Sue Hartigan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
HI Kathy:
Basically that is the same way it works here in California. In some
cases the record can be expunged by the judge after he reviews reports
from the probation department, etc.
The probation department actually holds a lot of power here in
California.
In this case, IMO, I am glad to see this happen. I hope that He can get
on with his life, and put this Simpson thing in the background. He
wasn't the real criminal in this case, IMO.
And I'm glad to see anything that pisses off Simpson. <BG>
Sue
> Hi Kathy
>
> I don't know about other states, but in MN for first-time offenders who are
> not seen as a risk, they do the following:.
>
> 1. If all other conditions of probation have been fulfilled (fines paid,
> restitution made, etc.), then the offender, on advice of probation officer,
> may ask the court for early release off probation. Of course, there is a
> thorough investigation of what the offender has been doing since the
> conviction.
>
> 2. The records are not really expunged or erased totally. The crime the
> offender is convicted of is reduced to a misdemeanor and the felong records, I
> believe, are sealed except for certain instances--commission of another crime
> is one reason. Then the prior felony is used in sentencing.
>
> The cases I am familiar with are those dealing with first-time, small-change
> dealers who have not committed prior offenses, there are no other crimes
> connected to the "bust" (robbery, burglary, shoplifting), and the police and
> prosecuting attorney feel that the person will learn from this mistake and by
> reducing the crime from a felony to a misdemeanor the person can get on with
> his/her life in a positive way, rather than slipping back into the criminal
> subculture. This procedure may have changed, however, with the increase in
> drug convictions that is currently occurring and they may no longer do this.
>
> Also, in the cases I know about, this is an incentive that is recommended at
> the sentencing and is put right into the record as part of the proceedings.
> The conviction is always there in the background though and can be made public
> if the offender again breaks the law.
>
> The cases I know about have been successful in straightening our some people
> before it is too late for them. This procedure is not used often--but only in
> cases, the police and prosecutors feel that the offender has learned from
> his/her mistake and will benefit by not having a felony holding them back from
> being responsible citizens.
>
> However, to have it expunged, the offender must still go through the Pardon
> procedure. This is a lengthly procedure and the Board of Pardons rarely
> considers it until 5 to 10 years have elapsed and the person really shows
> change. Before a pardon, if it is granted, the person is subject to the same
> restrictions as any other felon has in regard to rights to vote, have
> firearms, etc. even though the conviction has been dropped to a misdemeanor.
>
> So this might be in Furhman's transcript of his sentencing. I would imagine
> that this was done so that he could ask for a pardon and have his rights
> restored, if this is like the procedure in MN was a few years back.
>
> jackie
--
Two rules in life:
1. Don't tell people everything you know.
2.
Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
