The judge in the case refused to throw it out on Presidential immunity grounds.
I guess Bragg isn't actually 0-2.
It will be a constitutional violation. The sentencing is what allows Trump to begin the appeals process, because the trial court will no longer have jurisdiction once Trump is sentenced. On the other hand, the judge can't wait 4 years to impose the sentence or it's a violation of the right to a speedy trial. It's all going to cave in on Bragg and this crooked judge in the not-too-distant-future. Trump can go to a higher court for a Writ of Mandamus if Munchkin delays much longer on the sentencing.
...or it's a violation of the right to a speedy trial."
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Thank you, CDL, thank you, thank you, thank you for proving once and for all that YOU KNOW NOTHING ABOUT THE LAW!!
I know you righties only care about the Second Amendment but there is also the Sixth Amendment which covers "speedy trials." The Sixth Amendment prevents defendants from being held indefinitely without proving the charges. The Sixth Amendment does NOT apply to the time between conviction and sentencing.
When a defendant is arraigned, the judge asks his attorney: "Do you waive time?" This is shorthand for: "Do you waive your right to a speedy trial?" 99 times out of 100, time is waived so the defendant can have enough time to prepare his defense. However, in the OJ case, Robert Shapiro did NOT waive the right to a speedy trial. He forced the prosecution to get their case ready in a short period of time. This was one of the most important reasons OJ was acquitted. In the civil case the plaintiffs had all he time they needed to find a photo of OJ wearing the "ugly ass" Bruno Magli shoes that made the shoeprints found at the crime scene.
OK, CDL, maybe I should give you the benefit of the doubt. It's possible you wanted to appear as stupid as your fellow righties Lester, CKS175, LostSon and durran421. You might be afraid they would ostracize you as an "elite intellectual" if a righty actually posted something intelligent. Yeah, that's the ticket! ROFLMAO!!!
Yes, he continually talks out of his ass.
Yes, he actually knows virtually nothing about the law.
And, yes, he just makes shit up to suit his argument.
But he does it with such a wonderful air of authority, it's almost believable.
Almost.
"Writ of mandamus." LMAO!
BigP is a losing proposition. You should know that by now. Lol
Your batting average against him is well below The Mendoza Line.
But you might be relying on the fact that, even when soundly beaten, you refuse to take the L.
Though that hardly means you get a W.
he was eating my shit. This was a prime example of him taking a victory lap on his so-called knowledge of the law when he takes a simpleton's view of the issue without knowing the full scope of what he's talking about. There are others here who have that same problem. If I don't take the 'L" then it means I know I'm right, just like in this case. I cited both federal and state law to corroborate what I originally said. The W is mine on this one. Trump's sentencing cannot be unreasonably delayed, or a higher court can step in and order Munchkin to sentence Trump immediately.
You know what SPOAT stands for, right? Better take the L quickly and get outta Dodge before things get worse for you. LMAO!!!
Oh he's eaten someone's lunch alright! The only thing that internet troll can win is a hot dog eating contest. But we're all glad to see your white knighting for him. You two make one helluva pair of fuk board trolls.
Oh he's eaten someone's lunch alright! The only thing that internet troll can win is a hot dog eating contest. But we're all glad to see your white knighting for him. You two make one helluva pair of fuk board trolls.
As they give each other their daily reach-around.
Do you remember when you ickypus the gloat (greatest liar of all time)
Mocked others for using the term “reach-around” as having an obsession for gay sex. Well since you use the term more than anyone else, except for your fellow backstabber, the only logical conclusion is that you not others have an obsession with gay sex.
Tell us, SwallowMeat, what is it about felching that obsesses you so?
played like a fiddle ....Again
Section 380.30 (1) states:
"Sentence must be pronounced without unreasonable delay."
The Federal Rules say the same thing in Rule 32.
The Appellate courts have held this requirement to be a constitutional right under the Sixth Amendment, which covers . . . . . .wait for it . . . . "speedy trial." IOW, you can't convict someone and leave them in limbo. They MUST be sentenced in a timely manner after the probation office submits its pre-sentencing report to the Court. A trial is not "concluded" until, in the case of conviction, a sentence is imposed. I always love it when you call me out on things you know little or nothing about. You should be the court jester here.
CDL claims here are appellate court cases holding that "Sentence must be pronounced without unreasonable delay" because "The Appellate courts have held this requirement to be a constitutional right under the Sixth Amendment, which covers . . . . . .wait for it . . . . 'speedy trial.'"
