User Controls
Deleted posts for: Truth Details
-
2022-09-21 at 1:31 AM UTC
"Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"
-
2022-09-21 at 1:41 AM UTCOzone layer hits a "significant milestone" as concentrations of harmful chemicals drop 50%, NOAA says
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/ozone-layer-significant-milestone-concentrations-harmful-chemicals-drop-50-noaa/ -
2022-09-21 at 4:48 AM UTC
-
2022-09-21 at 4:48 AM UTC
No passports or visas were needed to enter the United States through Ellis Island at this time. In fact, no papers were required at all.
-
2022-09-21 at 1:32 PM UTC
-
2022-09-21 at 1:33 PM UTChttps://www.cbsnews.com/minnesota/news/derek-chauvin-moved-to-federal-prison-in-arizona/#:~:text=Derek%20Chauvin%20is%20serving%20more,Heights%20state%20prison%20on%20Wednesday.
Derek Chauvin is serving more than 20 years for the murder and for violating Floyd's civil rights.
-
2022-09-21 at 1:37 PM UTChttps://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1111
Murder is the unlawful killing of a human being with malice aforethought.
-
2022-09-21 at 1:38 PM UTChttps://apnews.com/article/derek-chauvin-trial-charges-716fa235ecf6212f0ee4993110d959df#:~:text=They%20didn't%20have%20to,the%20way%20he%20was%20restrained.
WHAT’S SECOND-DEGREE UNINTENTIONAL MURDER?
It’s also called felony murder. To prove this count, prosecutors had to show that Chauvin killed Floyd while committing or trying to commit a felony — in this case, third-degree assault. They didn’t have to prove Chauvin intended to kill Floyd, only that he intended to apply unlawful force that caused bodily harm. -
2022-09-21 at 1:42 PM UTC
Originally posted by aldra yes, thankyou for demonstrating
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1111 -
2022-09-21 at 1:43 PM UTC
-
2022-09-21 at 1:55 PM UTC
-
2022-09-21 at 1:56 PM UTC
-
2022-09-21 at 1:58 PM UTChttps://www.greghillassociates.com/when-are-sentences-on-multiple-convictions-concurrent.html#:~:text=The%20Gist%20of%20this%20Article,act%20are%20to%20run%20concurrent.
When someone is convicted of multiple crimes from a single act, the sentence is usually the longest one for any one crime and the other convictions arising from the same act are to run concurrent. The exception is in sex crimes or cases with multiple victims, where the sentences run consecutive, making for some very long sentences. Sentence enhancements are then added, or used as a multiplier when it is a second strike under the Three Strikes Law.
It is quite common for someone to be convicted of multiple counts in a case. -
2022-09-21 at 1:59 PM UTC
The answer, as it is to most legal questions, is it matters. First, it matters if there are multiple convictions related to a single incident. When that is the case, Penal Code § 654 prohibits multiple punishment for the same act. The judge can impose punishment for only one of the acts and must otherwise “stay” punishment for the others, meaning it is not imposed. The judge would then impose punishment for the longest term, looking at both the base term and any sentence enhancements.
For example, under Penal Code § 654, for a person with one prior strike conviction, the judge may impose a four-year term for one count, double it to eight years and then add a five-year enhancement for a prior serious felony conviction. Punishment on other convictions from the same incident at the same time would be at one-third of the mid-term punishment for the crime, then added to the underlying 13 years in this case, for example.
Please note that by its terms, however, § 654 does not prohibit multiple punishment for multiple punishment of the same statute. For example, in People v. Correa (2012) 54 Cal.4th 331, 244, defendant, a felon, was found hiding with seven guns and the judge was punished for seven counts of felon-in-possession of a handgun.
When Penal Code § 654 is not an issue, special rules apply with respect to whether a defendant will serve sentences for multiple counts concurrently or consecutively. In general, unless a judge specifies to the contrary, sentences are presumed to run concurrently. Penal Code § 669.
It is good to note that when a judge imposes concurrent sentences and one or more of the crimes is required to be served in state prison and one or more of the crimes is to be served in county jail, the sentence is served in state prison. Penal Code § 669(d); People v. Torres (2013) 213 Cal.App.4th 1151, 1160.
If, however, a judge decides to impose consecutive (i.e. one after the other) sentences, the judge must follow the sentencing rules set out at Penal Code §§ 669 and 1170.1(b). The judge must first select a “principal term” and set out its reasoning on the record for that term. The principal term must be the longest punishment imposed for that conviction, including any additional time for applicable enhancements (Penal Code § 1170.1(a).
Then the judge would order consecutive terms on “subordinate terms,” which are one-third of the middle term for additional offenses, plus one-third of the term for any applicable enhancements. Penal Code § 1170.1(a); People v. Hill (2004) 119 Cal.App.4th 85, 91. The judge must explain on the record why the “subordinate” term is to run consecutively. Cal. Rules of Court, Rule 4.425.
To impose consecutive sentences, the judge must find a minimum of one factor under the applicable statutes or court rules. People v. Forbes (1986) 182 Cal.App.3d 676, 679. The most common reason is that the “crimes involve separate victims or involve the same victim on separate occasions.” Penal Code § 667.6(d). This type of consecutive sentence is most commonly seen in sex crimes involving the same victim such as in a child molestation case.
