Obstruction of Justice and Deportation

The U.S. Supreme Court this morning decided the “crimigration” case of Pugin v. Garland, No. 22-23. Among the many crimes that aliens can be deported for committing are offenses “relating to the obstruction of justice.” Does that term require that an investigation be pending, or can it include dissuading a witness from even reporting a crime?

The Fourth and Ninth Circuits went opposite ways on this question, and the Supreme Court took up both cases to resolve it. Continue reading . . .

California leniency kills 5 young women in Minnesota

Present California policy shaves large amounts of time off prison sentences, even for violent crimes. We are fighting these policies because of the danger they present to law-abiding Californians. But crime knows no boundaries, and these policies also endanger people in other states, as was tragically demonstrated last Friday according to this report in the Minneapolis Star-Tribune by Paul Walsh

Derrick John Thompson, 27, of Brooklyn Park, remains jailed Tuesday with charges pending on suspicion of murder in connection with the crash late Friday after he sped off an Interstate 35W exit ramp in his full-size Cadillac Escalade SUV and struck a car going through an E. Lake Street intersection….

Killed in the crash were Sabiriin Ali, 17, of Bloomington; Sahra Gesaade, 20, of Brooklyn Center; Salma Abdikadir, 20, of St. Louis Park; Sagal Hersi, 19, of Minneapolis; and Siham Adam, 19, of Minneapolis.

The crash occurred three years after Thompson was sentenced to eight years in California prison, the story reports. How is that possible? Continue reading . . .

BLM-Supporting Business Sues Over Losses Caused by BLM

Virtue signaling hypocrisy is on display in Seattle as an ice cream parlor which enthusiastically supported the Black Lives Matter (BLM) protests that shut down several square blocks of the city, is now suing the city over the damage and loss of business resulting from the shut down.  Jeffery Clark of Fox News reports that during the summer 2020 BLM protests over the death of George Floyd rioters created a BLM zone in a 10-block section of the city where a Molly Moon’s ice cream parlor was located.  The zone was renamed CHOP, (Capitol Hill Occupied Protest) after armed protesters barricaded streets and prohibited police and fire-rescue officers from entering.   The city eventually agreed not to allow patrols in the area.  During the 24-day life of CHOP, there were multiple shootings with two deaths along with reports of “narcotics use and violent crime, including rape, robbery, assault, and increased gang activity.”  From June 2 to June 30, Seattle Police logged a 525 percent increase in violent crime compared to June 2019.

Continue reading . . .

Supreme Court Narrowly Interprets Mandatory Consecutive Sentencing Statute

Most of the time, when a defendant receives more than one sentence in a single case the judge has discretion to run the sentences consecutively or concurrently. Concurrent sentences, in effect, eliminate the shorter sentence(s); the defendant will do the time for the longest-sentence crime and will not do a single day in prison more for committing the additional crime(s). Cheaper by the dozen.

Legislatures can mandate consecutive sentences in particular circumstances, though. One such mandate is found in the very long and very confusing federal firearm crime sentencing statute, 18 U.S.C. § 924. The U.S. Supreme Court tends to interpret limits on judicial discretion narrowly, especially in sentencing. Today it gave the limit in §924(c) the narrower of two possible interpretations. No surprise there. The decision in Lora v. United States, No. 22-49, was unanimous. Continue reading . . .

No, Defendant Does Not Get Off Scot-Free for a Technical Error

This post on March 16 discussed the Supreme Court case of Smith v. United States, No. 21-1576. Smith had been tried in the wrong district, and his conviction was reversed on appeal. He claimed that the venue was an element of the offense, such that the Double Jeopardy Clause precluded his retrial in the correct district.

I wrote then, “When this case first came up, I thought the claim to be so obviously wrong that there was no chance the Court would buy it. I still think so.”

Sure enough, the high court today decided that Smith can be retried. Unanimously. Continue reading . . .

LA DA Fails to Boot Victim’s Advocate Out of Court

Our system of criminal justice is an adversary one, normally pitting the prosecutor against the defense lawyer. In Los Angeles today, however, the office of District Attorney George Gascón is often agreeing with the defendant.

While there are only two parties to a criminal case, victims of crime in California have a right to be heard under Article I § 28 of the state Constitution, as amended in the original Marsy’s Law, Proposition 9 of 2008. Retired Deputy District Attorney Kathleen Cady has been doing great work in LA toward ensuring that victims’ voices are heard. This raises the ire of Mr. Gascón, interfering with his cozy, collusive motions. Continue reading . . .

SCOTUS Monday

It’s an uneventful Monday at the U.S. Supreme Court. The court issued an orders list but did not take up any cases for full briefing and argument. There are no summary decisions or dissents from denial of certiorari.

We are still waiting on two decisions from the present term: Jones v. Hendrix, No. 21-857, on successive collateral attacks by federal prisoners and Counterman v. Colorado, No. 22-138, on stalking laws and “true threats.”

Decisions are expected on Thursday and Friday this week.

Continue reading . . .

Judge: LA Murderer Can’t Represent Himself

A Los Angeles Superior Court Judge has ruled that a man charged with the brutal stabbing murder of a 24-year-old college co-ed can no longer represent himself at his murder trial.  The judge’s order came following an outburst in the courtroom where Shawn Laval Smith continuously cursed the judge and jumped out his seat, requiring his removal from the hearing.  My News LA reports that Smith will be confined to a security chair and represented by a public defender for his next court appearance.

Continue reading . . .