Do felons who are pardoned get back their fine money?

[ratatoskK]

@Dallas_Jones

A pardon is a forgiveness for what you were convicted of, it is not that the conviction was overturned, just that you are forgiven and free from further penalty as a result of your conviction.

The conviction still stands.

Pardon vs Clemency | What is the Difference Between a Pardon and Clemency?

That link is interesting and clearly written. Unfortunately I still cannot find a clear explanation for what Trump did this week. This article lists the people involved and says some were “pardoned” and some had their sentences “commuted.” The only explanation given in the article is:

The Constitution gives presidents what the Supreme Court has ruled is the unlimited authority to grant pardons, which excuse or forgive a federal crime. A commutation, by contrast, makes a punishment milder without wiping out the underlying conviction.

[x-ray_vision]

@Dallas_Jones

A pardon is a forgiveness for what you were convicted of, it is not that the conviction was overturned

I’m finding conflicting information on websites that seem reputable. Here’s an example of a website claiming the opposite:

Over time, the power of the President to pardon has evolved quite a bit from the words in the Constitution. The President has the power to completely overturn a criminal conviction. This is a full pardon. The conviction is wiped away as if it never happened.

https://www.usconstitution.net/consttop_pard.html

I’m sure the above is wrong.

[bump]

According to this article:

Pardon vs. Commutation: What's the Difference?

TL;DR: The main difference is that a pardon is essentially forgiveness- all the baggage associated with being a convicted felon is erased- you can own guns, vote, etc… but it doesn’t imply innocence or expunge your record.* Commutation is basically changing the sentence without any forgiveness. For example, Blagojevich gets out of prison because his sentence was commuted, but he’s still a convicted felon with all the stuff that comes with it.

• see section 10 - “While a presidential pardon will restore various rights lost as a result of the pardoned offense and should lessen to some extent the stigma arising from a conviction, it will not erase or expunge the record of your conviction.”

[doreen]

Commutation involves the sentence only - a death sentence may be commuted to a life sentence or a ten year sentence to five.
Pardons remove penalties and disabilities associated with the conviction, but not the conviction itself. Depending on exactly when the pardon is issued, the person may not be sentenced, may be released before serving the full sentence , or may have finished serving the sentence before being pardoned. As for the disabilities , felony convictions may be a bar to obtaining certain licenses, to voting, to holding certain offices etc. A full and unconditional pardon will remove most or all of these disabilities.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[x-ray_vision]

Regarding getting money back, it seems you don’t get any, but you don’t have to pay what you still owed.

In addition to clearing his record, the pardon cancels out $103,300 in restitution that Kerik still owed the Internal Revenue Service as part of his sentence, according to a spokesman for the U.S. attorney’s office in Manhattan.

Trump grants clemency to Rod Blagojevich, ex-NYPD commissioner Bernie Kerik...

Once a convicted criminal pays a fine, the treasury can’t issue a refund—even if that person is later exonerated. For Libby to get back his 250 Gs, Congress would need to pass a law to make the funds available. Or it’s possible that President Bush could issue a customized presidential pardon that specifies a refund.

If Scooter Libby gets pardoned, will he get his $250,000 back?

[x-ray_vision]

@bump

According to this article:

Pardon vs. Commutation: What’s the Difference? – NBC Chicago

TL;DR: The main difference is that a pardon is essentially forgiveness- all the baggage associated with being a convicted felon is erased- you can own guns, vote, etc…

Not all the baggage (assuming the below info is correct).

Thus, although a full pardon restores civil rights such as the right to vote that may have been revoked as part of the original punishment, pardon recipients may, for example, still be subject to censure under professional rules of conduct or precluded from practicing their chosen profession as a result of the pardoned conduct.

Presidential Pardons: Overview and Selected Legal Issues

[Really_Not_All_That_Bright]

@Si_Amigo

Voting and firearm ownership are controlled by the states. I believe that pardon alone doesn’t erase the record, ithe record needs to be expunged in a state court.

