#Parole Laws California

[calparolelawyer]

Challenging Three Strikes Sentences: How a Skilled Parole Lawyer Can Help

California's "Three Strikes" law is one of the most stringent sentencing policies in the United States. It imposes severe penalties, including life imprisonment, for repeat offenders. However, changes in the law and evolving interpretations by courts have created opportunities to challenge these harsh sentences. This is where the expertise of a three strikes parole attorney becomes invaluable.

Understanding the Three Strikes Law

The Three Strikes law aims to enhance public safety by targeting repeat offenders. Under this policy, individuals convicted of three qualifying felonies face mandatory life imprisonment. While the intent of the law is to deter repeat offenses, it has also led to overly punitive sentences, even for non-violent crimes. Thankfully, legal reforms and case reviews have provided pathways for inmates to seek sentence reductions or parole.

The Role of a Three Strikes Parole Lawyer

A three strikes parole lawyer specializes in navigating the complexities of California's parole system. These legal professionals assess the specific circumstances of a case, identify errors in sentencing, and advocate for the inmate's eligibility for parole or sentence modification. By leveraging their expertise, they can argue for reduced penalties, often based on factors such as good behavior, participation in rehabilitation programs, or changes in the law.

How Legal Representation Makes a Difference

The success of challenging a three strikes sentence heavily relies on thorough preparation and an understanding of the parole process. A seasoned California parole attorney knows how to present compelling evidence and advocate for their client during parole hearings. This advocacy not only increases the likelihood of a favorable outcome but also ensures the client’s rights are upheld throughout the process.

For individuals serving life sentences under the Three Strikes law, hope lies in the expertise of skilled legal professionals. Navigating the parole system can be daunting, but with the assistance of experienced attorneys, there is a pathway toward a fairer outcome. If you or a loved one is facing this challenge, seeking the guidance of an experienced legal advocate like the team at Cal Parole Lawyer can make all the difference.

[stresscrimes]

INFO POST ON DANIEL MARSH

On April 14th, 2013, Daniel would leave his mothers home early in the morning to search for a home with open windows or doors in Davis, California. He would later come upon the home of Claudia (76) and Oliver (87). Daniel cut open the window screen, invading their home, and made his way into their bedroom where they were asleep. After a few minutes of watching them sleep, Daniel would stab them to death, with Claudia sustaining 67 stab wounds, and Oliver 61. Daniel would then dissect, eviscerate, and mutilate their dead bodies. The couples bodies were discovered the next day, but there would be no arrest for Daniel until June due to his extensive planning, no DNA, fingerprints, footprints, or any evidence at the crime scene. Even though the idiot almost got away with murder at 15, he would become a suspect after bragging to his friends about what he did. Daniel was then interrogated and confessed to the crimes, where he would tell investigators the murders gave him a feeling of pure happiness which he felt for weeks. Daniel had a long history of violent and antisocial behaviors, as well as mental health issues. He had also been fantasizing about murdering people since the age of 10 and aspired to become a serial killer. Daniel was given the maximum of 52 years to life, which was given to him at 17 years old in 2014. Daniel will be allowed by California law to be paroled after serving 25 years, when he is 42.

[offender42085]

Post 1371

Chase Leonard Bomar, California inmate BV7380, born 1998, incarceration intake August 2023 at age 24, sentenced 16 years to life, scheduled release date not published, parole eligible August 2029

Murder

In July 2023, a year after a jury found brothers Chase and Cody (California inmate BV7381) Bomar guilty of second-degree murder in the 2018 killing of their former roommate Jeremy Fortuin, the brothers were sentenced.

Both Bomars were sentenced to 16 years to life in prison, including a one-year enhancement for being armed with a deadly weapon. As the second-degree murder charge is a serious, violent felony offense, it counts as a first strike for both Bomars and would count as an enhancement in future trials in accordance with California's "three strikes" law. If the Bomars do attain release in the future, they will be subject to a lifetime term of parole or post-release community supervision. 

Though the Bomar brothers' weeks-long jury trial concluded July 19, 2022, a series of rescheduled dates led to the delayed sentencing that finally unfolded. 

Before their sentences were delivered, the court held a 'Franklin hearing' for the Bomar siblings; at the time of Fortuin's murder, Chase was 19 and Cody was 21. Taking into consideration their young age and a letter of recommendation from the brothers' pre-trail release officer, the Judge was called upon to rule if the Bomars' case constituted as unusual, which would allow for the two to be placed on probation rather than sent to prison. 

Evidence proffered during the hearing included a letter from the release officer, a psychiatric analysis and a letter from Cody that expressed his remorse. Though the pair were young at the time of the crime and had no significant prior history of criminal offenses (Chase had a prior juvenile offense and had successfully served his probation), the Judge's analysis led her to decide against the possibility of probationary release for either brother.

4d

[aries-the-red05]

EVERYONE SHOULD BE TALKING ABOUT THIS!!!!!

Huge GIGANTIC TW for SA, mentions of rape, mentions of masturbation, and transphobia.

