Judges improperly enhanced sentences of more than 100 Jan 6 protesters, court rules

ziggy

Verified User
Judges may have improperly applied federal sentencing guidelines to more than 100 people convicted of participating in the Jan. 6, 2021, riot at the US Capitol, a federal court ruled Friday.

A three-judge panel of the DC Circuit Court of Appeals rejected the Justice Department’s argument that convicted rioters merited lengthier prison sentences for interfering in the “administration of justice” when they stormed the Capitol to disrupt the certification of Joe Biden’s 2020 election win.

“[T]he phrase ‘administration of justice’ does not encompass Congress’s role in the electoral certification process,” Judge Patricia Millett wrote in the court’s unanimous ruling.

“[T]ext, context, and commentary show that ‘administration of justice’ refers to judicial, quasi-judicial, and adjunct investigative proceedings, but does not extend to the unique congressional function of certifying electoral college votes,” she added.

“Administration of justice” enhancements are typically reserved for defendants who disrupt judicial proceedings, such as a courtroom trial or grand jury investigation.

However, prosecutors routinely asked DC judges to apply the enhancement to individuals convicted of participating in the riot at the Capitol.

More than 100 rioters have had “administration of justice” enhancements applied to their sentences, Patricia Hartman, a spokesperson for the DC US Attorney’s Office, told the Associated Press.

The imprisoned rioters who had their sentences enhanced may push for new, lighter sentences if the appeals court ruling stands.

The case before the appeals court was specifically related to the enhancement of convicted rioter Larry Brock.

Brock, a retired Air Force officer who stormed the Capitol while wearing a military combat helmet and tactical vest, was convicted of a felony charge of obstruction of an official proceeding and misdemeanor offenses for his role in the riot.

He was sentenced last year to two years in prison.

“Brock’s interference with one stage of the Electoral College vote-counting process — while no doubt endangering our democratic processes and temporarily derailing Congress’s constitutional work — did not interfere with the ‘administration of justice,’” the appeals court ruled.

Brock’s attorney argued that the misapplied enhancement likely increased his client’s sentence by about nine months.

The Justice Department is considering whether to appeal the ruling, according to Hartman.

https://nypost.com/2024/03/01/us-ne...ced-sentences-of-jan-6-rioters-appeals-court/
 
Judges may have improperly applied federal sentencing guidelines to more than 100 people convicted of participating in the Jan. 6, 2021, riot at the US Capitol, a federal court ruled Friday.

A three-judge panel of the DC Circuit Court of Appeals rejected the Justice Department’s argument that convicted rioters merited lengthier prison sentences for interfering in the “administration of justice” when they stormed the Capitol to disrupt the certification of Joe Biden’s 2020 election win.

“[T]he phrase ‘administration of justice’ does not encompass Congress’s role in the electoral certification process,” Judge Patricia Millett wrote in the court’s unanimous ruling.

“[T]ext, context, and commentary show that ‘administration of justice’ refers to judicial, quasi-judicial, and adjunct investigative proceedings, but does not extend to the unique congressional function of certifying electoral college votes,” she added.

“Administration of justice” enhancements are typically reserved for defendants who disrupt judicial proceedings, such as a courtroom trial or grand jury investigation.

However, prosecutors routinely asked DC judges to apply the enhancement to individuals convicted of participating in the riot at the Capitol.

More than 100 rioters have had “administration of justice” enhancements applied to their sentences, Patricia Hartman, a spokesperson for the DC US Attorney’s Office, told the Associated Press.

The imprisoned rioters who had their sentences enhanced may push for new, lighter sentences if the appeals court ruling stands.

The case before the appeals court was specifically related to the enhancement of convicted rioter Larry Brock.

Brock, a retired Air Force officer who stormed the Capitol while wearing a military combat helmet and tactical vest, was convicted of a felony charge of obstruction of an official proceeding and misdemeanor offenses for his role in the riot.

He was sentenced last year to two years in prison.

“Brock’s interference with one stage of the Electoral College vote-counting process — while no doubt endangering our democratic processes and temporarily derailing Congress’s constitutional work — did not interfere with the ‘administration of justice,’” the appeals court ruled.

Brock’s attorney argued that the misapplied enhancement likely increased his client’s sentence by about nine months.

The Justice Department is considering whether to appeal the ruling, according to Hartman.

https://nypost.com/2024/03/01/us-ne...ced-sentences-of-jan-6-rioters-appeals-court/

So basically a witch hunt. Every one of those conviction should be overturned and prosecutors reprimanded.
 
Standard Stalinist bullshit; a complete , politically motivated, corruption of the justice system.
 
I'll drink to that!!!

Trump did nothing for 187 minutes as Capitol riot unfolded.
As rioters swarmed the Capitol building on Jan. 6, 2021, and aides begged Donald Trump to help stop the violence, the then-president watched TV in his West Wing dining room

“Within 15 minutes of leaving the stage, President Trump knew that the Capitol was besieged and under attack,” Luria said, adding:*“At 1:25, President Trump went to the private dining room off the Oval Office. From 1:25 until 4:00, the president stayed in his dining room … The TV was tuned to Fox News all afternoon.”
 
So basically a witch hunt. Every one of those conviction should be overturned and prosecutors reprimanded.

You totally misunderstood the ruling, they MAY have improperly used an enhancement, IF they did, it would not overturn any convictions, but MIGHT reduce some sentences. It was an interpretation of the law that was found to be incorrect, no lawyer gets reprimanded for such. We are allowed to argue the laws meaning, being overturned is not something people get reprimanded.
 
You totally misunderstood the ruling, they MAY have improperly used an enhancement, IF they did, it would not overturn any convictions, but MIGHT reduce some sentences. It was an interpretation of the law that was found to be incorrect, no lawyer gets reprimanded for such. We are allowed to argue the laws meaning, being overturned is not something people get reprimanded.

You really think Yagina can comprehend all that?

I don't.
 
You totally misunderstood the ruling, they MAY have improperly used an enhancement, IF they did, it would not overturn any convictions, but MIGHT reduce some sentences. It was an interpretation of the law that was found to be incorrect, no lawyer gets reprimanded for such. We are allowed to argue the laws meaning, being overturned is not something people get reprimanded.

The minute I read ziggy's thread title I knew there was more to the story, and when I opened the thread...

VOILA!!

I was right. He left out the KEY word "MAY".

The one thing you can count on from JPP's GOP contingent is that they never tell the whole story.
 
The minute I read ziggy's thread title I knew there was more to the story, and when I opened the thread...

VOILA!!

I was right. He left out the KEY word "MAY".

The one thing you can count on from JPP's GOP contingent is that they never tell the whole story.

I copied and pasted the title of the posted article, cry harder.
 
Yet, pulling a (false) fire alarm in an attempt to halt a congressional vote gets no legal deterrent.
 
You totally misunderstood the ruling, they MAY have improperly used an enhancement, IF they did, it would not overturn any convictions, but MIGHT reduce some sentences. It was an interpretation of the law that was found to be incorrect, no lawyer gets reprimanded for such. We are allowed to argue the laws meaning, being overturned is not something people get reprimanded.

It's prosecutorial misconduct, plain as day.
 
Should be over in January 2025

I'm concerned about that.

Shouldn't they be put down before the pigfucking orangutan pardons them?

And why, for that matter, hasn't Biden taken care of Trump yet?
This republic is already dead.
They'll be no restoring it.

Let's hope that it's the correct people who replace it,
but that could go wrong too.

Somebody else's problem, though.
At this point, I shouldn't even give a fuck.
 
Back
Top