Thread: Brief:Border Agents Were Charged With 'Non-Existent Crime'

See: www.libertypost.org/cgi-bin/readart.cgi?ArtNum=195119

The link reads:

Title: Legal Brief Says Border Agents Were Charged With 'Non-Existent Crime'
Source: Cybercast News
URL Source: http://www.cnsnews.com/news/viewstory.asp? Page=/Nation/archive/200707/NAT20070726b.html
Published: Jul 26, 2007
Author: Matt Purple
Post Date: 2007-07-26 11:14:44 by inboxnews
8 Comments


Two Border Patrol agents whose prosecution and sentences to lengthy prison terms triggered a political storm this year may have been charged with a "non-existent crime," according to a legal brief submitted to a federal appeals court in May, and obtained by Cybercast News Service.

Ignacio Ramos and Jose Compean are serving 11- and 12-year sentences respectively for shooting and wounding a Mexican national who was trying to escape after attempting to smuggle 743 pounds of marijuana across the Mexico-Texas border in February 2005.

Although they were convicted on 11 counts, the crime carrying the lengthiest penalty was for the "discharge of a firearm in relation to a crime of violence," a violation of section 924(c)(1)(a) of the U.S. Code. It carries a minimum 10-year prison sentence.

Cybercast News Service obtained a copy of an amicus curiae ("friend of the court") legal brief filed by Reps. Walter Jones (R-N.C.), Virgil Goode (R-Va.), and Ted Poe (R-Texas) in the former agents' appeal before the Fifth Circuit Court in New Orleans.

They accuse the prosecution of "creating a purported criminal offense never enacted into law by Congress," and of charging Ramos and Compean with a "non-existent crime."

Simply discharging a firearm near a violent crime is not illegal, the brief argued, saying the law they were convicted under is not a law at all, but a sentencing factor used to help a jury determine jail time after a conviction.

The brief cited several cases as precedent, including United States v. Barton in which the Fifth Circuit Court ruled that "discharging a firearm during and in relation to a crime of violence" could be used only as a sentencing factor, not as an element of a conviction. In Harris v. United States, the Supreme Court made a similar ruling.

The brief argued that, for a 10-year sentence, a defendant must be convicted under the specific terms laid out in section 924(c)(1)(a) (see section).

This provision is applicable, the section says, to "any person who, during and in relation to any crime of violence or drug trafficking crime ... uses or carries a firearm, or who, in furtherance of any such crime, possesses a firearm ..." If, and only if, these conditions apply can a defendant be sentenced to ten years in prison for the "discharge" of a firearm.

The brief argued that the shooting of drug smuggler Osvaldo Aldrete-Davila was not "in relation to" the drug crime because Ramos and Compean were themselves not participants in the drug crime.

Furthermore, Border Patrol Agents are authorized to carry and use firearms as law enforcement officers.

"By narrowing the issue to the discharge of the firearm," the brief said, "the prosecution and the trial court actions adversely affected the fairness of the entire trial, depriving defendants of any opportunity to present to the jury that they were using and carrying their firearms during and in relation to their employment as Border Agents."

The brief also criticized the prosecution.

"The criminal code cannot be treated by the prosecution as a legal chameleon, changing elements to fit the circumstances of the case that the government, in its discretion, wants to present to the judge and jury," it said.

One of the brief's authors, Larry Pratt of Gun Owners for America, told Cybercast News Service that this case could set an alarming precedent under which any law enforcement officer who fired a gun at the scene of a drug crime could be prosecuted under Section 924(c).

He also criticized U.S. Attorney Johnny Sutton, the lead prosecutor in the case.

"What [Sutton] was apparently trying to do is avoid the little detail that there was no underlying crime of carrying a gun because [Ramos and Compean] were authorized to carry guns," Pratt said. "So I think he tried to slide around and use the sentencing provision as an underlying crime."

'Perverse'

Rep. Jones conceded in a statement that Ramos and Compean may have been guilty of violating Border Patrol policy by shooting Aldrete-Davila and failing to file a subsequent report.

