Judge Tells Court of Appeals What He Thinks of Them

Not often do you see a lower court so openly criticize a higher court.
www.lehtoslaw.com

[@dandailey1857]

The biggest reason why cameras should be in every court including u.s. supreme court

[@fettel1988]

Well in reality, the law is supposed to be purely objective and according to the Constitution. Not subjective and willy-nilly

[@IHaveNoName2009]

@@fettel1988 This is a great point. The public may find that what occurs in court seems arbitrary and in fact much of the time it is. Without the deeper knowledge of how the rules of the court and the laws which are interpreted by the court have come into existence, people would likely be pretty amazed by what is and isn't allowed. What is and isn't legal. And since the VAST majority of cases don't go to trial all of those settlements where most of the legal process is actually played out would still be hidden from public view.

[@travelnc2g]

@@fettel1988 law is "it depends". Its not math.

[@Dr.MikeGranato]

@@fettel1988 unfortunately, no part of the law is objective. Even legalese “objective” standards are inherently subjective. Any standard is, by definition, subjective. Reading a transcript necessarily requires one to intuit inflection, meanings, etc., based on nothing but words on a page. Video allows us to base those judgements on more information, taking us closer to objectivity.

[@sheppycider123]

Well US Supreme Court does have audio recordings at least.

[@grumpypolecat2237]

The essential problem with humans and justice has always been one of 'who polices the police?'

[@frankfacts6207]

Easy question - easy answer. The police police the police

[@kisstune]

@@frankfacts6207 This is why more CRB (Citizen Review Boards) are needed.

[@davidseslar5798]

@@kisstune And, just who enforces the CRB's decisions? Especially if the violate negotiated labor agreements between the City and their LEOs?

[@johnrebman5718]

How does a quilt plea have anything to do with the police? The dependent had their trial and the judge sentenced them appropriately. Why did you need to bring the Police into as if they caused an injustice. By doing this and accusing the police shows your lack of justice!

[@johnrebman5718]

@@frankfacts6207 Actu the police officer polices himself by his Integrity!

[@tayzonday]

$4,000 sounds like low pay to smuggle 52 pounds of contraband. That’s minor pay considering the risks to the defendant. They need a labor union.

[@Skank_and_Gutterboy]

Yeah, Tuco doesn't have much sympathy when a mule complains about low pay.

[@davidseslar5798]

Yeah, well, desperation born of poverty is like that. Not to mention that the specifics of product type and quantities are not likely to have been mentioned - "I just need you to drive this vehicle from TJ to LA" . . .

[@ewoodley82]

Independent contractors always get screwed in this country.

[@batemanboi9672]

I guess you could say… she makes that cocaine rain and some stay high while others flush it down the drain

[@jamesgibson5876]

My thought exactly .. 4000 dollars for smuggling that much dosent soud like a person who is well connected in the organization .. shitty pay for the risk reward factor ...

[@j.6756]

My experience with appellate courts is that they do not always rule on the law, but sometimes to promote their personal agenda.

[@jamesgibson5876]

Well that is the basic habit of law isnt it ?

[@RDKirbyN]

This is all courts when you get down to it. How much do they respect the law, or parts of the law, and how do they apply their biases?

[@edacheson8540]

Trial courts do that too. A LOT

[@I_SuperHiro_I]

Sometimes?!

[@christophercarrigg3775]

Yeah they were appointed for a reason

[@mikeslater6246]

I was under the impression that the 9th circus itself is the most overturned appeals court in the country. So I googled just to check the facts and found out that I was incorrect, that it is actually the second most overturned appeals court in the country behind the 6th circuit in DC. So a ruling like this does not surprise me but I commend the judge for doing the right thing. His experience told him to sentence the criminals one way and because he was not able in good conscience to meet the demands of the appeals court he recused himself from the case and explained why. He did the right thing.

[@briangallagher787]

That also means that he was not able to follow the laws, as well as his oath. Which is very disturbing.

[@mikeslater6246]

@@briangallagher787 but the truth is he did follow the laws as he has understood it for 25 years in the same job. The 9th circus opinion is not law but is an opinion that he should have given them a lesser sentence. It is a legal difference of opinion between two courts. He disagreed so he recused himself which is an appropriate action. It has nothing to do with him not following the laws or his oath as you suggest.

[@suedenim9208]

Judging a court's performance based on the reversal rate is the same kind of simplistic reasoning that would use simple statistics to say that you've got one testicle, and what we can expect from either people who have an agenda or people who don't have a clue. SCOTUS can choose a case as one of the very small percentage the review for a number of reasons, and often that's because they think a court was wrong about an important point of law. Ignoring (a whopping 3) cases appealed from the armed forces, the average reversal rate at SCOTUS is 69.4%. By the simplistic metric of reversal the 4th circuit was "best", getting it right only 40.7% of the time. For a more reasonable evaluation you could start by looking at the number of cases reversed compared to the total number of cases a district has tried. If you do that you'll find that what some people claim as a large number of reversals is actually a very tiny fraction of the cases that were tried. In fact, the differences from one district to the next are largely just statistical noise with very little significance.

[@TheRealScooterGuy]

"Most overturned court" in terms of raw numbers, possibly, but as a percentage of cases it hears, it is about average. The 9th hears more cases than any other US Circuit Court.

[@mikeslater6246]

@@TheRealScooterGuy here's where we emulate the district courts. You claim that the 80.4% reversal rate is about average when the average is 69.4, the low is 59.3 (if you drop the three cases from the armed forces), and 81.5 is the high. With those numbers I would not call the 80.4% reversal from the 9th circuit average. But that's just my opinion based on the facts I have seen. Just like the details of the case that the judge who was overturned saw led him to give the defendant a higher jail term and those same details led the ninth circus to send it back for resentencing.

