Friday January 14 7:23 PM ET
Justices To Review Davidians Appeal
By LAURIE ASSEO Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON (AP) - The Supreme Court agreed Friday to review an appeal in which five Branch Davidians challenged their sentences for using firearms during a gun battle that began the 1993 standoff at the cult's compound near Waco, Texas.
The court said it will hear the Davidians' argument that they could not be given longer sentences for using machine guns, rather than some other kind of firearms, because a jury never decided what type of weapons were used.
A decision is expected by July.
Four federal agents and six Davidians were killed during the Feb. 28, 1993, shootout that started when federal agents tried to arrest cult leader David Koresh. Fifty-one days later, Koresh and some 80 followers died during a fire after agents injected tear gas into the building. Nine Davidians who escaped were arrested.
After a trial, Jaime Castillo, Brad Eugene Branch, Renos Lenny Avraam and Kevin A. Whitecliff were sentenced to consecutive terms of 10 years in prison for manslaughter and 30 years for using machine guns during a violent crime. Graeme Leonard Craddock was sentenced to 10 years for using a grenade and a consecutive 10 years for using a machine gun.
The firearm law set a five-year sentence but allowed a 10-year term if the weapon was a semiautomatic firearm and a 30-year term for use of a machine gun or grenade.
The jury was not asked to decide what type of firearm was used. The judge made that determination during sentencing.
The five Davidians challenged the firearm sentences, saying the type of weapon should be considered an element of the offense that must be submitted to the jury.
The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled against them, saying the type of weapon need not be decided by the jury.
In the appeal acted on Friday, the Davidians' lawyers said the firearm law's sentence-enhancing provision was similar to one in the federal carjacking law allowing longer sentences in cases of serious injury. Last year, the Supreme Court decided the serious-injury issue was an element of the carjacking crime that must be submitted to the jury.
Justice Department lawyers acknowledged that federal appeals courts had differed on the firearm law. But they added the law has been revised to clarify that the type of weapon was a sentencing issue and need not be decided by the jury.
The case is Castillo vs. U.S., 99-658.
Guys, If anybody finds this in the "media", will you let US know. I looked at the Washington Times, and the N.Y. Post, and didn't see anything. Changing the law after sentencing seems to exceed Expost Facto even.
If ANY "controlling authority" looked at this raid with a rational mind, MOST if not all of the federal agents involved would be subject to this law. But, then, it HAS been said, "there IS NO controlling authority". ONCE, he was right. Peace and love, George.
When you disarm your subjects, however, you offend them by showing that either from cowardliness or lack of faith, you distrust them; and either conclusion will induce them to hate you. Niccolo Machiavelli "The Prince"