Archive for the ‘Frog Gravy legal case’ Category

The Kentucky Supreme Court denied our Motion For Discretionary Review of the Frog Gravy legal case without opinion or comment. Here is a copy of the order:

10 02/15/2012 ORDER DENYING DISCRETIONARY REVIEW: DD
11 02/15/2012 FINALITY: FL

Source.

This means we have reached the end of the road on the direct appeal in Kentucky and the published opinion by the Court of Appeals is the law of the case. The briefs filed by the parties will be available online at the Chase Law School in Kentucky at some point.

Documents in this case, including the briefs and the published opinion (pdf), are also available here:

https://froggravy.wordpress.com/2012/02/06/table-of-contents-court-briefs-and-documents-frog-gravy-legal-case/

The preliminary hearing is here:

https://froggravy.wordpress.com/2012/02/05/the-full-text-preliminary-hearing-frog-gravy-legal-case/

The Grand Jury hearing is here:

https://froggravy.wordpress.com/2012/01/12/the-full-text-grand-jury-hearing/

The exculpatory labs are here:

https://froggravy.wordpress.com/2011/10/16/grand-jury-misuse-and-perjury-frog-gravy-38/

The suppression hearing is here:

https://froggravy.wordpress.com/2012/02/08/the-full-text-suppression-hearing-pdf-frog-gravy-legal-case/

The first order denying suppression:

https://froggravy.wordpress.com/2012/02/08/the-first-of-three-orders-denying-suppression-frog-gravy-legal-case/

And the second, and the third:

https://froggravy.wordpress.com/2012/02/08/the-second-and-third-orders-denying-suppression-frog-gravy-legal-case/

Other documents:

https://froggravy.wordpress.com/2012/02/13/more-documents-frog-gravy-legal-case/

What is the next step in this case?

There are three options right now:

1. Do nothing. The case no longer specifically impacts our day-to-day lives one way or the other. Fortunately, I am not on death row. The case will impact others in the future, because it is published and it sets precedent. One option is to do nothing.

2. Petition the United States Supreme Court for Certiorari, or review, of the decision. The issues are very specific in such a petition. Here is more information about Certiorari:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Certiorari

3. File a state habeas corpus petition alleging ineffective assistance of counsel. In Kentucky, this is called an 11.42 petition. Here is more information about that:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ineffective_assistance_of_counsel

It will be interesting to see how this case will impact future cases.

This latest result is entirely consistent with the patterns and practices of the case so far, as evidenced by these documents.

Advertisements

My case is so surreal, I sometimes have difficulty believing it myself. That is why I am trying to provide as many documents as I can.

Judge Craig Clymer’s sentence in my case was eight years from the bench but four years in writing. Unless specified, DOC will read sentences as to be served concurrently:

Final Judgment & Sentence

I went home on parole, with a parole plan, after serving the required time on a four year sentence. Judge Craig Clymer contacted DOC and said something like, “Why is she out? I amended her sentence.”

I was then rearrested with a doubled sentence. Here is that article:

https://froggravy.wordpress.com/2011/10/17/released-on-parole-by-mistake-frog-gravy-39/

Here is the amended sentence:

Corrected Judgment & Sentence

Here are some other sentences, issued by the same judge:

MCCRACKEN COUNTY, KY – From a house party to the jail house. A shocking end to the Caleb Barnett tragedy. Despite emotional pleas for mercy a local man learned how much time he’ll serve in connection to the death of his close friend.

In July 2009 Taylor Thompson and Caleb Barnett were partying and taking drugs, drugs Thompson provided. On Wednesday, McCracken County Circuit Judge Craig Clymer sentenced Thompson to two two-and-a-half-year terms to run concurrently.

Thompson pleaded guilty to trafficking a controlled substance, possession of drug paraphernalia and possession of marijuana.


http://www.wpsdlocal6.com/news/local/83492172.html?m=y

McCracken County Circuit Court Judge Craig Clymer sentenced Karen Clark Thursday morning. Clark had already pleaded guilty to Theft by Deception and Criminal Abuse in the Second Degree. On Thursday, Judge Clymer sentenced Clark to three years on both charges. Clark will serve the sentences at the same time, totaling only three years.

http://www.wpsdlocal6.com/news/local/90108107.html

PADUCAH, KY (AP) – A western Kentucky judge sentenced a woman involved in the sale of hallucinogenic mushrooms implicated in a deadly break-in to more than two years in jail.

The Paducah Sun reports McCracken Circuit Judge Craig Clymer sentenced Shaina Skinner on Monday to 2-1/2 years for trafficking in a controlled substance.


http://www.shroomery.org/forums/showflat.php/Number/12355896

Seriously, had I trafficked in drugs that were directly involved in the death of a young person, I would have received less than half the time I did receive, for a no-drugs-no-alcohol-no-bad-driving DUI and possession of one-tenth of a gram of crack.

Are you interested in state-by-state incarceration rates and other statistics?

