This one is confusing as heck.

But last October, the 4th District Court of Appeal tossed those guilty verdicts as well, ruling a mistake was made at Dorsey’s retrial when the jury was not allowed to consider Stand Your Ground.The jury was instructed the law doesn’t apply to someone “engaging in an unlawful activity” — it’s illegal for felons to possess guns, and Dorsey at the time was a felon brandishing a gun

Source: Stand Your Ground claim: Felon wins dismissal of two manslaughter charges in 2006 shooting deaths – Sun Sentinel

To summarize: He was at a party, went to his vehicle, extracted a gun and kept it concealed (without a permit), he was approached by several people who attacked him, he defended himself and killed two.

Dorsey gets charged with several counts including murder and felon in possession of a firearm. He is found guilty, the case is appealed again because of bad Jury instructions, upper courts dismisses the murder charges but still has to serve 15 years for the Felon Carrying a Gun charge.

In the article at the bottom, you find this:

Previously, Dorsey’s attorneys have argued he shouldn’t have been classified as a convicted felon in the first place.

The year before the shootings, he was charged with two forgery-related counts: He and a friend tried to pass off a fake $20 bill to buy cigarettes and entry to a community pool

Now, if he was only charged and there was no trial or no plea was entered, why was he charged as Felon carrying a firearm? I looked online, but could not find info about that particular case. Looking at Dorsey’s page in the Department of Corrections database, the only charges in his file are the ones relating to the shooting and charged and found guilty of plain vanilla carrying a concealed weapon without a permit and given 5 years.  Nothing shows a felony conviction for forgery.

Either we are missing a bunch of information or somebody overstepped in his/her prosecutorial powers…again.

14 Replies to “This one is confusing as heck.”


        1. Pretrial Diversion

          Pretrial diversion removes a defendant from prosecution prior to a guilty or nolo contendere (no contest) plea. In addition to pretrial diversion, the following terms are often used to describe this sort of program:

          deferred prosecution
          pretrial intervention
          accelerated pretrial rehabilitation
          accelerated rehabilitative disposition
          As mentioned above, in a pretrial diversion the prosecutor halts the case against the defendant so that the defendant can meet certain conditions. These conditions can include probation, counseling and community service, among others.

          In most cases, the prosecutor has the discretion to admit a defendant to a pretrial diversion program. A statute will set the eligibility requirements, but a prosecutor will make the ultimate determination about whether or not to allow a defendant to enter into a pretrial diversion program. In some jurisdictions, judges can suggest pretrial diversion for a defendant or have the final say about admitting a defendant to pretrial diversion.

          Sometimes prosecutors must get the consent of the victim of the crime before they can put a defendant into pretrial diversion. Certain things, such as previous involvement in a pretrial diversion program, can render a defendant ineligible for pretrial diversion.

          In addition, prosecutors will usually require a candidate for pretrial diversion to waive their right to a speedy trial and their protections under the relevant statute of limitations.

          If the defendant fails to meet the conditions of the pretrial diversion program, prosecutors can put the defendant on trial as if no diversion had taken place.

          – See more at: http://criminal.findlaw.com/criminal-procedure/deferred-adjudication-pretrial-diversion.html#sthash.lB7fSZOi.dpuf

          Deferred Adjudication

          Deferred adjudication begins after a defendant has pled guilty or nolo contendere. In this way, it resembles probation, but in most other respects a deferred adjudication proceeds similarly to a pretrial diversion. In addition to deferred adjudication, this sort of program is also known as a stay of adjudication.

          Even though the defendant pleads guilty or nolo contendere in a deferred adjudication, the court will not enter a judgment of guilt. Instead, like a pretrial diversion, the court will lay out a number of conditions that the defendant must meet. If the defendant meets the conditions, the charges are dismissed and the defendant will not have a record of conviction.

          If, on the other hand, the defendant does not satisfy the conditions, the court will enter a judgment and determine a punishment. At this point, the defendants record will show a conviction.

          The main difference between a deferred adjudication and a pretrial diversion is that, in a deferred adjudication, a defendant must first plead guilty or nolo contendere. This means that, if the defendant does not fulfill the conditions of the deferred adjudication, the state does not have to put the defendant back on trial for the crime. Instead, the court simply enters its judgment and sentence.

          In a pretrial diversion, if the defendant fails to meet the conditions of the program, the state must then place the defendant on trial since there was no prior guilty plea.

          – See more at: http://criminal.findlaw.com/criminal-procedure/deferred-adjudication-pretrial-diversion.html#sthash.lB7fSZOi.dpuf

          That would make sense




          0



          0
    1. Florida statutes 831.01 (forgery) and 831.02 (uttering a forged instrument) are felonies of the 3rd degree. If the guy was charged there has to be some record of the disposition/outcome. The newsrag article is behind a paywall so I cannot get date info to go looking in the court records. Maybe you can do that?

      The attorney’s statement that his client should not have been considered a convicted felon needs some explanation. That may also be behind the paywall.

      stay safe.




      0



      0
    1. That I will have to leave to somebody who knows. I figure mens rea will have to be considered. If it is a good fake, probably you will only lose the money. But you should see some of the craps they try to pass as good…no way in hell they are doing it with a free and innocent mind.




      0



      0
  1. Why would the jury be instructed about SYG? SYG is not a defense that can be invoked by a defendant, it is a barrier to prosecution for having failed to retreat in an incident that was otherwise a lawful self-defense shooting – it is a bar to state action. Additionally, SYG prevents prosecution for failure to retreat only in cases of legitimate self-defense – it does not make an otherwise illegitimate, unlawful shooting lawful. If the shooting was unlawful, SYG is completely irrelevant – nobody has a right to stand his ground in order to shoot someone unlawfully, and nobody is required to retreat instead of unlawfully shooting someone. Once you shoot someone unlawfully, you’ve committed a crime and, if you’re caught, you’ll be prosecuted for it. SYG doesn’t, and can’t, figure into it.




    0



    0
    1. SYG is not a defense that can be invoked by a defendant, it is a barrier to prosecution for having failed to retreat in an incident that was otherwise a lawful self-defense shooting – it is a bar to state action.

      You are mixing both SYG and immunity from prosecution. Don’t worry, thanks to the media that is normal. You can take a case to a hearing and ask for Immunity from Prosecution and the judge may decide there is no grounds or it might be too iffy so it gets forwarded to a normal trial. At trial, you can go for SYG and the jury has to take it in consideration.




      0



      0

Feel free to express your opinions. Trolling, overly cussing and Internet Commandos will not be tolerated .