There are certain crimes for which a court must impose a consecutive sentence. For example, then sentence for any offense committed while defendant is incarcerated is to run consecutively to the existing sentence. Penal Code § 1170.1©. Similarly, a violation of Penal Code § 139(b) (criminal threats against a victim of violence) must serve the full-term consecutive, not at one-third. Other exceptions to the one-third provision under 1170.1(a) include convictions for kidnapping under Penal Code § 207 (as specified in 1170.1(b)). -
2022-09-21 at 2 PM UTChttps://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/lung-expert-testifies-george-floyd-died-because-his-breathing-was-restricted
Lung expert testifies George Floyd died because his breathing was restricted
Floyd died because his upper airway was compressed by Officer Derek Chauvin’s knee, while his position on the hard asphalt with his hands cuffed behind his back — as two other officers helped hold him down — did not allow his lungs to expand, Dr. David Systrom said. That restricted the flow of oxygen and raised carbon dioxide levels in his body, Systrom, a pulmonologist and critical care physician at Brigham and Women’s Hospital in Boston, said at the federal trial for J. Alexander Kueng, Thomas Lane and Tou Thao.
“Oxygen delivered to the heart and brain is critical to survival,” Systrom said, later calling Floyd’s death “an eminently reversible respiration failure event.” -
2022-09-21 at 2:02 PM UTChttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trial_of_Derek_Chauvin
Chauvin was found guilty of unintentional second-degree murder, third-degree murder, and second-degree manslaughter; the first charge could have carried a maximum penalty of 40 years in prison. It was the first conviction of a white officer in Minnesota for the murder of a black person. On June 25, 2021, Chauvin was sentenced by the trial judge to 22+1⁄2 years in prison for second-degree murder, 10 years more than the sentencing guidelines of 12+1⁄2 years.
-
2022-09-21 at 2:03 PM UTC
-
2022-09-21 at 2:32 PM UTC
The answer, as it is to most legal questions, is it matters. First, it matters if there are multiple convictions related to a single incident. When that is the case, Penal Code § 654 prohibits multiple punishment for the same act. The judge can impose punishment for only one of the acts and must otherwise “stay” punishment for the others, meaning it is not imposed. The judge would then impose punishment for the longest term, looking at both the base term and any sentence enhancements.
For example, under Penal Code § 654, for a person with one prior strike conviction, the judge may impose a four-year term for one count, double it to eight years and then add a five-year enhancement for a prior serious felony conviction. Punishment on other convictions from the same incident at the same time would be at one-third of the mid-term punishment for the crime, then added to the underlying 13 years in this case, for example.
Please note that by its terms, however, § 654 does not prohibit multiple punishment for multiple punishment of the same statute. For example, in People v. Correa (2012) 54 Cal.4th 331, 244, defendant, a felon, was found hiding with seven guns and the judge was punished for seven counts of felon-in-possession of a handgun.
When Penal Code § 654 is not an issue, special rules apply with respect to whether a defendant will serve sentences for multiple counts concurrently or consecutively. In general, unless a judge specifies to the contrary, sentences are presumed to run concurrently. Penal Code § 669.
It is good to note that when a judge imposes concurrent sentences and one or more of the crimes is required to be served in state prison and one or more of the crimes is to be served in county jail, the sentence is served in state prison. Penal Code § 669(d); People v. Torres (2013) 213 Cal.App.4th 1151, 1160.
If, however, a judge decides to impose consecutive (i.e. one after the other) sentences, the judge must follow the sentencing rules set out at Penal Code §§ 669 and 1170.1(b). The judge must first select a “principal term” and set out its reasoning on the record for that term. The principal term must be the longest punishment imposed for that conviction, including any additional time for applicable enhancements (Penal Code § 1170.1(a).
Then the judge would order consecutive terms on “subordinate terms,” which are one-third of the middle term for additional offenses, plus one-third of the term for any applicable enhancements. Penal Code § 1170.1(a); People v. Hill (2004) 119 Cal.App.4th 85, 91. The judge must explain on the record why the “subordinate” term is to run consecutively. Cal. Rules of Court, Rule 4.425.
To impose consecutive sentences, the judge must find a minimum of one factor under the applicable statutes or court rules. People v. Forbes (1986) 182 Cal.App.3d 676, 679. The most common reason is that the “crimes involve separate victims or involve the same victim on separate occasions.” Penal Code § 667.6(d). This type of consecutive sentence is most commonly seen in sex crimes involving the same victim such as in a child molestation case.
There are certain crimes for which a court must impose a consecutive sentence. For example, then sentence for any offense committed while defendant is incarcerated is to run consecutively to the existing sentence. Penal Code § 1170.1©. Similarly, a violation of Penal Code § 139(b) (criminal threats against a victim of violence) must serve the full-term consecutive, not at one-third. Other exceptions to the one-third provision under 1170.1(a) include convictions for kidnapping under Penal Code § 207 (as specified in 1170.1(b)). -
2022-09-29 at 12:33 AM UTC
-
2022-09-29 at 1:24 AM UTC
