Court denies appeal of judge's sentencing goof
Headline News
The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday rejected an appeal from an Alabama man who was sentenced to five years in prison when a judge wrongly thought the law required him to serve time.
U.S. District Judge William Steele didn't want to order Patrick Lett, a 17-year Army veteran who served two tours in Iraq, to prison after the former soldier pleaded guilty to cocaine possession. But the judge thought the law required prison time.
When Steele learned differently, he reduced the punishment to 11 days of time served and three years of supervised release. That didn't satisfy prosecutors, who appealed the lighter sentence on the grounds that Steele didn't have the authority to change the initial five-year sentence.
The 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled the judge could not undo his sentence, and the Supreme Court rejected Lett's appeal of that decision without comment.
A new sentencing hearing is set for Oct. 24, though one of Lett's attorneys said a delay may be needed to prepare arguments.
Attorney Douglas Berman of Ohio State University's Moritz College of Law in Columbus said Monday that defense attorneys are expected to argue Lett initially had ineffective legal representation.
A Justice Department spokesman was not immediately available for comment on the high court's ruling.
At the initial sentencing, Steele noted that Lett had led "an exemplary life up until the time of the offenses and even after," when Lett re-enlisted and served another 17 months before his indictment.
Lett, now 39, pleaded guilty to cocaine possession for his involvement in a cousin's drug operation.
Lett works full time doing fiber optics work at a shipyard in Pascagoula, Miss. His two children, who live with Lett's mother, visit him on weekends. He supports his family as a single parent, his attorney said.
Related listings
-
Lawsuits likely over NYC mayor's bid for 3rd term
Headline News 10/02/2008Mayor Michael Bloomberg is almost certain to face a legal challenge if he tries to alter the city's term-limits law and seek four more years in office.Several lawyers and government watchdog groups said Wednesday they are mulling legal action to bloc...
-
Indicted federal judge Kent will continue working
Headline News 09/02/2008U.S. District Judge Samuel Kent plans to keep hearing court cases while facing prosecution on charges he fondled a former court employee, according to the chief judge for the Southern District of Texas."The only way he doesn't receive cases is if he'...
-
Detroit mayor's political future back in court
Headline News 08/29/2008Arguments are under way in a Detroit courtroom, where a judge is expected to decide whether Gov. Jennifer Granholm can hold a hearing to remove Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick from office.Wayne County Circuit Judge Robert Ziolkowski (zill-KOW-ski) handled oth...
Grounds for Divorce in Ohio - Sylkatis Law, LLC
A divorce in Ohio is filed when there is typically “fault” by one of the parties and party not at “fault” seeks to end the marriage. A court in Ohio may grant a divorce for the following reasons:
• Willful absence of the adverse party for one year
• Adultery
• Extreme cruelty
• Fraudulent contract
• Any gross neglect of duty
• Habitual drunkenness
• Imprisonment in a correctional institution at the time of filing the complaint
• Procurement of a divorce outside this state by the other party
Additionally, there are two “no-fault” basis for which a court may grant a divorce:
• When the parties have, without interruption for one year, lived separate and apart without cohabitation
• Incompatibility, unless denied by either party
However, whether or not the the court grants the divorce for “fault” or not, in Ohio the party not at “fault” will not get a bigger slice of the marital property.