Crown of the War Stone

Interesting California opinion about right of allocution at sentencing

Edward Davidson – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Edward "Eddie" Davidson (1973 – July 24, 2008), also known as the "Spam King," from July 5, 2002 through April 15, 2007, conducted a business in Colorado …

This new piece from the San Francisco Chronicle discusses this interesting new ruling from the California Supreme Court. Here first is the press account:

cbs4denver.com – Source: 'Spam King' Dies Along With Wife, Daughter
24 Jul 2008 … U.S. Marshals, the FBI and IRS had been looking for Edward "Eddie" Davidson. The U.S. Attorney's Office announced his escape on Tuesday. …

A criminal defendant’s right to address the judge before sentencing and plead for mercy without being cross-examined, a right traced back to 17th century England, doesn’t exist in California, the state Supreme Court ruled today.

In a case from San Mateo County, the justices ruled unanimously that a defendant who is about to be sentenced must be treated like any other witness testifying under oath and subject to cross-examination by the prosecutor when asking for leniency.

Coltan

The Associated Press: "Spam king" walks away from prison
U.S. Marshals, the FBI and IRS are looking for 35-year-old Edward "Eddie" Davidson, who left a minimum-security facility in Florence on Sunday. …

Here is the start of the unanimous opinion in People v. Evans:

California law requires that in a criminal case a trial court must, before imposing sentence, ask the defendant whether there is “any legal cause to show why judgment should not be pronounced against him.” (Pen. Code, § 1200.) This inquiry is called the “allocution.” At issue is whether, in response to the allocution, the defendant has the right to make an unsworn personal statement in mitigation of punishment. Here, the Court of Appeal held that a criminal defendant has no such right, expressly disagreeing with In re Shannon B. (1994) 22 Cal.App.4th 1235 (Shannon B.), in which a different Court of Appeal reached a contrary conclusion. We conclude that California law gives a defendant the right to make a personal statement in mitigation of punishment but only while under oath and subject to cross-examination by the prosecutor.

Related posts: Centre island, Renta 2008, Purgatorio, Rte news, Gas boycott