A 2018 report from the Indiana University Maurer School of Law along with a subsequent report in the UCLA Journal of Gender and Law, found that it was common for trans women placed in men's prisons to be assigned to cells with aggressive cisgender male cellmates as both a reward and a means of placation for said cellmates, so as to maintain social control and to, as one inmate described it, "keep the violence rate down". Trans women used in this manner are often raped daily. This process is known as "V-coding", and has been described as so common that it is effectively "a central part of a trans woman's sentence". The report also found it common for correctional officers to publicly strip search trans women inmates, before putting their bodies on display for not only the other correctional officers, but for the other prisoners. Trans women in this situation are sometimes made to dance, present, or masturbate at the correctional officers' discretion. The prisoners serving as customers for these women are informally referred to as "husbands". A 2021 California study found that 69% of trans women prisoners reported being made to perform sexual acts they would have rather not, 58.5% reported being violently sexually assaulted, and 88% overall reported being made to take part in a "marriage-like relationship". Trans women who physically resist the customer's advances are often criminally charged with assault and placed in solitary confinement, the assault charge then being used to extend the woman's prison stay and deny her parole.

This not only happens in the USA, but happens globally and there has been documented cases of it happening in France and the UK as well.

Many people aware of it fear that it will drastically increase after Trump's Project 2025 as trans women are arrested and imprisoned for simply existing in public, this is a real possibility, and the influence can spread globally to cause other nations to do this too.

Best I can say is: SPREAD AWARENESS PEOPLE!

Written by u/communistsorcerer

Commented on a post by u/communistsorcerer on r/traaaaaaannnnnnnnnns2

Spread this!!!!!!!

[dertaglichedan]

Max Factor heir and convicted rapist Andrew Luster is set to walk free after being granted parole - as victim slams Kamala Harris reform law

The disgraced Max Factor heir who was convicted of 86 counts of drugging and raping unconscious women in 2003 is set to be released early after his crimes were reclassified as 'non-violent' under a 2016 law change masterminded by Kamala Harris, DailyMail.com can reveal. 

Andrew Luster, now 60, infamously fled to Mexico during his rape trial – only to be tracked down by Dog the Bounty Hunter and hauled back to the US in chains.

Now one of his victims has bravely come forward in an exclusive interview to talk about her fears at his imminent freedom.

Tonja Balden, 51, who was just 23 when she was drugged and raped by Luster after a night out in Santa Barbara, told DailyMail.com. 'I'm afraid that when he is released he may continue the same crimes. He just turned 60. That's not very old.

'It is so psychopathic to set up this type of thing where you find a woman, drug her, and then she's an unconscious body and to do all of these things to her while you're videotaping it. That is a real sadistic way of thinking that I don't know if that can be fixed.'

Initially handed 124 years in prison, depraved Luster's sentence was revised down to 50 years in 2013 on appeal.

And now the serial rapist will walk free from Valley State Prison in Chowchilla, California, in a few months' time after being granted parole in August, having served just half his sentence.

[dreaminginthedeepsouth]

“And now the news”:

The wildfires engulfing Los Angeles County have scorched more than 36,000 acres, or 56.25 square miles — a total area larger than some of the United States’ most densely populated cities. They have spread to roughly 36,365 acres combined.

The Palisades Fire has burned over 20,000 acres and destroyed more than 10,000 structures, and as of 9 a.m. was 8% contained, which is progress from last night when it was 6% contained at 10 p.m., thanks to favorable wind conditions overnight.

The Eaton Fire in Pasadena-Altadena has now destroyed 13,956 acres with 3% containment. The fire is believed to have damaged or destroyed 4,000 to 5,000 structures. The fire did make a push toward Mount Wilson Observatory on Thursday, but the building did not suffer any damageand the relay antennas atop the mountain for communication across Southern California are unharmed.

The Palisades and Eaton fires have become the No. 1 and No. 2 most destructive fires in Southern California history.

The red flag warning will continue until Friday at 6 p.m. PST, but firefighters will be preparing for the next red flag event expected to begin on Monday.

Los Angeles Sheriff Robert Luna said the devastation caused by the wildfires in Los Angeles has been catastrophic and that “parts of the city look like an atomic bomb was dropped.” (He’s right)

So far, at least five blazes have burned an area:

About the same size as Miami…

Two and a half times larger than Manhattan.

Larger than San Francisco and Boston, both of which cover more than 46 square miles…

And around 3.5% the size of Rhode Island, the smallest state.

And it really is worse than it looks. Whole neighborhoods have been devastated, leaving nothing but rubble. At least 10,000 properties have been destroyed, the Los Angeles County assessor said. The death toll has risen to ten and will go higher once it is safe to enter the burned-out areas; one of the ten was found in front of his house with a garden hose in his hand. The Palisades Fire could be the costliest in US history, according to a climate expert. The overall cost is estimated at more than $50 billion and will go higher.

Firefighting teams are expecting more wind and dry conditions to continue to complicate efforts into next week. If winds are too strong, firefighting aircraft won’t be able to take off.

California Insurance Commissioner Ricardo Lara has used his moratorium power to stop non-renewals and cancelations of fire insurance for one year.

A man questioned by police about possible attempted arson Thursday afternoon was arrested on a felony parole violation charge, Los Angeles Police Department Assistant Chief Dominic Choi said Friday morning. Officers responded to calls about a man trying to start a fire who was being detained by members of the public in the 21700 block of Ybarra Road in Woodland Hills, near the Kenneth Fire, at 4:32 p.m. Due to lack of probable cause he was not arrested or charged, , but he was arrested on a felony probation violation.

The Los Angeles District Attorney announced that anyone flying an unauthorized drone will be “prosecuted to the maximum.” "If you're thinking that it's fine to send a drone up in the area for your own amusement, or you want to get information that nobody else can get, and you do it in one of these areas that for which drones are not permitted … you will be arrested, you will be prosecuted and you will be punished to the full extent of the law.” This follows an incident yesterday in which one of the Canadian “Super Scooper” water bombers collided with a drone over a drop over the Palisades Fire, damaging the nose gear and putting the plane out of service until at least Monday for repair. This leaves only one of the “Super Scoopers” in service.

