State files motion to proceed with check fraudUPDATE CASE TO BE SCHEDULED

[Searchfortruth]

BBM. This means the A's and SP would probably testify, especially if the defense tries to say KC's never had a history of stealing before.

But wouldn't that give the state a free pass to cross examine them on the thefts including prior statements made by family that she did indeed taake money from family ?

 

[Searchfortruth]

Casey is not use to being held accountable for anything.
She never thought this through enough to see herself in court.
JBs attempt to postpone the trial has failed.
His only real option now is to try to plead her out to a reduced charge.
ie- get her out of being a convicted felon which will be an aggravating factor in the death penalty phase

I agree, I will be shocked if there isn't a plea to avoid a trial. Now if Jose can get her out of a felony charge, I don't know. I don't think the state will give on that one.

 

[static]

That's not going to come up in this trial I wouldn't think. Or will it? I just don't see what possible defense there could be when you're on video signing the checks. She should try what I try when I get a traffic ticket.

Judge: "Guilty or Not Guilty"
Me: "Um, guilty with an explanation your Honor"

I am willing to bet my dog and the lot that is going to be KC's excuse-"Amy gave me permission, I seriously thought she was awake when she said I could. I ABSOLUTELY had no idea she was talking and walking in her sleep when she gave me the thumbs up."

 

[Spangle]

They will wait until the last minute and then try to plead this out.

 

[Intermezzo]

BBM. This means the A's and SP would probably testify, especially if the defense tries to say KC's never had a history of stealing before.

Maybe brother Rick's testimony as well, he knew about Casey stealing from his parents.

 

[coco puff]

I am willing to bet my dog and the lot that is going to be KC's excuse-"Amy gave me permission, I seriously thought she was awake when she said I could. I ABSOLUTELY had no idea she was talking and walking in her sleep when she gave me the thumbs up."

I'm also willing to bet your dog :crazy: that this will be her defense but Maybe I'm wrong but doesn't she have to take the stand and SAY that she was given permission? How else can they get it on the record?

 

[Gaia713]

I'm not sure I see the point. Check fraud for such a minimal amount would be a misdemeanor at most and it's not like she would get time. She has no previous criminal record. If that was the only charge, she'd probably get a fine and probation.

Anyone out there have access to the Florida penal code?



~Jai Yen

I believe prior convictions can be considered when sentencnig her on the murder charges. If she gets off with Manslaughter 3, sentence is 5 years. If she has other convitions it would add to that time. Thank you, Judge Stickland. The indictments for the fraud charges were filed LONG before the charges for murder so they should be heard first imo. Baez had AMPLE time to prepare for these charges, but he was too busy trying to get the murder discovery before she was even charged with murder. Bad lawyering is not an excuse to forstall justice.

 

[Gaia713]

I'm also willing to bet your dog :crazy: that this will be her defense but Maybe I'm wrong but doesn't she have to take the stand and SAY that she was given permission? How else can they get it on the record?

You are correc. Baez can SAY it, but the jury will b e instructed that what a lawyer says is not to be considered testimony. Amy will say she did NOT give Casey permission adn that WILL be testimony. I think Baez will pull a "pity party" for Casey - how she needed that money to feed her daughter and clothe her. Too bad she didn't spend any of that money on her child unless she was dressing her in lingerie and giving her beer.

 

[Spangle]

You are correc. Baez can SAY it, but the jury will b e instructed that what a lawyer says is not to be considered testimony. Amy will say she did NOT give Casey permission adn that WILL be testimony. I think Baez will pull a "pity party" for Casey - how she needed that money to feed her daughter and clothe her. Too bad she didn't spend any of that money on her child unless she was dressing her in lingerie and giving her beer.

Baez might not want to mention the daughter. Which would open the door to the missing daughter, dead daughter, mom being charged with death of daughter ... issue.

 

[ClockWatcher]

http://www.wftv.com/pdf/21508669/detail.html


Motion to Dismiss counts 1 2 4 5 7 8 10 11 13 for Violation of Double Jeopardy Clause.


Double jeopardy? Really?

Translation please?

 

[jamiect]

http://www.wftv.com/pdf/21508669/detail.html


Motion to Dismiss counts 1 2 4 5 7 8 10 11 13 for Violation of Double Jeopardy Clause.


