Even the guilty can sue for due process violations!

This case isn't quite as simple as the title may suggest, yet the title is accurate. What we have here is a man who was rightfully convicted by his own guilty plea to an attempted robbery charge, following his attempted murder conviction being overturned. I bring this nugget to share because it's an odd duck and for more than one reason.....

MANHATTAN (CN) - New York City must face claims that it concealed evidence from a Bronx man who pleaded guilty to attempted robbery after his attempted murder conviction was thrown out, the 2nd Circuit ruled in a rare en banc decision.

An attorney for Michael "Marcos" Poventud said that her client is "elated" about the opportunity to pursue his allegations.

Wait.. he's guilty, right? Said so right there at the open...so what allegations does HE have to pursue? Well... This is where we get into interesting territory. It's not trailblazing, as the end of the story notes, but it's certainly not daily fare, either...as the En Banc decision indicates. (En Banc, in simple terms, means the whole Circuit Court of appeals comes together to sit and review a case as a group. Appellate courts usually review cases in panels of Judges out of the overall court...not all of them at once)

The charges stemmed from the March 6, 1997, robbery and shooting of livery cab driver Younis Duopo.
Police found a wallet on the floor of the cab that had two ID cards for Poventud's brother Francisco, and Duopo told investigators that the man pictured in the photos matched his shooter.

Uh Oh... Sounds pretty clear. Robber came, robber shot the victim with a buddy, dropped ID in the process and made off into the night to be busted later. There is even a photo line-up and indentification! So...What's the deal? Indeed...it's a pretty big deal. That Photo-Lineup part? Oh...That is THE deal here...and they seemed to follow the old adage "If at first you don't succeed, try and try again!".

Police arranged four photo lineups including Poventud, who said he was playing video games at a friend's house on the night of the robbery, and Duopo fingered Poventud only on the last attempt.

Police disclosed Duopo's failed attempts at identifying Poventud before trial, but they did not preserve the photo array in which Duopo picked out his brother Francisco.

Source: Courthouse News

Yeah..That's a major problem. Lemmie see here... 4 lineups in photo packs. He fails 3 and hits gold on #4...but no one can know what #4 looked like or why 3 failed to that last success...because no one remembered to preserve that step? Uhh... Really???

The 2nd Circuit appears to feel much the same here and there is quite a bit more to the story. The most important part is...his accomplice rode a full acquittal and his own conviction had been overturned on the attempted murder. He was sitting in prison and offered a choice....... He could plead guilty to a lesser felony in what amounts to what the article calls a 'Hobsons Choice' scenario, or he could sit in prison and rot while the prosecutors pursued a lengthy appeal process, despite his overturned conviction.

Freedom by the next day ...or years more in maximum security? He took the guilty plea to be released ...and the 2nd Circuit basically stated that his guilty plea doesn't negate the failure to follow due process here in preservation of what convicted him.


So, what do you know? Even a guilty man...where guilt is acknowledged by the deciding court to be accepted on face value for legal purposes...can chase down and seek remedy from those who may well have violated his rights. I'll be interested to see how this one turns out, eh?

Yeah, sadly this happens all the time. I was told by the police that if someone breaks into my house and appears to be armed, to shoot to kill and make sure his body is inside the house when they come. Or I can get sued. Even though I would probably win the case, the legal costs of defending myself could cost me everything I own.

reply to post by rickymouse

That example is where the state you live in means everything. Missouri was the same at one time for that. Criminals could actually sue the victim for putting them down during the act of defense from that crime. Our Castle Doctrine was written to include immunity from civil liability in the event of a legitimate defense shooting...and our laws are written (and work out) to favor the defender over the criminal.

I think that is part of what makes the law and the world of it so interesting. Our system is such a conflicting patchwork by design and intent of having states with independent identity....but once in awhile of course, something comes to transcend all that and the Federal Courts have to say Whoa....everyone has rights to see protected.

At least the 2nd circuit made the right call on this one, IMO. They do that from time to time....even if that's literally true for how often it seems to happen.

Even the guilty deserve a fair trial,

The most vile of humanity deserves fairness,

Not because of who they are,

But because of who we are.

reply to post by benrl


Absolutely! That is how I feel on this one too. The evidence looks bad...coerced guilty plea or not. He probably did it, IMHO...but that's opinion and that's the whole point, right? We can't have evidence being crafted to fit outcome or lineups being run over until a favorable result comes out of it.

He may or may not be guilty....but how many got nailed in similar ways and didn't have the high profile attention with an ambitious attorney to go fight their case all over?

Wrabbit2000
reply to post by benrl

 

Absolutely! That is how I feel on this one too. The evidence looks bad...coerced guilty plea or not. He probably did it, IMHO...but that's opinion and that's the whole point, right? We can't have evidence being crafted to fit outcome or lineups being run over until a favorable result comes out of it.

He may or may not be guilty....but how many got nailed in similar ways and didn't have the high profile attention with an ambitious attorney to go fight their case all over?

Agreed, it should be the sole duty of the legal system to enforce JUSTICE fairly, the same for every Citizen, irrespective of all else, race, creed, social economic class, etc.

Every citizen should have the same chance at "Justice" NO matter the circumstances, to have any part of the Judiciary temper with the process, from Judge on down to beat cop throws the whole thing into question.

Its one of the main reasons I am personally opposed to the Death Penalty, NOT for the sake of the criminal, but on the concept that the System is so corrupt how can we even begin to use such penalties with the flaws inherent in the current system.