The question that should be asked in these cases is If there were an innocent person convicted would this be cruel and unusual. In the cases where concurrent sentences have been applied I would argue the people have been really guilty beyond any possibility of doubt and have a long criminal history before hand so likelyhood of wrongful conviction is low. It also gives an innocent person the opportunity for new evidence to come out to prove his innocence later on which would allow for some remediation.
Permenantly removing someone from society is not cruel or unusual provided they are secured and well treated. If Garland is to win this case it will be around the prison systems in ability to protect him. Not that he deserves it but the hypothetical innocent person in this situation does.
I agree with these types of cases going to the Supreme Court as it is good to have checks on our governments.
|