[@philmann3476]

When it comes to back seat drivers and Monday morning quarterbacks in the legal profession, rest assured you are not alone. (And you're lucky if it only goes as far as exchanging a couple of nasty letters.)

[@timnossem5538]

I looked up the initial case. Naming the drugs is indeed important 47 pounds of methamphetamine and 5 pounds of heroin. There are no "pawns" with those quantities of those drugs

[@GamesFromSpace]

Uh, all they have to do is drive a car from A to B. The car could have a literal ton of heroin in it, and they'd be just as involved as if they were delivering a pre-rolled joint.

[@timnossem5538]

@@GamesFromSpace They all know they arent delivering teddy bears to children's hospitals

[@nnelg8139]

@@GamesFromSpace I'd say that there's a huge difference between delivering a single joint vs. enough drugs to kill multiple elephants. And no reasonable person wouldn't realize that they're doing something *big* by smuggling massive bales of mystery substances.

[@FrankieJames7]

Everyone is a pawn to the war on drugs

[@ericvoge6678]

FrankieJames7. The gubment war on drugs. Is war on the competition.

[@ericblenner-hassett3945]

The judge has made, in my view, a good if not lower than needed sentence prior to the appeal. They, the accused, had priors in the same capacity and I would expect sentencing for the same type of crime to increase with each conviction. If one tried and failed to smuggle a chocolate bar across the border, was convicted, released, and tried to repeat the act that had them caught and convicted everyone reading the case for the second instance should expect an increase in punishment.

[@youcool1391]

I'm not saying I disagree with your opinion but I wish you used something other then smuggling a chocolate bar for your example

[@briangallagher787]

No problem with an increase. As long as it’s within the law.

[@jxtq27]

I'm glad you phrased it that way. Let's say the first chocolate bar got 1 year in prison. How many years in prison is it reasonable to give someone for a second chocolate bar? Obviously, zero. Just because we made a mistake once, doesn't mean that repeating it is correct.

[@jxtq27]

@@briangallagher787 the law can be wrong. We admit this every time we change it. There's a certain flower that used to be illegal in every state. Many lives were ruined over this. Now it's legal in half of states. Those states are doing better. The fact that the law changed and that change improved the situation is proof that the law was wrong. What value is there in destroying our own society to enforce unjust laws?

[@ericblenner-hassett3945]

@@jxtq27 If it is contraband, going from the months mentioned as " minimum " and the difference is less than 1/3 to 1/2 it is a reasonable increase. With your 1 year, that is 12 months, so going to 14 to 18 months would be reasonable.

[@davekramer4266]

The trial Judge can see the Defendant Smile or Grin, Laugh ETC.. This time from what Steve said, I totally agree with the Trial Judge.. REPEAT OFFENDERS, are NOT Minor Offenders..💯👎👮

[@Karen_Marie]

The woman was not a repeat offender and the trial judge didn't base his opinion that she wasn't a minor participant on her demeanor. He based it upon her knowledge of the operation and prior use as a smuggler (do not confuse this as a prior offender as she wasn’t caught before which is the "prior offender" standard). I'd like to compare this case to a different case where the offender was given "minor participant" consideration from this judge to see how he determines who is a minor participant and who isn't. It sounds like he almost always denies defendant minor participant consideration. A sentence shouldn't be affected based upon an unlucky draw of a judge. A sentence should fit the crime and should be standard according to the facts of the case, not according to the particular judge.

[@B_Bodziak]

​@@Karen_MarieYou listened!! I'd only add that over 100 sentences by this judge have been appealed for him not using the "minor participant" requirement

[@B_Bodziak]

She was NOT considered a repeat offender under the law.

[@neruneri]

@@B_Bodziak I don't know if that's true, but if it is, that does change the character of this situation quite a bit. If there is a pattern of the judge giving sentences that are irreconcilable with the commonly held interpretations of the law as it is written, that's a really big problem.

[@dave2132]

When Steve wrote to the other lawyer "If you have any further questions or comments" I thought he was going to follow that with "Put them below."

[@dwayne7356]

Maybe we are suppose to do a prisoner exchange for an arms smuggler. I hope the next judge gives a longer sentences.

[@AeroGuy07]

El Chapo is really hoping that an American celebrity screws up in Mexico!

[@anthonyburke5656]

I’ve been the recipient of some “sharp” comments from Judges whose decisions I have successfully Appealed, I’ve had Judges apologise to me for getting it wrong when an Appeal has overturned their verdict, I’ve had Judges “crow” when an Appeal has failed. I’ve never had a Judge criticise the Appeal Court.

[@CarolineBearoline]

Then all the court proceedings should be filmed, it's not like we need reels of film strip anymore! It's all digital. Also, nobody who's anybody in drug smuggling or sales is doing the kind of grunt work where you could get busted with it in transit etc If they're doing it right, their hands never touch the substance

[@eddiehuff7366]

I agree Steve. Sooo much communication is non-verbal. Also, reading words on a page is not the same as hearing it live with all the voice inflections.

[@UnicornOfDepression]

If I'm ever on the stand, I will state "sarcasm", "humor", etc. just so it is on the record.

[@Bob-Lob-Law]

Everyone knows the movie is never as good as the book

[@mvpfocus]

Nevertheless, reading the room is not sufficient evidence, in and of itself, to conclude someone is a major player.

[@IHaveNoName2009]

Body language is not universal. In general body language is worse than flipping a coin in terms of predicting if someone is being truthful. If you really know someone and have spent a long time in conversation with them there are individually unique indications which are part of human communication. But, that isn't the type of thing we are talking about during a trial.

[@alanmcentee3035]

@@IHaveNoName2009 With respect, these weren't trials. Both pleaded guilty. While there was most likely an allocution and a statement or even testimony from the Federal agent involved, all that should be held under the microscope of black and white.

[@chrisoakey9841]

If courts weren't so silly, the appeals court could watch the testimony.

