Facebook Twitter Youtube Linkedin
Elizabeth Franklin-Best P.C. | Federal Criminal Defense Lawyers & Prison Consultants

News

Elderly Prisoners in the Federal Bureau of Prisons

Aug 1, 2013 No Comments

By Christopher Zoukis

Introduction: A Loyal Prison Law Blog Reader Writes

Earlier this week, a loyal Prison Law Blog reader presented a situation to us and asked for our help.  The reader said that his elderly family member, who’s currently incarcerated in the Federal Bureau of Prisons on a crack cocaine related offense, had served 24 years in prison — has maintained a clean disciplinary record — and just turned 72.  The question was simple, and a good one, too: “Is there any way that he can petition to be released due to his age and the length of time he’s been in prison?”  While there is no easy answer to this situation, a discussion of the applicable regulations at hand is warranted.  This blog post will provide a top-level overview of early release opportunities for elderly offenders who are incarcerated within the Federal Bureau of Prisons.

The Regulation At Hand: 18 U.S.C. § 3582 (c)(a)(A)(ii)

To start, there is law which specifically allows for the release of elderly offenders incarcerated within the Federal Bureau of Prisons.  18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A)(ii) provides that the sentencing court, upon motion of the Director of the Bureau of Prisons, may reduce the term of imprisonment for a defendant who is “at least 70 years of age, has served at least 30 years in prison . . . for the offense or offenses for which the defendant is currently imprisoned, and a determination has been made by the Director of the Bureau of Prisons that the defendant is not a danger to the safety of any other person or the community . . .”*1  As such, there is regulation and precedent for elderly offenders to be released early, but rarely do facts combine into a perfect storm where the motion or request would be granted.

Read More »

My Prison Education

Jul 30, 2013 No Comments

By Christopher A. Vaughn I was kicked out of high school during my sophomore year due to attendance issues. Shortly after that, I was arrested for several crimes that resulted in a 34-year prison sentence in the Illinois Department of Corrections. Coming to jail at seventeen and facing many serious offenses I was faced with

Read More »

Habeas Hints: 2012 Supreme Court Habeas Highlights: Plea Bargaining Cases

Jul 29, 2013 No Comments

By Kent Russell

This column provides “habeas hints” to prisoners who are considering or handling habeas corpus petitions as their own attorneys (“in pro per”). The focus of the column is on “AEDPA” (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act), the federal habeas corpus law which now governs habeas corpus practice in courts throughout the United States.

Missouri v. Frye, 132 S.Ct. 1399 (2012)

Lafler v. Cooper, 132 S.Ct. 1376 (2012)

In Missouri v. Frye (Frye) and Lafler v. Cooper (Cooper), the U.S. Supreme Court (SCOTUS) held that, when a plea offer by the State is rejected due to ineffective assistance of counsel (IAC), the defendant may be entitled to a second chance at accepting the offer – even if he subsequently pleaded guilty to less favorable terms, or went to trial, was found guilty and received a longer sentence than that provided for in the original plea offer.

In Frye, the defendant was charged with a felony for a fourth offense of driving with a revoked license. The prosecutor sent Frye’s lawyer a letter offering to reduce the charge to a misdemeanor if Frye pleaded guilty within a specified time period and agreed to a 90-day sentence. However, the lawyer never informed Frye of the offer before the deadline for acceptance, and the offer expired. Then Frye, ignorant that the plea offer had lapsed, pleaded guilty without conditions and was sentenced to 3 years in prison – more than 10 times the sentence he would have received had he accepted the plea offer.

In Cooper, the defendant was charged with assault with intent to murder after he shot a woman in the buttocks. Prosecutors offered a plea deal with a recommended term of four to seven years. However, Cooper’s lawyer advised him to reject the offer because the lawyer insisted that state law did not permit an attempted murder conviction for wounds inflicted below the waist. The lawyer’s advice was 100% wrong, but Cooper relied on it and rejected the plea offer. Cooper then went to trial, was convicted and received a mandatory minimum sentence of 15 to 30 years – more than 4 times greater than the sentence he would have received had he taken the plea bargain.

