{"id":1498,"date":"2009-03-06T15:53:03","date_gmt":"2009-03-06T15:53:03","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/166.62.41.2\/~holaamericanews\/2009\/03\/06\/flores-figueroa-takes-case-to-supreme-court\/"},"modified":"2009-03-06T15:53:03","modified_gmt":"2009-03-06T15:53:03","slug":"flores-figueroa-takes-case-to-supreme-court","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/holaamericanews.com\/es\/flores-figueroa-takes-case-to-supreme-court\/","title":{"rendered":"Flores-Figueroa Takes Case to Supreme Court"},"content":{"rendered":"
Advertisements<\/div>\"\"<\/a><\/div>

The case previously reported in this paper of an East Moline resident who appealed his charge of identity theft on grounds of exploitation was heard by the National Supreme Court, according to reports from the Chicago Tribune and the Associated Press. Judges appeared sympathetic to Ignacio Carlos Flores-Figueroa, whose case has been bouncing amidst the circuit courts for some time.
<\/p>\n

Flores-Figueroa argues that the charge of aggravated identity theft should not apply in his case, placing emphasis on the word “knowingly” in the wording of the law, which is as follows: “knowingly transfers, possesses or uses … a means of identification of another person.” Flores-Figueroa bought the card in Chicago and was told that the number had been randomly generated. “I had no intention of stealing anyone’s identity,” he said. Aggravated identity theft carries a two year minimum prison sentence. <\/p>

Advertisements<\/div>\"\"<\/a><\/div>
\n

“Why should someone get a longer prison term if it just so happens that the number he picked out of the air belongs to someone else?” mused Chief Justice John Roberts. The case has significant implications because it is a common tactic of immigration officials to threaten detainees with the identity theft charge so that they will sign a mandatory deportation order. A decision on the case will be made in June of this year. <\/p>\n

Advertisements<\/div>\"\"<\/a><\/div>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

The case previously reported in this paper of an East Moline resident who appealed his charge of identity theft on grounds of exploitation was heard by the National Supreme Court, […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"om_disable_all_campaigns":false,"_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"_uf_show_specific_survey":0,"_uf_disable_surveys":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[42],"tags":[],"translation":{"provider":"WPGlobus","version":"3.0.2","language":"es","enabled_languages":["en","es"],"languages":{"en":{"title":true,"content":true,"excerpt":false},"es":{"title":false,"content":false,"excerpt":false}}},"aioseo_notices":[],"aioseo_head":"\n\t\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t