State Of Florida Tough On Juvenile Offenders

Juveniles in the State of Florida face some of the harshest sentences in the United States. Records show that Florida has handed out more life sentences to juveniles for non-murder crimes than have all other states combined. In a study conducted by Florida State University, 77 young men have been sentenced to life in prison, without parole, in Florida for non-homicide crimes when they were 17 years of age or younger. Six of those juveniles were 13 or 14 at the time of their crimes.

These sentencing trends have raised questions about cruelty and generated protests from human rights groups which argue that these sentences violate the ban on cruel and unusual punishment in the 8th Amendment to the Constitution.

Florida"e;s position on sentencing is currently before the U.S. Supreme Court in a case involving two men, ages 16 and 13 at the time of their crimes, who were sentenced to life without parole. Terrance Graham, was convicted after fleeing police after a home invasion robbery. He was on probation at the time for an armed robbery he committed when he was 16. Despite the recommendations of prosecutors for a sentence of 30 years, the judge, citing an escalating pattern of criminal conduct and the protection of the community, handed down the life sentence. The other party to the Supreme Court case involves a then 13 year old convicted after a one day trial of raping a 72 year old woman.

A wide array of groups including the American Bar Association and the American Psychiatric Association have filed briefs in the case which is using the 2005 U.S. Supreme Court ruling that the death penalty for juveniles was unconstitutional as the legal basis for this challenge.

http://www.heraldtribune.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090809/ARTICLE/908091068/2107/BUSINESS&Title=Florida justice Tough on youths&template=printart

http://sentencing.typepad.com/sentencing_law_and_policy/graham and sullivan eighth amendment cases/

http://eji.org/eji/childrenprison/deathinprison/sullivan

Why Did Michael Jackson’s Person Physical Hire An Attorney?

With all of the media attention and controversy surrounding the death of Michael Jackson, his alleged use of prescription drugs and his personal physician, who was present at the time of his death, the fact that the physician has hired a criminal defense attorney to represent him during the investigation may lead many to believe he has something to hide. However, it is not an uncommon practice for individuals being questioned by police during an investigation to be represented by an attorney and, in this case especially, is a wise thing to do. Even if police do not consider a person a target of an investigation, that person has a right to have an attorney present to protect their rights as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. In cases such as this, where there are no clear answers as to what happened, it is even more important to hire a criminal defense attorney before being questioned by the police. This right is reinforced by Miranda v. Arizona wherein the government must advise any individual being questioned of their right to have an attorney present to protect your Fifth Amendment privilege against self incrimination and that any statements made by the individual, whether they are a suspect or simply a witness, can and will be used against them. Even if you know you are completely innocent, you do not want to be put in the position of saying something the police could potentially use against you during the investigation. Many people are intimidated by the police and their nervousness may cause them to say or do something that is misinterpreted by investigators. An attorney can guide the individual through the questioning process to ensure the person does not unwittingly incriminate themselves.

http://www.examiner.com/x-12971-Houston-Legal-Issues-Examiner~y2009m6d30-Why-does-Michael-Jacksons-personal-physician-need-a-criminal-defense-lawyer

Disparity in Cocaine Sentences May Soon End

President Obama recently voiced his desire to change federal law concerning the sentencing disparity between crack and powder cocaine crimes. Under current federal law, it takes five-hundred grams of powder cocaine to receive a five-year mandatory minimum sentence. On the contrary, it only takes five grams of crack cocaine to receive that same sentence. Interestingly enough, 9/10 of crack cocaine arrests are of African Americans, while 3/4 of powder cocaine arrests are of white people. Changes in sentences will hopefully end this example of institutionalized racism in the criminal justice system.

New DNA Law Affects Anyone Charged With Felony

On June 16, 2009, Gov. Charlie Crist signed a new Florida law that allows police to take a DNA sample, such as a mouth swab, from every individual charged with a felony. The new law will allow the state to add the sample to a state database even if the charge is ultimately dismissed. Under current law, DNA samples can only be taken after a conviction of a felony or specified misdemeanors. The new law will be phased in over the next 10 years. The ACLU may challenge the new law as government expands its intrusions into “the people.”