September 12, 2007
An amici sentencing brief going to the dogs
Though the dog-days of summer have come to an end, the dog-days of sentencing are just starting to heat up. Specifically, today I received a copy of a "Brief of Amici Curaie" in US v. Vick, with the friends being a group of "organizations concerned about animal welfare and responsible dog ownership." This brief runs over 30 pages and can be downloaded below.
There are many interesting facets of this brief, including (1) a section purporting to be "a victim impact statement on behalf of the bad newz kennel dogs, (2) a section arguing that the "agreed upon offense level does not adequately reflect the nature of Vick's conduct nor his role in the offense," (3) a calculation indicating that Vick's guideline offense level should be 20 and his sentencing range 33-41 months, (4) a request that amici have a "brief opportunity to be heard at sentencing."
Perhaps most notable is the precise sentencing recommend in this amici brief: that the court impose a 57-month sentence and a $250,000 fine, and order the forfeiture of the property on which the dog-fighting took place, and that Vick has to pay to renovate and convert his property into a "no-kill shelter for abused and neglected dogs."
Some related Vick sentencing posts:
- The nitty-gritty on sentencing in the Michael Vick case
- Who knows what guidelines apply to dog fighting?
- Vick being sacked by the collateral consequences of an indictment
- Friday forum: what sentence should Vick get if he pleads guilty?
- A late afternoon Vick update (with federal guideline musings)
- Michael Vick takes a plea deal
- Mid-week forum: is it fair for Vick also to face state criminal charges?
September 12, 2007 at 04:05 PM | Permalink
TrackBack URL for this entry:
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference An amici sentencing brief going to the dogs:
I'm curious, do you get an enhancement for "special skill" if you can leap over linebackers, land on your head and score a touchdown?
Ok, ok. I won't give up my day job.
Posted by: dweedle | Sep 12, 2007 4:44:41 PM
A little harsh to call these people "fiends."
Posted by: Anonymous | Sep 12, 2007 5:49:39 PM
Could it be a PR move to bring in more bucks?
I know, but respond that anyone who isn't cynical probably doesn't know what is going on.
Does anyone know of a study on income for these "nonprofits" in relation to sensational crimes?
Bet it spikes. And bet they can't help but pray somewhere in the back of their minds for more, more, more for more, more, more bucks.
It is, after all, the profit motive that drives America.
For example, where would federalist be without them? He must be thankful in a way. Maybe 9/11 conspiracy theorists think conspiracy not because the government would likely be involved, but only because the government is so happy to take advantage of it.
Posted by: George | Sep 12, 2007 8:12:32 PM
Holy cow! I love dogs just like most other Americans, but $10 million to care for 53 dogs for 18 months. No wonder they offered to do so, at Vick's expense, sounds more like a sales pitch than an amici. What about economies of scale? Are they really suggesting that each dog gets its own trainer? Why can't amici help out in the cases where we have human victims?
Posted by: David | Sep 12, 2007 9:58:20 PM
The idea of victim rights for dogs is a novel one, huh?
Posted by: Gritsforbreakfast | Sep 13, 2007 9:46:59 AM
My cat doesn't see what all the fuss is about.
Posted by: | Sep 13, 2007 10:34:00 AM
typo on fiends, rather than friends, now fixed
Posted by: Doug B. | Sep 13, 2007 1:15:48 PM
I don't know, Doug, I know some Texas ranchers who would consider the idea of "victim rights" for animals to indeed be the work of "fiends." :)
Posted by: Gritsforbreakfast | Sep 13, 2007 6:38:44 PM