"Not So Fast Babyboy" !

The Supreme Court has done it again, sidestepping
an issue. After reading the article below please give
us your thoughts about it, Ok?


The Supreme Court refused today to reconsider a legal rule that might surprise most Americans. It allows judges to punish defendants for certain crimes even after a jury has acquitted them of the charges.

In recent years, the justices have described the right to jury trial as one of the bedrock principles of American law. But they have been unwilling to say that a jury's not-guilty verdict means the defendant cannot be punished for these charges.

Instead, the court has said judges may take into account "acquitted conduct" when they decide on a prison term.

The case of Mark Hurn from Madison, Wis., provides a stark example. The justices today turned away his appeal of an extra 15-year prison term for having crack cocaine after a jury had acquitted him on the crack cocaine charges. He was convicted of having powder cocaine in his house, a charge that would warrant between two and three years in prison under the federal sentencing guidelines.

The high court endorsed this "acquitted conduct" rule a decade ago in a California case, but they did so in a brief opinion. They agreed judges can decide on the right sentence for a convicted criminal by "relying on the entire range of conduct" presented by prosecutors, not just the charges that resulted in guilty verdicts.

But in recent years, that rule has allowed judges to give defendants long prison terms even when a jury rejected key parts of the prosecution's case.





This Article Continues Here





Get your copy of the award winning King:
"From Atlanta to the Mountain top
It's the 3-Hour Docudrama that
tells the story of the Civil Rights
movement and the life of
Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.
To learn more and hear
excerpts from this treasured
program,click here:
http://www.kingprogram.net/