Losing an entire semester of college credit to get def adjudication for a MIC

[mnauman]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Texas
My daughter, age 19, attending college out of town (Blinn has a mandatory attendance policy no exceptions even for court orders) was charged with MIC (her first offense for anything ever) along with about 20 others in Travis County. As part of the "contract" to recieve deferred adjudication they ALL have to perform their required community service and classes together with the dates and times specified - no exceptions. This means she will lose an entire semester of college credits (already paid for) in order to fulfill her obligations. I understand the fees, fines, classes, and community service obligations but to make them mandatory in Travis County with specific times and dates is ridiculous. This judge is minimizing the importance of jobs and education when young adults are just beginning to be career minded and setting goals for their lives. The constructive use of time such as school or work should be encouraged and the offenders should be able to fulfill most of the ordered mandates in the city in which they reside. The Judge acknowledged the court was ok for her to lose this semesters credits as she must abide by his location specific requirements for community service in order for her to recieve deferred adjudication for a MIC in Travis County. Yes they should pay $ and sacrifice weekends and evenings attending classes and performing community service to make amends for breaking the law but not lose their job or college credits. Is this really how the law is intended to be carried out for a 19 year old caught drinking a beer?

 

[Antigone*]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Texas
My daughter, age 19, attending college out of town (Blinn has a mandatory attendance policy no exceptions even for court orders) was charged with MIC (her first offense for anything ever) along with about 20 others in Travis County. As part of the "contract" to recieve deferred adjudication they ALL have to perform their required community service and classes together with the dates and times specified - no exceptions. This means she will lose an entire semester of college credits (already paid for) in order to fulfill her obligations. I understand the fees, fines, classes, and community service obligations but to make them mandatory in Travis County with specific times and dates is ridiculous. This judge is minimizing the importance of jobs and education when young adults are just beginning to be career minded and setting goals for their lives. The constructive use of time such as school or work should be encouraged and the offenders should be able to fulfill most of the ordered mandates in the city in which they reside. The Judge acknowledged the court was ok for her to lose this semesters credits as she must abide by his location specific requirements for community service in order for her to recieve deferred adjudication for a MIC in Travis County. Yes they should pay $ and sacrifice weekends and evenings attending classes and performing community service to make amends for breaking the law but not lose their job or college credits. Is this really how the law is intended to be carried out for a 19 year old caught drinking a beer?

Use this opportunity to teach your daughter about the consequences of her actions. I might also suggest that you make her pay you for the funds you lost since that is important for you.

 

[Ohiogal]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Texas
My daughter, age 19, attending college out of town (Blinn has a mandatory attendance policy no exceptions even for court orders) was charged with MIC (her first offense for anything ever) along with about 20 others in Travis County. As part of the "contract" to recieve deferred adjudication they ALL have to perform their required community service and classes together with the dates and times specified - no exceptions. This means she will lose an entire semester of college credits (already paid for) in order to fulfill her obligations. I understand the fees, fines, classes, and community service obligations but to make them mandatory in Travis County with specific times and dates is ridiculous. This judge is minimizing the importance of jobs and education when young adults are just beginning to be career minded and setting goals for their lives. The constructive use of time such as school or work should be encouraged and the offenders should be able to fulfill most of the ordered mandates in the city in which they reside. The Judge acknowledged the court was ok for her to lose this semesters credits as she must abide by his location specific requirements for community service in order for her to recieve deferred adjudication for a MIC in Travis County. Yes they should pay $ and sacrifice weekends and evenings attending classes and performing community service to make amends for breaking the law but not lose their job or college credits. Is this really how the law is intended to be carried out for a 19 year old caught drinking a beer?

She should not have been breaking the law. Then she wouldn't have this issue. This is HER fault and not the responsibility of her college. Sometimes, consequences can be expensive.

Your daughter is career minded? Not if she thought it was so important to be out boozing it up while underage. Sounds more like someone who thought partying was a priority.

 

[wrongsometimes]

Did you take a plea bargain? If not, then an appeal with a request to stay the sentence may be a course of action.

 

[Ohiogal]

Did you take a plea bargain? If not, then an appeal with a request to stay the sentence may be a course of action.

