Magically enough, our system of jurisprudence managed to fix this one without JAIL

By -
From today's Rapid City Journal:
A judge gave a Pennington County man an illegal sentence when ordering him to pay about $4,300 for tax evasion, the state Supreme Court said Thursday in a unanimous ruling. The decision overturns the restitution requirement for Steven E. Thayer, who pleaded guilty last year to a felony count of not paying sales taxes for Villa Cleaners of Box Elder.

The written sentence was flawed because it unlawfully increased the sentence that Thayer was given in the courtroom, the state Supreme Court said, overturning the restitution requirement.
Read it all here.

How? How did us poor fools manage to right this judicial wrong without J.A.I.L.?

Well, duh. Actually, it was pretty easy. It's called the appeals process. That's why we have it, and we managed to accomplish it without any Special Grad Jury or two star Jailers-in-chief.

And it didn't take an amendment.

Comments

Anonymous said…
Well, maybe this will help put a spike in the new horror movie: "Bill and Ron's Excrement Adventure." I'm still laughing at BS, the constitutional scholar's answer to your Q#4. Yep, the framers should have gone that extra step and created a fourth branch of government: The Branch for Sore Losers. I'm sure the founding fathers would have done that if only they could have forseen the doctrine of judicial immuninity dropping from the sky in 1871 like a space alien. These guys really need to read the Federalist Papers, and try to figure out (perhaps it is beyond their comprehension) how judicial independence is an imperative under our form of government. The judicial immunity doctrine has deep roots in common law; the doctrine being a logical protection of the independence of the judiciary given the safeguards our founding fathers built into the system, such as due process (something the JAIL bozos don't provide the accused) and appeals (something the accused don't get under JAIL). Keep these dopes on the ropes!
8:41 AM
Anonymous said…
right on !
8:21 PM
Anonymous said…
Hey PP,

Is that your child pictured on the front page of the Register?

Maybe you could figure out a way to print a NEW t-shirt for her next year.
10:10 AM
PP said…
Yes. It is. And I did do the Tshirt last year.
4:28 PM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

A note from Benedict Ar... Sorry. A note from Stan Adelstein why he thinks you should vote Democrat this year.

By -
Image
(Click on letter to enlarge) And while it may not be printed at taxpayer expense, I don't see a disclaimer, either. When they hold the special session (supposedly at the end of November) , since he's left them already, I think his colleagues should expel him from the caucus. Sure. At that point it's only going to be symbolic. But since he's already said he's running again in the near future, sometimes symbolism is enough.
Read more

Corson County information on Klaudt Rape Charges

By -
Here's some of the information on the Corson County Charges: COUNT I That on or about December of 2005, in the County of Corson, State of South Dakota, Ted Alvin Klaudt did commit the public offense of SECOND DEGREE RAPE (SDCL 22-22-1(2)) in that he did accomplish an act of sexual penetration with his foster daughter, A.M., through the use of force or coercion; and as to COUNT II That on or about July or August of 2006, in the County of Corson, State of South Dakota, Ted Alvin Klaudt did commit the public offense of SECOND DEGREE RAPE (SDCL 22-22-1(2)) in that he did accomplish an act of sexual penetration with his foster daughter, A.M., through the use of force or coercion; and as to COUNT III That on or about July or August of 2006, in the County of Corson, State of South Dakota, Ted Alvin Klaudt did commit the public offense of SECOND DEGREE RAPE (SDCL 22-22-1(2)) in that he did accomplish an act of sexual penetration, separate and distinct from the act alleged in Count II, with
Read more

It's about health, not potential promiscuity.

By -
As the only South Dakota blogger out with 5 daughters, I feel I need to weigh in on the whole discussion that's occurring with regards to the HPV vaccine, and Governor Rounds' proposal to make it available. My family (including my three oldest girls) watched my mom, their grandmother, succumb slowly and painfully to cancer which spread throughout her body. If a similar fate from a different type of cancer was preventable through a simple shot, why wouldn't anyone advocate for it? At the age most of my kids are going to be getting it, they're still playing with barbies, and negative influences such as most of the programming on MTV, and other assorted trashy television is verboten in my house. All they're going to know about this vaccination is that it's a shot, just like for teatnus or measles. They'll go "Ow, I don't want a shot," and that will be it. Just another mark on their vaccination record. One check box for DPT, one for HPV, and so on
Read more