SCOTUS on Indiana case: Fleeing police is a 'violent felony'

[sloughfoot]

And on April 30th, the prosecutor decided that there would not be criminal charges against the off duty Officer working as a Security Guard at the gas station.

Every Officer is trained in the first week in the Academy that things are NEVER as they seem....

St. Louis Officer Cleared in Videotaped Beating - Officer.com

 

[Garb]

Every Officer is trained in the first week in the Academy that things are NEVER as they seem....

Which is why they threaten and/or kill witnesses, and destroy evidence. Wouldn't want to mislead anyone now would we?

 

[j706]

Damn good common sense ruling that might take the fun out of all the IDIOTS that think it is cool to flea in a vehicle. Pursuits are dangerous stuff and there is no sense in it at all. I suppose the usual INGO's clown posse will now say police should not chase at all.

Courthouse News Service

 

[SemperFiUSMC]

I was going to rep rambone for the post, but DROSS's first post was also funny so I was going to rep that one but after seeing yours you are the winner.

Seems like we can't take anything serious here anymore.
BTW I will take the purple pill (red + blue) so what does that give me?

Not sure what to make of this new ruling. Too much negative info I have read today for 1 day. Someone said it best today on INGO, "The world is on fire."

AIDS?

 

[cosermann]

So, is reckless driving also a 'violent felony'?
Seems like it might be by SCOTUS logic.

 

[dross]

So, is reckless driving also a 'violent felony'?
Seems like it might be by SCOTUS logic.

You have to understand what the Supreme Court actually does. The didn't decide that fleeing the police was a violent felony exactly. They upheld an interpretation of existing law. They decided that the prosecution for that particular act as violent was consistent with the language of the existing law.

Within those parameters they might have decided that cat juggling was a violent act, if the language of the law had considerd it so.

 

[cosermann]

Yeah, I know about some of the legal machinations involved. I'm just thinking where this could go in the future (logically and philosophically - probably a mistake, I know).

Some of the language in the article and the IC on reckless driving are pretty close.

IC 9-21-8-52
"(a) A person who operates a vehicle and who recklessly:
(1) drives at such an unreasonably high rate of speed or at such an unreasonably low rate of speed under the circumstances as to:
(A) endanger the safety or the property of others; ... commits a Class B misdemeanor."

 

[lashicoN]

I suppose the usual INGO's clown posse will now say police should not chase at all.

Really? That sounds like the opposite of what you guys would say.

 

[dross]

Damn good common sense ruling that might take the fun out of all the IDIOTS that think it is cool to flea in a vehicle. Pursuits are dangerous stuff and there is no sense in it at all. I suppose the usual INGO's clown posse will now say police should not chase at all.

Courthouse News Service

INGO has a clown posse? I never got invited. How do you join?

 

[mrjarrell]

Damn good common sense ruling that might take the fun out of all the IDIOTS that think it is cool to flea in a vehicle. Pursuits are dangerous stuff and there is no sense in it at all. I suppose the usual INGO's clown posse will now say police should not chase at all.

Courthouse News Service

Actually, while not a clown, I will come down on the side of not chasing. Numerous studies have shown that police chases are inherently dangerous. Not just for those fleeing, but for innocent bystanders and cops. The death rates are just too high to justify them. In locales where departments have a no chase policy, fatalities for officers and innocents have dropped and there's been no appreciable lack of arrests of those who've chosen to flee. You can catch them without high speed pursuits and the increased risk of fatal crashes.

 

[jsharmon7]

I never argue with your evidence and usually not with your premeses. It's the flying squirrel-like leap you take from them to glide to your conclusions to which I take exception.

Thank you for saying this. He's like Stretch Armstrong.

 

[printcraft]

INGO has a clown posse? I never got invited. How do you join?

Join my fan page.

 

[steveh_131]

I'm not sure that I can take issue with this particular ruling. It simply clarifies existing laws, in my opinion.

I think the heart of the issue is that you can be penalized for resisting illegal arrests, not arrests in general.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

Flee from illegal activities from an officer, and you will get an enhanced federal sentence. In an age when everything is illegal, this should be of concern for those of us who care.

Whoa, now, ease up on those hammers, ram.

This decision focuses on a sentencing enhancement of a federal statute for prior offenses. The problem is that the statute is less than optimally drafted and has been subject to confusion for . . . as long as I've been practicing.

Driving away from the cops has been determined to be violent under that statute's definition of violent. It clarifies a question that has been bouncing around in the federal courts for a while.

If Congress does not like it, then Congress can modify the statute.

 

[Kutnupe14]

Maybe I'm not understanding. Are we saying that a person being chased by police in a fleeing automobile isn't dangerous?

 

[dross]

Maybe I'm not understanding. Are we saying that a person being chased by police in a fleeing automobile isn't dangerous?

No one is saying that. It is however, a legitimate question whether fleeing is in and of itself a dangerous felony as was intended under that particular law.

Reasonable people may disagree on that.

 

[Kutnupe14]

No one is saying that. It is however, a legitimate question whether fleeing is in and of itself a dangerous felony as was intended under that particular law.

Reasonable people may disagree on that.

fleeing on foot? No.... Fleeing in a car certainly.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

Maybe I'm not understanding. Are we saying that a person being chased by police in a fleeing automobile isn't dangerous?

It depends.

How is the statute written? The problem is that this federal sentencing enhancement is less than happily drafted and creates a cloud of vagueness where defense lawyers frolic and play and federal judges rub their temples. This decision clarifies this question, much to Scalia's dismay.

 

[dross]

fleeing on foot? No.... Fleeing in a car certainly.

Brings up an interesting question, especially if the law is vague. If I'm fleeing on foot from the police through a crowd, someone is getting trampled, maybe even hurt pretty bad when my 300 pounds of inertia moving at high speed slams into their little bodies. Under this vague law, does that constitute a dangerous felony?

 

[ATOMonkey]

Bo and Luke Duke would be locked away for multiple life sentences.