OP can't appeal at all. The OP is the criminal's PARENT. If she (the child) does NOT complete the deferred adjudication then she will be found guilty and suffer the consequences. Deferred adjudication was a way of getting this off the criminal's record. Also, an appeal would not work in this situation. The daughter could withdraw her request for deferred adjudication and just keep her crime on her record.

 

[mistoffolees]

OP can't appeal at all. The OP is the criminal's PARENT. If she (the child) does NOT complete the deferred adjudication then she will be found guilty and suffer the consequences. Deferred adjudication was a way of getting this off the criminal's record. Also, an appeal would not work in this situation. The daughter could withdraw her request for deferred adjudication and just keep her crime on her record.

Which would be a bad move, btw.

The daughter should make sure that she's explored all the options. Will the court consider a delay in her performing community service (Mom said 'no exceptions', but did the daughter really try?). Will the college make exceptions for court-ordered community service? Sometimes people just assume that there's nothing that can be done without trying.

But, if they have tried everything, then daughter is just going to have to face the consequences of her actions.

 

[Ohiogal]

Which would be a bad move, btw.

The daughter should make sure that she's explored all the options. Will the court consider a delay in her performing community service (Mom said 'no exceptions', but did the daughter really try?). Will the college make exceptions for court-ordered community service? Sometimes people just assume that there's nothing that can be done without trying.

But, if they have tried everything, then daughter is just going to have to face the consequences of her actions.

I agree with you wholeheartedly.
Deferred adjudication is a great idea but if daughter doesn't want to deal with the fallout from being able to get away without a criminal record for committing a crime then ...
I will say that the court most likely will NOT consider a delay in community service as they consider this a court order and an important part of people realizing what they did was wrong. If school will not excuse her for court ordered activities, then the daughter gets to sit out a semester and pay back her parents for their outlay. Mighty expensive beer, wasn't it?

 

[TinkerBelleLuvr]

I'm thinking logical consequences. You get a job that works around your community service in order to pay back your parents for the tuition. Yep.... and probably any scholarships and grant money received. Very expensive beer.

 

[NellieBly]

She has to obey the judge whether it is to her liking or not.

Judges are like that.

 

[mnauman]

Missed the point. Of course there should be a consequence to breaking the law. My question concerns grouping these 20 kids together on mandatory dates and times to complete the requirements of classes and community service. Normally you have the option of several established dates for the classes and the community service is scheduled with the facility you work at (just like having a temp job). Joint participation for 20 allows no flexibility and I don't understand the point the judge is making. They should individually be able to perform these mandates. So many of these kids are losing credits, losing jobs, losing scholarships, and its not because of the nature of the crime it is because of the scheduling restriction without ANY options for ANY of the tasks so they can't attend school, work, or sports practice. What is the point of keeping them together and if there is one why not one class but all 3 classess and every hour of community service seems like setting them up for failure. The whole idea behind deferred adjudication is for the individual to learn and pay for their mistake but not to have a criminal record that interferes with their future. This judge made sure that the future of many of these kids would be greatly impacted. They should have that minimum flexibility (which isn't much but at least they wouldn't lose jobs, etc.) just like everyone else gets that ends up in the system.

 

[Antigone*]

Missed the point. Of course there should be a consequence to breaking the law. My question concerns grouping these 20 kids together on mandatory dates and times to complete the requirements of classes and community service. Normally you have the option of several established dates for the classes and the community service is scheduled with the facility you work at (just like having a temp job). Joint participation for 20 allows no flexibility and I don't understand the point the judge is making. They should individually be able to perform these mandates. So many of these kids are losing credits, losing jobs, losing scholarships, and its not because of the nature of the crime it is because of the scheduling restriction without ANY options for ANY of the tasks so they can't attend school, work, or sports practice. What is the point of keeping them together and if there is one why not one class but all 3 classess and every hour of community service seems like setting them up for failure. The whole idea behind deferred adjudication is for the individual to learn and pay for their mistake but not to have a criminal record that interferes with their future. This judge made sure that the future of many of these kids would be greatly impacted. They should have that minimum flexibility (which isn't much but at least they wouldn't lose jobs, etc.) just like everyone else gets that ends up in the system.

