Rescuing Worshippers

[Joel Sogol]

In a message dated 8/7/98 4:57:16 PM Central Daylight Time, dsg at PRCHFE.ORG
writes:

<<
  While one may claim that the time served by this grandmother was an
excessive penalty for the severity of the crime (which may be a question of
fact related to the nature of the trespass and the behavior of the
trespassers), the issue being discussed here is not whether the punishment of
time served and probation is appropriate (adequate, excessive ¯ whatever) but
rather whether a judge should modify any punishment because of the claim that
it was religiously motivated.
  >>
Agreed...

So--if a native American Indian was convicted of possession/use of peyote, and
upon being placed on 2 years probation conditioned on no drug use, told the
judge, in all honesty and with great sincerity, that his religious convictions
were such that he could not comply with the condition, we should just
eliminate it????

Whether I agree with that or not, I believe the Supreme Court disagreed with
that idea from the beginning.

Probation is generally a benefit to the defendant, given as an alternative to
jail.  If you don't want the probation (or parole for that matter), do the
full sentence.

Joel L. Sogol
Attorney at Law
609 28th Ave.
Tuscaloosa, Alabama  35401
(205) 345-0966
jlsatty at wwisp.com