[@alc5792]

That would be work

[@B_Bodziak]

We'd need far more appellate courts

[@mikekwayne]

I'm about to retire but since I was a kid in school, the 9th circuit has been known more as a circus than a court of law.

[@dushooter]

Well said.

[@georgesheffield1580]

Along with the 5th circuit .

[@B_Bodziak]

It has the second highest number of rulings overturned (in the nation).

[@weekendwarriorweldingdiypr4604]

I'm sure that's going to help him next time one of his cases is appealed, regardless of his experience.

[@BastiatC]

He stepped down

[@corssecurity]

@@BastiatC from the case not from his job

[@weekendwarriorweldingdiypr4604]

@@BastiatC the next time one of his cases is appealed, it will still go to the 9th circuit.

[@Relkond]

There’s mess enough I think for all the judges involved, granted it’ll focus on the judge who had his case appealed, the judges in the appeals court are not immune from blowback. consider - if your court gets famous for making nonsensical decisions not based on facts or laws?

[@finerbiner]

The courts are a ridiculous joke and are so insulated from reality there is little light shed on it. I appreciate the judge.

[@spikey2740]

I may have mentioned this before, either herein or perhaps on another forum, if you've heard it before, suffer. This reminds me of a case (I'm not a lawyer, just someone who knows a lawyer that told us about the case afterward) that happened in Tennessee a few years ago. I hope my memory on this is correct..... A young woman stole a Mercedes somewhere in or near Knoxville TN. She proceeded to head west on I-40 toward Nashville, TN. The police began chasing her because of the vehicle theft, and the race was on. Somewhere short of Nashville, other police were in the process of trying to stop her, either via a roadblock or sticks. One policeman was at the edge of the highway when Miss High Speed Driver swung the Mercedes toward him, hit, and killed him. She was captured soon thereafter. She was charged with vehicular homicide or whatever TN law permits, and the case was nearing trial. She was offered a plea deal, and her grandmother objected, saying something like "Don't do it, take your chances in court, you'll get a better deal - either get a lesser sentence or will beat it entirely". The case went to trial. She got a better deal alright, she was found guilty and given a sentence several years longer than the plea Granny objected to.

[@jamesgibson5876]

Well this goes to show .. you should be more interested in your case than your lawyer is . They can give you options but you make the desions .. a d if you want to make an informed descion ..you should edicate your self ..not just listen to your lawyer ...or granny

[@alpheusmadsen8485]

On the one hand, it bothers me by how many jury trials produce punishments far in excess of plea bargains -- on the other hand, in this case, I'm pleased with the result. I can't decide if the gulf between plea and jury sentencing is an indictment of the plea bargaining system, or the jury system, or both. (Likely both, although I lean heavily against plea bargaining in no small part because of the way it essentially nullifies jury trials.)

[@spikey2740]

@@alpheusmadsen8485 No system is ever going to be correct in all instances. We can only hope it is appropriate in most of them.

[@jamesgibson5876]

Agreed.. 95 0ercet are plea.... if the state has evedence then make the procecutor give the people justice .. other wise let the acused go free.. its a system desigined for profit not justice .. qnother thing is ..bonds.. get rid of the bonds man... not needed now adays ...

[@EJ-74]

Hypocrites arguing over who's the biggest hypocrite 🤔 lol

[@DerykRobosson]

The fourth circuit eating itself, followed by the ninth circuit eating itself, the second circuit ignore SCOTUS, suggests that the judiciary is beginning to implode.

[@CtrlAltRetreat]

Pretty much. It really makes sense though, the circuit rulings only applying within their circuit is a sign that there isn't much shared confidence in the law as practiced across the nation and that erodes the authority of the shepard herding the cats... catherd... of the various circuits. The basic ideology of judges across America varies so much that the open interpretation and bench legislation of common law means that incompatible rulings and power struggles are a foregone conclusion. Political sensibilities were the only things keeping things together this long and those civilities are looking quite frayed.

[@texasforever7887]

Of all the circuit courts the 9th distinguishes itself as being truly the special one of the bunch time and time again.

[@lizhaydon2250]

So how soon after the criminals were released did they reoffend? Great video.

[@jodyvanliew2514]

I agree 100% with Steve on his assessment of these rulings .

[@Alecw51]

Some people in San Diego call the 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals the 9th US Circus Court of Appeals.

[@claudiametzger306]

A LOT of people in San Diego call it the 9th circus.

[@freethebirds3578]

Many people nationwide call them that.

[@charlespaine987]

Lady justice wears a blindfold. Facts not in evidence equals too much “discretion “ corruption

[@johntracy72]

One can get her to take off the blindfold if they have enough money.

[@AndrewMerts]

​@@johntracy72 The saying is "lady justice is blind but she can smell money".

[@maxsdad538]

Like it or not, "facts not in evidence" aren't facts.

[@tridave9811]

She wears the blindfold to claim being impartial and for the most part she is. Where people get confused is thinking the scales are there to weigh the evidence, they are for weighing how much gold someone has.

[@charlespaine987]

@@maxsdad538 facts are always facts presently shown or never shown or revealed in the future . Accusers / whiteness can think what they saw is fact but may not be . humans are all fail-able judge prosecutors witnesses all humans . Even camera s can be tricked. I sure ain’t god.

[@AeroGuy07]

The smuggling of drugs has changed. The cartels will get the drugs to the border, but its the clients problem to get them across. Generally, but not always, the people getting caught are low level. They're just paid couriers. The real "kingpins" on this side of the border rarely even see the drugs, much less touch them. I recommend the Koncrete podcast featuring Johnny Mitchell or Roger Reeves. There is also the channel "The Connect with Johnny Mitchell." Both go into great detail about drug smuggling.

[@ipissed]

So drug mules are a new innovative technique?

[@jimyhalfpoint5852]

Cia government are the biggest drug and arms smugglers. Couriers bringing it on there body is small amounts .

