|
''Rummel v. Estelle'', , was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court upheld a life sentence with the possibility of parole under Texas' three strikes law for a felony fraud crime, where the offense and the defendant's two prior offenses involved approximately $230 of fraudulent activity.〔(FindLaw | Cases and Codes )〕 ==Background== Defendant William James Rummel had, prior to the offense in question, twice pled guilty to felony charges involving property:〔 *In 1964, Rummel pled guilty to fraudulent use of a credit card to obtain $80 worth of goods or services. As the amount in question exceeded $50, under Texas law the offense was classified as a felony punishable by 2–10 years in the Texas Department of Corrections (TDC). Rummel was sentenced to three years. *In 1969, Rummel pled guilty to passing a forged check in the amount of $28.36. The offense was classified as a felony by 2–5 years in the TDC. Rummel was sentenced to four years. The third offense, in 1973, involved Rummel refusing to return $120.75 received as payment for repairs of an air conditioning unit that, depending on the source cited, were either performed unsatisfactorily〔''CounterPunch'', 7 August 2009, (Legal Absurdities )〕 or not at all.〔 By itself, the crime was designated as "felony theft" and punishable by 2–10 years in the TDC. However, the prosecution sought to enhance the sentence under Texas' three strikes law, citing the 1964 and 1969 convictions as proof of Rummel being a repeat offender; the law required a mandatory sentence of life with the possibility of parole if the enhancement allegation were found to be true. A jury found Rummel guilty of felony theft and also found as true the allegation that Rummel had been convicted of two prior felonies; the trial court imposed the mandatory sentence in accordance with the law.〔 抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』 ■ウィキペディアで「Rummel v. Estelle」の詳細全文を読む スポンサード リンク
|