Abatement ab initio

Last updated

Abatement ab initio (Latin for "from the beginning") is a common law legal doctrine that states that the death of a defendant who is appealing a criminal conviction extinguishes all criminal proceedings initiated against that defendant from indictment through conviction. Abatement ab initio was the subject of two United States Supreme Court decisions, Durham v. United States (1971) and Dove v. United States (1976). The former extended the doctrine to cases where certiorari was pending and not yet granted, and the latter excluded discretionary appeals. [1]

Contents

Cases

Abatement ab initio was used in federal court to overturn the conviction of Enron CEO Kenneth Lay. [2] In the state of Massachusetts, it was used to overturn the convictions of John Salvi and Aaron Hernandez, both convicted of murder. In the latter case, however, the state appealed the decision; in March 2019 the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court reinstated Hernandez's conviction and ended the use of the doctrine in Massachusetts. [3] The ruling held that the defendant's death rendered the appeal moot; it also held that trial records should indicate that such convictions were "neither affirmed nor reversed". [4]

Retroactive effect

In instances where the doctrine is applied, a legal issue emerges concerning previous rulings or actions made. An example is the case of Aaron Hernandez's conviction for Odin Lloyd's murder. Due to the principle of abatement ab initio, his conviction was initially rendered void before the Massachusetts Supreme Court ruled to abolish abatement ab initio (see above). It was thus argued that, since he was cleared of every murder he was accused of, Hernandez's family was entitled to the money that the New England Patriots refused to pay after it voided his contract on account of Lloyd's murder. [5] [2] In 2016, when the court posthumously cleared Kenneth Lay's Enron-related fraud convictions, the compensation for defrauded victims was also lost. [1] A ruling involving asset forfeiture law in the United States held that if an offender satisfied a forfeiture judgment, the government is never required by the principle to return fines that were already paid. [6]

See also

Related Research Articles

In jurisprudence, double jeopardy is a procedural defence that prevents an accused person from being tried again on the same charges following an acquittal or conviction and in rare cases prosecutorial and/or judge misconduct in the same jurisdiction. Double jeopardy is a common concept in criminal law – in civil law, a similar concept is that of res judicata. The double jeopardy protection in criminal prosecutions bars only an identical prosecution for the same offence; however, a different offence may be charged on identical evidence at a second trial. Res judicata protection is stronger – it precludes any causes of action or claims that arise from a previously litigated subject matter.

A vacated judgment legally voids a previous legal judgment. A vacated judgment is usually the result of the judgment of an appellate court, which overturns, reverses, or sets aside the judgment of a lower court. An appellate court may also vacate its own decisions. Rules of procedure may allow vacatur either at the request of a party or sua sponte.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Jeffrey Skilling</span> American businessman and felon (born 1953)

Jeffrey Keith Skilling is an American businessman who in 2006 was convicted of federal felony charges relating the Enron scandal. Skilling, who was CEO of Enron during the company's collapse, was eventually sentenced to 24 years in prison, of which he served 12 after multiple appeals.

United States v. Ballard, 322 U.S. 78 (1944), was a United States Supreme Court case from the October 1943 term.

The trial of Kenneth Lay, former chairman and CEO of Enron, and Jeffrey Skilling, former CEO and COO, was presided over by federal district court Judge Sim Lake in the Southern District of Texas in 2006 in response to the Enron scandal.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2005 term per curiam opinions of the Supreme Court of the United States</span>

The Supreme Court of the United States handed down sixteen per curiam opinions during its 2005 term, which lasted from October 3, 2005, until October 1, 2006.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Kenneth Lay</span> Founder of Enron Corporation (1942–2006)

Kenneth Lee Lay was an American businessman who was the founder, chief executive officer and chairman of Enron. He was heavily involved in Enron's accounting scandal that unraveled in 2001 into the largest bankruptcy ever to that date. Lay was indicted by a grand jury and was found guilty of 10 counts of securities fraud at trial. Lay died in July 2006 while vacationing in his house near Aspen, Colorado, three months before his scheduled sentencing. A preliminary autopsy reported Lay died of a heart attack caused by coronary artery disease. His death resulted in a vacated judgment. Conspiracy theories regarding Lay's death surfaced, alleging that it was faked.

The Wichita Massacre, also known as the Wichita Horror, was a week-long violent crime spree perpetrated by brothers Reginald and Jonathan Carr, in the city of Wichita, Kansas, between December 8 and 15, 2000. Five people were killed, and two people, a man and a woman, were severely wounded. The brothers were arrested and convicted of multiple counts of murder, kidnapping, robbery, and rape. They were both sentenced to death in October 2002. Their vicious crimes created panic in the Wichita area resulting in an increase in the sales of guns, locks, and home security systems.

The Double Jeopardy Clause of the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution provides: "[N]or shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb..." The four essential protections included are prohibitions against, for the same offense:

Town of Mt. Pleasant v. Chimento was a South Carolina case that ruled that while poker was a game of skill, the Dominant Factor Test is not demonstrably a legal standard in South Carolina and thus poker is still subject to the laws related to gambling. The case was later appealed to a higher South Carolina district court where the Judge overturned the trial court's convictions, stating that Dominant Factor Test was the appropriate legal standard and therefore participating in a private home poker game is not illegal, nor is it gambling. The Judge further declared sections of the 207-year-old statute unconstitutionally vague and therefore void. In 2012, the South Carolina Supreme Court upheld the statute and reinstated the convictions of the defendants.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Aaron Hernandez</span> American football player and convicted murderer (1989–2017)

Aaron Josef Hernandez was an American professional football player who was a tight end in the National Football League (NFL). He played three seasons with the New England Patriots until his arrest and conviction for the murder of Odin Lloyd.