[@jamessimms415]

@@TheBooban Have you been to a major border crossing like El Paso, Laredo, San Diego, Brownsville, Del Rio?

[@lrmackmcbride7498]

@@TheBooban not enough money, time or people

[@briangallagher787]

@@ipissed No. But apparently this judge thought that mules make decisions regarding what the Cartel does. For someone that supposedly has a collective over 25 years experience. He seems to have a limited view of what someone in CHARGE does.

[@billscott1601]

The 9th circuit court has always been out to lunch.

[@MarsMan1]

How is that WAR on Drugs Going? 50+ Years... are we winning yet?

[@nicholasvinen]

Don't you read The Onion? The drugs won some time ago.

[@cleanupkyle]

It was never anything other than an excuse to target people of color so they can keep prison labor camps full. Prison labor is legal slavery according to the 13th amendment after all.

[@MarsMan1]

@@nicholasvinen The Drugs will keep on winning and people keep losing.

[@samevans1535]

You presume that the Appeals judges actually read the transcript and all the documents carefully and had anything confusing explained to them. SINCE WHEN?

[@dushooter]

9th circuit is a clown circus. They are criminal supporting circuit.

[@B_Bodziak]

I assume the prosecutor and the appeals attorneys presented their arguments, as well.

[@-yeme-]

I will say, the judge saying he based his decision on his experience as a judge and prosecutor isn't exactly what I would like to hear. I would rather hear that he based his determination that the guilty parties weren't minor players on the evidence presented in the case. Because by definition, his experience as a judge and prosecutor came in other cases. Without that reference to specific evidence, but with reference to prior experience, it sounds a little like he had some gut feeling or intuition that he was confident applied in this case because it had applied in others. Not how its supposed to work.

[@deconteesawyer5758]

The judge's reply was twenty two pages. How much of that did Steve read on camera ?

[@jamesgibson5876]

Exactly .. the judge was sayin .. i domt like being questioned .. because i lnow what im doing ..see how much experience i have ?

[@albutterfield5965]

Being an ex Californian I have little to no use for the 9th circuit, but I am glad to see judges call out the higher courts as they are not infallible or always right, Our justice system has had a pecking order that has lasted way to long, from the Supreme court down they have all made mistakes, Every department and department head including the supreme court and the presidents needs to be publicly criticized when they screw up. No level of government or branch of government should be exempt from criticism or having their mistakes publicly pointed out.

[@PushingThroughThePain]

Loved your personal story there near the end!

[@thatguy7085]

Contempt… I’ve seen a judge do this too… show contempt for higher court rulings.

[@rationalbushcraft]

I was going to argue they might be a unwilling mule and not know what they were carrying but since they had both been busted previously it seems unlikely they didn't know what they were doing.

[@mvpfocus]

'Knowing what they were doing' is not the same thing as being a major player.

[@rationalbushcraft]

@@mvpfocus just the amount makes they a major player. The average mule doesn’t move that much. Most swallow a few bags. That weight makes you a major player because cartels won’t trust just anyone with that much valuable product.

[@suedenim9208]

@@rationalbushcraft Exactly. That's why any McDonald's employee filling an order that costs more than $25 is automatically gets anew job title that makes them a low level manager.

[@mvpfocus]

@@rationalbushcraft While that seems plausible, it's still just an assumption... which is _not_ a finding of fact. The amount of drugs is already another factor in sentencing.

[@briangallagher787]

@@rationalbushcraft Not anymore. Not unless they are smuggling into Prison.

[@johngeary220]

A USSC Guidelines sentence calculation is driven by points aggregating an 'adjusted offense level'. The offense of conviction starts with a 'base offense level'. To that, adjustments can be made. For instance, a leader or organizer gets +2 or +3 (depending on level: kingpin. LT, et cet); a 'minor' participant gets -2; and a participant who was involved in the conspiracy but as an underling gets no adjustment, i.e, he or she gets the 'base offense level'. The determination between a minor player and a regular participant is typically fact-specific and made initially as part of the PreSentence Report by U.S. Probation, charged with preparing the PSIR. Such decisions when made by the Presiding Judge are supposed to be given deference by appeals courts. Counsel for defendants can object to such proposed finding and get an evidentiary hearing before the judge makes a final determination at sentencing. It's not done lightly. No wonder the trial judge is pissed but kudos to defendants' appeal counsel!

[@milkman2758]

Simple: the smuggler gets life, no parole.

[@concretecaveman7666]

There was a very good reason why Rush Limbaugh always referred to the 9th Circuit as the 9th Circus.

[@kencar8961]

Ben behind mymitv plate

[@bartsanders1553]

Quick!

[@kencar8961]

@Bart Sanders just lucky to be at the right place at the right time.

[@SeanBZA]

The getting out for time served means she will be back doing it next week. If they are caught again and again they are clearly not minor, and show they are doing this for money.

[@thomasdalton1508]

It was only time served because she had served a lot of time while the appeal was going on.

[@YouSh0uldCryAboutIt]

Good stuff Steve, thanks.

[@2lefThumbs]

What else is an appeal court there for? Surely they're just there to ensure the law (and associated rules) are applied- not to establish facts. Was the original trial a bench trial, or was there a jury there to do fact finding? If the latter, then the judge should just apply the rules, and not double-guess the jury, right?

[@bem121]

47 lbs of plastic straws

[@deconteesawyer5758]

and five pounds of Teddy bears.

