• FreeAdvice has a new Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, effective May 25, 2018.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our Terms of Service and use of cookies.

Court hearing SNAFU

Accident - Bankruptcy - Criminal Law / DUI - Business - Consumer - Employment - Family - Immigration - Real Estate - Tax - Traffic - Wills   Please click a topic or scroll down for more.

jedtooley

Junior Member
What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Colorado
I was in court recently on a interlock infraction and the intitial offer was a suspension with no jail but was told that it was possible that there would be jail at some unknown date later or that it was unknown if I could jail somehow eventhough the judge said she would not jail me on the charge. When I asked to have that explained to me how a deal could be offered and then there be a unknown risk of jail later I was told that she needed to get the rest of the people in court taken care of and that she would do some research and get back to my case. After she looked in some book she said that my case could be construed as a class 1 misdemenor and that jail was required. I dont understand how one offer can be given then yet another later based on a "could be considered" wording in some book. I was offered a continuance and took it. Does this sound strange or less than legal to you?
 


I_Got_Banned

Senior Member
I was in court recently on a interlock infraction and the intitial offer was a suspension with no jail but was told that it was possible that there would be jail at some unknown date later or that it was unknown if I could jail somehow eventhough the judge said she would not jail me on the charge. When I asked to have that explained to me how a deal could be offered and then there be a unknown risk of jail later...
So she wasn't sure and needed to look it up...

After she looked in some book she said that my case could be construed as a class 1 misdemenor and that jail was required. I dont understand how one offer can be given then yet another later based on a "could be considered" wording in some book.
... she looked it up and "as it turns out", there is a mandatory jail sentence included in the penalty that she can't change and if she did change it, the judge is not likely to allow for the change.

I dont understand how one offer can be given then yet another later based on a "could be considered" wording in some book.
It really isn't that difficult to understand. :rolleyes:

I was offered a continuance and took it.
Unless the law changes in the meantime, the mandatory jail sentence is not going away... Maybe they'll offer you a different plea deal under a different statute, but again the judge may or may not sign on to that deal.

Does this sound strange or less than legal to you?
No, its not strange nor less than legal!
 

sandyclaus

Senior Member
What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Colorado
I was in court recently on a interlock infraction and the intitial offer was a suspension with no jail but was told that it was possible that there would be jail at some unknown date later or that it was unknown if I could jail somehow eventhough the judge said she would not jail me on the charge. When I asked to have that explained to me how a deal could be offered and then there be a unknown risk of jail later I was told that she needed to get the rest of the people in court taken care of and that she would do some research and get back to my case. After she looked in some book she said that my case could be construed as a class 1 misdemenor and that jail was required. I dont understand how one offer can be given then yet another later based on a "could be considered" wording in some book. I was offered a continuance and took it. Does this sound strange or less than legal to you?
"Some book" was probably the specific legal requirements or sentencing requirements for different offenses. As it turns out, yours was not simply an infraction, it was considered a criminal offense with a mandatory sentencing requirement.

The attorney may have not known for sure, wanted to look it up and make certain of what was negotiable and what would be required for your specific situation. They did, and since there was a mandatory sentencing requirement, there were unable to offer you a "no jail" option to plead your case out.

Certainly not strange or illegal. You are just upset because your actions had consequences that could not justify you getting out of jail time like you had hoped.

Perhaps this time, you will learn your lesson. If you don't want to do the time, don't do the crime.
 

Find the Right Lawyer for Your Legal Issue!

Fast, Free, and Confidential
data-ad-format="auto">
Top