Loss of voting and firearms rights for federal offenses are not controlled by the states, and the POTUS doesn’t have the power to pardon people for state offenses.

[DrCube]

So, maybe this is the wrong thread to ask, but I’m curious. Is there a specific exoneration process in any jurisdiction? Or is it just a matter of interested parties gathering enough evidence to convince a judge to reopen an old case? I’ve heard of people on death row for thirty years getting exonerated and finally freed by DNA evidence, but I’m not 100% sure of what exactly happened for that to occur. I’m afraid that it’s possible and indeed likely that many innocent people are in prison, exculpating evidence is available and known to officials who could do something, but they just refuse to do anything about it, either because it’s too much work or not politically expedient.

[ZonexandScout]

@DrCube

So, maybe this is the wrong thread to ask, but I’m curious. Is there a specific exoneration process in any jurisdiction? Or is it just a matter of interested parties gathering enough evidence to convince a judge to reopen an old case? I’ve heard of people on death row for thirty years getting exonerated and finally freed by DNA evidence, but I’m not 100% sure of what exactly happened for that to occur. I’m afraid that it’s possible and indeed likely that many innocent people are in prison, exculpating evidence is available and known to officials who could do something, but they just refuse to do anything about it, either because it’s too much work or not politically expedient.

NC has an Innocence Inquiry Commission that can do exactly that. This happens to be the 10th anniversary of the exoneration of the first person to be freed in this manner, Gregory F. Taylor. You can Google him to learn more about the case and the process. BTW, Taylor, unlike many other individuals freed from prison in similar situations, is doing just great.

[ratatoskK]

The Times referred me to the DOJ web site, which says:

In the federal system, commutation of sentence and pardon are different forms of executive clemency, which is a broad term that applies to the President’s constitutional power to exercise leniency toward persons who have committed federal crimes.

A commutation of sentence reduces a sentence, either totally or partially, that is then being served, but it does not change the fact of conviction, imply innocence, or remove civil disabilities that apply to the convicted person as a result of the criminal conviction. A commutation may include remission (release) of the financial obligations that are imposed as part of a sentence, such as payment of a fine or restitution. A remission applies only to the part of the financial obligation that has not already been paid. A commutation of sentence has no effect on a person’s immigration status and will not prevent removal or deportation from the United States. To be eligible to apply for commutation of sentence, a person must have reported to prison to begin serving his sentence and may not be challenging his conviction in the courts.

A pardon is an expression of the President’s forgiveness and ordinarily is granted in recognition of the applicant’s acceptance of responsibility for the crime and established good conduct for a significant period of time after conviction or completion of sentence. It does not signify innocence. It does, however, remove civil disabilities – e.g., restrictions on the right to vote, hold state or local office, or sit on a jury – imposed because of the conviction for which pardon is sought, and should lessen the stigma arising from the conviction. It may also be helpful in obtaining licenses, bonding, or employment. Under some – but not all – circumstances, a pardon will eliminate the legal basis for removal or deportation from the United States. Pursuant to the Rules Governing Petitions for Executive Clemency, which are available on this website, a person is not eligible to apply for a presidential pardon until a minimum of five years has elapsed since his release from any form of confinement imposed upon him as part of a sentence for his most recent criminal conviction, whether or not that is the conviction for which he is seeking the pardon.

It also says:

Is a presidential pardon the only way a person convicted of a federal felony offense may regain his right to bear arms?
Yes. At present, a presidential pardon is the only means by which a person convicted of a federal felony offense may obtain relief from federal firearms disabilities.

Also:

Does a presidential pardon expunge or erase the conviction for which the pardon was granted?
No. Expungement is a judicial remedy that is rarely granted by the court and cannot be granted within the Department of Justice or by the President.