[@pchelloo]

I think the King Pins & Queen Pins are The Untouchables. They're like a dragon with many heads; cut one head off and another grows in its place.🐉

[@atkravitz]

I think this is the only time we disagree. The District Court Judge is there to supervise that case. I don’t want his prosecutor bias or experience. I want him to apply the facts to the law. That is the District Judge’s job. The Appellate Courts, including the Supreme Court, interprets the law. If the District Court doesn’t like the new interpretation of the law, too bad. I might not like what the Appeals Courts and the Supreme Court are doing with their new interpretations, but that is how our system is set up. This District Court Judge wants to get on his soapbox because the Appeals Court has now reinterpreted the law he had applied for 25 years. He better get used to it because I have a feeling new interpretations of the law are going to be the norm for the foreseeable future.

[@somethingelse4424]

I have to respectfully disagree with you on this one Steve. All this prosecution of drug smugglers is making my taxes higher and worst of all my drugs more expensive. Nobody should have to choose between filling the tank with heroin and putting cocaine on the table.

[@isaiahwelch8066]

This is like an auto tech who has worked in the same shop for 25 years. Customer comes in, has a problem. The tech makes a call, fixes the problem. The customer comes back with another problem, same tech gets the same car. Manager comes over and basically tells the tech to follow the book, despite the tech saying he had seen the problem hundreds of times before, and knew what he was doing. Then the manager says he doesn't care, follow the book anyway. The tech then says to give the repair to someone else.

[@grahamo22]

No, its more like a technician bodges a repair, makes it work but voids the car warranty. So the boss tells him to do it again properly and stop breaking warranty conditions.

[@tcolsher8003]

That’s the problem, it’s a revolving door. They will be out and doing the same thing.

[@McSynth]

Good to hear that one Steve.

[@kirkmorrison6131]

The War on Drugs is stupid. Drugs won back in 1980s

[@highpockets2376]

Im not a big judge fan, but atleast this guy has integrity.

[@jamesgibson5876]

Im not sure it shows integrity as much as it was more of a pissing contest.. first judge dudnt like being questioned.. that isnt what i would call integrity

[@andrewgilbertson5356]

Thank you

[@jimmeade2976]

It would have been interesting if all of the judges in the original judge's district supported his rebuttal and recused themselves from the cases, on the same grounds that he did. What would have happened then ... the Appeals Court would have had no court to return to sentencing to?

[@Cutest-Bunny998]

Appellate Courts are able to issue their own orders, and their own mandates. If there truly was no valid lesser Court to receive the mandate, then the Court of Appeals would issue an order dispensing justice themselves. Or to put it more succinctly: the Court of Appeals' authority is not contingent on the consent of the trial court, it is just usually the case that the trial court procedurally imposes a modification to the case of original jurisdiction.

[@lindaward3156]

it happens everywhere in every job I've had where the people who don't actually do the job tell you how to do what they can't. in the early '80s I had a beginner job at a Taco bell. there was a large vegetarian pop in the area and regulars would come in for the bean burritos. the boss forced me to greet everyone with "would you like to try our burrito supreme (meat) today?" even to the nonmeat eaters. those customers were disappointed in me as everyone likes to have their needs met. I felt like a fool. I quit soon after as he was also a creep. as I matured and had better skills/education it still continued to happen. most of my work experience was in the field but it didn't stop upper management trying to muck things up from on high. I never saw them except on rare occasions, they didn't have the skills themselves, but it still didn't stop them from idiotic actions. and wage theft if they could. i became a union steward to stop that!

[@jamesgibson5876]

If there should be a law against any thing ..taco bell should be added to the list ... that is the worst shit in the world .. .. if i were you i wouldnt admit to any one i ever worked there

[@karlrovey]

Unfortunately, the boss was likely stuck following an edict from corporate on promoting that specific item.

[@lindaward3156]

@@karlrovey no, it was him. yes, promotions were part of the job but that guy was sadistic, took pleasure ordering young women around

[@lindaward3156]

@@jamesgibson5876 I own up to my mistakes - and it was 40 years ago! it was brand new in MA at that time and i believe a bit different than today's version but i'm not a fan of any fast food unless in a pinch

[@nelskrogh3238]

The 9th circuit is and has been a judicial joke for a long time now.

[@logmover123]

I bet we'll see her in front of another judge soon

[@WeThePeepHole333]

@@logmover123 she's not the discussion here GayDolph

[@clydewmorgan]

No it’s not. That’s just what you’ve been told by your betters at Fox News now go fuck yourself

[@logmover123]

@@WeThePeepHole333 You appear to have a room temperature IQ level, let me spell it out for you. She was sentenced to time served, as in, she's no longer in prison. Now she'll go right back to where she got the drugs in the first place, and smuggle them back all over again.

[@pplusbthrust]

Justice is an elusive entity. Judges are charged with adjudicating justice that lurks in the dusty corners of the halls of the courthouse.

[@christinerobinson9372]

I couldn't resist a header like that!

[@DemocratsrPDFfiles]

The war on drugs is over ... drugs won 🏆

[@WeThePeepHole333]

There never was one

[@johns140]

Depends on what they were smuggling. At this point, smuggling weed is somewhere close to smuggling counterfeit Gucci bags. On the other end of the spectrum… Caught smuggling fentanyl? Punishment should be death with the possibility of commutation to life should they give up a higher level trafficker resulting in a conviction.

[@deconteesawyer5758]

No problem with 47/5 lbs co cane/meth and heroin. Stern talking to will do.

[@charlesbrumble5918]

I'm not going to try to Monday-morning QB this judge; he was the presiding judge and the findings within his 'honest perception' that played into his decision really are probably impossible recreate at an appeals level. Quite honestly, even if two judges were present and saw the same behavioral aspects - the could reach two different judgments as to what they saw and what they felt it meant. The problem is probably not per se with the judge - but, rather with the law that permitted the enhancement by way of a subjective interpretation (including potentially personal experiential bias). We all have some bias - period. Is what it is - highlights a law that permits too loose of interpretation and no means to guard against the inclusion of bias at sentencing. Probably, a great deal could be said about how the appeals court addressed the issue presented. I question: Should this sentencing enhancement law even remain on the books if it is prone to such so-called 'misapplication'?

