperate with police and identify miscreants: “Our job is to unmask them, arrest them, and prosecute them.”

Donald Trump ? Sheriff Arpaio ? Nope.

Continue reading . . .

USCA9 “Clearly Erred” on Habeas Corpus. Again.

by · Apr 26, 2021 9:39 am

In today’s only decision from the United States Supreme Court, the court reversed a decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in which that court had taken an expansive view of its own jurisdiction. The Supreme Court summarily reversed, meaning that it did not see any need to take further briefing or hear oral argument, as it does when there is some doubt of the correct result. The unsigned opinion says the Ninth Circuit “clearly erred.” No dissent is indicated.

This is not the first time the Supreme Court has rebuked the Ninth in this manner on this subject. It is not the second, third, or fourth. I stopped counting years ago.

Why is the Ninth so consistently the “gang that can’t shoot straight” on this particular topic? Continue reading . . .

SCOTUS Orders Monday

by · Apr 26, 2021 8:27 am

The U.S. Supreme Court issued an orders list from last Friday’s conference today. No new criminal cases were taken up for full briefing and argument.

Two civil cases of interest were taken up. United States v. Zubaydah, No. 20-827 involves the state secrets privilege and a discovery demand by a terrorist detained in Guantanamo Bay. New York State Rifle v. Corlett, No. 20-843 is a Second Amendment case involving concealed carry licenses. Continue reading . . .

SCOTUS Stops Calling Teen Criminals “Children,” For Now

by · Apr 23, 2021 2:25 pm

“What’s in a name? That which we call a rose by any other name would smell as sweet.” Quite a lot is in a name, as “Juliet and her Romeo” tragically found out in the end. More on point, George Orwell demonstrated the pernicious exploitation of language for propaganda purposes in his famous dystopian novel 1984.

Some years back, advocates for lenient treatment of adolescents who commit horrible crimes of violence began exploiting an ambiguity in the word “children” as a propaganda tool. In 2012, the United States Supreme Court jumped on this Orwellian bandwagon. Yesterday it jumped off, at least for the time being. Continue reading . . .

Coverage of Jones Decision

by · Apr 23, 2021 9:41 am

Not a lot of media coverage of the Jones v. Mississippi decision. A lot of other events were happening yesterday. Jessica Gresko has this story for Associated Press:

In a statement, Kymberlee Stapleton of the California-based Criminal Justice Legal Foundation called the decision a “victory for the families of victims murdered by juveniles.”

Continue reading . . .

Major Victory in Juvenile Murder Case

by · Apr 22, 2021 7:47 am

Today the U.S. Supreme Court decided Jones v. Mississippi, No. 18-1259, a case of teenager who murdered his grandfather. The high court pruned back expansive language in its 2016 decision in Montgomery v. Louisiana. The decision confirms that the 2012 case of Miller v. Alabama requires only that the sentencer have discretion to choose between life without parole and a lesser sentence in the case of a juvenile murderer. There is no requirement imposed by the federal constitution that the judge find that the juvenile is “permanently incorrigible,” a finding that cannot be made with any degree of reliability. Continue reading . . .

Felony Murder, Depraved Hearts, and the Chauvin Verdict

by · Apr 21, 2021 1:11 pm

Former police officer Derek Chauvin was convicted yesterday of three charges: second-degree murder, third-degree murder, and second-degree manslaughter. (Since all three were based on the same act against the same victim, he will only be punished for one.) Understanding these charges, and how likely they are to be sustained on appeal, requires some background.

Felony Murder

The second-degree murder charge is based on the controversial felony-murder rule. This rule is a prime target of the criminal justice “reform” movement. The California Legislature has abolished the rule to the extent that it can, being limited by a voter-enacted initiative. Continue reading . . .