Double jeopardy? Really?

Translation please?

Did you notice

did not sign it.:innocent:

 

[LiveLaughLuv]

Not sure but it's a stretch..Defense wants charges 1, 2, 4 ,5 ,7, 8 ,10, 11 & 13 dismissed based on "double jeopardy" clause...

Miss Anthony has been charged with three crimes for each four checks as well as one count of grand theft. For each seperate offense, Miss Anthony was charged with forgery of a check, uttering a forged check and fraudulent use of personal identification information for a total of three charges for writting one check. Therefore, Miss Anthony was charged 13 times for writting four checks. Under Florida law prosecution is barred under the same elements test of offense that has duplicate statutory elements or when one is necessarily included offense of the other. Fla statute 775.024(4) see also Blockburger vs US 284 US 299 (1932)





775.021 Rules of construction.--

(1) The provisions of this code and offenses defined by other statutes shall be strictly construed; when the language is susceptible of differing constructions, it shall be construed most favorably to the accused.

(2) The provisions of this chapter are applicable to offenses defined by other statutes, unless the code otherwise provides.

(3) This section does not affect the power of a court to punish for contempt or to employ any sanction authorized by law for the enforcement of an order or a civil judgment or decree.

(4)(a) Whoever, in the course of one criminal transaction or episode, commits an act or acts which constitute one or more separate criminal offenses, upon conviction and adjudication of guilt, shall be sentenced separately for each criminal offense; and the sentencing judge may order the sentences to be served concurrently or consecutively. For the purposes of this subsection, offenses are separate if each offense requires proof of an element that the other does not, without regard to the accusatory pleading or the proof adduced at trial.

(b) The intent of the Legislature is to convict and sentence for each criminal offense committed in the course of one criminal episode or transaction and not to allow the principle of lenity as set forth in subsection (1) to determine legislative intent. Exceptions to this rule of construction are:

1. Offenses which require identical elements of proof.

2. Offenses which are degrees of the same offense as provided by statute.

3. Offenses which are lesser offenses the statutory elements of which are subsumed by the greater offense.

http://www.flsenate.gov/statutes/ind...775/Sec021.HTM

 

[100%Agave]

Not sure but it's a stretch..Defense wants charges 1, 2, 4 ,5 ,7, 8 ,10, 11 & 13 dismissed based on "double jeopardy" clause...

Miss Anthony has been charged with three crimes for each four checks as well as one count of grand theft. For each seperate offense, Miss Anthony was charged with forgery of a check, uttering a forged check and fraudulent use of personal identification information for a total of three charges for writting one check. Therefore, Miss Anthony was charged 13 times for writting four checks. Under Florida law prosecution is barred under the same elements test of offense that has duplicate statutory elements or when one is necessarily included offense of the other. Fla statute 775.024(4) see also Blockburger vs US 284 US 299 (1932)





775.021 Rules of construction.--

(1) The provisions of this code and offenses defined by other statutes shall be strictly construed; when the language is susceptible of differing constructions, it shall be construed most favorably to the accused.

(2) The provisions of this chapter are applicable to offenses defined by other statutes, unless the code otherwise provides.

(3) This section does not affect the power of a court to punish for contempt or to employ any sanction authorized by law for the enforcement of an order or a civil judgment or decree.

(4)(a) Whoever, in the course of one criminal transaction or episode, commits an act or acts which constitute one or more separate criminal offenses, upon conviction and adjudication of guilt, shall be sentenced separately for each criminal offense; and the sentencing judge may order the sentences to be served concurrently or consecutively. For the purposes of this subsection, offenses are separate if each offense requires proof of an element that the other does not, without regard to the accusatory pleading or the proof adduced at trial.

(b) The intent of the Legislature is to convict and sentence for each criminal offense committed in the course of one criminal episode or transaction and not to allow the principle of lenity as set forth in subsection (1) to determine legislative intent. Exceptions to this rule of construction are:

1. Offenses which require identical elements of proof.

2. Offenses which are degrees of the same offense as provided by statute.

3. Offenses which are lesser offenses the statutory elements of which are subsumed by the greater offense.

http://www.flsenate.gov/statutes/ind...775/Sec021.HTM

Please translate into plain english for those of us (ME!) that do not speak legalese. Thanks.:innocent:

 

[amethyst221]

I don't think "double jeopardy" is truly in issue. As I read the statute quoted, it is the intent of the Florida legislature to allow an accused to be prosecuted for all the crimes that arise out of a "transaction," so long as they are to a degree different. It doesn't matter if the related charges share a number of elements, so long as there is some additional or different one they don't have in common.

