Know Your Rights – Did you know…….. Pleading “Nolo Contendere” has the same Immediate effect as a guilty plea??

Know Your Rights – Did you know…….. Pleading “Nolo Contendere” has the same Immediate effect as a guilty plea??

Nolo contendere is a legal term that comes from the Latin for “I do not wish to contend.” It is also referred to as a plea of no contest.

In criminal trials, and in some common law jurisdictions, it is a plea where the defendant neither admits nor disputes a charge, serving as an alternative to a pleading of guilty or not guilty.

A no-contest plea, while not technically a guilty plea, has the same immediate effect as a guilty plea, and is often offered as a part of a plea bargain

Court costs shall be assessed and collected in each instance a defendant pleads nolo contendere to, or is convicted of, or adjudicated delinquent for, a felony, a misdemeanor, or a criminal traffic offense under state law, or a violation of any municipal or county ordinance if the violation constitutes a misdemeanor under state law. The court costs imposed by this section shall be $50 for a felony and $20 for any other offense.

Federal Judge Throws Out Florida’s Drug Law

A federal judge ruled July 27 that Florida’s drug law was unconstitutional, leaving thousands of criminal cases up in the air. US District Court Judge Mary Scriven of Orlando threw out the Florida Drug Abuse Prevention and Control law on the grounds that it violates due process because it does not require prosecutors to prove a person knew he or she possessed illegal drugs.  In 2002, Florida legislators amended the state’s drug law, eliminating the requirement that prosecutors prove mens rea, or criminal intent, as part of obtaining a conviction. Florida was the only state in the nation to not require mens rea as part of a drug conviction.

“Not surprisingly, Florida stands alone in its express elimination of mens rea as an element of a drug offense,” Scriven wrote in her order. “Other states have rejected such a draconian and unreasonable construction of the law that would criminalize the ‘unknowing’ possession of a controlled substance.”

The ruling came in the case of Mackle Vincent Shelton, 33, who was convicted in 2005 of drug charges in Osceola County. Shelton, who is currently serving an 18-year prison sentence for cocaine delivery and other charges, appealed his conviction on the grounds that the jury wasn’t required to consider intent in order to convict him.

In his instructions to the jury in Shelton’s case, the trial judge told jurors that “to prove the crime of delivery of cocaine, the state must prove the following two elements beyond a reasonable doubt: that Mackle Vincent Shelton delivered a certain substance; and, that the substance was cocaine.” The state did not have to prove that he knew he was carrying or distributing cocaine or any controlled substance at all.

The National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers (NACDL), which filed an amicus curiae brief in the case, pointed out that without the criminal intent requirement, “a Federal Express delivery person who unknowingly delivers a parcel containing a controlled substance, would be presumed a felon under Florida’s drug law.” Joining the NACDL in filing the brief, which was favorably cited by the court, were the Florida Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, the ACLU of Florida, the Drug Policy Alliance, the Calvert Institute for Policy Research, and 38 professors of law.

Florida defense attorneys applauded the ruling, saying the impact could be huge. Several told the St. Petersburg Times they intended to file motions seeking dismissal of pending drug cases, citing the judge’s order.

“It has one of the largest potential effects on criminal law in the past decade,” said St. Petersburg lawyer Jeff Brown. “We’re talking hundreds of thousands of drug cases.”

“In declaring the statute unconstitutional on its face, it appears that all drug prosecutions in the state are at risk,” said Tampa defense lawyer Eddie Suarez.

That’s tough, said Tampa attorney James Felman, who represented Shelton. Legislators should not have written an unconstitutional law removing mens rea, he said. “It takes the presumption of innocence and throws it in the garbage can,” Felman said. “I think the legislature must immediately fix the statute,” he said. “This is not a close call. No state has ever done this before. Legally, it’s beyond the pale.”

“This is a victory for the most fundamental notions of fairness and justice in our system — the idea that no one should suffer a conviction unless the state proves criminal intent beyond a reasonable doubt,” said NACDL executive director Norman Reimer. “As I previously said about this case, the country has been drifting away from the moral anchor of a clearly defined mens rearequirement in its criminal laws. Laws like these would run it aground.”

Orlando, FL

United States
by Phillip Smith, July 29, 2011, 03:49pm, (Issue #695)

Broward County Court Judge Contact

County Court Judges

Open Broward County Court Judge Contact List here!

The County Court is a limited jurisdiction court.

It is divided into two divisions: Criminal and Civil.

The Criminal Division has jurisdiction over all traffic cases and misdemeanor criminal cases.   Misdemeanors are criminal acts which carry a penalty of up to one year in the county jail.

The Civil Division has jurisdiction over all actions at law in which the controversy does not exceed $15,000, small claims, and most landlord and tenant disputes.

The 17th Judicial Circuit utilizes County Court Judges at Regional Courthouses to best serve the citizens of Broward County.  These court facilities are fully functional County Courts: both civil and criminal cases are heard by these judges.  No jury trials are held at these locations.

Open Broward County Court Judge Contact List here!

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.