It is Monday 9:30 PM and we are being locked in our rooms for the 10:00 PM count.
My cellie, and his constant farting, left for the free world Friday morning at 6:30 AM and I have been blessed with my own space since then. This also means that I have to go through getting a new cellie, and there is not anyone I can pick from right now.
It is bittersweet in that one of the things I have learned is to not get used to the difference that something that is out of my control makes in my existence. I may even have a new person by tomorrow evening.
After all, this is a very popular place with the big WELCOME ALL sign out front!
I have actually managed to get most of my last-ditch NY legal motion done. The dealing with the specifics is not at all pleasant. But the logic of the "double punishment" is hopeful, so the hope is there, along with the fear that if this fails, I may end up serving an additional seven or more years!
I do not know if you remember an article in the NY Times on the DC sniper case. It mentioned something called the Petit case.
Even though it is technically OK for the Feds and state to prosecute for the same acts, the stated policy of the U.S. Attorney General is that it is not to be done lightly. So if a truly awful case like the DC sniper might be jeopardized by the Feds going first, what they do is drop the changes, i.e. turn the suspects over to the state, in this case, Virginia!
My point is, if it is supposed to be exceptional, not the norm, should not my lawyer have raised the issue?
She did not.
The argument I make has nothing to do with guilt, only my constitutional right to effective counsel. If the court agrees that my lawyer should have raised the issue and did not, then I would still have to argue the actual double punishment.
It’s still a long way to go and they can still stop me at the start by refusing to agree that I was not properly represented.
Stay tuned for further hoped-for progress.