Updates to follow.

[lunas-nargle]

↳ fifteen

chapter fifteen of "meddle about" series brian o'connor x reader

xv. sentenced

At the end of the day, Dom still ended up in handcuffs. 

Y/n sat between Brian and Mia as they waited for the judge to sentence Dom. Monty sat beside Mia, holding her hand soothingly, Y/n holding the other tightly, as they tensely stood up as instructed, watching the judge walk to his seat. 

"Please be seated." someone said, letting everyone sit back down. Brian put his arm around the back of Y/n, trying to provide some comfort to her. 

"Please rise, Mr. Toretto," the judge said. Dom silently stood. "I've listened to the testimony...and taken into special consideration...Agent O'Conner's appeal of clemency on behalf of Mr. Toretto, that his actions directly resulted in the apprehension of known drug trafficker, Arturo Braga." Y/n felt her stomach and lungs squeeze as the judge continued. "However, this judiciary finds that one right does not make up for a lifetime of wrongs," 

Y/n let out a shaky breath. Hearing this, Brian moved his arm that was wrapped around Y/n. 

"And as such I find that I am forced to level the maximum sentence under California law." 

Brian couldn't hear anymore. He stood up, and walked off upset. 

"Dominic Toretto," the judge said, as a tear slid down Y/n's cheek. "You are hearby sentenced to serve 25 years to life at the Lompoc maximum security prison system without the possibility of early parole. This court is adjourned."

[justinspoliticalcorner]

AP, via The Guardian:

The man who was sentenced to 30 years in federal prison for attacking the husband of Nancy Pelosi with a hammer in their California home was sentenced on Tuesday to life in prison without the possibility of parole following a separate state trial.

A San Francisco jury in June found David DePape guilty of charges including aggravated kidnapping, first-degree burglary and false imprisonment of an elder. Before issuing the sentence, Judge Harry Dorfman dismissed arguments from DePape’s attorneys that he be granted a new trial for the 2022 attack against Paul Pelosi, who was 82 years old at the time. “It’s my intention that Mr DePape will never get out of prison, he can never be paroled,” Dorfman said while handing out the punishment. One of the defense attorneys, Adam Lipson, asked Dorfman before the sentence was handed down to consider DePape’s mental health and isolation that made him susceptible to online propaganda. “This is a man who has always been a peaceful, law-abiding person up until his activation,” Lipson said.

When given the chance to address the court before his sentencing, DePape, dressed in prison orange and with his brown hair in a ponytail, spoke at length about September 11 being an inside job, his ex-wife being replaced by a body double, and his government-provided attorneys conspiring against him. “I’m a psychic,” DePape told the court, reading from sheets of paper. “The more I meditate, the more psychic I get.” In a letter read in court by the victim’s daughter, Christine Pelosi, Paul Pelosi called for the maximum sentence, saying the “last peaceful sleep” he had ended abruptly “when the defendant violently broke into my home, burst into my bedroom and stood over my bed with a hammer and zip ties demanding to see my wife, yelling: ‘Where’s Nancy?’” He said the attack had left him with bumps on his head, a metal plate in it, dizziness and nerve damage in his left hand. Sleeping alone at home evokes memories of the attack, he said.

MAGA criminal David DePape sentenced to life in prison for his role in conducting hammer attack on Paul Pelosi.

[theserpentsadvocate]

So I’ve been doing a lot of research (or, more accurately, I’ve been doing cursory research fairly often) for the seventy-million Veronica Mars fanfics I’m currently writing, and I’ve run into a… difficulty. The fic that actually prompted this post wasn’t even related to the Thumper thing even peripherally, like it doesn’t even happen in it, but what can you do.

Here’s the thing: under California law, assault is the attempt to hurt or cause harm to someone by an individual with the capacity to actually cause that harm (e.g. throwing a rock at someone and missing, trying to punch someone who dodges). Actually harming someone is battery (e.g. you knock someone out and hide their drug money inside their motorcycle).

Now we, the audience, know that whatever someone might feel morally*, Weevil isn’t legally guilty of murder – he committed battery, and that’s probably all Lamb can prove, because he has witnesses to that part. But he has witnesses. He should have Weevil over a barrel on the battery charge at least.

But here’s the sticking point (or one of them): Veronica says, canonically, that Weevil ‘pled down to assault’ (and he seems to agree with her). So… why did he end up doing time for a lesser charge?

Answer One: The writers messed up.

Okay, so this is a very unsatisfying answer, and I’m rolling my eyes at myself about it. But still: it’s very common for the general public to gloss ‘assault and battery’ as one thing, or to use ‘assault’ to refer to battery charges, doubly so since, in a non-legal sense, the word ‘assault’ does include (legal) battery. Probably whoever wrote that line assumed that they knew what ‘assault’ was and just didn’t double-check.

(And they also didn’t bother to brush up on the difference between a felony and a misdemeanour and whether you can be on parole for a misdemeanour (answer: no), but I’ll get to that.)