But Jones also blasted Sutton, saying the prosecutor "had no business charging [Ramos and Compean] with a crime that Congress clearly designed to apply only to the individuals who are possessing, using, or carrying firearms for the purpose of facilitating the commission of a crime - not to federal law enforcement agents."

"How perverse it is that this statute is now being used against law enforcement officers who were trying to stop drug trafficking," he added.

Sutton told the Senate Judiciary Committee on July 17 that it was his trial team that made the decision to bring the "discharge of a firearm in relation to a crime of violence" charge, and that he was not consulted on the issue.

"We have a deliberative process that goes on inside our office that I cannot describe," he said.

Sutton could not be reached for comment, and his spokeswoman said she did not think anyone else in the office would comment on the brief until it responds to the appeal in early August.

Asked about the appeal, Pratt said he was worried that it may be denied because the cited evidence had not been presented previously.

"The thing that concerns me most is that, because [the alleged misuse of Section 924(c)] wasn't brought up at the first trial, the Fifth Circuit Court could play legal games and say, well, too bad," he said.

Still, Pratt described himself as "hopeful" and warned that Sutton's tactics would eventually catch up with him.

"[Sutton] can only hide in the tall grass for so long and, Lord willing, the lawnmower's on the way in," he said.

Click for Full Text!

"[Sutton] can only hide in the tall grass for so long and, Lord willing, the lawnmower's on the way in," he said.

Sure hope so!

YOU HAVE GOT TO READ THIS. at the end of the story,
the notorious "house of death" is talked about and it says DAVILA was a member of this and also was a DEA inforemant


http://www.townonline.com/malden/columnists/x933443468


Over the Memorial Day weekend I had the opportunity to interview, face to face, a border patrol agent who operates out a field office not too far from where Ramos and Compean did. He was fully credentialed and asked that I not identify him or his field office at this time. We spoke about the border in general, how only two miles of the border fence have actually been built, but then I touched on the subject of Ramos and Compean. Apparently I had touched the “Third Rail of Immigration.â€

Moving to News.

Added to Homepage:
http://www.alipac.us/modules.php?name=N ... =0&thold=0

It now comes to light that many of those crossing into the US are controlled by the Mexican Mafia. If you are not armed to protect yourself, you best think about it. I believe that crime is going to get a lot worse before anything concrete is going to be done by our sitting government.

Our local Senator, Sue Myrick has sponsored a bill to make English the US official Language. This would be a start of requiring all public interstate advertisements to be in English only which would go a long way to stop the coddling of illegal Spanish speaking people.

Remember, no nation has survived that tried to support more than one official language.

Welcome Cliff from West Central Jawjah. Glad to have you here.

diddo.........crime is going to go through the roof, and what's up with this huge epidemic of rape? Keep close tabs on your wives & daughters! It is serious! DHS is releasing illegal alien sex offenders and drug dealers in particular rather than deporting them. Appears to be a form of psychological warfare against our people. Some corrupt idiot in the gov't has been paid off to let these criminals go free. Why these 2 types of criminals in particular? They are probably Mexicali Mafia.

Right now, Mexican drug lords and possibly Mexican Army have taken over huge areas within our national parks and turned them into marjiuana farms. And what did Chertoff have to say about it? Be careful! YOU'VE GOT TO BE KIDDING! People with kids who don't know are vacationing in those parks, and he says be careful!

And now with the native threat of 50% of youths not graduating high school, the problem is going to become uncontrolable. Please everyone, make sure you can protect your families!!

Because of the increase in crime, especially murder in Charlotte, I took the training for carrying a concealed weapon. I had a permit years ago and let it expire, so had to do it again and I am glad I did. There has been a big change in the way states are viewing an individual carrying a concealed weapon. Now (30) states respect the NC permit to carry a concealed weapon in your vehicle or on your person. There is only one location where it is against the law to carry a weapon and that is Washington DC.

Even if you don't carry after obtaining a permit, it does identify you as a law abiding citizen who has passed local, state and federal background checks.