Abstract
In November 2011, the victim, Kyle McManus, was murdered after a plan to rob him of marijuana failed. A jury convicted the defendant, Nathan Lugo, of murder in the second degree. The defendant, who was 17 years old at the time of the murder, was sentenced to the mandatory term of life imprisonment with eligibility for parole after fifteen years. On appeal, the defendant argues that the mandatory sentence is unconstitutional because it does not allow the judge to exercise his or her discretion to impose anything less than a life sentence with the possibility of parole. The defendant contends that the judge erred in denying his motion to continue his sentence so that he could present evidence related to his juvenile status.
Abstract
In November 2011, the victim, Kyle McManus, was murdered after a plan to rob him of marijuana failed. A jury convicted the defendant, Nathan Lugo, of murder in the second degree. The defendant, who was 17 years old at the time of the murder, was sentenced to the mandatory term of life imprisonment with eligibility for parole after fifteen years. On appeal, the defendant argues that the mandatory sentence is unconstitutional because it does not allow the judge to exercise his or her discretion to impose anything less than a life sentence with the possibility of parole. The defendant contends that the judge erred in denying his motion to continue his sentence so that he could present evidence related to his juvenile status.
In November 2011, a homicide occurred during a robbery attempt targeting marijuana possessed by the victim, Kyle McManus. Nathan Lugo, the defendant, who was 17 years old at the time of the crime, was subsequently found guilty of second-degree murder by a jury. The court imposed the statutory mandatory sentence of life imprisonment with the possibility of parole after fifteen years. Mr. Lugo is appealing this ruling, arguing that the mandatory sentencing structure is unconstitutional. His argument centers on the constraint placed upon the presiding judge, preventing the court from exercising discretion in potentially imposing a lesser sentence. Furthermore, Mr. Lugo asserts that the court erred in denying his motion for continuance, which would have afforded him the opportunity to present evidence pertaining to his juvenile status at the time of the offense.
Abstract
In November 2011, the victim, Kyle McManus, was murdered after a plan to rob him of marijuana failed. A jury convicted the defendant, Nathan Lugo, of murder in the second degree. The defendant, who was 17 years old at the time of the murder, was sentenced to the mandatory term of life imprisonment with eligibility for parole after fifteen years. On appeal, the defendant argues that the mandatory sentence is unconstitutional because it does not allow the judge to exercise his or her discretion to impose anything less than a life sentence with the possibility of parole. The defendant contends that the judge erred in denying his motion to continue his sentence so that he could present evidence related to his juvenile status.
In November 2011, a botched robbery resulted in the death of Kyle McManus. The perpetrator, Nathan Lugo, intended to steal marijuana from McManus. A jury subsequently found Lugo guilty of second-degree murder. As Lugo was 17 years old at the time of the crime, he received the mandatory sentence of life imprisonment, with the possibility of parole after fifteen years. Lugo is appealing this sentence, arguing that its mandatory nature is unconstitutional. He asserts that the sentencing judge should have discretionary power to impose a lesser sentence and that the judge erred by denying a motion to continue sentencing. This motion would have allowed Lugo to present evidence related to his status as a minor at the time of the offense.
Abstract
In November 2011, the victim, Kyle McManus, was murdered after a plan to rob him of marijuana failed. A jury convicted the defendant, Nathan Lugo, of murder in the second degree. The defendant, who was 17 years old at the time of the murder, was sentenced to the mandatory term of life imprisonment with eligibility for parole after fifteen years. On appeal, the defendant argues that the mandatory sentence is unconstitutional because it does not allow the judge to exercise his or her discretion to impose anything less than a life sentence with the possibility of parole. The defendant contends that the judge erred in denying his motion to continue his sentence so that he could present evidence related to his juvenile status.
In November 2011, Kyle McManus was killed during a robbery gone wrong. The plan was to steal marijuana from McManus, but things turned deadly. Nathan Lugo, who was 17 years old at the time, was found guilty of murder by a jury and given a life sentence with a chance of parole after fifteen years. This lengthy sentence is required by law for this type of crime.
Lugo is now appealing his sentence, arguing that it's unfair for a judge to have no choice but to give such a harsh punishment. He believes the judge should have the power to give a shorter sentence, especially considering he was a minor at the time of the crime. Lugo claims the judge made a mistake by not allowing him to delay his sentencing. He wanted more time to show the court how his young age should affect his punishment.
Abstract
In November 2011, the victim, Kyle McManus, was murdered after a plan to rob him of marijuana failed. A jury convicted the defendant, Nathan Lugo, of murder in the second degree. The defendant, who was 17 years old at the time of the murder, was sentenced to the mandatory term of life imprisonment with eligibility for parole after fifteen years. On appeal, the defendant argues that the mandatory sentence is unconstitutional because it does not allow the judge to exercise his or her discretion to impose anything less than a life sentence with the possibility of parole. The defendant contends that the judge erred in denying his motion to continue his sentence so that he could present evidence related to his juvenile status.
In November 2011, a man named Kyle McManus was killed during a robbery that went wrong. The plan was to steal marijuana from Mr. McManus, but sadly, he lost his life. A jury decided that Nathan Lugo, who was 17 years old at the time, was responsible for the murder. Because of this, Lugo was found guilty of murder and given a life sentence in prison, with the chance of parole only after fifteen years.
Lugo believes this punishment is unfair. He thinks the judge should have had the option to give him a shorter sentence. Lugo also feels it was wrong for the judge to not let him present evidence about being young at the time of the murder, which he believes might have led to a different sentence.