This takes.....ah.....guts.
Greer, who pleaded no contest to the charges of possession of cocaine and carrying a concealed weapon, as sentenced five and a half years in jail and four years extended supervision on the drugs charge and a nine months concurrent sentence on the weapons charge.
Which means that he did NOT plead "not guilty," right?
Greer, 35, served 18 months in prison on the drug conviction before the appellate court decision released him last summer. The court found that while the officer had a reason to stop and question Greer on June 25, 2004, but didn't have sufficient cause for for an arrest.
Umnnnh. So the cop's learned instincts were absolutely spot-on--but 'learned instincts', even when proven correct, aren't sufficient.
Greer is suing the City of Milwaukee for $80,000 because the 4th District Court of Appeals tossed out his drug convicition.
Nice.
"Which means that he did NOT plead "not guilty," right? That means the dope and the gun were present as alleged, right?"
ReplyDeleteNo, that's not what it means.
OK. Here's the Wiki definition:
ReplyDeleteIn criminal trials, and in some common law jurisdictions, it is a plea where the defendant neither admits nor disputes a charge, serving as an alternative to a pleading of guilty or not guilty.
But for most purposes, it has the EFFECT of a 'guilty' plea.
But your statement that he admitted the dope and the gun were there is totally false. He didn't admit that. The difference between a guilty plea and a no contest plea is subtle and unimportant in most instances. But in the specific case you're talking about, the difference in EFFECT is huge, rendering this post wrong.
ReplyDelete