In this case there was an admission of guilt, so there was no bias on the conviction. We didn't even need to make this determination on our own, it was handed to us by the defendant. Your entire post, Supreme, is invalid and does not even apply to this situation, except perhaps in your note about an appeals court, as all appeals on Project 1999 are done through the GM's, who also give convictions as well as sentencing, which differs from real life. Welcome to the server, we hope you enjoy playing here.
Yes, I know it may be hard for you to follow, but you obviously did not understand the situation at hand, and are once again making another post that makes no sense. We do not have statutes on Project 1999 determining punishment, and in the real world there are many states who only impose mandatory minimum sentences for most crimes. Thanks for trying to sound intelligent, it's been fun.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Findlaw.com
Disclaimer by Derubael: Admittedly not necessarily the best source for reference (IE, the internet), but fairly accurate in terms of sentencing. There are some state and federal criminal laws that proscribe "mandatory sentences" or "mandatory minimum sentences." If a criminal defendant is found guilty of one of these crimes, the judge is restricted by law to impose a mandatory sentence, or a mandatory minimum sentence. The laws that set out mandatory sentences are put in place by state legislatures and the U.S. Congress.
However, there are only a few laws on the books that have mandatory sentences. In most situations, judges are allowed to take in a number of considerations when determining a sentence for a convicted criminal defendant. For example, judges are often allowed to consider a defendant's criminal history, the circumstances under which the crime was committed (did the defendant steal for the fun of it, or did he steal because he needed to put food on the table for his kids?), and whether the defendant genuinely feels remorse about his or her actions.
- See more at: http://criminal.findlaw.com/criminal....EPXEKQ8j.dpuf
Keep in mind that if you have prior convictions or criminal punishments on your record, the sentence that is put down in a book may not be the punishment you would get. Judges frequently add enhancements to sentences when the convicted has a criminal record. - See more at: http://criminal.findlaw.com/criminal....EPXEKQ8j.dpuf
Source
|
EDIT: Now I feel dumb, I just reread the first post i responded to by Supreme, and noticed he said guilt instead of punishment.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Supreme
By this reasoning...every time you face disciplinary action all of your previous faults, accusations, hearsay and convictions should factor into the determination of guilt.
|
No, prior convictions should not affect the determination of guilt, but it absolutely should affect punishment.