New indictment against the 4 Brown supporters

[Demosthenes]

http://www.cheatingfrenzy.com/wolffe124.pdf

[Demosthenes]

Danny's Counts from the Prior Indictment:

18:372 CONSPIRACY TO PREVENT OFFICERS OF THE UNITED STATES FROM DISCHARGING THEIR DUTIES

18:371 AND 111 (A)(1) CONSPIRACY TO COMMIT OFFENSES AGAINST THE UNITED STATES

18:3 ACCESSORY AFTER THE FACT

18:924(c)(1)(A)(i) CARRYING AND POSSESSING A FIREARM IN CONNECTION WITH A CRIME OF VIOLENCE

Danny's New Counts:

18:372 Conspiracy to Prevent Officers of the United States From Discharging Their Duties

18:371 and 111(a)(1) Conspiracy to Commit Offenses Against the United States in violation of 18:3

18:3 ACCESSORY AFTER THE FACT

18:924(c)(1)(A)(i) & 924(c)(1)(B)(ii) Carrying Using and Possessing a Firearm in Connection with a Crime of Violence

18:924(c)(1)(A)(i) Carrying and Possessing a Firearm in Connection with a Crime of Violence

That single count increases his prison term by a minimum of 25 years.

[Demosthenes]

Reno's counts remained the same:

18:372 Conspiracy to Prevent Officers of the United States From Discharging Their Duties
(1s)

18:371 and 111(a)(1) Conspiracy to Commit Offenses Against the United States in violation of 18:3
(2s)

18:3 ACCESSORY AFTER THE FACT
(3s)

18:924(c)(1)(A)(i) Carrying and Possessing a Firearm in Connection with a Crime of Violence
(5s)

[Demosthenes]

Wolffe's counts stayed the same:

18:372 Conspiracy to Prevent Officers of the United States From Discharging Their Duties
(1s)

18:371 and 111(a)(1) Conspiracy to Commit Offenses Against the United States in violation of 18:3
(2s)

18:3 ACCESSORY AFTER THE FACT
(3s)

[Demosthenes]

And Jason (the guy with the kick ass court appointed lawyer and the only defendant smart enough to shut up) dropped five key counts which effectively knocks something like 100 years off his mandatory prison sentence.

Under the prior indictment:

18:372 CONSPIRACY TO PREVENT OFFICERS OF THE UNITED STATES FROM DISCHARGING THEIR DUTIES
(1)

18:371 AND 111 (A)(1) CONSPIRACY TO COMMIT OFFENSES AGAINST THE UNITED STATES IN VIOLATION OF 18:3
(2)

18:3 ACCESSORY AFTER THE FACT
(3)

18:924(c)(1)(A)CARRYING AND POSSESSING A FIREARM IN CONNECTION WITH A CRIME OF VIOLENCE AND IN VIOLATION OF 18:371 AND 111(a)(1) AND (b)IN FURTHERANCE OF SUCH CRIME OF VIOLENCE, POSSESSED A FIREARM
(5-10)

Under the new indictment:

18:372 Conspiracy to Prevent Officers of the United States From Discharging Their Duties
(1s)

18:371 and 111(a)(1) Conspiracy to Commit Offenses Against the United States in violation of 18:3
(2s)

18:3 ACCESSORY AFTER THE FACT
(3s)

18:924(c)(1)(A)(i) & 924(c)(1)(B)(ii) Carrying and Possessing a Firearm in Connection with a Crime of Violence
(4s)

[LPC]

That single count increases his prison term by a minimum of 25 years.

If convicted.

An indictment is only an allegation, and defendants are presumed innocent until proven guilty.

Your mileage may vary.

[Judge Roy Bean]

Ahem...

Let's not lose sight of the fact that at least some portion of the USA office's bluster is designed to send some kind of a message to the recalcitrant but previously unincarcerated masses. The rookie USA's just don't have the freedom of vocabulary suitable for the task at hand.

'Round here on this side of the Pecos, we're a bit more plain spoken. Hence, more easily understood by the poor miscreant, to wit: "Hey *hithead! Yes, I'm addressing you, sir. Y'all having been bunked there with Crazy Charlie, you probably got to wonderin' what they put in that jail grub, eh? I know, I know, one day you woke up and all of a sudden you found some new rash you've never seen before. Well, at one time so did Crazy Charlie."

Like I said, their vocabulary has to be a little more reserved, er go somewhat less effective.

[Scoop]

That single count increases his prison term by a minimum of 25 years.

Make that 30. New charge is for a "destructive device," not a gun. If he's convicted, of course.

[Demosthenes]

Question for the criminal lawyers. If Jason's counts five through ten simply disappear between the superseding indictment and the second superseding indictment, are those counts still active?

[Dr. Caligari]

If Jason's counts five through ten simply disappear between the superseding indictment and the second superseding indictment, are those counts still active?

No. The most recent indictment is the only legally-operative one. Those counts, however, can come back in a later superseding indictment; their omission from the current indictment has the same effect as a dismissal, but not with prejudice.

[Judge Roy Bean]

Question for the criminal lawyers...

Are there two Lawyer Duds?