Big Day for Nevada Justice in Taylor Case

Out in Nevada today, Michelle Taylor will get a chance to argue to the Nevada Supreme Court that her life sentence violates the ban on cruel and unusual punishments.  In case you've forgotten the details, here's the skinny:

Ms. Taylor, 34, was convicted under Nevada’s “life-for-lewdness” law in November 2009 for drunkenly forcing a 13-year-old boy to touch her breast and demanding (unsuccessfully) that the boy engage in sex. Neither the judge, nor one of the original legislative sponsors of the lewdness law, felt the punishment fit the crime. Still, the existence of the mandatory minimum law forced the court to sentence Taylor to life in prison with possibility for parole in 10 years.

FAMM's been following the case closely and filed an amicus brief in support of Ms. Taylor's position, and you can read our press release about it here.

Here are our previous blog posts on this case, to get the full history and see some of the outrage and disbelief it has fostered:

Nevada's Shame: The Case of Michelle Taylor, Part I

SentenceSpeak: Nevada's Shame: The Case of Michelle Taylor, Part II

Now John Stossel Weighs in on Michelle Taylor Sentence

An Honest Politician....Seriously

Michelle Taylor's Attorneys Take Case to NV Supreme Court

SentenceSpeak: One Year Anniversary of Michelle Taylor Life ...

Regardless of what you think about her conduct, Michelle Taylor didn't get the individualized treatment that all people deserve when they are sentenced in an American court.  That's what FAMM is fighting for.  A one-size-fits-all punishment is, by definition, cruel and unusual punishment. As FAMM President Julie Stewart puts it:

In all cases, however, FAMM is committed to the bedrock principle of justice that individuals should be punished based on the severity of their crime as well as their personal culpability. In Ms. Taylor’s case, the life-for-lewdness law is written so broadly that she could have received a shorter sentence if she had murdered or kidnapped her victim. Hers was not the case lawmakers had in mind when they set the mandatory life penalty. But, once again, a mandatory minimum law took away the court’s discretion to impose a more reasonable sentence.

Check back at www.famm.org for updates on the Taylor case in the next few months.