Jump to content
Marilynjray77

20 years agg on first crime as a juvenile

Recommended Posts

My son was charged with agg robbery when he was 16 years old. He was certified as an adult and had never been in trouble before. He had a court appointed attorney who talked him into doing a PSI after I told her I didnt want him to do that. She lied to him and said that I told her he should take the PSI and told him that he would get probation. The charge was Agg robbery with a deadly weapon. However, they had no weapon. The victim was a witness for the state and she testified that it was 11 at night and they had on ski masks but she also testified and described my son in detail in court while she was looking at him in the courtroom. She described his skin color, weight, cheek bones, eyes, and mind you he had already been incarcerated a year so weight was more and skin color was lighter due to incarceration. His attorney never objected to any of this or anything else during the PSI, which is pretty much trial by judge. At the end of testimony on both sides the judge imposed his sentence of 20 years agg and my son was 17 at this time. What can we do to appeal or give this time back or even get a time reduction?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure you understand what an "accessory" is. It sounds like you mean "accomplice" and your state does not treat accomplices differently than principal actors. If your son was present at the time, whether he was the primary actor or not, the charge is the same.

 

The witness' description would only be relevant if it were NOT your son. The fact that her recall isn't perfect or there are inconsistencies in her description is only relevant if there is doubt he is the guy in question. If that is not at issue, it is legally meaningless whether or not she has the details correct. It is actually pretty rare for a witness to have perfect recall. You admit he was there so I am unsure on what basis you think this testimony being thrown out would be helpful?

 

Also, Aggravated Robbery doesn't have to be with a deadly weapon. The charge includes robbery with a weapon present or implied as as those with certain other criteria met.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, Marilynjray77 said:

Well she shouldn't have been describing my son because it wasn't him he was in a vehicle at the end of the driveway so how could she describe him when she didn't see him?

Well, she did.  Appeals courts do not overrule findings of fact by the judge who actually heard the evidence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even without the witness, if he was in the "get away car" at the end of the driveway, in your state, that is the same as the guy who grabbed the goods. Your state, like many others, does not differentiate based on the degree of participation in serious crimes of this nature. The judge also isn't required to credit every argument or piece of evidence put forth. A judge very well *may* discredit a witness and still find the person guilty based on other factors and evidence presented. Since your son WAS there, an appeal based on innocence seems a fool's errand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...