What happens to a convicted muderer after being senteced by the Supreme Court?
463331
The Supreme Court does not have original jurisdiction in criminal cases (or in any case except under very specific circumstances outline by the Constitution).  A criminal Court convicts and them the case works it's way up the system until it reaches the Supreme Court.  If the SCT upholds the ruling, there is no recourse.
626655
The court was split in the following manner:\n\nIn a opinion by Kennedy, J., joined by Rehnquist, Ch. J., and O'Connor, Scalia, and Thomas, JJ., joined as to holdings 1 and 2b below by Stevens, J., and joined as to holdings 1a, 1b, and 2 below by Souter, Ginsburg, and Breyer, JJ., it was held that the Court of Appeals should remand the case to the District Court, where the (1) Court of Appeals had erred (a) by invoking the do novo standard of review, as the appellate court reviewing a District Court's decision to depart from the sentencing ranges in the Guidelines ought to apply an abuse-of-discretion standard, (b) in finding that the suspect's misconduct did not justify the District Court's downward departure five offense levels, and (c) in finding that the officers' susceptibility to prison abuse and their burdens of successive state and federal prosecutions could not be relied upon for downward departure; and (2) the District Court abused its discretion in considering, as factors justifying downward departure, the officers' (a) career loss, and (b) low risk of recidivism.\n\nStevens, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part, (1) agreed with the Supreme Court's opinion that (a) the Court of Appeals had applied the wrong standard of review and had erred in finding that the suspect's misconduct did not justify a downward departure and in finding that the officers' susceptibility to prison abuse and other burdens of successive state and federal prosecutions could not be relied upon for downward departure, and (b) the District Court had abused its discretion in considering low risk of recidivism; but (2) expressed the view that the District Court did not abuse its discretion when it relied on the unusual collateral employment consequences faced by the officers as a result of their convictions.\n\nSouter, J., joined by Ginsburg, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part, (1) agreed with the Supreme Court's opinion that (a) the Court of Appeals had applied the wrong standard of review and had erred in finding that the suspect's misconduct did not justify a downward departure, and (b) the District Court had abused its discretion in considering the officers' career loss and low risk of recidivism; but (2) expressed the view that the Court of Appeals' rejection of the downward departures based on susceptibility to abuse in prison and on successive prosecutions ought to be affirmed.\n\nBreyer, J., joined by Ginsburg, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part, (1) agreed with the Supreme Court's opinion that (a) the Court of Appeals had applied the wrong standard of review and had erred in finding that the suspect's misconduct did not justify a downward departure, and (b) the District Court had abused its discretion in considering the officers' career loss and low risk of recidivism; but (2) expressed the view that the record in the case did not support departures based upon either the simple fact of two prosecutions or the risk of mistreatment in prison.
188703
If someone is accused of a crime no they do not receive any type of restitution since they are only being accused. \nIf someone is incarcerated for any real length of time they  sometimes receive a little something  for their lost time. Its more like a payoff so the person wont try and sue the city for false imprisonment or being wrongly accused.
232895
Well if you didn't do it fight it to the supreme courts if you have too. If you did, just admit it and move on. I am not sure what the sentence is but jail time or a fine maybe. Steer clear of the x. I have one that is a jerk from you know where too....good luck to you.
1000170
That depends on whether or not the victim is under a subpoena.  In the United States system of justice, the victim is not required to show up to most criminal proceedings.  The victim does not actually prosecute the defendant.  The state (through the District Attorney's office) prosecutes the defendant.  If the victim is under a subpoena then it's possible that a judge will throw out the case because the accused have the Constitutional right to confront their accuser.  \n\nWhat generally happens is that the District Attorney will subpoena the victim to testify so the court will then compel the victim to testify.  The victim is not actually required to testify, however, unless there is a subpoena.  So in this case, it will all depend on the district attorney.
450792
Dismisal for furtherince of justice.  Meaning the case has been dismissed.
76485
You did not specify whether you were in Texas state court or in federal court.  I have posted a link to the website of the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas below and I know they have local rules on that website.\n\nI don't have knowledge of Texas law, but I am an attorney.  In some states, the trial court cannot resume jurisdiction until the appellate court issues something called a remittitur.  This is the official notice to the trial court that appellate opinion is final.  The higher court usually sends back a case and its record to the trial court for further proceedings in accordance with instructions or the decision of the higher court.\n\nI am assuming that the appeal of the third party claimant is not completely dead yet, otherwise the trial court would have acted by now.  Perhaps there is still time for them request a hearing before the full Circuit Court of Appeal or time file a petition for review the the Supreme Court.
137000
You may motion the judge to do that.  It will be up to the judge on the case.
838942
The judge will decide.\n\nCoach
271811
Well, you will probably be arrested and spend some time in jail. Since you committed forgery for one. And since you admitted in here, they will have a good case against you.
284178
I agree it is going to be tough. Since you feel they were inadequately represented I would check into the appeal process. It is possible to get a worse punishment after the appeal so weigh this out carefully. I will pray for you.
170758
Turn youself in. Recieve judgemnt from the judge. Then travel accordingly.
629189
A person can appeal as often as needed.  There really is no limit, however, once the Supreme Court makes a decision that appeal is over.  The person can try to appeal for a different reason though.
778247
You are lucky to have been given a third chance. Generally speaking the case would have been dismissed (in my state) after the second no show.
205913
you go back to jail. :P
895012
Most of the grounds are gone.\nHowever he can still appeal based on, for example, duress in obtaining the plea bargain.
250496
Terroristic threatening, assault, criminal harrassment...the judge or jury would determine how much of a sentence this person would get.