But CDL provides NO LINKS to these appellate court cases. You wanna know why? BECAUSE CDL IS FULL OF SHIT!
He has NO links. Assuming, arguendo, that CDL does have appellate court cases up his ass, it wouldn't matter.
I will see his appellate court cases and raise him a SUPREME COURT case - Betterman v. Montana, 578 U.S. 437 (2016).
BETTERMAN HOLDS THAT THE RIGHT TO A SPEEDY TRIAL DOES NOT GUARANTEE THE RIGHT TO SPEEDY SENTENCING.
Well, CDL, watcha got now? Are you gonna man up for once in your miserable life and say you are WRONG and take the "L" or are you gonna run away and hide like the little cockroach you are when the light of TRUTH shines on you?
Who da court jester now...bitch?!
CDL claims here are appellate court cases holding that "Sentence must be pronounced without unreasonable delay" because "The Appellate courts have held this requirement to be a constitutional right under the Sixth Amendment, which covers . . . . . .wait for it . . . . 'speedy trial.'"
But CDL provides NO LINKS to these appellate court cases. You wanna know why? BECAUSE CDL IS FULL OF SHIT!
He has NO links. Assuming, arguendo, that CDL does have appellate court cases up his ass, it wouldn't matter.
I will see his appellate court cases and raise him a SUPREME COURT case - Betterman v. Montana, 578 U.S. 437 (2016).
BETTERMAN HOLDS THAT THE RIGHT TO A SPEEDY TRIAL DOES NOT GUARANTEE THE RIGHT TO SPEEDY SENTENCING.
Well, CDL, watcha got now? Are you gonna man up for once in your miserable life and say you are WRONG and take the "L" or are you gonna run away and hide like the little cockroach you are when the light of TRUTH shines on you?
Who da court jester now...bitch?!
Trump was found guilty (complete bullshit and you know it) and is if memory serves, appealing said conviction.
The bullshit judge doesn’t know WHAT THE FUCK TO DO! AND BIG PAPPA FELCH…. Y O U KNOW IT!
...AND YOU KNOW IT, dummy!
You don't even know what the fuck CDL and I are debating. CDL says Trump has to be sentenced within a reasonable time of his conviction or else it will be a violation of his constitutional right to a speedy trial under the Sixth Amendment. He claims there are statutes and appellate court decisions that back him up.
I posted a SUPREME COURT decision that shows what a fucking moron CDL is for thinking the right to a speedy trial also applies to the time for sentencing after a conviction. CDL had the good sense to run away and hide like a little bitch but here you are like the imbecile you are - trying to defend the indefensible. Don't you ever get tired of looking like an idiot? Even fucking fool CKS175, TER's certified white knight, isn't stupid enough to try to rescue CDL from his ignominy.
Now get back on the short bus before they find out you're missing.
He's also so stupid that he thinks his info about the case you cited has ANY bearing on the issue of speedy sentencing. Looooser is a drooling, incompetent IDIOT.
...Betterman's first name to prove he knows how to look up a case. Big fucking deal! All he proved is what a fucking moron he is. He reminds me of Fredo in The Godfather:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zgHXHtHSsNo
a conviction during a trial a jury. This is a distinguishing factor that the appellate court noted when delivering their ruling. There is no constitutional right that attaches to a plea deal. A defendant is giving up his rights in exchange for a lighter sentence. Likewise, waiving time to START a trial does not eliminate procedural rules and protections during the Trial. Federal and State rules (as the case may be) must still be followed even if the START of the trial was delayed by circumstance or waiver.
...is not the same as a conviction a trial. Unbelievable! CDL is obviously so desperate not to take the "L" that he agrees with the dumbest shit on TER. Look, CDL is a bullshitter and a liar but I always thought he was smarter than the other idiot righties here. But his post proves he's as stupid as the rest of them. Let me count the ways...
LostSon made a distinction between the guilty plea in Betterman and Trump's conviction at trial. CDL agreed with LostSon and said the appellate court noted this "distinguishing factor." CDL didn't post a link to the appellate court case because he's FULL OF SHIT! There is no such appellate court case; CDL is bullshitting. If there was an appellate court case, CDL would have stated the name of the case.
CDL's subject line of his post acknowledges the SUPREME COURT case of Betterman. But in the body of the post he mentions a fictitious "appellate court" case. How fucking stupid do you have to be not to know that a SUPREME COURT case trumps an appellate court case?