[@TheRealScooterGuy]

The crux of the matter is whether or not these defendants were minor participants in these drug smuggling cases. They were both paid relatively minor amounts. They were just mules. That's a minor role, even if the quantity of drugs is major. As long as our sentencing guidelines include the "minor role" clause, it should be applied. We've seen judges before who rely on their experience (and bias, as a former prosecutor, sometimes) to over-sentence defendants. That experience doesn't make the over-sentencing correct. I hate the illegal drug trade. I wish we could do more to get the top people who are behind it, but we are bankrupting our country by putting so many low-level dealers and users in prison. We need to attack the root-causes of drug use, and the original sources of the drugs if we want to solve this problem.

[@coupledyetivonvanderburg5385]

Let's just annex Mexico. Sixty stars for Ol' Glory!

[@TheRealScooterGuy]

@@coupledyetivonvanderburg5385 If Mexico agreed, that could be done. Without agreement, it's just Russia and Ukraine, American style. (And frankly, there are too many powerful corporations depending on cheap labor in Mexico for the US Congress to ever agree.)

[@johnwilliamson467]

When 47 lb is an amount considered minor player, one does wonder what is the major amount required ? The 9th circuit is the most overturned appeals court so there is that .

[@tissuepaper9962]

The amount is irrelevant. It wouldn't matter how much they were carrying, the people carrying the drugs aren't the ones making decisions, putting those people in jail doesn't deter anything because there's an endless supply of poor people who can be bought or threatened to do this simple task.

[@briangallagher787]

@@tissuepaper9962 They still need to be put in prison. But reasonably. That way you get them, and maybe they cooperate.

[@briangallagher787]

@@M167A1 While your theory satisfies your bloodlust. It does nothing to curtail drug abuse. As proven by the steady rise in drug use from the 1930’s through to the 1990’s. Highest Prison sentences for abusers. NO drop in demand. Or in smuggling.

[@suedenim9208]

@@M167A1 Exactly. Can you believe there are morons out there who think that education instead of punishment might have an effect?

[@tissuepaper9962]

@@suedenim9208 it's people like yourself that have caused the police to become the rabid, wild, animals they are today. Punish punish punish, don't worry about finding the root of any issue, just throw people in jail where they can rot away out of your sight. It's a lazy solution that suits vengeful people.

[@AeroGuy07]

Will KZbin restrict a video because you say the names of the drugs she was carrying?

[@ericvoge6678]

Demonitize. I have yet to see a Lehto vid in the decade i have watched, be demonitized or age restricted. He knows the line.

[@RoseNZieg]

according to comments i read, the contrabands were meth and heroin.

[@suedenim9208]

@@ericvoge6678 Yeah, but the line is really stupid. Largely because YT is far more interested in maximizing clicks than in good content for the channel's target audience.

[@big0bad0brad]

@@suedenim9208 Yep, if you want to know if youtube will do something, ask the advertisers

[@jimmybutler1379]

THINK ABOUT THE LAW ENFORCEMENT of today the lack of jail time and releases instead of long sentences for the crime of the drug running of drugs into our nation ! more like whom gets to do drug sales in the USA ! for injustice !...

[@oldmanfunky4909]

San Diego was all I needed to hear.

[@AdmiralKnight]

I agree that a lot of information is lost when words are put to text but to me that's just more reason to push for better recordings of court procedures, not to limit appeals courts.

[@pansepot1490]

If the evidence for harsher conviction can’t be read in the transcript this is a case of a judge saying “trust me bro”. I agree that experience means a lot in a profession but we if accept that a judge’s feelings can override the standard application of the law that opens the door for huge injustices. Almost every day Steve has a story of an “experienced” judge caught misbehaving, so to speak. I know nothing about this particular case and it’s frankly irrelevant. I prefer a criminal getting a shorter sentence than an innocent jailed unjustly.

[@AdmiralKnight]

@@pansepot1490 I was going to write something similar in my original comment but figured shorter was better. I agree 100%.

[@alanmcentee3035]

The transcript will only have the evidence. it won't show if the defense attorney is a person of color or the accused is unkempt. It won't show how buddy buddy the judge and prosecutor are. Everything the appeal court should see should be in that transcript.

[@suedenim9208]

@@pansepot1490 Exactly. A bunch of people using good grammar to lie is just as obvious in a transcript as it is to people listening and watching them in the courtroom, so it's ridicuous for a lower court to claim they knew anything an appeals court can't know by reading the transcript.

[@alanmcentee3035]

Disagree. What is in the transcript is what should be seen by the judge. Not if the accused was a minority, or a female, or indigent, young, poorly groomed, or spoke with a heavy accent. The judge shouldn't be looking at the defense attorney remembering the last time they met and that client of his. The judge shouldn't be looking at the prosecutor reliving their round of golf at their country club. He should be looking at the evidence before him. That evidence is black and white, without emotion, bias, or color. Just as it was read by the Ninth Circuit or anyone else. Second, the judge's response is why Congress initiated sentencing guidelines. HIS experience as a prosecutor and later as a "hanging judge" show he crossed the line. Repeatedly. While I saw it long before the quote from the defense attorney came out, apparently this judge rarely, if ever, considered someone "a minor trafficker". The guidelines are as much a part of sentencing as the range Congress passed. If a judge can not remain inside the law, as written by Congress and interpreted by the appeal courts, he shouldn't be on the bench. Third, any time a judge tells an appeal court that he knows better than they do, he is undeserved of his bench. He might be better educated, far more wittier, handsomer than the devil, have a photographic memory, and even have more experience before the law. But the law has determined that the appeal courts get to determine what the law means. I do not know, but I firmly believe that this judge has been overturned several times on appeal for his sentencing. Far more than what the defense attorney alluded to. Just his response to the Ninth Circuit shown his hubris and narcissism. *** I wish we could put every drug trafficker in prison for the rest of their lives. But I don't write the laws.

