Federal Judge Refuses to Vacate Sheriff Joe’s Conviction


The drama surrounding President Trump’s pardon of former Sheriff Joe Arpaio is far from resolved. The latest chapter comes as Arpaio’s legal teams calls for a dismissal of his conviction. The judge hearing the case has halted the sentencing proceeding in light of the pardon, but is not throwing out his conviction.

According to tribunist.com:

U.S. District Court Judge Susan Bolton was set to hear arguments in the sentencing phase of the trial this week. There’s no need, now. Instead, she has asked Arpaio and the U.S. Department of Justice to make their respective cases on why his conviction should or should not be overturned.

There is some confusion here. As The Arizona Republic writes, “There is case law that says a pardon implies an admission of guilt, and that will have to be argued in open court.”

Mark Goldman an attorney on Arpaio’s defense team, is taking it one step further, and hedging on a technicality. “We look forward to the hearing,” he said, “and hope that the court will make the appropriate ruling. The verdict should have been set aside by the court already and prior to the pardon for the reason that it was never delivered to Sheriff Arpaio in open court, but instead sent to his attorneys via email, thus violating his constitutional rights to a public trial and to participate in his trial.”

“This motion is made on the grounds that on August 25th, 2017, the president of the United States of America issued a full and unconditional pardon of defendant,” Arpaio’s team wrote in their motion. “The president’s pardon moots the case, and it warrants an automatic vacatur of all opinions, judgments, and verdicts related to the criminal charge.”


This is not the only bone Arpaio’s team has to pick. Many news outlets reported that Arpaio had been convicted of racial profiling. He has not. They are asking for publications to print retractions and corrections “in a manner comparable to that of the original publication.”

Arpaio, himself, has jumped into this attempt to clear his name. “It’s not just TV, it’s elected officials,” Arpaio told The Arizona Republic. “You’ve got one guy here … calling me a racist, calling the president a racist. You’ve got others saying I was charged of racial profiling. That’s untrue … and my lawyer is concerned with these derogatory, slanderous statements that are going around.”

“He was extremely distressed with the mischaracterization of the conviction,” Goldman said. “It was extremely hurtful and upsetting to him that it was being reported that he was convicted of racial profiling.”

“The sheriff is not a racist and has never been a racist, and any type of such accusation was upsetting and extremely distressing to him.”


Views: 142

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

a pardon implies an admission of guilt

Interesting indeed.

Yes, if not guilty a pardon isn't necessary. Arpaio's lawyer playing games because of an email delivery of a verdict won't go far, IMHO.

I'm thinking this Obama appointed Judge doesn't or hasn't read the constitution. Scholars of the constitution have debunked this judges thinking. A stir the pot moment for the judge resulting in a seek and find a day in the sun and press notice.

I'm so sick of the left!

From the little I have read and seen, it appears to be an attack instead of justice.  Why do people need many lawyers to protect themselves from agenda judges?  Blind justice...  how can there be blind justice if judges have an agenda?  Do republican judges follow the spirit of the term 'Blind Justice' more than democrat judges?   

Michael, Good question "Do republican judges follow the spirit of the term 'Blind Justice' more than democrat judges?"

I think its possible  that judges of both stripes could follow the law if they stick to strict constitutional principles. If a law is unconstitutional "truly" send the law back to congress to be made conditional.

I think honestly that any of us who sit by and allow such abuse of the state to harass just one individual that harassment makes us all victims.

Patricia, that's what I don't understand about the justice system.  Judges 'could' follow the law, but they SHOULD follow the law, and there shouldn't be any other consideration than strict constitutional principles.  Isn't that part of the oath they took to be a judge?  Blind justice is a great principle, but judges with an agenda causes that principle to be nothing more than words.  

aObama, Holder, encouraged their Administration to violate the law, that the end justifies the means, that DOJ would protect them. Using the Cloward-Piven strategy, they believed that NOBODY would be able to send the entire Government to jail!  That's why we need to have a Nuremberg Trial and charge them all with TREASON. The presiding judges would be Judge Jeanine Pirro, Judge Napolitano, and Trey Gowdy. We can fill GITMO, and the rest can be housed in the empty Gulf of Mexico offshore oil platforms not being used.

Lanyon, On first read of your reply I went "oh, Lanyon" reread and thought not a bad solution, not bad at all.


Latest Activity

Patricia Gillenwater replied to Patricia Gillenwater's discussion Common Sense Commentary From Arizona
"There exist tons of gun laws. I say no more needed but what is needed is addressing underlying…"
9 hours ago
Patricia Gillenwater commented on John Velisek's blog post The Progressive Socialist Agenda Must be Stopped Part 1
"justfolk I totally agree with all you said. KAG! Trump 2020! In the primary support a good…"
9 hours ago
Daniel John Sobieski's 2 blog posts were featured
John Velisek's blog post was featured

The Progressive Socialist Agenda Must Be Stopped Part 5

The progressive socialist tyrants that look to set the agenda for our country have not changed.…See More
R.C. "Bob" Lewis's 2 blog posts were featured
Suzie Nielsen's discussion was featured
justfolk commented on John Velisek's blog post The Progressive Socialist Agenda Must be Stopped Part 1
"Excellent post Suzie. Everything they are doing . The Joseph Goebbels style propaganda in media and…"
Michael Trivisani replied to Patricia Gillenwater's discussion Common Sense Commentary From Arizona
"100% gun solution....hmmmm.  What if everyone once reaching the age to vote are REQUIRED to…"

Volcano's and Earthquakes

Your Contribution is Greatly Appreciated

Donate safely and securely through PayPal

© 2019   Created by Suzie Nielsen.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Privacy Policy  |  Terms of Service