Veteran Phila. officer could face life in prison

[WhiteFeather]

http://www.philly.com/philly/news/local/19309909.html

Veteran Phila. officer could face life in prison

Malik Snell was an 11-year veteran police officer assigned to the 18th District in West Philadelphia until shortly before Christmas last year.
Then he was arrested on charges of taking part in a home invasion. Now he faces serious federal firearms charges that could lead to a life sentence.

A federal grand jury yesterday indicted Snell, 35, and two others on charges that they took part in a home invasion in Pottstown on Dec. 16.

After his arrest on local charges just after the robbery, Snell was suspended from the department for 30 days with an intent to dismiss.

Assistant U.S. Attorney Curtis R. Douglas said the case seemed more appropriate for a federal prosecution. "We thought it was a good case to try federally," he said yesterday.

Douglas said that if convicted of the most serious charge - carrying a firearm during a crime of violence - each of the men could be sentenced to up to life in prison.

According to the indictment, Snell, along with Tyree Aimes, 24, and Stephon Gibson, 21, both of Philadelphia, went to an apartment in Pottstown where they believed a drug dealer stored the proceeds of his sales.

Snell drove Aimes and Gibson to the apartment and was armed with a loaded semiautomatic handgun, the indictment stated. The three tried to rob the occupants but were unable to find the drug money and left, authorities said.

Snell and Aimes allegedly fled but returned to look for Gibson. They encountered

[Statkowski]

And the Philly cops on Coptalk complain about us?

[pex]

Can anyone explain why this intrastate issue has reached a federal grand jury?

[MrUgly]

Originally Posted by pex

Can anyone explain why this intrastate issue has reached a federal grand jury?

You can be charged with a Federal offense anytime you commit a felony, unless I am mistaken. Federal crimes have stiffer penalties and this could be a "We're tough on crime" case.

Or I could be blowing smoke. Someone else want to weigh in?

[CarolinaGuy]

Originally Posted by Statkowski

And the Philly cops on Coptalk complain about us?

Lmao...I'd love to hear their take on the matter...

[tmg19103]

Most likely the use of a firearm that crossed state lines as it was no doubt manufactured somewhere else. Not that that is truly constitutional per the intent of the Constitution, but that's how the Fed's get away with charging on a lot of crimes.

Article 1, Section 8, Clause 3 of the United States Constitution, known as the Commerce Clause, states that Congress has the exclusive authority to manage commerce between the states. The founder's interpreted this as actual commerce - economic activity. The courts have now distorted this into charging any crimes that involved intruments that involved crossing state lines.

The firearm used in the home invasion crime was no doubt involved in interstate commerce, but to twist that into making it an interstate crime is one of many areas where the constitution has been disregarded and re-written by the courts.

[mjfletcher]

Originally Posted by MrUgly

You can be charged with a Federal offense anytime you commit a felony, unless I am mistaken. Federal crimes have stiffer penalties and this could be a "We're tough on crime" case.

Or I could be blowing smoke. Someone else want to weigh in?

Could be part of the Hard Time for Gun Crime (www.hardtimeforguncrime.org) initiative. Basically it comes down to local/state attorneys having people charged under federal law for gun crims because of the combination of stiffer penalties and no parole in the federal system. From what i've been able to find, its working wonders to get the BGs off the street and keep them in a cell where they belong.

http://wvgazette.com/Opinion/Op-EdCo...s/200804260209

John Chapman
Ad campaign for heavy gun-crime penalties is working well
The story the police officer told is music to the ears of those of us involved in the Hard Time for Gun Crime campaign.

The story the police officer told is music to the ears of those of us involved in the Hard Time for Gun Crime campaign:

When the officer was arresting a defendant for selling drugs to another undercover officer, he searched the defendant for weapons. As his training and experience taught him, he also searched the immediate area. The officer was surprised not to find any firearms; his experience was much like that of his fellow officers: Where there are drugs, there are likely to be guns.

So, just to be sure, he asked the defendant if he had any firearms or other weapons that the officer needed to be concerned about. The defendant's reply was becoming more and more common:

"Are you crazy?" came the reply. "You think I want to do fed time?!"

This is exactly the goal of Hard Time for Gun Crime (www.hardtimeforguncrime.org), a community-based initiative in the 23 counties that are in the jurisdiction of the U.S. Attorney's Office in the Southern District of West Virginia and supported by the Department of Justice.

[pex]

I don't think the manfactorial origin of the gun is at all germane to the crime committed. If such a thing could be concluded, the fact that people work in any state, given their value to commerce, or that they've visited any other state, would allow the fed to usurp all power on all people and create no meaning for the 9th and 10th amendments.

From what i've been able to find, its working wonders to get the BGs off the street and keep them in a cell where they belong.

If it's giving the fed more power than it already has or is allowing the continual abuse already in play, I don't want it.

[mjfletcher]

Originally Posted by pex

If it's giving the fed more power than it already has or is allowing the continual abuse already in play, I don't want it.

Its not giving more power to the fed, its the state letting the fed prosecute for violations of federal gun laws rather than prosecuting for violations of the states gun laws. So instead of getting sentenced to 10 years by the state and being out in 5, they get senteneced to 10 years by the fed and they're in for all 10.

As long as it remains a decision for each state to make on its own, and with the states laws and federal law being nearly identical in many firearm related matters (ie: prohibiting convicted felons from posessing firearms) id rather see the state decide to hand them over to the feds for violation of federal law to make sure they serve their whole sentence than have them serve half and be released for "good behavior."

[pex]

Originally Posted by mjfletcher

As long as it remains a decision for each state to make on its own, and with the states laws and federal law being nearly identical in many firearm related matters (ie: prohibiting convicted felons from posessing firearms) id rather see the state decide to hand them over to the feds for violation of federal law to make sure they serve their whole sentence than have them serve half and be released for "good behavior."

I'm sorry, this just isn't the right way. The states can attempt to 'hand over' cases like these to the fed, but any competent executive or judiciary would then see THEY DON'T HAVE JURISDICTION. It's a good way to get cases prosecuted nonsuccessfully.

States can't just do what they want any more than the federal government can.