Florida Law Change

The Foundation - Is Your Sentence Actually "Cruel and Unusual"? The Eighth Amendment prohibits "cruel and unusual punishments." For centuries, this was interpreted to ban only certain methods of punishment (e.g., torture, drawing and quartering). However, in the 20th century, the Supreme Court began to interpret it more dynamically, ruling that the amendment "must draw its meaning from the evolving standards of decency that mark the progress of a maturing society" ( Trop v. Dulles , 1958). Today, a punishment can be "cruel and unusual" in two primary ways: The  What : The Punishment Itself:  The nature of the punishment is forbidden for a specific class of offenders or crimes. Example:  The death penalty for a person who committed a non-homicide crime ( Kennedy v. Louisiana ). Example:  The death penalty for an individual with intellectual disability ( Atkins v. Virginia ) or a juvenile ( Roper v. Simmons ). The  How : The Sentencing Process:  Th...

Florida is one of a number of US states which has the “Felony Law” in operation. This is when someone dies as a result of another crime which led to the person’s death. All participants of that crime are equally liable for the death irrespective of their role which led to the fatality. An example of this is that if three people set out to rob someone and that someone dies as a result of the robbery then all three are equally guilty of the death and will be charged with first degree murder. Here is another example of how the felony law works: Supposing that the target of the robbery fought back and in an effort to defend himself, he kills one of his attackers, then the other two participants in the robbery are guilty of first degree murder because the death resulted in the felony which they were a part of. The felony rule is indefensible. You are either responsible for taking part in the felony which led to a person’s death or you are not. There are some unfair aspects to the felony l...

Written by R. A. Stewart The Felony rule is applicable to any crime when someone dies as a result of a separate crime. For example, a group of people may rob someone but if the victim dies as a result of the robbery then all participants in the robbery are equally guilty of the victims death.  This legal doctrine operates under the assumption that those engaged in serious criminal activity should bear responsibility for the foreseeable consequences of their actions, including the unintended deaths that may arise from their criminal endeavours. This has resulted in people being sentenced to life without parole for a murder which they did not commit.  The prosecution must demonstrate that the death was a foreseeable consequence of the felony. This does not mean the felon must have intended the death, but rather that it was a reasonable outcome of engaging in the criminal act. Consider a scenario where two individuals rob a convenience store. During the robbery, a store employee ...

Written by R. A. Stewart Just who is responsible for the outcome of the discharge of a firearm? Is it the person who is in possession of the firearm, the person who owns it but is not the person who fired it, the person who bought it as a gift for the person who discharged it, or accomplices to a different crime which resulted in a firearm related death? It all depends on which state we are talking about in the US. In one state, parents of a teenager bought him a firearm and he went and used it to kill several of his fellow students with it. He received a life without parole sentence while the parents were charged of a less serious crime because they supplied him with the firearm in the knowledge that he had mental issues. This law-abiding couple still received severe sentences.  In this case it seems that they were made the scapegoat for their son’s behaviour. Florida is one of several states of America that has the “Felony law” in place. This is when a participant in a fatal crim...

Why the Florida Felony rule is unjust Florida and other states of America have what is called, “The Felony Rule.” It is when someone who wasn’t directly involved in the death of someone else was involved in the felony which led to that individual’s death. A perfect example of this is the case of Jennifer Mee from Florida. As a nineteen year old Jennifer was involved in a mugging which led to the death of the victim. Her two male accomplices carried out the mugging and during this process the victim was shot. There was no intent involved in the death. It was simply a matter of unintended consequences as far as Jennifer was concerned. The trio were convicted of first degree murder and sentenced to life without parole.  Thinking about this case it is difficult to see how anyone can justify such a harsh sentence when there is no intent involved because Jennifer received the same sentence as some of the worst murderers in the US. While the rule’s intention is to deter crime, its broa...

Life without parole unjust for under 21 Year olds... According to the Supreme Court in Massachusetts sending under 21 year olds to prison for life without the possibility of parole is unjust. The State's highest court ruled that anyone under the age of 21 cannot be sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole, raising it from under 18.  There was a 4-3 ruling in favour of the ban, describing life without parole sentences for those under 21 as cruel and unusual under the Massachusetts Constitution. At the centre of this case was the finding which confirms that the brains of emerging adults are similar to that of juveniles. In 2013 the court ruled that defendants under 18 could not be sentenced to life without parole based on the fact that "it is not possible to prove that a juvenile is irretrievably depraved," thus under these circumstances such a severe sentence is unjustified." This ruling took place in the Commonwealth V. Sheldon Mattis case, which...

Written by R. A. Stewart In 2010 Florida women Jennifer Mee was convicted of first degree murder. “Was the death premeditated” “No” Was the death intentional “No” Was the death malicious “No” Did Jennifer actually kill the victim “No” Then why was she found guilty? The answer Under Florida law all participants in a fatal robbery are equally guilty of murder. Is it right... that someone who had no intention to murder can face the same charges as someone who committed the murder? And spend the rest of their life in prison... for a murder she did not commit... but... she is guilty according to Florida law. The worst part of it is that there is no room for a judge to use their discretion. This law is known as “The Feloney Rule.” Florida is not the only state where this law is applicable. A petition is circulation as part of a campaign to change this situation. You can see details on this on the link below: Change.org Abolish the Felony Murder Rule in America!! At Change.org there is a peti...