But that doesn’t help square everything up with canon (unless you’re the kind of person who can say stuff like ‘that line doesn’t make sense so I’m ignoring it’, which I… am not, generally speaking), so more productively –

Answer Two: Veronica messed up

Veronica’s attitude toward Weevil isn’t always great in season three, trending towards dismissive on several occasions, and she is, technically, a member of the general public, so maybe she just said assault and meant battery, and he did go to prison for battery and not assault. This would track with him still being on parole – well, at all, but notably about halfway through season three, when Veronica wants to meet with the PCHers – and mentioning his parole officer multiple times. (Simple assault is a misdemeanour and has a maximum sentence of six months; parole, unless there is a glaring hole in my Googling, is only for felonies. Nothing he does to Thumper, as far as I can tell, would qualify as felony assault – he doesn’t use caustic chemicals or a deadly weapon, and he definitely doesn’t throw anything at a moving vehicle.)

Misdemeanour battery, on the other hand, appears to have a maximum sentence of a year, and a battery charge would leave the possibility of a felony open: aggravated battery, or battery causing serious bodily harm, is a ‘wobbler’, which means it can be filed as a misdemeanour or a felony, depending on the circumstances, and ‘serious bodily harm’ includes loss of consciousness. (This would also mean he very well could be a convicted felon, which of course has implications for the rest of his life beyond just having a record. I don’t actually want this for him, obviously, but if you want the felony for fic reasons, or to explain the repeated parole references, that versatility is there.)

The only problem is, Veronica is not a very likely person to make this particular mistake. Her dad spent most of her life in law enforcement and she’s very well-acquainted with most law enforcement (and much legal) procedure, she regularly interacts with the sheriff’s department, and she commits enough illegal and dubiously legal acts herself that it’s in her best interest to be familiar with these kinds of distinctions. (Although she’s still very much protected by being a middle-class white woman – she can do things like tasing obnoxious frat bros in The Rapes of Graff without worrying overmuch that she’ll be arrested on misdemeanour battery charges, even though it would absolutely qualify.)  Also, she clearly made the effort to look into how his case played out, since she’s the one who brings all this up, and she appears to have tracked him down at the car wash deliberately, so it would be kind of bizarre if she then got the offence wrong. This one is convenient, but in the end it’s a hard sell and I don’t think I buy it.

Answer Three: Weevil didn’t plead down from murder to assault, he pled down from battery to assault.

Lamb’s case for murder probably isn’t all that great. It makes for terrific oomph when you are deliberately arresting someone two minutes before he’s supposed to graduate, like an absolute monster, but what does he have, really? Two kids who saw Weevil knock Thumper out with… a cloth? Or something? and take a bag of… something. (And leave.)

So this proves battery, it strongly implies robbery, and given Thumper showing up under the ruins of Shark Stadium it certainly suggests murder, but that’s not going to stand up in court. Assuming the autopsy can conclusively determine which ones are from the stadium collapse and which aren’t (admittedly a big if), Thumper’s likely to have injuries from the beating the Fitzpatricks gave him that Weevil is (per the prosecution’s own witnesses) not responsible for and which were incurred after his attack on Thumper. The kids also saw him leave Thumper’s unconscious body and walk away with the bag of money, so – dead to rights on battery, but iffy on murder. The other PCHers can testify that he had motive to kill Thumper, but they might well not be willing to, for a whole host of reasons. Weevil is absolutely smart enough to establish himself an alibi for the entirety of the time after his attack on Thumper, and that would make Lamb’s case very difficult, as does that fact that Weevil literally didn’t kill Thumper, and so there’s very little forensic evidence to be found that would be damaging to him.

(Honestly, even if the charge was murder, and he pled down to assault or to battery, the fact that they offered him that also suggests the case was flimsy. Rich, white, even-more-innocent-of-the-actual-murder Logan only got offered manslaughter in the plea deal for Felix’s murder.)

So if this is it? That is a ton of reasonable doubt. And that’s before Cliff gets up there and points out that Eduardo Orozco was a known gang member and drug dealer and had all kinds of opportunities to make the kind of enemies who might have chained him up in that stadium (which is not only true but also… basically what did actually happen). In fact, typing this all up, I’m kind of pissed Weevil did any time at all.

Add to that the fact that both eyewitnesses are kids, who are notoriously unreliable on the stand… Yeah, I can easily see the DA deciding a murder charge won’t stick. But they have him on battery! …Wiiiith most of the proof being those notoriously unreliable child witnesses. So maybe they drop the murder charges, get him on battery, and then offer him a deal. On their side, they don’t have to worry about those kids holding up in court; on his side, well, if they threatened to file the aggravated battery charge as a felony, he’s looking at the difference between a year at most in prison and a possible four-year term with all the attendant miseries of being a convicted felon for the rest of his life. And he definitely can’t afford a better lawyer than whoever’s available from the public defender’s office. So it’s reasonable to decide that going to court is too much of a gamble, and just take the deal. This also explains how he’s out so quickly, since it cannot be more than three months since he was arrested when season three starts – but if he pled right away and got a light sentence (since it’s his first adult conviction), that might make sense.

The main problem with this one, even though I really like it, is that, well, there are the repeated references to him being on parole. Weevil himself could just be glossing probation as parole, I suppose – ‘don’t tell my parole officer’ makes a better joke than ‘don’t tell my probation officer’ – but Veronica also says he’s on parole in President Evil, which is an unlikely mistake for her to make if he’s not on parole, for all the reasons outlined in Answer Two, especially in what is literally a presentation for her criminology class. (Of course, in that same presentation she refers to him ‘assaulting’ Thumper, so who knows.) Most damning is the entire B-plot of Wichita Linebacker, which makes it clear he is indeed on parole, since if he doesn’t get another job he’ll go back to prison.

(And I suppose ‘pled down to assault’ is kind of a weird way for Veronica to phrase it in this case – but not utterly bizarre, and she’d be unlikely to spell it all out like that, since she doesn’t know she’s on TV and that line is supposed to be letting the audience know why he’s not in prison.)

