December 3, 2007
Former border agents Ramos and Compean having appeal heard today
As highlighted in media coverage linked here by How Appealing, a Fifth Circuit panel will hear today the appeal of former U.S. Border Patrol agents Ignacio Ramos and Jose Compean, who were sentenced to terms of 11 and 12 years of imprisonment for shooting an illegal alien drug smuggler. As detailed in a series of prior posts, this case has generated lots of political controversy and the severity of the sentences are part of the reason for the case garnering so much attention. I do not think the appeal is focused on the sentencing terms, but prominent Senators from both parties (Diane Feinstein and Jon Cornyn) have already formally requested that President Bush commute the sentences of Ramos and Compean.
Some prior posts about the Border Agents case:
December 3, 2007 at 10:00 AM | Permalink
TrackBack URL for this entry:
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Former border agents Ramos and Compean having appeal heard today:
Who is on the panel?
Posted by: | Dec 3, 2007 10:28:22 AM
My bet is the US attorneys who prosecuted the case took the typical arrogant attitude held by their department distorted the facts, twisted the facts for their own gain within the department.
The President finds time to commute his friend’s sentence but continues to ignore this case.
When is everyone going to realize the problem with sentencing falls right into the lap of an out of control department of justice?
Posted by: | Dec 3, 2007 10:44:17 AM
Oh, for god’s sake, if you really cared about it, you could describe exactly why the jury’s findings should be set aside. But, absent that, you are just arguing that the guidelines are incorrect.
One man’s “twisting of the facts” is another man’s “inferences.” These two criminals (which is what they are at the moment) had an opportunity to present their case to the jury, AND they enjoyed a presumption (perhaps an assumption) of innocence.
The president can commute or pardon any federal convict for any reason or no reason at all. His decision on whether to do this does not impact the DOJ’s ongoing prosecution of someone.
There may be good reasons that the sentence is improper. But they relate not so much to any fact-finding, but rather to the proper construction of the guidelines and the application of the 3553 factors.
Posted by: S.cotus | Dec 3, 2007 2:46:03 PM
Perhaps S.cotus, you can find in your heart to protest the erroneous and outrageous sentences and lead a crusade to stop this madness. Or you prefer to stand in the background and pretend that you care.
Posted by: | Dec 8, 2007 12:06:46 PM