Casey Anthony appeal: probation a 'vindictive act by a glaringly biased judge'
Lawyers for Casey Anthony file an emergency petition appealing a judge's order that she must return to Orlando next week to begin serving a year of probation they say she already completed.
(Page 2 of 2)
In his ruling, Perry said the goal of probation was to provide for a period of supervision once released from incarceration. Since Anthony had not been subject to supervision outside jail, her earlier supervision while in jail did not count to satisfy her sentence, the judge ruled.Skip to next paragraph
Subscribe Today to the Monitor
The judge also blamed Anthony’s defense counsel for failing to notify Strickland that Anthony’s probation was being conducted while she was in jail.
In their appeal, the lawyers blasted back at Perry for what they said were “three pages of moralizing” in his ruling. They said state prosecutors received formal notice that Anthony’s probation was beginning in jail, but no notice went to defense counsel. In addition, they said Strickland “actually signed the original order which established probation while the defendant was awaiting trial.”
“That the court feels it necessary to chastise the defense (and the defense alone – by name) for not bringing this matter to the court’s attention is, at best, misplaced,” the appeal says.
Defense lawyers say both judges – Strickland and Perry – lacked legal jurisdiction to take up the matter since Anthony had already completed her full sentence. The actions of both judges violate the constitutional ban on double jeopardy, they said.
The lawyers charged that Strickland was motivated by personal bias against their client, citing one-sided comments the judge made in television interviews after the not guilty verdict was announced in the Anthony case.
At one point Judge Strickland told an Orlando television station: “I think the prosecution presented their case beautifully. I think if you follow the dots and connected them there wasn’t a reasonable doubt.”
Anthony’s lawyers referred to Strickland’s resentencing as “a vindictive act by a glaringly biased judge.”
Strickland’s resentencing of Anthony “was taken 562 days after the defendant’s probation began and without request from the State of Florida, with no notice to the defendant or her counsel, and without regard for the fact that defendant had successfully completed the terms of her probation,” the appeal says.
The lawyers also criticized Perry’s ruling upholding Strickland’s earlier actions.
“While the court expresses some of the philosophical reasoning behind probation, any suggestion that a period of probation cannot be served by one in jail … is an argument to be made to the legislature and not a justification to impose a second sentence in violation of Double Jeopardy,” the appeal says.
Anthony has remained in an undisclosed location since her release from jail in July. Her lawyers say she has received death threats.
IN PICTURES: Key players in the Casey Anthony murder trial