Quote:
Originally Posted by ShadowRoll
Federal sentences are too harsh, almost draconian. But the truth is that Bush's actions will have no effect on other criminal cases in the federal system because such sentences are the result of strict sentencing guidelines which take into account many factors in a very exacting manner. It would make not a bit of difference if a defense attorney pointed out the justifications spewed out by the White House in defense of the president's use of his pardon power. A federal judge in any other criminal case will still be limited and directed by the guidelines, from which there can be little deviation.
And by the way, not all defense attorneys are liberals. Plus, an attorney, whether liberal or conservative, is going to do all he can, and make every reasonable argument he can on the behalf of his client. An attorney can't disregard any potentially effective argument just because he disagrees with it philosophically. If he did, he wouldn't be doing his job, which is to zealously defend his client.
|
Ellen Podgar disagrees with you but I understand what you are saying.
“By saying that the sentence was excessive, I wonder if he understood the ramifications of saying that,” said Ellen S. Podgor, who teaches criminal law at Stetson University in St. Petersburg, Fla. “This is opening up a can of worms about federal sentencing.”
And by the way, not all defense attorneys are liberals. And of course you are correct. I think I was making a fairly safe generalization.