State of Minnesota v. Nicholas Rekieta, Kayla Rekieta, April Imholte

[Kosher Dill]

I hope the book is "Pawverbs".

 

[Catgirl Tyranid]

I hope the book that gets thrown at him is not something silly like a Bible on paper, but instead something like the Hammurabic Code, in its original form on a basalt stele, wielded by a giant, and he's beaten to death with it.

Alternatively, the tablets holding the ten commandments (the second set). Blunt force trauma plus some potential radiation poisoning.

 

[Friend of Dorothy Parker]

I'm a little confused on the appended "He will probably walk." He is still pleading guilty to a Felony. This is still a Guilty verdict, but it's just a self inflicted one to bribe the accused into taking a lesser sentence. At best, his life is still irreparably shifted henceforth. His ability to legally own a firearm is null and void- something I disagree with, personally, but is still the case. He will always have this on his criminal record, assuming it isn't somehow expunged for non-violence reasons after a few years. He will still have a criminal record, even if it is expunged, in which case it will be blank to most employers, and only visible to law enforcement. He won't ever get to be a lawyer again (not that he was one, really) bar some freak Better Call Saul shit. His life will have lasting consequences for willingly throwing himself into the flames of Moloch, even if he doesn't see iron bars for coking up his own infant daughter and leaving loaded guns strewn about the snowfall,

Dude, have you read any of this thread or his other one? You're wrong on about all counts. Assuming the Court accepts the agreement and he meets the requirements set by the Court in connection with the stay of adjudication referenced on p. 3 of the Petition to Enter a Plea of Guilty:

• Not a guilty verdict (plea =/= conviction).
• Not a bribe (dumb).
• Not prohibited from owning firearms forever.
• Not automatically disbarred (not a matter for a criminal court), and unlikely to lead to a disbarment specifically due to the outcome.
• Expungement is available.

 

[Not Really Here]

I hope the judge throws the book at Nick.

Criminal justice reform says he's not allowed to.

 

[Gobermental Supervisor]

Criminal justice reform says he's not allowed to.

The judge can reject the plea, find Nick guilty, then Nick can demand a trial instead where the full video of his Coke stream, including Judge Pussy Liquor comments, can be played for a jury.

 

[Not Really Here]

The judge can reject the plea, find Nick guilty, then Nick can demand a trial instead where the full video of his Coke stream, including Judge Pussy Liquor comments, can be played for a jury.

"Throwing the book" generally refers to punishment, and Nick is entitled to an attempt at deferred contract.
A trial doesn't matter, the outcome would be the same.

 

[Thomas Talus]

I hope the book that gets thrown at him is not something silly like a Bible on paper, but instead something like the Hammurabic Code, in its original form on a basalt stele, wielded by a giant, and he's beaten to death with it.

Or at least the Codex Gigas.

 

[JackassTracker]

It's not just Cowtoons!

 

[Napoleon III]

I hope the book that gets thrown at him is not something silly like a Bible on paper, but instead something like the Hammurabic Code, in its original form on a basalt stele, wielded by a giant, and he's beaten to death with it.

One reason for optimism is that this is such a good result for Nick he won't feel any contrition or even any fear. He'll feel like he is invincible and untouchable. Then he will commit some act or fail to hide some misdeed and completely destroy himself.

Posters reacted similarly when Ralph escaped the revenge porn charge, but we forget what fate has in store for all lolcows wherever. If one rises in triumph it is only so they can fall further.

Nick Rekieta will do something stupid again. Likely many things.

 

[AnOminous]

"Throwing the book" generally refers to punishment, and Nick is entitled to an attempt at deferred contract.
A trial doesn't matter, the outcome would be the same.

It's presumptive but not mandatory. The judge can deviate from the guidelines, but has to explain it in writing and that is subject to less deferential review than a guidelines sentence, which is generally presumed to be valid on appeal. It also has to be based on facts actually in the record, under the Booker/Apprendi line of cases. This can be either through being proven beyond a reasonable doubt in a trial (either by the judge in findings of fact or by a jury usually subject to a questionnaire on the relevant findings), or by admission from the defendant.

I didn't see anything in the (defendant) questionnaire or in the allocution that would justify a deviation from a guidelines sentence.

People are understandably disappointed in the results, but I'm not really seeing how Judge SJW could deviate from a guidelines sentence, under which Nick is, indeed, entitled to what the guidelines say, and where a deferral (or possibly at worst a suspended sentence but I am a bit cloudy on that and possibly someone here knows better) is the guidelines sentence.

 

[Not Really Here]

People are understandably disappointed in the results,

They should wait, he's going to have about 4 years to fuck everything up.

 

[Dumpster dived waifu]

I didn't see anything in the (defendant) questionnaire or in the allocution that would justify a deviation from a guidelines sentence.

And then the judge files that Nick is getting a death sentence because Nick could not shut the fuck up or avoid being a colossal slimy faggot. This would hold up in supreme court too.