[Really_Not_All_That_Bright]

@DrCube

So, maybe this is the wrong thread to ask, but I’m curious. Is there a specific exoneration process in any jurisdiction? Or is it just a matter of interested parties gathering enough evidence to convince a judge to reopen an old case? I’ve heard of people on death row for thirty years getting exonerated and finally freed by DNA evidence, but I’m not 100% sure of what exactly happened for that to occur. I’m afraid that it’s possible and indeed likely that many innocent people are in prison, exculpating evidence is available and known to officials who could do something, but they just refuse to do anything about it, either because it’s too much work or not politically expedient.

The procedure typically depends on the basis for the request. In Florida, the Rules of Criminal Procedure permit the court to allow postconviction DNA testing under certain circumstances:

RULE 3.853.MOTION FOR POSTCONVICTION DNA TESTING

(a)Purpose. This rule provides procedures for obtaining DNA (deoxyribonucleic acid) testing under sections 925.11 and 925.12, Florida Statutes.

(b)Contents of Motion.The motion for postconviction DNA testing must be under oath and must include the following:
(1)a statement of the facts relied upon in support of the motion, including a description of the physical evidence containing DNA to be tested and, if known, the present location or last known location of the evidence and how it originally was obtained;
(2)a statement that the evidence was not previously tested for DNA, or a statement that the results of previous DNA testing were inconclusive and that subsequent scientific developments in DNA testing techniques likely would produce a definitive result establishing that the movant is not the person who committed the crime;
(3)a statement that themovant is innocent and how the DNA testing requested by the motion will exonerate the movant of the crime for which the movant was sentenced, or a statement how the DNA testing will mitigate the sentence received by the movant for that crime;
(4)a statement that identification of the movant is a genuinely disputed issue in the case and why it is an issue or an explanation of how the DNA evidence would either exonerate the defendant or mitigate the sentence that the movant received;
(5)a statement of any other facts relevant to the motion; and
(6)a certificate that a copy of the motion has been served on the prosecuting authority.
. . .
(d)Time Limitations.The motion for postconviction DNA testing may be filed or considered at any time following the date that the judgment and sentence in the case becomes final.

There are separate procedures for other types of postconviction relief, which generally require a showing that there are new facts that could not have been ascertained at the time of trial, or that the law has changed to recognize a fundamental constitutional right which would have prevented the conviction.

Most jurisdictions have similar procedures, either by rule or statute.

[bump]

@x-ray_vision

Not all the baggage (assuming the below info is correct).

Presidential Pardons: Overview and Selected Legal Issues - EveryCRSReport.com

Sure, but that’s outside of the President’s power to pardon. By that I mean that he can pardon a lawyer for your crime, but the state Bar association doesn’t necessarily have to care that you were pardoned. I would be curious whether a Presidential pardon for a federal crime would mean that you would be reinstated to practice in the Federal districts to which you were previously admitted though?

And Really not all that bright, that stuff IS within the states’ purview, as they’re the ones that set the voting rules- after all, you’re voting in a state election for a Federal office, not in a Federal election. Same with guns- they’re mostly regulated (or not) at a state level.

https://www.txwp.uscourts.gov/supervision-civil-rights-restoration/index.html

[doreen]

@bump

And Really not all that bright, that stuff IS within the states’ purview, as they’re the ones that set the voting rules- after all, you’re voting in a state election for a Federal office, not in a Federal election. Same with guns- they’re mostly regulated (or not) at a state level.

Civil Rights Restoration – U.S. Probation Office

It’s right in the site you linked to

Right to own a firearm
The Gun Control Act of 1968 states a convicted felon cannot receive, transport, own or possess any type of firearm, ammunition, or explosive material. The Supreme Court held that federal felons remain subject to the federal firearms disability until their civil rights are restored through a federal procedure

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[x-ray_vision]

@bump

Sure, but that’s outside of the President’s power to pardon.

Apparently. It could have been the case that pardons made sure that baggage would be done away with.

And Really not all that bright, that stuff IS within the states’ purview, as they’re the ones that set the voting rules- after all, you’re voting in a state election for a Federal office, not in a Federal election. Same with guns- they’re mostly regulated (or not) at a state level.