The court does not care about your daughter's schedule. They have no need to be flexible.

You just want to make things easier for her, when in reality the harder this is on her, the more effect it will have on her future behaviour.

So, no we did not miss the point. You, however have.

 

[stealth2]

Missed the point. Of course there should be a consequence to breaking the law. My question concerns grouping these 20 kids together on mandatory dates and times to complete the requirements of classes and community service. Normally you have the option of several established dates for the classes and the community service is scheduled with the facility you work at (just like having a temp job). Joint participation for 20 allows no flexibility and I don't understand the point the judge is making. They should individually be able to perform these mandates. So many of these kids are losing credits, losing jobs, losing scholarships, and its not because of the nature of the crime it is because of the scheduling restriction without ANY options for ANY of the tasks so they can't attend school, work, or sports practice. What is the point of keeping them together and if there is one why not one class but all 3 classess and every hour of community service seems like setting them up for failure. The whole idea behind deferred adjudication is for the individual to learn and pay for their mistake but not to have a criminal record that interferes with their future. This judge made sure that the future of many of these kids would be greatly impacted. They should have that minimum flexibility (which isn't much but at least they wouldn't lose jobs, etc.) just like everyone else gets that ends up in the system.

Your daughter and her friends seemed fine about being grouped when they were drinking illegally. So they should enjoy paying the price together. I think it is genius!

 

[Ohiogal]

Missed the point.

Nope. YOU are missing the point.

Of course there should be a consequence to breaking the law. My question concerns grouping these 20 kids together on mandatory dates and times to complete the requirements of classes and community service.

The court did not group these kids together. THEY CHOSE to be grouped together for their illegal activity. The court is following through on their choice for that to group them together for the punishment. If they can break the law together, they can be punished together.

Normally you have the option of several established dates for the classes and the community service is scheduled with the facility you work at (just like having a temp job).

How many times have have you or your children broken the law that you would know what is NORMAL for community service?

Joint participation for 20 allows no flexibility and I don't understand the point the judge is making. They should individually be able to perform these mandates. So many of these kids are losing credits, losing jobs, losing scholarships,

Losing credits is THEIR choice from drinking. Some schools will EXPELL underage drinkers for violating the law. Some employers will FIRE criminals for breaking the law. Some scholarships require fitness of both morals and character -- which breaking a law pretty much shows an UNFITNESS. You are making excuses.

and its not because of the nature of the crime it is because of the scheduling restriction without ANY options for ANY of the tasks so they can't attend school, work, or sports practice.

Sports practice? Really? Many sports teams will SUSPEND or BENCH underage drinkers because their athletes have to meet certain guidelines. Drinking is not acceptable if you are underage for most college teams of which I am aware.

What is the point of keeping them together and if there is one why not one class but all 3 classess and every hour of community service seems like setting them up for failure.

They have set themselves up for failure by deciding that drinking is a wise decision when it is against the law. Your daughter made a serious mistake. If she gets treated easily on this crime, she may progress to drunk driving and other issues. Good for the court.

The whole idea behind deferred adjudication is for the individual to learn and pay for their mistake but not to have a criminal record that interferes with their future.

Well your daughter will be learning that she was an idiot and a moron for deciding that drinking underage -- a crime -- was acceptable for her and she could just get away with it easily. Now she knows there are PENALTIES to her stupidity. Let her get out of deferred adjudication and just plead guilty. That way it will not be as difficult for her short term. Of course, depending on her choice of profession, she may find that her criminal record holds her back.

This judge made sure that the future of many of these kids would be greatly impacted. They should have that minimum flexibility (which isn't much but at least they wouldn't lose jobs, etc.) just like everyone else gets that ends up in the system.

This kids already had flexibility -- enough that they decided to have an alcohol party and break the law. Now they are learning about consequences. And no, not everyone that ends up in the system gets flexibility minimally. Of course, the fact that you seem to think they do shows that you are ignorant. QUIT making excuses for your daughter.

 

[Just Blue]

This question is in the wrong form. OP's daughter is 19. An adult. NOT a Juvi.

This should be posted in the ADULT CRIMINAL forum.