UPDATE: Should He Now Serve His Sentence?

[Value Buy]

This is a real moral dilemma.

If we were talking white collar crime under these exact circumstances, I imagine most members here would say, do the crime, do the time.

If we were talking physical assault with injury, probably the same.

Rape? Most definitely

Murder, no question.

In this case, I am not sure. He knew he had not heard from the appeal decision.

His attorney, whether public defender, or private attorney should have gotten the results of the appeal.

It was not just the court system that messed up here.

A"reasonable defendant" would understand there was an outcome for his trial out there, somewhere, even if the guilty verdict was over turned on appeal.

That said, the President just reduced a sentence on a convict, who was accidently sentenced under incorrect guidelines used by a judge in deciding the length of the sentence.

This case almost screams for the President to act in this case due to circumstances, although I realize he cannot be everywhere for all convicted felons.

Have to agree with most people here, if he has led a good life, he should not be held to the original sentence now, but as I originally stated there are many cases where the op should serve the time, even years later.

I am not even sure if serving weekend incarceration is necessary in this situation.

[The Captain]

Apr 15, 2014 18:16:04 GMT -5 jkapp said:

Apr 15, 2014 15:57:05 GMT -5 billisonboard said:

When you owe money to the IRS, are you on the hook forever? Fortunately, the answer is usually "no." As a general rule, there is a ten year statute of limitations ... www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/time-limits-irs-collections.html

That's weird considering one of our clients back when I worked at the CPA firm was getting billed for taxes from 1989-1995 (and this was in 2007).  I wonder if the IRS was trying to skirt around this time limit?  I wouldn't put it past them.

But if the statute is true, then that's another kick in the nuts to the family members in the other thread who were being collected on for their parents/guardians' overpayment of benefits decades ago.

JK - the ten year statute is for collections (and I agree with your last sentence).  However, the statute does not start running until a return is filed.  I've seen many cases where folks didn't file returns for several years then get a W-2 job and think the statute had run on the older years.

That's why you always file your return, even if you can't afford to pay the taxes - it at least starts the statute.

[billisonboard]

Apr 16, 2014 6:30:06 GMT -5 The Captain said:

Apr 15, 2014 18:16:04 GMT -5 jkapp said:

That's weird considering one of our clients back when I worked at the CPA firm was getting billed for taxes from 1989-1995 (and this was in 2007).  I wonder if the IRS was trying to skirt around this time limit?  I wouldn't put it past them.

But if the statute is true, then that's another kick in the nuts to the family members in the other thread who were being collected on for their parents/guardians' overpayment of benefits decades ago.

JK - the ten year statute is for collections (and I agree with your last sentence).  However, the statute does not start running until a return is filed.  I've seen many cases where folks didn't file returns for several years then get a W-2 job and think the statute had run on the older years.

That's why you always file your return, even if you can't afford to pay the taxes - it at least starts the statute.

Interesting parallel to the murderer not caught for twenty years scenario.

[The Captain]

Apr 16, 2014 7:14:13 GMT -5 billisonboard said:

Apr 16, 2014 6:30:06 GMT -5 The Captain said:

JK - the ten year statute is for collections (and I agree with your last sentence).  However, the statute does not start running until a return is filed.  I've seen many cases where folks didn't file returns for several years then get a W-2 job and think the statute had run on the older years.

That's why you always file your return, even if you can't afford to pay the taxes - it at least starts the statute.

Interesting parallel to the murderer not caught for twenty years scenario.

Except, and I will defer to the legal eagles on this board, I don't believe there is a statute of limitations for murder.  For every other crime, yes, but not for murder.  I could be wrong on this though.

[Deleted]

The state screwed up.

I don't think that the state should just say, oh well, close the case. I think he should have another sentencing hearing and all of the relevant up to date facts should be used to come up with an applicable sentence. IMHO, I don't think jail time is appropriate and that something like community service would be better, but legally I don't know if that is possible.

