Typo Cuts Prison Sentence

[2ffat]

Are grammar and spelling important? Look at this article about how the law decided an extra "ten" cuts a ten year sentence to one year (after serving four years).

James P. Cottingham
[sup]I'm number 1,229!
I'm number 1,229![/sup]

 

[GSCaupling]

My first reaction is there ought to be some alternative to giving the guy the complete benefit of the doubt.

However, even if one were to reconstitute the jury and ask them their true intention, there would be no way of knowing at this point if they have been exposed to and influenced by post-trial information. The verdict has to be beyond a reasonable doubt and based solely on evidence presented at trial.

I think the only remedy for this type of error is giving the defendant the benefit of the doubt, however distasteful that may be.

GS

[red]******^*******
[small]I[/small] [small]Love[/small] [♥] [small]Redundancy.[/small][/red]

 

[Turkbear]

Hi,
Maybe, but the jury also specified a number as well as the words:

amount exceeding ten one hundred (100) grams

Had they meant an amount less than a gram they would have specified 10/100 --

It seems that the Judge was just easily persuaded by a good defense lawyer..





To Paraphrase:"The Help you get is proportional to the Help you give.."

 

[flapeyre]

There should be a mechanism for correcting obvious typos such as this (with the judge's approval, and subject to appeal by the prosecution).

The typographical error should not cause an unintended result. Personally, I fail to see how a typo violates the defendant's constitutional rights.

-- Francis
I'd like to change the world, but I can't find the source code.

 

[traingamer]

Since the document is unclear for which actual crime the defendant was convicted, the courts chose the lesser punishment.

I have to agree with his lawyer (wait, did I just agree with a lawyer? ):

But in our system, we give the benefit of the doubt to the defendant, and we do that for good reason. And in here there's a statutory mandate to ensure that we know what we're convicting people of and we know why we're doing it. And that mandate wasn't met.

Greg
People demand freedom of speech as a compensation for the freedom of thought which they seldom use. Kierkegaard

 

[p5wizard]

[voice scrambler]
Let's hpoe he's alrdaey on his way to New Jeesry...
[/voice scrambler]

p5

 

[ChrisHunt]

I think the law is an ass in this case. The document in question states (my emphasis):

We, the jury, further find that the amount of crack cocaine WAS in the amount exceeding ten one hundred (100) grams as charged in the indictment

If the original indictment did not contain this typo, there's no ambiguity in my view.

We keep things simpler in the UK (I speak from personal experience, having served as the foreman of a jury a couple of weeks ago). The clerk reads out the charges, and the foreman just says "guilty" or "not guilty". The jury doesn't get to write potentially ambiguous verdict documents. I'm surprised something similar doesn't happen in Ohio - it seems to work that way on TV cop shows.

-- Chris Hunt
Webmaster & Tragedian
Extra Connections Ltd

 

[KenCunningham]

Chris - the two verdicts isn't UK-wide - for example in Scotland there's the 'Not Proven' option too.

Some days are diamonds, some days are rocks - make sure most are the former.

 

[GSCaupling]

KenCunningham,

What is the legal difference between "not proven" and "not guilty?" Does the former allow for retrial where the latter would represent double-jeopardy if retried? Just curious.

GS

[red]******^*******
[small]I[/small] [small]Love[/small] [♥] [small]Redundancy.[/small][/red]

 

[Grenage]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Not_proven

Apparently that's correct.

"We can categorically state that we have not released man-eating badgers into the area" - Major Mike Shearer