Answer Four: Veronica was just guessing

I’ve always read the scene in Wichita Linebacker as her finding him on purpose, especially since she doesn’t actually stick around to get her car washed, which is why I also tend to assume that she’s either recently looked up his case or been following it from the beginning and would know what the charge is. (She doesn’t appear to be surprised to see him, either.) I also just… like to think that she’d care enough to follow up on him.

But it’s also possible that she really is just at the carwash for carwash-related reasons, and she’s just… guessing about the reasons he’s out already. In this case, she might have said assault, and he acknowledges this as correct even though the actual charge was battery, because he figures it’s close enough, and she’s got the general idea, anyway.

This covers more bases than anything else, although it still doesn’t explain why she implies he’s on parole for an assault charge during the criminology presentation, at which point she would definitely have done the background to know it was battery and not assault, but mostly I don’t love it for character reasons.

Anyway. If anyone wants to hit their heads repeatedly into this particular wall with me, I would love to hear your thoughts.

*and I’m inclined, personally, to say that the moral responsibility for Thumper’s death is pretty much on the Fitzpatricks, and it’s not like he didn’t know who he was getting into business with

[beardedmrbean]

The U.S. Supreme Court has denied Idaho serial killer Thomas Eugene Creech's last-minute request for a stay of execution.

Associate Justice Elena Kagan issued the decision to deny Creech's request Wednesday morning, clearing the way for prison authorities to carry out his execution by lethal injection.

Attorneys for the 73-year-old Creech, Idaho's longest-serving death row inmate, had filed a certiorari petition that the High Court halt the execution to give the panel time to review the decision by the Idaho Supreme Court denying Creech's appeals.

"The application for a stay of execution of sentence of death presented to Justice Kagan and by her referred to the Court is denied," the ruling said. "The edition for a write of certiorari is denied."

Barring a last-minute reprieve by Idaho Gov. Brad Little, Creech will become the first person executed in Idaho in 12 years.

Little has already said he has "zero intention" of halting the execution at Idaho Maximum Security Institution near Boise.

"Thomas Creech is a convicted serial killer responsible for acts of extreme violence," Little said in a statement issued on Jan. 29. "His lawful and just sentence must be carried out as ordered by the court. Justice has been delayed long enough."

In the petition to the Supreme Court, Creech's attorneys argued that his due process rights were violated by the Idaho Supreme Court.

"Mr. Creech has identified a substantial need for guidance from the Court on an issue of great national importance and he has brought a strong vehicle for it to do so," Creech's attorney wrote in the petition, asking for "clarity on [the] question of when a state's post-conviction regime affords little meaningful review to legitimate federal constitutional claims that it violates due process."

The petition added, "There are strong reasons to suspect that at least some states have gone too far in limiting post-conviction review, thus calling for the Court's intervention."

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in San Francisco also denied Creech's latest appeal in a ruling issued Saturday, prompting attorneys for the condemned man to take their argument to the Supreme Court.

Creech, according to prosecutors, has been convicted of five murders in three states, including three committed in Idaho.

In a 1993 opinion issued by the U.S. Supreme Court denying an appeal filed by Creech, late Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor wrote that "Creech admitted to killing or participating in the killing of at least 26 people."

"The bodies of 11 of his victims -- who were shot, stabbed, beaten, or strangled to death -- have been recovered in seven states," she said.

The last murder Creech pleaded guilty to occurred in 1981 at an Idaho maximum security prison when he killed 23-year-old David Dale Jensen, a disabled fellow inmate, by beating him to death with a sock filled with batteries, according to prosecutors. At the time of Jensen's slaying, Creech was serving two life sentences for a double murder he committed in Idaho and had been convicted of murders in California and Oregon.

Creech argued in his recent appeal that his due process rights were violated by the Idaho Commission of Pardons and Parole and the Ada County, Idaho, Prosecuting Attorney's Office.

At the commutation hearing in October, Ada County deputy prosecutor Jill Longhurst told the commission that Creech is a "sociopath" who has "utter disregard for human life."

"Mr. Creech is a serial killer, and in 1981 said he would kill again, and he did," Longhurst told the commission. "Thomas Creech is the most prolific serial killer in Idaho."

[calparolelawyer]

Navigating Parole Eligibility and Hearings with a California Parole Attorney

When it comes to securing parole, the process can be complex and challenging. For individuals seeking early release from prison, understanding parole eligibility and preparing for hearings are critical steps. Having the right legal guidance can make a significant difference in the outcome of these proceedings. This is where a California parole hearing attorney can provide invaluable assistance. A knowledgeable California parole hearing lawyer can help navigate the legal intricacies of parole eligibility, effectively advocating for the best possible outcome.

[themenendezbrothers]

Hochman recently said in the deadline interview: HOCHMAN: Knowing the Geragos narrative is absolutely wrong, the issues that we’ll be looking at for the trial will be whether or not these two young men faced an immediate threat to their life? 

The "immediate threat to their life" was the crux of the 2nd trial. Because the courts determined the brothers may have had a legitimate fear, but there was no "immediate threat to their life". This is why Weisberg didn't allow imperfect self-defense which took Manslaughter off the table. So now, Hochman is asking the same question.

Why did the courts allow imperfect self-defense in the 1st trial but not in the 2nd trial? The courts cited the law in the 2nd trial saying the defense couldn't use that. 👀

Resentencing

Former D.A. Gascon believed that the murder was premeditated and said they received the right sentence. But now, with the new resentencing laws, he would recommend Life With Parole. The new D.A. might agree with Gascon or he may disagree they should be resentenced at all and their current LWOP should stand. Also, the opposition to the resentencing from the family member carries some weight.