[@thatguy7085]

The sentencing factors can only constitutionally have occurred during the crime they were convicted of. A sentence can not be constitutionally extended because of a previous crime conviction, or action where no conviction occurred.

[@suedenim9208]

Tell us more about the imaginary constitution you're using.

[@Spartan1312]

Man has bragging rights for standing up to the 9th circus...

[@justkelly6992]

I'm a tad confused. My understanding is that when you plea bargain and enter a guilty plea voluntarily you waive your right to appeal.

[@mojoman2001]

Yeah. Nah. Taxpayers pay to appeal practically every guilty plea with active time. Why would the defendant not take a shot at a free lawyer on appeal?

[@wisenber]

@@mojoman2001 "Taxpayers pay to appeal practically every guilty plea with active time. " Few ever make it to the appeals court. With the exception of capital offenses, appeals aren't automatic.

[@jamesgibson5876]

The only real appeal to a plea is if the prosecution fails to follow the plea agreement to the letter ... meaning .. plea agreements are a contract and both parties must follow the contractbor the other party cant be held to it ..

[@daleallen7634]

@@jamesgibson5876 : You're leaving out that the judge isn't the prosecutor, and, as such (as your defense attorney SHOULD point out to you), is NOT "bound" by any "plea bargain" made INDEPENDENTLY between you (through your attorney), and the prosecutor. Also, the judge, cannot get involved in the actual bargaining, because that would constitute "practicing law from the bench", he/she is necessarily limited to either accepting, or denying the bargain, as made, and brought forth, by the prosecutor.

[@jamesgibson5876]

@@daleallen7634 correct the judge will tell you this before accepting your plea and tell you tge range of sentence .. then he will ask you ..knowing this ..do you still wish to ontinue with this plea? .. then you answer yes or no... . Tey have plea agreements prettywell sewn up ..not much to appeaal to... except failue of the proceution to follow the agreement ..such as .. if the procecutor said they had agreed to not make a recomendation for sentence ..but they had already provided the judge with items that wod cause the judje to add to the sentence.. ..after wards you could show that the state supreme court has decided in perevious case ...that the state equates ..making no recomendation for scentencing as making no damadging statement .. there fore .. the procecution has failed to follow the plea agree ment.. Ask me how i know

[@michiganborn8303]

The very mention of the 9th circus court of appeals I knew they would make the wrong decision.

[@cvr527]

The 9th Circus Court of Appeals is filled with progressive activists whose loyalty is to the progressive political religion and not to the rule of law or the US Constitution.

[@michiganborn8303]

@cvr527 It's some scary s**t. I looked at the coverage map of the 9th and encompasses most of the west coast even as far as the entire state of Idaho. That's almost 1/4 the population of the country. Definitely needs to be broken up.

[@shaunwheeler3484]

IMNSHO this begs the question whether the "Sentencing Guidelines" are, in fact, mandates? When a trial court judge with considerable, relevant experience deviates from the guidelines but explains the basis in his sentencing order it should compel the appellate court to request more than a mere trial abstract before determining "he got it all wrong". If a former prosecutor with decades of experience with this type of crime is not qualified to deviate I can only assume they think all trial court judges are unqualified to deviate from the guidelines. The 9th has kicked trial court discretion to the curb. Did the 9th call up the entire trial record or did they rely entirely on abstracts?

[@anthonyburke5656]

I’ve got to say I wouldn’t be a Judge, no matter what the pay or conditions, my friends who are Appeal Judges tell me their first job is to protect the Constitution and their second job is to apply the law, followed by the duty to protect the Trial Judge.

[@jmpattillo]

“Undercut his authority”? It’s a higher court, they are supposed to do that.

[@clydewmorgan]

Good point.

[@sloppyjoes7]

They CAN do that if the judge messed up.

[@suedenim9208]

No, they're supposed to correct actual errors, not substitute their discretion for discretion that the lower judge has and used to issue a ruling.

[@dereksmith1803]

Imagine that.... Another case the 9th Circus Court of Appeals tries to screw up.

[@OrenNoah]

On the other side, there's a great quote from Gwartz v. Superior Court (1999) 71 Cal.App.4th 480, 481-482, "We thought - incorrectly, as it turned out - that the trial courts would simply follow our opinion even if they disagreed with it. Stare decisis and all that stuff. (See Auto Equity Sales, Inc. v. Superior Court (1962) 57 Cal.2d 450, 455 ["Decisions of every division of the District Courts of Appeal are binding upon . . . all superior courts of this state"]; cf. Cal. Code Jud. Ethics, canon 3B.) But sometimes it seems as though we have to remind the lower court there is a judicial pecking order when it comes to the interpretation of statutes."

[@Waterlooplein1]

You know some judge, sometime, is going to sentence these two people somewhere in the future when they go smuggling again.

[@dougbotimer8005]

Aren’t appellate courts obligated to give deference to a trial courts finding of fact, unless there is clear error?

[@Captain-Cosmo]

Error or abuse, yes.

[@minhduong1484]

The disagreement is the sentencing not the verdict. In the appeals court opinion, the trial judge did not follow the Federal guidelines on sentencing. There are no findings on fact really to consider

[@briangallagher787]

The Federal Judge said “I’m taking my ball and going home “

[@jeffreyhowll1392]

If you plead guilty there should be no appeal allowed.

[@gregpenismith1248]

Nice KPIG sticker. One of the last real radio stations.

[@protocol6]

Almost sounds like you are making a case for videotaping court cases.

[@coachk37]

I hear you Steve but I like sticking to the guidelines.

[@ipissed]

Nothing worse than a Monday morning quarterback with a black eye.

[@jimmybutler1379]

If it was I, I would have told him don't write or call me again good by !...

