Convicted child molester Lindsey Whiteside will remain on house arrest after Special Circuit Judge Jeff Weill denied the District Attorney's motion for resentencing but threw a curveball into his ruling.
1) An intensive supervision program may be used as an alternative to incarceration for offenders who are not convicted of a crime of violencepursuant to Section 97-3-2 as selected by the court and for juvenile offenders as provided in Section 43-21-605. Any offender convicted of a sex crime shall not be placed in the program.
Rule 25.4 Clerical and Technical Errors. After giving notice to the State and the defendant, the court may correct a clerical error in a judgment or order, correct an error in the record arising from oversight or omission, or correct a sentence that resulted from arithmetical, technical, or other clear error. Emphasis added by the Court.
it is clear that the Supreme Court disfavors revisiting sentencing decisions once made, particularly when the State is seeking a sentence harsher than the sentence meted out by the original sentencing judge.
The Supreme Court held the right to challenge the sentence belonged to the defendant, not the prosecution. Judge Weill decreed the law gave him no remedy to fix the illegal sentence. The opinion got rather squirrely as the Court ruled:
The initial Sentencing Order is awkwardly written in that it consists of an (inapplicable) form order to be used when a Defendant is sentenced to the MDOC’s ISP program, a program which a Defendant convicted of sexual battery may not participate in.
Judge Weill hammered the District Attorney, observing he raised no "contemporaneous objection" when Judge Howorth imposed the sentence. The opinion gets a little squirrely:
Judge Howorth sentenced the Defendant to a ten-year sentence with seven years suspended, with actual incarceration to be served on monitored house-arrest for three years, then post-release supervision (PRS) for five years, followed by two years of non-reporting post-release supervision. That sentence is permitted within the sentencing parameters provided by the sexual battery statute and within Judge Howorth’s discretion, which the State and the Defendant deferred to when they agreed to an open plea. The error within that order was in placing Whiteside in the MDOC’s ISP program, not in sentencing her to incarceration via house arrest.
Consistent with that observation, the Court herein amends the sentencing order to reflect and implement Judge Howorth’s sentence rendered in open court, bound by the Supreme Court’s holding in Sweat v. State, supra, which does not allow sentencing the Defendant to a harsher sentence “…when the error benefits the defendant in the form of a more lenient sentence…”
Judge Weill removed Whiteside from the jurisdiction of MDOC and ordered her to serve her house arrest under the supervision of the Court. The Court concluded:
While this Court can correct the terms of incarceration by entering a corrected sentencing order pursuant to MRCrP Rule 25.4, it is without authority to resentence the Defendant to serve a harsher one, as the Supreme Court has made clear.
While Whiteside escaped prison in Circuit Court, she may still go to prison.
A federal grand jury indicted Whiteside for transporting a minor across state lines for sexual purposes in October. Although a U.S. Magistrate granted bond to Whiteside, U.S. District Judge Debra Brown revoked it in November. Whiteside currently resides at the Lafayette County jail.
If convicted, she will face a minimum sentence of ten years in federal prison. Earlier post on federal prosecution and bond revocation.
Judge Brown scheduled Whiteside's trial for April 20 in the Greenville federal courtroom.
17 comments:
What no one seems to be asking is did Howorth knowingly exploit loopholes in order to benefit Whiteside?
The Three Stooges become lawyers and jurists.
She needs to repent and ask for forgiveness. Also, the full weight of the law should land squarely on her shoulder.
Hoping the Federal charges stick and are harshly sentenced, preferably consecutively with her state sentence rather than concurrently.
Wow, a court blessing not in Hinds County. 😂
Why does the system protect pedophiles?
Protecting their own 1:59 .
I feel like that's the question to ask the nine teachers and the Desoto County School Board member Michele Henley who all wrote presentencing letter of support for their child rapist.
Seems like the judges are often almost as much of a problem as the criminals.
I just wonder how many other children have been the victims of her attentions. It is well known that child abusers/predators do not commit their actions on an isolated basis. They usually commit these acts as serial offenders.
So the local DA messed up? Makes his actions in the aftermath all more telling…
@3:20 - That’s my read on it.
Seems like Judge Wiell maybe goes to church with the Defendant with such a favorable ruling. District Attorney Matthew Barton is a hero for exposing the corruption that's clearly rife in DeSoto County.
This is nothing new. Historically, The Mississippi Supreme Court has always appointed special masters, who rig the system, in favor of a well paid lawyer.
DA Barton is a dumbass that dropped the ball. He only cares about preening before the camera. Little man's disease victim
so what about that dude that got 80 years for cp of a 14 year told that he had sex with? can he get house arrest too?
Yall just leave this woman alone. She’s suffered enough. This is a witch hunt.
Post a Comment