The Judge will ultimately decide. I'm not sure but, even if the prosecutors argue their original sentence should be upheld, the Judge might rule that it is not in the best interest of Justice to keep them incarcerated. The brothers have been beyond rehabilitated, they pose no threat to society. resentencing memo.

HOCHMAN: And you do this with a fairly vague standard that doesn’t give judges particular guidance on how to evaluate all these factors only to figure out whether or not someone is a threat to society, poses a danger to society, and otherwise has been rehabilitated, so and it’s somewhat California unique in that respect. "So, we’re going to go through all that evidence and weigh all the factors and ultimately come to the judge and say, to the judge, here’s all the records. Here are your options. And make sure that whatever decision is ultimately made is the best-informed decision possible."

Habeas

In 2005, the Menendez brothers appealed their convictions to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, which denied their petition for habeas corpus. (The courts didn't find anything wrong with the outcome of the 2nd trial).

Hochman is already saying that the jurors in the second trial heard about the sexual abuse and even with that, they found the brothers guilty.

HOCHMAN: As I said, Erik Menendez was able to testify in great detail about all the sexual abuse he experienced. He was even able to testify about sexual abuse that Lyle experienced. He was even able to testify about the fact that Lyle purportedly confronted his father, their father, about this whole issue, which is why they had some level of fear that the father was going to kill them. All that was presented to the jury, and the jury still convicted them both of first-degree murder.

But now there is new evidence that the courts are required to consider. This new evidence supports that the brothers were not lying and it was not an abuse excuse as Prosecutor Conn repeatedly told the jurors. The jurors in the first trial heard about the sexual abuse. Some jurors believed the brothers were absolutely in fear of their lives at that moment. They wanted to vote for manslaughter. And they stood their ground which is why there was a mistrial. So had the jury in the 2nd trial heard testimony about the sexual abuse, why wouldn't it have made a difference like it did in the first trial?

As noted, the second trial began in October 1995. At this trial, much of the defense evidence, including Diane Vandermolen’s testimony, was excluded. So the prosecutor’s emphasis changed as well. Based on the evidence presented at the second trial, there was no longer any need to hedge bets; the prosecutor told jurors that the sexual “abuse [allegations] in this case [were] a total fabrication.” (RT 50869.) There was “no way of corroborating” these allegations. (RT 50868.) “The abuse never happened.” (RT 51088.) “There is no corroboration of sexual abuse.” (RT 51378.) The “allegation[s] of physical and sexual abuse are not corroborated.” (RT 51469.) Jose Menendez was not the “kind of man that would be abusing his sons.” (RT 50991.) He was “restrained and forgiving. [He was] not a violent and brutal man.” (RT 51472.) Both petitioners were convicted of first degree murder. But now new evidence has surfaced in two areas...

[offender42085]

Post 0636

Richard Sepolio, California inmate, born 1992, incarceration intake in May 2019 at age 26, released November 2020

DUI Manslaughter, DUI causing injury

In November 2020, a 28-year-old former inmate, who was released in early after serving less than three years (including jail and prison confinements) of a nearly 10-year sentence, partially because of the COVID pandemic. Sepolio also received a reduced sentence for good behavior and for working in a prison fire camp.

He was involved in a DUI crash on October 15, 2016, a crash that killed Annamarie Contreras, 50, and Cruz Contreras, 52, a married couple from Chandler, Arizona; and Hacienda Heights residents Andre Banks, 49, and Francine Jimenez, 46.

When it was announced Sepolio would be released, San Diego County District Attorney, Summer Stephan said, “This very early release is unconscionable''.

Stephan further stated, "Department of Corrections decision is re-victimizing the family and friends of the four people killed and seven injured who have been devastated by their loss and continue to deal with the financial, emotional, mental and physical trauma caused by the defendant. This inmate continues to deny and minimize the crime by refusing to admit he was speeding and denying being impaired while arguing with his girlfriend on the phone, which resulted in the devastating crash.''

In addition to having drinks prior to getting behind the wheel, Sepolio was arguing with his girlfriend on the phone just moments before losing control of his truck on the bridge, the prosecutor said.

Sepolio testified he was driving on the transition ramp -- a route back to Coronado that he had driven more than 90 times before -- when he sped up to merge in front of another car and lost control.

Prosecutors said he was driving between 81 and 87 mph when the crash occurred.  His truck plunged over the Coronado Bridge in October 2016. It dropped about 60 feet onto crowded Chicano Park. 

In May 2023, the inmate petitioned the court. He sought to have his parole terminated early and his convictions for vehicular manslaughter while intoxicated and DUI causing injury erased through a new law that allows inmate firefighters an expedited path to purging their criminal records.

The law, which went into effect in 2023, aims to provide a smoother path for formerly incarcerated volunteer firefighters to obtain employment. Inmates released from custody can now apply for such relief if they successfully complete fire camp and judges can grant those requests if the expungement is found to be “in the interest of justice.”

While now discharged from the Navy, he elected to wear his Navy Uniform in his court proceeding.

This was his second attempt after the first attempt was denied earlier by the court. The second petition was denied.