[EVT1]

More details- they robbed the guy with a BB gun and after all this time they sent a SWAT team to barge in his house after they found their error- not even a phone call.

     Megaro described Anderson as a model citizen — a married father who became a carpenter and started three businesses. He paid income and property taxes and kept a driver's license showing his true name and address. When he was pulled over for a couple of traffic violations, nothing showed up indicating he should be in prison

    What happens next isn't clear. Missouri Attorney General Chris Koster on Tuesday filed a court response that said the state is justified in making Anderson serve the sentence.

     However, Koster wrote that Megaro could refile the case as an action against the director of the Department of Corrections, which could give Anderson credit for the time he was technically at large.

     Megaro doubted that strategy would work. He said the law does not allow credit for time served when the convicted person was not behind bars.

     "I don't think that's an option, unfortunately," Megaro said.

     Instead, he's relying on case law. The last time anything like this happened in Missouri was 1912. In that case, the convicted man was set free, Megaro said.

     Gov. Jay Nixon could also commute the sentence. A spokesman for Nixon declined to comment.

news.yahoo.com/armed-robber-never-told-report-prison-195146743.html

[Tennesseer]

Judge Rules 13-Year Sentence Man Never Served is Complete

A Missouri man who was locked up after officials realized he never served a 13-year sentence is being released from jail by a judge who decided he turned his life around when he should have been doing time.

Cornealious "Mike" Anderson's family began crying when the court granted his request for release nine months after he began serving the sentence he was given in 2000.

Judge Rules 13-Year Sentence Man Never Served is Complete

[kent]

May 5, 2014 11:11:21 GMT -5 Tennesseer said:

Judge Rules 13-Year Sentence Man Never Served is Complete

A Missouri man who was locked up after officials realized he never served a 13-year sentence is being released from jail by a judge who decided he turned his life around when he should have been doing time.

Cornealious "Mike" Anderson's family began crying when the court granted his request for release nine months after he began serving the sentence he was given in 2000.

Judge Rules 13-Year Sentence Man Never Served is Complete

Works for me

[djAdvocate]

May 5, 2014 11:11:21 GMT -5 Tennesseer said:

Judge Rules 13-Year Sentence Man Never Served is Complete

A Missouri man who was locked up after officials realized he never served a 13-year sentence is being released from jail by a judge who decided he turned his life around when he should have been doing time.

Cornealious "Mike" Anderson's family began crying when the court granted his request for release nine months after he began serving the sentence he was given in 2000.

Judge Rules 13-Year Sentence Man Never Served is Complete

i guess this answers the question i had earlier: clearly this judge thinks that prisons are there to reform, not punish.

[Tennesseer]

May 5, 2014 14:21:38 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

May 5, 2014 11:11:21 GMT -5 Tennesseer said:

Judge Rules 13-Year Sentence Man Never Served is Complete

A Missouri man who was locked up after officials realized he never served a 13-year sentence is being released from jail by a judge who decided he turned his life around when he should have been doing time.

Cornealious "Mike" Anderson's family began crying when the court granted his request for release nine months after he began serving the sentence he was given in 2000.

Judge Rules 13-Year Sentence Man Never Served is Complete

i guess this answers the question i had earlier: clearly this judge thinks that prisons are there to reform, not punish.

House detention/GPS tracking for some non-violent crimes?

[djAdvocate]

May 5, 2014 16:22:12 GMT -5 Tennesseer said:

May 5, 2014 14:21:38 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

i guess this answers the question i had earlier: clearly this judge thinks that prisons are there to reform, not punish.

House detention/GPS tracking for some non-violent crimes?

i would love that.  but the prison/industrial complex will fight it tooth and nail.

[Tennesseer]

May 5, 2014 18:11:15 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

May 5, 2014 16:22:12 GMT -5 Tennesseer said:

House detention/GPS tracking for some non-violent crimes?

i would love that.  but the prison/industrial complex will fight it tooth and nail.

And we need to fight back the prison/ìndustrial complex.

[truthbound]

Yeah I agree. Fight back. The ass should serve his time.