Beard v. Kindler, 558 U.S. 53 (2009), is a United States Supreme Court case that deals with the federal review of state laws, known as the adequate and independent state ground doctrine.

Skilling v. United States, 561 U.S. 358 (2010), is a United States Supreme Court case interpreting the honest services fraud statute, 18 U.S.C. § 1346. The case involves former Enron CEO Jeffrey Skilling and the honest services fraud statute, which prohibits "a scheme or artifice to deprive another of the intangible right of honest services". The Court found the statute vague, meaning it was written in a manner that almost anyone could be convicted of the statute by engaging in most legal activities. However, the Court refused to void the statute as unconstitutionally vague. The Court decided to limit the application of the statute only to defendants who hold a fiduciary duty and they participate in bribery and kickback schemes. The Court supported its decision not to rule the statute void for vagueness on its obligation to construe and not condemn Congress' laws. Ultimately, Skilling's sentence was reduced by 10 years as a result.

American Electric Power Company v. Connecticut, 564 U.S. 410 (2011), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court, in an 8–0 decision, held that corporations cannot be sued for greenhouse gas emissions (GHGs) under federal common law, primarily because the Clean Air Act (CAA) delegates the management of carbon dioxide and other GHG emissions to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Brought to court in July 2004 in the Southern District of New York, this was the first global warming case based on a public nuisance claim.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Kathryn Ruemmler</span> American lawyer and former White House Counsel

Kathryn H. Ruemmler is an attorney who formerly served as Principal Deputy White House Counsel and then White House Counsel to President Barack Obama. Previously a partner at Latham and Watkins co-chairing its white-collar defense group, Ruemmler joined Goldman Sachs in 2020 as a Partner and Global Head of Regulatory Affairs. In 2021, she was promoted to Chief Legal Officer and General Counsel.

<i>Franklin v. State</i> Florida Supreme Court case decriminalizing sodomy

Franklin v. State, 257 So. 2d 21, was a case in which the Florida Supreme Court struck down Florida's sodomy law as being "unconstitutional for vagueness and uncertainty in its language, violating constitutional due process to the defendants." The court retained the state's prohibition on sodomy by ruling that anal and oral sex could still be prosecuted under the lesser charge of "unnatural and lascivious" conduct, thus reducing the crime from a felony to a misdemeanor.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Murder of Odin Lloyd</span> 2013 murder in North Attleborough, Massachusetts

Odin Leonardo John Lloyd was a semi-professional American football player who was murdered by Aaron Hernandez, a former tight end for the New England Patriots of the National Football League, in North Attleborough, Massachusetts, on June 17, 2013. Lloyd's death made international headlines following Hernandez's association with the investigation as a suspect. Lloyd had been a linebacker for a New England Football League (NEFL) semi-professional football team, the Boston Bandits, since 2007.

Durham v. United States, 401 U.S. 481 (1971), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that the death of a defendant pending a petition for certiorari before the Supreme Court on direct review of the criminal conviction will cause the Court to vacate the conviction. In a per curiam opinion, the Court wrote that "[t]he unanimity of the lower federal courts" in vacating criminal convictions when the defendant dies during direct review was "impressive" and accordingly vacated the original conviction.

Ramos v. Louisiana, 590 U.S. 83 (2020), is a U.S. Supreme Court decision in which the Court ruled that the Sixth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution requires that guilty verdicts be unanimous in criminal trials. See 590 U.S. 83 at 90 (2020) "Wherever we might look to determine what the term “trial by an impartial jury” meant at the time of the Sixth Amendment's adoption—whether it's the common law, state practices in the founding era, or opinions and treatises written soon afterward—the answer is unmistakable. A jury must reach a unanimous verdict in order to convict." Only cases in Oregon and Louisiana were affected by the ruling because every other state already had this requirement. The decision incorporated the Sixth Amendment requirement for unanimous jury criminal convictions against the states, and thereby overturned the Court's previous decision from the 1972 cases Apodaca v. Oregon and Johnson v. Louisiana.

Corruptly obstructing, influencing, or impeding an official proceeding is a felony under U.S. federal law. It was enacted as part of the Sarbanes–Oxley Act of 2002 in reaction to the Enron scandal, and closed a legal loophole on who could be charged with evidence tampering by defining the new crime very broadly.

References

  1. 1 2 NCVLI. "Abatement AB Initio and a Crime Victim's Right to Restitution". Lewis & Clark Law School. Retrieved March 3, 2020.
  2. 1 2 Gershman, Jacob (2017-04-19). "What Aaron Hernandez and Kenneth Lay Have in Common". WSJ. Retrieved 2020-03-04.
  3. ↑ Gaffin, Adam (March 13, 2019). "Aaron Hernandez will officially and forever be ruled a murderer, court decides". Universal Hub.
  4. ↑ "Aaron Hernandez's Murder Conviction Reinstated By Mass. High Court". www.wbur.org. Retrieved 2019-03-13.
  5. ↑ Patterson, James; Abramovich, Alex (2018). All-American Murder: The Rise and Fall of Aaron Hernandez, the Superstar Whose Life Ended on Murderers' Row. Little, Brown. ISBN   978-0-316-41268-1.
  6. ↑ Cassella, Stefan D. (2007). Asset Forfeiture Law in the United States - Second Edition. Huntington, NY: Juris Publishing, Inc. p. 734. ISBN   9781929446995.


This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.