Where did LostSon and CDL get the idea that a plea deal is not the same as a trial? They have no links - they pulled it out of their asses because they're idiots!! Copping a plea is a conviction. A guilty verdict at trial is a conviction. There is no fucking difference!!! Here's a link from some random law firm:
http://www.ssdpa.com/blog/what-does-pleading-guilty-mean-everything-you-need-to-know-about-pleas
Earlier in this thread CDL posted:
"From where I sit, it felt more . . . .
(like BigPapasan) was eating my shit. This was a prime example of him taking a victory lap on his so-called knowledge of the law when he takes a simpleton's view of the issue without knowing the full scope of what he's talking about. There are others here who have that same problem. If I don't take the 'L" then it means I know I'm right, just like in this case. I cited both federal and state law to corroborate what I originally said. The W is mine on this one. Trump's sentencing cannot be unreasonably delayed, or a higher court can step in and order Munchkin to sentence Trump immediately."
CDL - what a fucking moron!!! I can't believe I acually thought he was smarter than the other imbecile righties. SMH.
Betterman's holding is crystal clear:
"The Sixth Amendment's right to a speedy trial does not apply to sentencing."
But CDL is so fucking stupid because he won't take the "L."
That title is still held by The SPOAT -- The Stupidest Poster Of All Time -- though just barely. Looooser is behind by only a Red Cunt Hair. CDL is trailing by a length, with SwallowMeat coming up strong on the rail.
Just like the rest of the filthy magamoron traitor cunts.
seemingly intelligent debater runs out of fresh vocabulary and has to repeat himself multiple times.
Nah, it's just FACT that you dirty filthy maga traitor cunts LIE constantly and then try to take the 'high ground' of being 'right' when you're so fucking wrong. What a loser lying cunt. CUCK DOUCHE LIAR
but you should have seen this coming before you defaulted into your same tired spiel.
…like a cowardly little bitch who refuses to take the “L”
Snowflake lessons on how to repeat the same old garbage? Lol
No, we've just identified you as a fucking lying idiot and filthy maga traitor cunt little CUCK DOUCHE LIAR
...snowflake lessons on how to run away like a cowardly little bitch instead of admitting you were wrong like a MAN would?
When are you going to take the "L"...bitch?
an "L" kind of guy. Do you see the irony in YOU calling anyone else a "bitch?" Lol
Yeah, you are an "L" kind of guy. A fucking LOSER and LIAR. CUCK DOUCHE LYING LOSER
You said that earlier in the thread. It means you WOULD take the "L" if you were wrong. Now that you were proved wrong you say you're "not an 'L' kind of guy." All you've succeeded in doing is demonstrate what a weaselly piece of shit you are... as well as a little bitch.
You said that earlier in the thread. It means you WOULD take the "L" if you were wrong. Now that you were proved wrong you say you're "not an 'L' kind of guy." All you've succeeded in doing is demonstrate what a weaselly piece of shit you are... as well as a little bitch.
I'll send you a case of chocolate pies . . . . 2-days' worth. Lol
A person isn't convicted until sentencing, since the judge can toss the case up to that point.
A judge can't sentence someone until they've been convicted. It's a two part process, and sentencing happens after victim impact statements have been made. A judge can declare a mistrial during the trial itself, not afterwards. A judge cannot "toss the case" after the trial. An appeals court can overturn the verdict and send the case back down for possible retrial.
Yes, judges can and do toss cases after a jury guilty verdict.
I said the judge couldn't overturn the verdict after the trial, although as you said the judge could set aside a jury's verdict during the trial. Once the trial is over and the verdict set, a separate sentencing phase begins, whereby victim impact statements, defendant pleas, and legal deals are taken into consideration. By definition, a felon is a person who has been convicted of a felony, regardless of the nature and length of his sentencing.
until appeals have been exhausted. He was convicted of felonies, but if it was done in error, and the appeals court reverses the verdict, he will no longer be called a felon. At best, he is now a temporary felon pending appeal. However, if the judge does not impose the sentence within a reasonable time. A higher court (including the Supremes) could intervene and reverse the verdict for violation of his constitutional right to a speedy trial.
Didn't want to start any precedence of putting presidents in jail with the exception of Obama.If he was the molester, tax thief and rapist that Trump is they would lock up HIS brown ass.