Read More »

Prison Administrators Should Support Advanced Education

Jul 29, 2013 No Comments

By Derrick Falkenberg The value of education for today’s prisoners is increasing like never before. With the economic downturn, the uneducated are at a distinct disadvantage and uneducated prisoners are even worse off. As sizeable groups of citizens compete for well-paying positions, the edge goes to those with a greater understanding. These times have shown

Read More »

Prison Education as a Tool for Socialization

Jul 27, 2013 No Comments

Generally, crime is a violation of generally agreed-upon societal norms that have been codified into law via criminalization.  The concept is that society has deemed certain actions to be acceptable and others to be unacceptable, and when someone violates a social norm we expect that they will be chastised.  This chastisement maintains the agreed-upon social

Read More »

The Power of Education

Jul 26, 2013 No Comments

By Jermaine J. Sims The current economic situation in America has caused budgetary constraints to ensue within the Federal Bureau of Prisons. Because of these constraints, inmate tutors are having both their pay and hours cut. As such, it’s not difficult to imagine a Bureau of Prisons where academic and vocational programs are few and

Read More »

Maryland: Registry Changes

Jul 26, 2013 No Comments

By Aaron C. Davis

Maryland officials in recent weeks quietly removed the mug  shot of convicted child molester Robert M. Haines Jr. from the state’s  sex-offender registry.

They also deleted the Internet link to the former  middle school teacher’s guilty plea to charges he abused a 13-year-old student  decades ago. Haines’s physical description, the address of the cottage he lives  in near Annapolis, the make and model of the car he drives: Everything the state  had tracked for years to keep him from anonymity was erased.

Haines was  removed not because he was exonerated of his crime. His information was taken  down because of a recent ruling by the state’s Court of Appeals declaring  sex-offender registration unconstitutional punishment for those who committed  crimes before the registry began in 1995.

Under the ruling, Haines may be  the first of almost one in four registered sex offenders who Maryland could be  forced to scrub from its online database. Maryland officials are now bracing for  the possibility that a wave of lawsuits following his case could require the  state to delist roughly 1,800 of its 8,000 registered sex offenders, state  records, e-mails and interviews show. State officials say they’ll forcefully  challenge each suit.

And the fallout could go further. The state’s  second-highest court is now weighing whether the Haines case should be applied  to a broader group, beginning with a Montgomery County man who pleaded guilty in  2001 to preying on a 12-year-old Pennsylvania girl over the  Internet.

Read More »

States Create Special Commissions to Study Flat-Fee Indigent Defense

Jul 25, 2013 No Comments

By Joe Watson

Some states may soon be doing more to guarantee the Sixth Amendment right to counsel for indigent criminal defend-ants.

Special commissions have been convened in Nevada, Idaho, Michigan and Pennsylvania to investigate how flat-fee contracts with private defense attorneys are failing defendants who can’t afford to hire counsel. Meanwhile, some courts are weighing whether the practice of flat-fee indigent defense is unconstitutional.

According to Stateline, the news service of The Pew Center on the States, more than a dozen states use flat-fee contract attorneys to represent indigent defendants in order to save money and provide relief to swamped public defenders’ offices. However, critics argue that such “contract counsel” tend to be young, inexperienced, penurious and overwhelmed by their own caseloads; thus, the supposed savings effectively subsidize backlogged appellate courts and state prisons filled with poorly-represented defendants.

“This type of contract creates a direct financial conflict of interest between the attorney and the client,” said David Carroll, research director at the National Legal Aid and Defender Association. “Because the lawyer will be paid the same amount, no matter how much or how little he works on each case, it is in the lawyer’s personal interest to devote as little time as possible to each appointed case.”

In Jackson County, Michigan, for example, contract attorneys are paid a paltry $600 flat fee per case to defend indigent clients accused of second-degree and Class A through D felonies, and only $350 per case for lesser felonies. In Lyon County, Nevada, 200 indigent defense felony cases and 400 misdemeanor cases were contracted out to a first-year lawyer who had passed his bar exam only a few weeks earlier.

Read More »

“Guilty by Reason of Arrest – School to Prison Pipeline 2013”

Jul 25, 2013 No Comments

About Terrance Tykeem Author, Recording Artist and former NFL walk-on. Many around the country remember him for his 90’s hit single, “If You Can’t Learn To Love Her“ Which  Received national attention on radio and tv, as well as taking part in major events such the cash money ruff ryder tours and producing TV shows

Read More »
Search
Categories
Categories
Archives
Our Prison Books
Find a Federal Prison
Get a Case Consultation

Book an Initial Consultation

Got it!
X