Judicial Sentencing Discretion Post-booker: Are Judges Getting a Distorted View Through the Lens of Social Networking Sites?
| Jurisdiction | United States,Federal |
| Publication year | 2010 |
| Citation | Vol. 27 No. 3 |
Georgia State University Law Review
3-1-2011
Judicial Sentencing Discretion Post-Booker: Are Judges Getting a Distorted View Through the Lens of Social Networking Sites?
Christina R. Weatherford
Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalarchive.gsu.edu/gsulr Part of the Law Commons
Recommended Citation
Weatherford, Christina R. (2010) "Judicial Sentencing Discretion Post-Booker: Are Judges Getting a Distorted View Through the Lens of Social Networking Sites?," Georgia State University Law Review: Vol. 27: Iss. 3, Article 5. Available at: http://digitalarchive.gsu.edu/gsulr/vol27/iss3/5
This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the College of Law Publications at Digital Archive @ GSU. It has been accepted for inclusion in Georgia State University Law Review by an authorized administrator of Digital Archive @ GSU. For more information, please contact digitalarchive@gsu.edu.
JUDICIAL SENTENCING DISCRETION POST-BOOKER: ARE JUDGES GETTING A DISTORTED VIEW THROUGH THE LENS OF SOCIAL NETWORKING SITES?
Christina R. Weatherford*
Introduction
Jessica Binkerd, a graduate of the University of California, Santa Barbara,1 probably never imagined that pictures taken from her MySpace website would one day help send her to jail. Regrettably, that is exactly what happened. On August 6, 2006, Binkerd was driving her co-worker, twenty-five-year-old Alex Baer, home from a party when she swerved into oncoming traffic and collided with another car. Unfortunately, Baer did not survive the accident. Binkerd's blood alcohol level was more than twice the legal limit.4 Binkerd was subsequently charged and convicted of vehicular manslaughter without gross negligence and driving under the influence of alcohol causing injury.5 In 2007, a Santa Barbara superior court judge disregarded the probation department's recommendation of less than a one year jail sentence,6 opting instead to impose a much harsher penalty of five years and four months in
7 8
state prison. Despite pleas for leniency from the victim's family,
* J.D. Candidate, 2011, Georgia State University College of Law. Thanks to Professor Caren Morrison and the Law Review editors for their valuable insight and suggestions.
1. Steve Chawkins, Grieving Mother Hopes Motion for Mercy Will Prevail, L.A. Times, Jan. 22, 2007, at B1, available at http://articles.latimes.com/2007/jan/22/local/me-mercy22 [hereinafter Chawkings, Grieving Mother Hopes Motion for Mercy Will Prevail].
2. Id.
3. Id.
4. People v. Binkerd, 155 Cal. App. 4th 1143, 1146, 1146 n.2 (Cal. Ct. App. 2007).
5. Id. at 1146. Binkerd was also charged with driving with a blood alcohol content of 0.20 percent or higher causing injury, but the charge was dismissed. Id. at 1146-47.
6. Id. at 1150.
7. Id. at 1147 (overruling sentence on unrelated grounds). Binkerd was ultimately sentenced to three years in jail after a California Court of Appeals judge overturned the original sentence and remanded the case for resentencing. Id. at 1150-51; Chris Meagher, Drunk Driver Sentenced to Three Years, Santa Barbara Indep., May 13, 2008, http://www.independent.com/news/2008/may/13/drunk-driver-sentenced-three-years/.
674 GEORGIA STATE UNIVERSITY LAW REVIEW [Vol. 27:3
Judge Lodge ultimately decided that pictures posted on MySpace of Binkerd wearing an "I heart Patr-n" t-shirt and drinking with friends after the fatal accident9 indicated a lack of remorse that warranted a tougher sentence.10
Binkerd is not alone. In the last few years, several similar cases have resulted in longer sentences partially due to information taken from social networking sites being presented at the sentencing hearing.11
In a world where Facebook and MySpace are among the top five
12
most popular websites and twenty-one million people are "tweeting"13 in the United States alone,14 one can see how the plethora of information available online and the ease with which it can be accessed will have a significant impact on the criminal justice system. Many courts already grapple with how to deal with the Internet. For example, the Michigan Supreme Court has gone so far
8. Steve Chawkins, Judge Snubs Victim's Kin's Plea for Mercy, L.A. Times, Jan. 27, 2007, at B1, available at http://articles.latimes.com/2007/jan/27/local/me-mercy27 [hereinafter Chawkins, Judge Snubs Victim's Kin's Pleas for Mercy].
9. Sonia Lucyga, Pictures Affect Sentencing in UCSB Student DUI Case, Daily Nexus (Santa Barbara, CA), Feb. 1, 2007, available at http://www.dailynexus.com/2007-02-01/pictures-affect-sentencing-in-ucsb-student-dui-case/.