[@hogheadv2]

I recall sentences for many years for drugs measured in grams not pounds.

[@cleanupkyle]

That tends to be streets dealers being caught selling. Still absolutely ridiculous to put someone away for years for

[@wisenber]

@@cleanupkyle "Still absolutely ridiculous to put someone away for years for" Sure, why punish pounds of meth and heroin, right?

[@Mike1614b]

well, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals does have a long-standing reputation for being far left 'activists'

[@dushooter]

Well said.

[@marsmech]

Let's see how that works out Cotton.

[@rgoers]

So, what happens if the court takes its sweet time to reassign the sentencing and for another judge to do it? How much time is left for these two people? What happens if another judge also refuses and they can't find a judge to do the resentencing?

[@paul.van.santvoord1232]

I think that the judge is correct. The appeals court just opened Pandora box. Everybody sentenced by that judge will appeal if possible

[@arthursmith6854]

Rulings by he 9th Circuit Court itself has been overturned by the USS Supreme Court more than any 2 other Circuit Courts combined.

[@briangallagher787]

They may try. But the appeals court set very specific guidelines.

[@alanmcentee3035]

@@arthursmith6854 Wrong. The Eighth Circuit and Sixth Circuits are overturned more than the Ninth. The problem is the Ninth is larger than half the other circuits combined, so in terms of sheer numbers, they probably do get overturned more. But on a percentage of cases, not by a long shot.

[@alanmcentee3035]

The problem for the judge is he is what is known as a "hanging judge". People are appealing his sentences for a reason. I have no love for drug traffickers, but if the judge can't follow the law, he shouldn't be on the bench.

[@arthursmith6854]

@@alanmcentee3035 In 2021 the 9th Circuit Court had the highest rate of reversals by the US Supreme Court of any Circuit Court.. At one point during the year, the Supreme Court reversed 15 out of 16 cases.

[@jimmybutler1379]

Really or just one time it was told !...

[@neuropilot7310]

And there are too few stories of Generals, most notably Gen. Jim Mattis, who reportedly went out on patrol more than a few times, with a riffle and engaged hostile forces while being Commanding General. Whilst he may not have done this every day, It became one of the legends about Gen. Mattis. There was also a 3-Star F-22 pilot flying missions over Syria, and dropping live ordinance on targets, whilst in command of Air Forces, CENTCOM

[@spychopath]

6:50 That doesn't sound right from the appeals court. Deciding the facts of the case is the role of the lower court. The appeals court can only rule on matters of law. Only if it is defined in law what constitutes a major or minor participant in a crime is it inappropriate for the lower court to make that decision and appropriate for the appeals court to opine on it.

[@mikecallahan8234]

Oh, a courthouse cat fight.

[@jamessimms415]

Ben peeking out from above the ‘MYMITV’ Michigan plate above Steve’s right shoulder.

[@karenstein8261]

Can the prior experience of the judge also suggest he has opinions formed before trial and is considering matters not presented at trial? That is: was his mind made up before trial?

[@petnaby]

Possibly, but no way of proving that just based on that. You'd more more concerete evidence.

[@bigjoer6887]

Also known as the ninth circus, they are so bad.

[@alanmcentee3035]

@@petnaby The defense attorney pointed out that this judge had been overturned several times previously for excessive sentences. Add in that he used to be a prosecutor and that suggests he leans hard to the right.

[@opuscat999]

She PLED guilty.

[@mvpfocus]

True, but that isn't the sentencing factor that's in dispute.

[@vaughnrees8908]

What is an appropriate sentance? This is a problem. How do we know if a long sentence vs a short sentence is going to be an effective deterrent. Considering that there is little opportunity in prisons to rehabilitate the incarcerated. We essentially have created a revolving door system that insures it's business as usual.

[@heathhairrell3789]

Hey Check our Franklin county Alabama 2 ladies killed by same pack of dogs . One is a health department Employee And placed law suits on over 50 people in the local Government Things just now unfolding and some information is being released !! Love your channel Keep DoingWhatYou Do Brother

[@PushingThroughThePain]

9th Circus Court of Appeals at it again 😂

[@daviemaclean61]

The judge's years of experience allowed him to separate the wheat from the chaff and come to the correct decision. EVERY person involved in drugs tries to paint themselves as a small cog in a much larger machine. And the eventual outcome of the woman's case shows why.

[@grendal113]

I do have a question. Why would going or not going to trial affect the points of sentencing? And which direction does it take?

[@wisenber]

"Why would going or not going to trial affect the points of sentencing?" Pleading guilty saves the taxpayers the time and expense of a trial versus being found guilty and not pleading guilty before. Prosecutors will tend to offer more lenient sentences before a trial. Taking a plea deal tends to be a good option if you're guilty of the charges. Being innocent and losing anyway would not. Juries are a crapshoot.

[@suedenim9208]

People who are found guilty are often punished for exercising their right to a trial.

[@wisenber]

@@suedenim9208 They're actually punished for being found guilty of a crime as their is no punishment for having a trial.

[@daleallen7634]

@@wisenber : While I agree that "juries are a 'crapshoot'", the judge is, as a "good" defense attorney SHOULD point out to you NOT "bound" by any plea bargain made INDEPENDENTLY between you and the prosecutor, and, make no mistake the judge, beyond either acceptance, or denial of the "bargain" will NOT get "involved" with the actual bargaining process. "Practicing law from the bench" is a huge ethical problem, and could get Hizonner disbarred, or otherwise sanctioned.

[@daleallen7634]

@@suedenim9208 : Agreed. Judges really dislike "wasting their time" with a trial, when the defendant has the "option" to plead "guilty", and instead stands up, and takes a chance on a trial, rather than "rolling over", and pleading "guilty". The punishments consisting of longer sentences, and higher monetary forfeitures than a plea of "guilty" would have brought upon the defendant, and the end result is a conviction.