I read a case that I felt would interest all defendants as it illustrates important aspects of how the legal system works.
A defendant who had twice been convicted of narcotics related crimes was arrested for selling crack cocaine. Due to his previous convictions, he faced a life sentence under federal law. The defendant was a small time seller (they say it is easier to stop “using” drugs than “selling” them). At sentencing the judge felt sorry for the defendant and deemed his two previous convictions a single conviction so that the defendant could be sentenced to 20 years rather than a life sentence as the law demanded.
The government appealed. Not because it was disappointed by the fact that the defendant was going to do 20 years, but because it felt that the judge had acted improperly, which raised a legal issue. The Court of Appeals agreed with the government and said that the judge, while understandably sympathetic (the defendant was of borderline intelligence), applied the law illegally. The defendant’s prior convictions were in fact separate instances and so a life sentence was required by law. The case was remanded for the judge to impose the life sentence.
This may seem unfair, but fairness has nothing to do with the sentence. This was a matter of law, not justice. If defendants are aware of these sorts of issues they are better able to decide what course of action is best.