10. Chawkins, Judge Snubs Victim's Kin's Plea for Mercy, supra note 8.
11. See, e.g., Melissa Evans, Internet Plays Key Role in Vehicular Manslaughter Sentence, Santa Barbara Newsroom, Apr. 14, 2007, available at http://www.santabarbaranewsroom.com/news/crime--justice/internet-plays-key-role-in-vehicular-manslaughter-sentence.html (showing pictures of defendant holding a glass of wine and drinking related comments defendant posted on MySpace used by District Attorney); Eric Tucker, Web Photos Work Against Defendants, Chi. Trib., July 20, 2008, at 4 (describing how a prosecutor presented pictures from Facebook of defendant dressed in an inmate costume at a Halloween party two weeks after a crash that seriously injured a woman).
12. Daniel E. Harmon, Five Months of "Faces": Notes on Social Networking's Advantages & Risks, 26 No. 24 Lawyer's PC 1 (2009) (noting Facebook ranked third and MySpace ranked fifth on Alexa: The Web Information Company's "Top Sites," which ranks the 100 most popular websites in the United States); see also Leah DaSilva, Note, The Next Generation of Sexual Conduct: Expanding The Protective Reach of Rape Shield Laws to Include Evidence Found on MySpace, 13 Suffolk J. Trial & App. Advoc. 211, 214 (2008) (noting that MySpace has consistently ranked in the top ten most heavily visited websites in the United States since 2007); Peter T. wakiyama & odia Kagan, Facebook Vanity URLs May Hurt More Than Just One's Pride, 21 Intell. Prop. & Tech. L.J. No. 9, 7 (2009) (noting that since its founding in early 2004, Facebook has gained more than 200 million registered users).
13. See James Cool & Thomas Young, Do Well By Doing Good, 45 Trial 32, 36 (Aug. 2009) ("Twitter is a 'microblogging' site that allows you to tell members of your network what you are doing or thinking with 140-character status updates called 'tweets.'").
14. Nielsenwire, Social Media Stats: Myspace Music Growing, Twitter's Big Move, July 17, 2009, http://blog.nielsen.com/nielsenwire/online_mobile/social-media-stats-myspace-music-growing-twitters-big-move/.
2011] JUDICIAL SENTENCING DISCRETION POST-BOOKER 675
as banning jurors from using all electronic communications during trial.15 Presumably, this move is in reaction to recent cases of jurors posting information about an ongoing trial online16 and going online
17
to research aspects of the trial.
Social networking sites have also affected criminal procedure. For example, scholars have begun to argue that rape shield laws should be expanded to include online behavior in the definition of sexual
18
conduct. Although courts have started to confront problems facing the criminal justice system in the age of the Internet, one area where these pitfalls have not been addressed is in sentencing.
Judicial sentencing discretion has evolved from a policy of almost unlimited discretion, to the application of mandatory guidelines with little judicial discretion allowed, and recently back to, in many ways, unlimited discretion.19 This Note addresses the evolution and current state of judicial sentencing discretion in the United States and discusses the potential impact the information now available through social networking sites may have on the sentencing system. Part I examines the history of the United States sentencing system. This discussion focuses on the historical backdrop of United States v. Booker, a 2005 Supreme Court decision holding the Federal
20
Sentencing Guidelines to be advisory, not mandatory. Part II discusses the rise of the Internet and social networking sites. Part III examines how the world of social networking sites affects sentencing determinations. Particular interest is given to the potential for judges
15. Mich. Ct. R. 2.511(H)(2)(c)-(d) (amended June 30, 2009, effective Sept. 1, 2009) (indicating that judges must instruct jurors that they may not "use a computer, cellular phone, or other electronic device with communication capabilities while in attendance at trial or during deliberation" or "to obtain or disclose information about the case when they are not in court").
16. See United States v. Fumo, No. 06-319, 2009 WL 1688482, at *57-67 (E.D. Pa. June 17, 2009) (making a motion for new trial based on juror's postings on Twitter and Facebook during trial); United States v. Fumo, 639 F. Supp. 2d 544, 547 (E.D. Pa. 2009) (noting a second motion for new trial based on jurors exposure to media reports regarding use of social networking sites during the trial).
17. See John Schwartz, As Jurors Turn to Google and Twitter, Mistrials Are Popping Up, N.Y. Times, Mar. 18, 2009, at A1, available at http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/18/us/18juries.html (mistrial declared in Federal case after nine jurors admitted to doing independent online research regarding a complicated prescription drug case).
18. See generally DaSilva, supra note 12.
19. See discussion infra Part I.
20. United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220, 245 (2005) (Breyer, J.).
676 GEORGIA STATE UNIVERSITY LAW REVIEW [Vol. 27:3
to obtain a distorted view of defendants from their online profiles and what impact this may have on sentencing determinations. Part IV proposes potential ways courts can prevent this distorted view from inappropriately impacting sentencing determinations, including imposing new limits on what evidence judges may use to make their sentencing determinations. However, this Note also...
To continue reading
Request your trial