When Charged With a Crime ®

The conviction of former police officer Kimberly Potter for manslaughter in late December comes on the heels of the conviction of officer Derek Chauvin in connection with the death of George Floyd. Both cases occurred in Minnesota, but, as Managing Partner David Shapiro notes, they are very different. Derek Chauvin was convicted of committing second degree murder by pressing his knee into George Floyd’s back for almost 10 minutes while Floyd was face down on asphalt. The video of Kimberly Potter’s confrontation with Daunte Wright was quite different. She can be heard yelling “taser” over and over again prior to taking out her gun and shooting Wright. In the end, she claimed she mistook her gun for her taser, leading to the fatal shooting. Afterward, she is heard saying, “I’m going to jail.” Unlike Chauvin, Potter showed immediate and consistent remorse for the tragic loss of life she caused.

In this video, David reviews the basics of the two cases. He also comments on the sentence in the Chauvin case, as well as the range of options in the Potter case. Chauvin received a sentence of 22½ years for his conviction for murder. In the case of Potter, she was convicted of both first and second degree manslaughter – killing someone while committing a misdemeanor, in this case recklessly using a firearm (first degree); and a killing which was the result of culpable negligence (second degree). Potter theoretically faces 25 years when she is sentenced in February, although, as David points out, the sentencing guideline is about 7 years. He notes that we can expect the prosecution to attempt to raise aggravating factors, while the defense will argue mitigation and seek a lighter sentence.

There are times when cases that are seemingly identical, at least in the charges brought against the particular defendants, lead to different sentences for those defendants after they are convicted. These disparities often show up in news reports and on social media.

Partner Stefano L. Molea reviews the issue of sentencing disparities in this video. He notes, at the outset, that there are biases, prejudices, bigotry, and similar factors that can and do affect the relative sentences handed out by the court. In addition, the presence of different judges and different prosecutors, as well as various jurisdictions and their unique laws, can also have an impact on the outcome of a criminal case. Stefano also states that sometimes what appear to be gross sentencing disparities are actually due to major factual differences between the cases. He advises that when you examine the specifics of any two cases – putting the circumstances side by side – you will note that cases which seem on the surface to be identical, are often far from such.

If you or a loved one are facing criminal charges, contact our office today to learn how to start regaining control of your future.