Go here:

http://www.sentencingproject.org/map/map.cfm

After presiding over the suppression hearing and issuing a first order denying suppression, McCracken Circuit Court judge Hon. Craig Clymer issued a second order setting aside the first order and substituting this one for it. Here is that second order:

Supplemental Suppression Order

It gets better. After the completion of the trial and after the conviction, Hon. Craig Clymer issued a third order supplementing the second order denying suppression, with additional findings of fact and conclusions of law. Here is the third order:

Supplemental Suppression Order

Judge Clymer states that McGuire did not conduct a stop of my vehicle.

See if you agree. Here is McGuire’s Uniform Citation:

Uniform Offense Report

Pretty clear that McGuire fell in behind my vehicle and stopped it.

Then there’s this:

https://froggravy.wordpress.com/2012/01/12/the-full-text-grand-jury-hearing/

where McGuire said that he stopped my vehicle, and there’s this:

http://frederickleatherman.wordpress.com/2012/02/05/the-full-text-preliminary-hearing-frog-gravy-legal-case/

where McGuire talked openly about stopping my vehicle on a hunch.

But the kicker is that in the suppression hearing itself, McGuire admits that he put his emergency lights on before my car came to a complete stop.

I often wonder if, even today, there will be a fourth, or maybe even a fifth order denying suppression post trial and not based on the suppression hearing. His third order is, ironically, ‘unusual, suspicious and disturbing.’

The Full-Text Suppression Hearing pdf [Frog Gravy legal case]

Leatherman Suppression Hearing_0001

For those of you following the legal case, here are the documents and briefs that have been filed in the case so far. The case currently sits with the Kentucky Supreme Court, as a Motion For Discretionary Review. All of these documents are in the public domain. For law students following this case: filed briefs, responses and the COA opinion are all here, full-text from original sources, in one convenient place:

1. Appellant opening brief:

http://frederickleatherman.wordpress.com/2011/12/24/the-full-text-opening-brief-frog-gravy-legal-case/

2. Commonwealth Brief In Response:

http://frederickleatherman.wordpress.com/2012/02/06/full-text-commonwealth-brief-pdf-frog-gravy-legal-case/

3. Appellant Reply Brief:

http://frederickleatherman.wordpress.com/2011/12/25/the-full-text-reply-brief-frog-gravy-legal-case/

4. The Court of Appeals Opinion Affirming and To Be Published:

http://frederickleatherman.wordpress.com/2011/12/26/the-full-text-published-opinion-affirming-frog-gravy-legal-case/

5. Appellant Petition For Rehearing:

http://frederickleatherman.wordpress.com/2011/12/23/100/

6. Commonwealth Response to Petition For Rehearing:

The Commonwealth did not file a response. They were not required to file such a response.

7. Court of Appeals denies rehearing without comment, opinion or analysis:

101 04/12/2011 ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR REHEARING ORDER – DENYING PETITION FOR REHEARING.

The source.

8. The Motion For Discretionary Review:

http://frederickleatherman.wordpress.com/category/appeals-2/motion-for-discretionary-review/

9. Commonwealth Response to Motion For Discretionary Review:

http://frederickleatherman.wordpress.com/2012/02/06/commonwealth-full-text-response-to-mdr-pdf-frog-gravy-legal-case/

10. Will add this document on edit.

11. The docket, Court of Appeals:

The Court of Appeals docket in this case is at this site.

The status of the case today:

Case # 2011-SC-000272
Case Type Discretionary Review (CRIMINAL): (1R )
Document Type Discretionary Review: (D)
Case Status Active: (A)
Last Main Event SENT OUT FOR ASSIGNMENT (07/18/2011)

Source.

The full-text Motion For Discretionary Review is here:

https://froggravy.wordpress.com/2011/12/22/the-full-text-motion-for-discretionary-review-frog-gravy-legal-case/

Get your Pepto Bismol. Here is the full-text reply to the Motion for Discretionary Review by Dark And Stormy Night Gregory Fuchs.

Remember, this to-be-published case was affirmed by the Kentucky Court of Appeals, and the case now sits with the Kentucky Supreme Court.

If this case becomes binding case law, guess what? Exculpatory toxicology crime laboratory testing will be irrelevant. DNA won’t matter. If you are pulled over, you might as well waive the option for clearing yourself by opting for blood analysis.

Your fate will be in the hands of a rogue, lying deputy and whatever coached speculation he offers over a lengthy period of time. Science matters not in the least in the state of Kentucky, according to this decision.

So, you see, this case is not about me anymore. This case will affect pretty much every criminal case in the future.

Commonwealth Full-Text Response To MDR [Frog Gravy legal case]

20111010084852102 (1)

Have a gander at this incomprehensible hunk of garbage authored by Commonwealth Assistant Attorney General Gregory Fuchs. His writing would do the Bulwer-Lytton fiction contest proud, both for the fantasy as well as the wretched writing.

AG’s brief (1)