Civil Rights Restoration – U.S. Probation Office

Rules and regulations aren’t the same as “rights.” Of course one has to obey state laws regarding voting and firearms, but Really Not All That Bright was making a claim regarding loss of rights not being controlled by states. It appears he’s wrong at least in regard to voting.

In Maine and Vermont, felons never lose their right to vote, even while they are incarcerated.
In 16 states and the District of Columbia, felons lose their voting rights only while incarcerated, and receive automatic restoration upon release.
In 21 states, felons lose their voting rights during incarceration, and for a period of time after, typically while on parole and/or probation. Voting rights are automatically restored after this time period. Former felons may also have to pay any outstanding fines, fees or restitution before their rights are restored as well.
In 11 states felons lose their voting rights indefinitely for some crimes, or require a governor’s pardon in order for voting rights to be restored, face an additional waiting period after completion of sentence (including parole and probation) or require additional action before voting rights can be restored. These states are listed in the fourth category on Table 1. Details on these states are found in Table 2 below.

Felon Voting Rights

The above doesn’t specify that those conditions apply to only state convictions.

[Senegoid]

Whoa! Am I reading this right, or am I hallucinating again?

In Post #30, ratatoskK quotes the DOJ Pardons FAQ, including this statement:

Pursuant to the Rules Governing Petitions for Executive Clemency, which are available on this website, a person is not eligible to apply for a presidential pardon until a minimum of five years has elapsed since his release from any form of confinement imposed upon him as part of a sentence for his most recent criminal conviction, whether or not that is the conviction for which he is seeking the pardon.

Does this really say that a convicted and incarcerated person cannot be pardoned until at least five years after he gets out of jail (whether he is in jail for the crime to be pardoned or for a different crime)???

So you can’t get pardoned until well after you’ve served your time?

That certainly doesn’t seem to be the way pardons actually work. How could you be pardoned from a life sentence?

What am I missing here?

(Okay – upon quickly skimming that FAQ for myself, the salient detail I noticed is that nothing the DOJ might have to say about it is binding upon the president one way or the other. Is that all?)

[bump]

@doreen

It’s right in the site you linked to
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Sure, but many (most?) states also have statutes that prohibit felons from doing a whole bunch of stuff, including guns, voting, etc… that make no distinction between whether you’re convicted in a state or Federal court.

[doreen]

@bump

Sure, but many (most?) states also have statutes that prohibit felons from doing a whole bunch of stuff, including guns, voting, etc… that make no distinction between whether you’re convicted in a state or Federal court.

Some ,maybe most do - but some of them are less restrictive than the Federal disabilities that come with a Federal conviction. For example, so far as I can tell, Texas has no license or permit requirement for long guns- people with state convictions can get their rights reinstated through a state process but those with Federal conviction must obtain a presidential pardon in order to own or possess a firearm . Texas could restore rights to those convicted under state law upon release from prison if they chose.

[ratatoskK]

@Senegoid

Whoa! Am I reading this right, or am I hallucinating again?

In Post #30, ratatoskK quotes the DOJ Pardons FAQ, including this statement: […]

Does this really say that a convicted and incarcerated person cannot be pardoned until at least five years after he gets out of jail (whether he is in jail for the crime to be pardoned or for a different crime)???

So you can’t get pardoned until well after you’ve served your time?

That entry in the FAQ refers to the ability for a felon to apply for a pardon, using the typical process where they get reviewed by the DOJ pardon attorney, etc. The president can pardon anyone without that person having to undergo the typical process. From DOJ FAQ:

Can the President make clemency decisions without receiving a recommendation from the Department of Justice?
The regulations contained in 28 CFR §§ 1.1 thru 1.11 are advisory only and for the internal guidance of Department of Justice personnel. They create no enforceable rights in persons applying for executive clemency, nor do they restrict the authority granted to the President under Article II, Section 2 of the Constitution.