https://theappeal.org/philadelphia-media-slam-newly-elected-da-krasner-for-firings-but-house-cleaning-advances-his-f2da076ffb06/

Dear Dustin, I too am no lawyer. Nor do I profess to be. But like you I spent five years running a federal prison’s law library during which time I did little more than study federal habeas corpus law and post conviction relief law. That being said, a lot of us have spent much more time studying law than actually practicing it. There are nuances we miss compared to actual lawyers. But when it comes to experience in living as a prisoner and probationer, not many lawyers have that experience. That’s why I think this group is so vital…to share experiences, research, education and training to make solid arguments and fight for our “pesky” rights. In my experience, the feds view the Constitution and it’s appended Bill of Rights as a source of unlimited power…even though it is really our source of rights, privileges, and immunities for which we must fight. I am encouraged by the 10th Circuit’s decisions in Haymond. And like you, and probably like so many of us, I’ve been wrong before too. With the little hope I have left, I do hope SCOTUS will affrim the 10th Circuit and give all of us binding precedent across the Land that limits the prosecutions power rather than expand it. Thanks for your comments and thanks for all the lawyers and nonlawyers alike who fight for us.

This case is only about sentencing rules and circumventing due process. If you’re expecting them to go anywhere close to the weird reality you described you’re going to be very disappointed.

@Alex
I agree, agree and agree! That would make me extremely happy.

The rule of thumb in Georgia at least is that when parolees or probationers catch new charges (as opposed to PO violations), the state can proceed either as a violation or new crime, but not both. In my experience, they’ll only proceed as a new crime if there’s less than a year or two on paper (depending on circumstances). Ordinarily, they’ll just revoke probation. Mind you, that’s just what Georgia law says; what’s actually done is often quite different. (More often than not, they’ll sit on the new charges until release is pending, then push them as a new charge).

It looks to me like the feds just want to add time past the original sentence completion date based on new charges. 99% certain they can’t do that without violating those pesky constitutional rights, like right to an attorney and proof beyond reasonable doubt, that don’t apply to probation/parole revocation proceedings.

Pretty sure the law the feds rely on in that case can’t stand, but I’ve been wrong before.

Not sure how anyone with a brain can justify ‘public harm’ if this person is viewing images that are Free and IN THE PAST, so in other words, not ‘Fueling Demand for any Market’, contrary to what the less knowledgeable people love to claim on this topic. It’s been shown via research that such material, at least in 2 countries has led to LESS hands-on offenses because it provides people with an odd-fetish an outlet.

I would love to see them prove how this type of offender, the lowest risk level, poses a ‘Risk to the public’. I cannot wait to watch this show. Get the popcorn ready.