 

[Friend of Dorothy Parker]

It's presumptive but not mandatory. The judge can deviate from the guidelines, but has to explain it in writing and that is subject to less deferential review than a guidelines sentence, which is generally presumed to be valid on appeal. It also has to be based on facts actually in the record, under the Booker/Apprendi line of cases. This can be either through being proven beyond a reasonable doubt in a trial (either by the judge in findings of fact or by a jury usually subject to a questionnaire on the relevant findings), or by admission from the defendant.

I didn't see anything in the (defendant) questionnaire or in the allocution that would justify a deviation from a guidelines sentence.

People are understandably disappointed in the results, but I'm not really seeing how Judge SJW could deviate from a guidelines sentence, under which Nick is, indeed, entitled to what the guidelines say, and where a deferral (or possibly at worst a suspended sentence but I am a bit cloudy on that and possibly someone here knows better) is the guidelines sentence.

I'm under the weather and my mind is mush so I may be missing what you're saying, but:

Sentencing Guidelines Comment 2.D.106. Stays of adjudication aren't bound by guidelines timelines. If you blow it, revocation of adjudication can be cited as reason for a departure even if presumption is a stayed sentence unless there's another reason.

He's not getting a deferral bc of the guidelines, but bc of a separate statute.

Judges can also (in a non-stay of adjudication scenario) decide to stay execution of a sentence or stay imposition of it, meaning no incarceration. If imposition and you do well, you can also drop to a misdemeanor. If execution, you don't. 1.B.19.

 

[Osmosis Geiger]

This is the important part, I think:

View attachment 6899715

I have been told by my attorney and understand:
a. That my attorney discussed this case with one of the prosecuting attorneys and that my attorney and the prosecuting attorney agreed that if I entered a plea of guilty, the prosecutor will do the following: (Give substance of the agreement)

• Plead guilty to amended charge of drug possession in the third degree
• Statutory stay of adjudication pursuant to Minn. Stat. §152.18
• Remaining terms of the sentence at Court’s discretion
• State drops all other charges.
• State dismisses 34-CR-24-342 against Kayla Rekieta and case against April Imholte

This is an average deal to get the case closed and out of the docket. Nothing special here. Sentencing is heavily influenced by an "Offender Matrix" which weighs various factors such as gang affiliation, previous convictions, harm to victims, frequency of charges, etc... Since Nick has no serious criminal history this deal was always on the table and most likely the goal of the prosecution from the start. They dropped the gun charges because they can use the drug charges to force Nick into treatment rather than prison. It's actually really uncommon for an offender to go to prison on the first, second, or even third offenses. You really have to work at being sent to prison these days. Unless the crime caused physical/sexual harm, or you steal from the government or bank's money, that will get you locked up in a heartbeat.

The only surprise to me is that a guarantee to drop charges against potential co-conspirators was included in writing. I have not seen that very often.

I suppose the one honorable action of Nick was to fall on the sword to spare the other two, and take accountability for the situation. He has to morally accept the guilty plea to keep the terms. You can't plead guilty in court, then proclaim your innocence afterwards. The court will revoke a plea over that and allow refiling of the original charges.

I'm not a lawyer, but my partner works within the criminal justice system and I have seen my fair share of real court proceedings. Drugs and alcohol will warp and cloud your mind. I hope this dries Nick out long enough for him to start thinking clear again and get his shit together for his family.

 

[Kosher Dill]

I hope this dries Nick out long enough

Nick's beyond drying out, he's already reached the "any port in a storm" phase of high-seeking. When he hopped to Galaxy Gas that was pretty much the last nail in the coffin. Now he'll hop to anything else - cough syrup, nutmeg, jenkem, autoerotic asphyxiation - rather than spend one unnecessary second sober.

 

[Catgirl Tyranid]

Nick's beyond drying out, he's already reached the "any port in a storm" phase of high-seeking. When he hopped to Galaxy Gas that was pretty much the last nail in the coffin. Now he'll hop to anything else - cough syrup, nutmeg, jenkem, autoerotic asphyxiation - rather than spend one unnecessary second sober.

I hear using Nitrous while sky diving is better than sex. I'd hate for Nick to be able to experience being that high.

It'd really show us incel prudes.

 

[Dixieland Buckaroo]

I hear using Nitrous while sky diving is better than sex. I'd hate for Nick to be able to experience being that high.

It'd really show us incel prudes.

Two words: autoerotic asphyxiation.

 

[Kosher Dill]

I hear using Nitrous while sky diving is better than sex.

Forget it, skydiving is only for cool LA people like Dick Masterson.

 

[Owlbear]

Forget it, skydiving is only for cool LA people like Dick Masterson.

Autoerotic asphyxiation is also only for cool LA people, too. It's also only cool kids who dress up as a cow and get fucked in the ass.

Incidentally, it's pretty cool and gangster to get drunk and high on stream while you're on parole. Only cool kids do that.

 

[Useful_Mistake]

Nick:

No doc attached. Nothing in the events gives me any idea what this is about. Maybe pre-sentencing investigation was finished, and the Judge decided something?