 

[essies]

http://www.wftv.com/news/21508310/detail.html

New Motions On Casey Murder, Fraud Charges
Posted: 11:53 am EST November 3, 2009
Updated: 2:27 pm EST November 3, 2009
ORANGE COUNTY, Fla. -- Casey Anthony's defense team has filed three new motions in the case. One concerns the check fraud charges and the other two concern the death penalty murder case against her.
<snipped for space>
Casey’s pretrial for her check fraud case has been changed from December 18 to December 11, which is the anniversary of when Caylee’s remains were found.

How's that for KARMA???

 

[ClockWatcher]

In my limited understanding of the law, I was under the impression that the state was "throwing the book" at KC for the check fraud. Given the circumstances at that time, (out on Padilla bond) this was the state's back up plan for ensuring some additional jail time for KC if the child neglect/obstruction charges were reduced or pled out.

Given that later she was indicted for the 1st degree, then these fraud charges were an opportunity for her to plea guilty, but at a lesser degree. Misdemeanor instead of felony.
(I'm sorry, I don't know how to word that precisely, but I hope you get my intent?)

Then, here comes the defense. After all that hand wringing in court, "we don't have time for the fraud case" they come up with Double Jeopardy? Plus a change of venue?

I would applaud the defense if they would save the state a ton of money and just plea out on these charges. It seems as though they can't admit to any wrong doing or the whole defense strategy will collapse.

Amethyst, I'm hoping that you're interpretation of this motion is right on! I want the state to have the ability to throw this one right back at the defense as another preposterous and poorly crafted motion.

(sorry for the mini-rant and fragmented thought process, blaming the Halloween candy, warning: do not post while savoring Atomic Fireballs!!)

 

[USARDOG]

My understanding was in going forward with this trial first, it will impacts any sentence for killing Caylee because she can now not come before the court as a first time offender, but instead must appear as a convicted felon and the murder of Caylee her second strike.

 

[LiveLaughLuv]

I don't think "double jeopardy" is truly in issue. As I read the statute quoted, it is the intent of the Florida legislature to allow an accused to be prosecuted for all the crimes that arise out of a "transaction," so long as they are to a degree different. It doesn't matter if the related charges share a number of elements, so long as there is some additional or different one they don't have in common.

Yes, I'm thinking the three charges for one forged check are elements of the actions. One can possess a fradulent instrument (the check) but once you cash it (uttering a forged instrument) it brings it to another level. Then when you use the personal information (passing said check as your own), brings it to another charge. I do believe all three charges to one forged check go hand in hand, which is why I thought it a far stretch. I may be wrong since I am by no means a legal eagle but do have common sense...:waitasec:

To me, double jeopardy is (I will use OJ Simpson as an example)..OJ was acquitted of double homicide. Even if he were to confess that he did kill both RG and NBS, he cannot be charged/tried again. Should someone uncover evidence of his guilt, he still cannot be tried/charged..That is true double jeopardy. IMO

 

[sleutherontheside]

I don't think "double jeopardy" is truly in issue. As I read the statute quoted, it is the intent of the Florida legislature to allow an accused to be prosecuted for all the crimes that arise out of a "transaction," so long as they are to a degree different. It doesn't matter if the related charges share a number of elements, so long as there is some additional or different one they don't have in common.

So....different store locations, different dollar amounts...does that qualify as different? As opposed to 3 checks for cash in the same amount cashed at the same location?

 

[magic-cat]

I think that ID that the police grabbed night no. 31 is going to play into all of this. I don't think that was a valid ID of Casey Anthony, and I think THAT is where the excess charges to do with improper use of an ID come into play. If they have the ID then they use the ID to prove those charges, then that is completely different then using the video to prove the actual uttering of the checks...so I think that paves the way for some of those charges to stand as is...Double jeopardy? Are they kidding?