TexasCHLforum.com

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/10/16/il ... latestnews" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

So, an illegal alien can commit rape or murder, and cannot be denied bail due to the fact that they will probably NOT show up for court?

Where is the "smiley" icon with blood shooting out of it's eyes and it's head exploding?

It will take some time, but they will get slapped down.

Although recent years have seen other circuits competing with the Ninth Circuit for the title of “Most Reversed,” the Ninth still appears to hold the unquestioned title. The Ninth Circuit’s best showing in recent years was October Term 2009, with a 60 percent reversal rate in the 15 cases on which certiorari was granted. The Sixth Circuit got the prize for highest reversal rate that year, with seven cases resulting in seven reversals, while the Seven Circuit came in a close second (91 percent reversal rate in eleven cases).

But in 2010, perhaps seeking to reclaim its position at the top of the heap, the Ninth Circuit was reversed a startling 19 times (79 percent), three times as many reversals as most circuits had cases before the Supreme Court. The same pattern continued in the 2011 (71 percent) and 2012 terms (86 percent), when the Ninth Circuit was reversed more than twice as many times as most circuits had cases before the Court.

http://www.nationalreview.com/bench-mem ... athan-keim

AFAmmo wrote:So, an illegal alien can commit rape or murder, and cannot be denied bail due to the fact that they will probably NOT show up for court?

WRONG.

The Ninth Circuit did not decide that an illegal alien "cannot be denied bail."

The court simply held that an undocumented immigrant may request bail, and that the trial court may, as it may in any other case, decide to grant bail if, after due consideration, it finds the accused not likely to abscond and not return to court for trial.

On the other hand, should the trial court, after due consideration, decide that the accused is a flight risk it may, as it may in any other case, deny bail.

In other words, the decision as to whether or not the accused is a flight risk is to be made by the trial court, as it is in any other case, after due consideration of the facts and circumstances of the alleged offense and the risk of the accused in this particular case absconding, not in advance by a state law deciding, without exception, without consideration by a court, that all undocumented immigrants are flight risks.

One is of course entitled to disagree with the holding of the Ninth Circuit, and I refrain from stating my opinion as to the court's decision, but before either agreeing or disagreeing, I would suggest that one should first understand just what it was the court decided. I would certainly not be surprised if the Supreme Court some day gives us its opinion on this question.

Jim

b322da wrote:

AFAmmo wrote:So, an illegal alien can commit rape or murder, and cannot be denied bail due to the fact that they will probably NOT show up for court?

WRONG.

The Ninth Circuit did not decide that an illegal alien "cannot be denied bail."

The court simply held that an undocumented immigrant may request bail, and that the trial court may, as it may in any other case, decide to grant bail if, after due consideration, it finds the accused not likely to abscond and not return to court for trial.

On the other hand, should the trial court, after due consideration, decide that the accused is a flight risk it may, as it may in any other case, deny bail.

In other words, the decision as to whether or not the accused is a flight risk is to be made by the trial court, as it is in any other case, after due consideration of the facts and circumstances of the alleged offense and the risk of the accused in this particular case absconding, not in advance by a state law deciding, without exception, without consideration by a court, that all undocumented immigrants are flight risks.

One is of course entitled to disagree with the holding of the Ninth Circuit, and I refrain from stating my opinion as to the court's decision, but before either agreeing or disagreeing, I would suggest that one should first understand just what it was the court decided. I would certainly not be surprised if the Supreme Court some day gives us its opinion on this question.

Jim

Hi Jim, long time no speakee. I've got a question for you, and I trust your legal discernment...... Can the fact that the accused is an illegal alien be taken into consideration regarding their being a flight risk?

The Annoyed Man wrote: Can the fact that the accused is an illegal alien be taken into consideration regarding their being a flight risk?

That would be racist.

victory wrote:

The Annoyed Man wrote: Can the fact that the accused is an illegal alien be taken into consideration regarding their being a flight risk?

That would be racist.

Even if he were here illegally from Sweden?

The Annoyed Man wrote: Hi Jim, long time no speakee. I've got a question for you.... Can the fact that the accused is an illegal alien be taken into consideration regarding their being a flight risk?

Howdy, TAM,

I have no doubt that it would, if not must, be taken into account in the judge's consideration of a request for bail. Indeed, I believe it might in many such cases be the deciding factor. The circuit appears to have not changed at all the process of considering a request for bail, but only decided who should make the decision, which in effect is deciding that each case must be considered separately.

BTW. If you and I can still have a friendly conversation, why can not our members of congress? :)

Jim

The Annoyed Man wrote:

victory wrote:

The Annoyed Man wrote: Can the fact that the accused is an illegal alien be taken into consideration regarding their being a flight risk?

That would be racist.

Even if he were here illegally from Sweden?

The 9th Circuit might allow a court to consider immigration status if the accused was a Swede whose student visa had a mixup. However they are adamant about protecting illegals who are members of MS13, any Mexican drug cartel, or any organization associated with ISIL or Al Qaeda.

b322da wrote:BTW. If you and I can still have a friendly conversation, why can not our members of congress? :)

Jim

Probably because you and I have more in common than we do in differences. Congress-critters have one thing in common.... a lust for power and a need to be the boss of you and me...... but differ mightily in how to achieve that.

The Annoyed Man wrote:

b322da wrote:BTW. If you and I can still have a friendly conversation, why can not our members of congress? :)

Jim

Probably because you and I have more in common than we do in differences. Congress-critters have one thing in common.... a lust for power and a need to be the boss of you and me...... but differ mightily in how to achieve that.

Doggone. I find myself in agreement with you again. Obviously I'm going to have to start getting my news from HuffPost.

Jim