3g

Last reviewed August 2024

[science-criticaltheory]

How Trump might target DACA recipients and other immigrant groups - Jean Lantz Reisz

Donald Trump shows immigration charts during the Republican National Convention on July 18, 2024. Robert Gauthier/Los Angeles Times via Getty Images

There are 11 million people living without legal authorization in the U.S., and Trump would have the authority, as president, to deport those people. But it would be very expensive to pay for the immigration officers, immigration judges, detention facilities, the plane flights and more that would be required to do so. Estimates on the cost of mass deportation range from US$88 billion a year to more than $300 billion.

The administration is probably going to have to rely on state and local governments to help carry out these deportations. The president cannot legally force state and local governments to cooperate with immigration enforcement. About 10 states, including New York, Massachusetts and California, have laws that prohibit cooperation with Immigration and Customs Enforcement, or ICE – the federal agency that oversees immigration and deportation – under certain circumstances.

For example, in California, employers may not allow ICE to enter nonpublic areas of their workplace without a proper warrant. Other states also prohibit law enforcement from sharing the immigration status of certain low-level criminal offenders.

The federal government could give more money to a state in order to help it cooperate with federal immigration efforts, and take it away if they do not cooperate. But federal case law says that the president does not have the authority to withhold federal money to coerce a state into cooperating with immigration actions.

Could Trump still send federal immigration officers to a state that does not cooperate, in order to identify and detain immigrants?

States could not prevent the federal government from coming in to arrest and deport people – but they don’t have to help them, and could set up some obstacles. The federal government would have to provide all of its own personnel. Texas and Arizona have recently approved laws that require local law enforcement to cooperate with the Department of Homeland Security and enforce immigration law.

The Department of Homeland Security has the authority to deputize and train local law enforcement to enforce immigration law.

ICE could rely on local sheriffs or police in some states, like Texas, to identify and arrest immigrants and turn them over to ICE to deport. In other states, like Oregon and Illinois, that want to protect immigrants from deportation, they can refuse to cooperate with federal authorities by not providing certain personal information on immigrants.

What are the other risks immigrants might be concerned about?

There are about 580,000 people who are living in the U.S. and are part of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, or DACA, program. DACA gives some people who came to the U.S. illegally as children the right to legally work, go to school and live in the country. The courts have already litigated that a president can lawfully terminate DACA through a certain process.

Currently, President Joe Biden is defending DACA by appealing a Texas district court decision that DACA is an unlawful program. Once in office, Trump can instruct the Justice Department to dismiss the appeal, effectively ending DACA.

People who apply for DACA have to state in their application that they are in the country unlawfully. So the government could prove that DACA recipients can legally be deported, and will have information on where they live.

The next group of immigrants that could be targeted is people from Afghanistan and other countries who have humanitarian parole, which is temporary permission to remain in the U.S. legally. Trump can end all of the parole programs, including those for Ukrainians.

In addition, Trump can end Temporary Protected Status, a law that gives temporary permission to some people to legally stay in the U.S. for up to two years because of an emergency situation in their countries. He tried to do this, but was unsuccessful, during his first administration because he didn’t follow the right legal process. About 1.2 million people are covered under this program, which Biden expanded.

Trump has said he would end birthright citizenship, which is the right for any person born in the country to get citizenship. Could he legally do this?

The Trump administration could order federal officials to stop processing passports and Social Security numbers for people who cannot establish that their parents are U.S. citizens. An ensuing lawsuit, probably brought by individuals denied their documents, would force courts to weigh in on birthright citizenship.

The Fourteenth Amendment gives the right of citizenship to all people born in the U.S. regardless of their parents’ nationality. Challengers to birthright citizenship argue that the Fourteenth Amendment should be reinterpreted to exclude people who were born in the U.S. to parents who are present unlawfully and therefore without the consent of the U.S. government.

To succeed in overturning birthright citizenship, the Supreme Court would have to reverse a 126-year-old precedent, which states that anyone who is born on U.S. soil and not the child of someone engaged in diplomatic service is a U.S. citizen.

Trump has talked about using the Alien Enemies Act as a way to deport people. What does this mean?

Trump has talked about using the Alien Enemies Act of 1798 as a way to get around judicial review and immigration courts and deport people such as gang members and cartel members. This law allows a president, during a time of war, to detain and deport people born in an enemy nation.

One problem with this is that Trump won’t have the authority to deport people under this act, unless there is a war with or invasion by another nation or government. Gangs or cartels are not their own nation or government. For example, Trump could not simultaneously recognize the Mexican government and a cartel also as the government of Mexico – or succeed in legally proving the Mexican government is sending cartel members to invade the U.S. on behalf of the Mexican government.

Another problem Trump would have in using the Alien Enemies Act is that it allows for review by the courts to determine whether an individual is actually an “enemy alien.” It would not likely provide an automatic shortcut to deportation and would end up in litigation.

[tixythepixy]

A 2018 report from the Indiana University Maurer School of Law along with a subsequent report in the UCLA Journal of Gender and Law, found that it was common for trans women placed in men's prisons to be assigned to cells with aggressive cisgender male cellmates as both a reward and a means of placation for said cellmates, so as to maintain social control and to, as one inmate described it, "keep the violence rate down". Trans women used in this manner are often raped daily. This process is known as "V-coding", and has been described as so common that it is effectively "a central part of a trans woman's sentence". The report also found it common for correctional officers to publicly strip search trans women inmates, before putting their bodies on display for not only the other correctional officers, but for the other prisoners. Trans women in this situation are sometimes made to dance, present, or masturbate at the correctional officers' discretion. The prisoners serving as customers for these women are informally referred to as "husbands". A 2021 California study found that 69% of trans women prisoners reported being made to perform sexual acts they would have rather not, 58.5% reported being violently sexually assaulted, and 88% overall reported being made to take part in a "marriage-like relationship". Trans women who physically resist the customer's advances are often criminally charged with assault and placed in solitary confinement, the assault charge then being used to extend the woman's prison stay and deny her parole.

This not only happens in the USA, but happens globally and there has been documented cases of it happening in France and the UK as well.

Many people aware of it fear that it will drastically increase after Trump's Project 2025 as trans women are arrested and imprisoned for simply existing in public, this is a real possibility, and the influence can spread globally to cause other nations to do this too.

Best I can say is: SPREAD AWARENESS PEOPLE!

I saw this on reddit and it's really important to share so please share this especially if you have a lot of reach, this is absolutely horrifying and it needs to be stopped.

[roadtogracelandx45]

New York State of Mind |1| Suits x Sons crossover

I am so nervous about posting this after some reviews that I got about Ryder. But here we go;

crossposted on ao3 and wattpad.

Introduction 

Tacoma Washington 

For the first time in over 4 years Ryder Teller was able to travel for work without having a Sons' sitter go with her and she was thrilled, everywhere she went after she graduated law school and was in Tacoma, she had a Son with her. She went to Chino to see her brother or to see her sister-in-law and the kids, a Son went with her. She went into the office, a Son went with her.

A lot of the time it was Kozik or Happy but they were both unable to leave the state due to their parole status and Ryder was thankful for that, she needed to be a different Ryder, one that didn't bend to the will of her old man and as much as Jax wanted to override her going out there he couldn't, she had made a valid point, he was able to do what he wanted and could come and go as he pleased, but she couldn't? She had been faithful to him since they got together.

That double standard should never be around, but she lived in a very black-and-white man's world and what they said went and it was exhausting. She was exhausted and she just didn't know that until Jessica Pearce asked for her to come out and work with them.

"You know Jax is furious right?" Kozik commented from where he was sitting on the chair in front of Ryder's vanity, "That you are going, and you aren't listening to him." Ryder paused as she was folding up the shirt to put in her suitcase.

"I don't think that I should have to listen to him Koz, "She started, "I am not putting my career on hold again to appease him. If he and Clay want me to help the club out I have to make friends at other law firms in other states. What would happen if you guys went on the run and got in trouble? I have my law license in California, Washington, and New York. I can't do it anymore." She shoved her hands through her hair and fought back tears.

Kozik knew that she was right and that she had more hurt than joy since she became Jax's old lady. He remembered holding her as she cried her eyes out when she found that she had miscarried a baby when she first moved to Tacoma after Jax cheated on her again with Tara. This wasn't the Ryder that he knew when she was younger, this was a broken Ryder. A completely broken Ryder.

"Shouldn’t I be able to be happy to Koz? He is making himself happy.  I don't know if I can keep doing this every single time. " She pointed a trembling finger to the blackberry sitting on top of the folding clothes. It had gone off several times while they were talking and they both assumed that it was Jax trying to get into contact with her

 and talk her out of going to New York again. He had done everything short of showing up at the house and handcuffing himself to her. And being on probation he was unable to go with her to New York for the three months she had been loaned out to them. And it was driving him crazy.

"You are right." He started as he held up his hands not wanting to set her off. 

"I know I am god damn right Herman. I get that I was born into this lifestyle and it's a man's world. But I should never ever be subjected to live like this." She reached across the bed, yanking the phone off of her belongings, and pressed the green answer button, "WHAT do you want!" she snarled, causing the biker to lean back in his chair in surprise. In all the years that he had known the younger Winston sibling, she had never reacted like that before.

To anyone. 

Not even Tara Knowles who justifiably earned every single ounce of hatred that Ryder held towards her.  There was so much hate, so much bitterness. No amount of sweet-talking or promises on the Mother Charter's vice president's part was going to do anything to make her forgive him. 

And honestly, he didn't deserve it. It had finally happened. She had enough and was tired of being broken 

"Look, I am probably gonna catch hell for this but, Jax is coming up tonight after church to talk to you about staying." He started once she was off of the phone, the angry tears coming down her cheeks, "If I were you, I would get on an earlier flight."

Ryder abandoned all packing and picked up her phone and pressed a few buttons and put her phone to her ear. "Hey, Donna, It's Ryder Teller, is there a way you can get me on an earlier flight out? My brother told me not to come down today to see him and the sooner I get out of Washington the better." She was silent for several long minutes before speaking again, "Yes, I can be ready in 30 minutes to go." Donna Paulson, Harvey Specter's assistant, had already been told to get a private plane and driver set up for Ryder Teller. Jessica Pearson and her other partners wanted Ryder Teller to be a part of their firm.

"Thank you, Donna." She hung up the phone and looked at the blonde biker, "Thank you Koz, I know you aren't supposed to tell me stuff like this." He waved it away, "Finish packing what you absolutely need, and then go shopping for the rest when you get there." She wiped her cheek off again and started putting the rest of the clothes that she brought out of her closet into the suitcase.

"What are you going to tell Jax when he shows up?" She asked as Kozik carried her suitcase and carry on to the awaiting black car a while later. "Don't worry about it, Ry. I will handle it." He returned, "Just do stuff for yourself this time around, make yourself happy, that's

 all I can ask for."

"I can do that.' She returned, "Don't know what it looks like but I will find out." His mouth quirked into a smirk, he wanted to tell her to do what Jax did to her and sleep with someone else but he knew that Ryder wouldn't do it. But maybe she would surprise him. She always seemed to.