The Volokh Conspiracy - Woman Convicted of Murder, Sentenced by Jury to Probation and a $10,000 Fine:

The Brownsville Herald reports:

It took jurors two days to deliver their guilty verdict and another three days to sentence [Traci] Rhode to 10 years supervised release. Judge Ben Euresti tacked on a $10,000 fine to her punishment and she was released from the Carrizalez-Rucker Detention Center within a few hours.

"(They waited) for two days before they came out with their guilty verdict because they were not su," [Rhode's lawyer Ernesto] Gamez suspects .....

She has maintained her innocence throughout the trial, claiming Scott Rhode shot himself in their bedroom while she showered after a morning walk.

The prosecutors counter that Traci awoke at about 5 a.m. on Oct. 15, 2003, and shot her husband with a .45-caliber handgun while he slept.

She went jogging around their Briarwick Subdivision neighborhood then took a bath before calling police to report the shooting, they argued....

Prosecutors alleged that Traci killed so that she could collect her husband's life insurance policy and continue an affair with a co-worker.

She is the beneficiary of a $600,000 life and accidental death policy for Scott. It was not clear Thursday who would receive those benefits now that she's been convicted in his death.

"That's a civil issue that I'm not involved with," Gamez said. "The monies will probably go to the children, and rightfully so." ...

A new law passed by the Texas Legislature and effective since Sept. 1 prohibits murderers from receiving community supervised release. The law only applies to cases that take place after the effective date....

This is pretty puzzling to me; the jury convicted, which means they didn't buy the defense's "husband shot himself" theory. But if the wife deliberately killed him, what's the basis for the probation sentence for a deliberate murderer? Is there some factual twist that I'm not aware of (and that my quick searches haven't uncovered for me)? Is the suspicion that this is some odd compromise verdict, with the jury not being sure whether there was reasonable doubt, and deciding to convict but free instead of convicting and imprisoning or acquitting?

Note, incidentally, that Texas is one of several states (about five, I think) that provides for jury sentencing as at least an option in noncapital cases. In most states, sentencing in noncapital cases is done by the judge.

	[Eugene Volokh, December 19, 2007 at 1:16pm] Trackbacks Woman Convicted of Murder, Sentenced by Jury to Probation and a $10,000 Fine: The Brownsville Herald reports: It took jurors two days to deliver their guilty verdict and another three days to sentence [Traci] Rhode to 10 years supervised release. Judge Ben Euresti tacked on a $10,000 fine to her punishment and she was released from the Carrizalez-Rucker Detention Center within a few hours. "(They waited) for two days before they came out with their guilty verdict because they were not su," [Rhode's lawyer Ernesto] Gamez suspects ..... She has maintained her innocence throughout the trial, claiming Scott Rhode shot himself in their bedroom while she showered after a morning walk. The prosecutors counter that Traci awoke at about 5 a.m. on Oct. 15, 2003, and shot her husband with a .45-caliber handgun while he slept. She went jogging around their Briarwick Subdivision neighborhood then took a bath before calling police to report the shooting, they argued.... Prosecutors alleged that Traci killed so that she could collect her husband's life insurance policy and continue an affair with a co-worker. She is the beneficiary of a $600,000 life and accidental death policy for Scott. It was not clear Thursday who would receive those benefits now that she's been convicted in his death. "That's a civil issue that I'm not involved with," Gamez said. "The monies will probably go to the children, and rightfully so." ... A new law passed by the Texas Legislature and effective since Sept. 1 prohibits murderers from receiving community supervised release. The law only applies to cases that take place after the effective date.... This is pretty puzzling to me; the jury convicted, which means they didn't buy the defense's "husband shot himself" theory. But if the wife deliberately killed him, what's the basis for the probation sentence for a deliberate murderer? Is there some factual twist that I'm not aware of (and that my quick searches haven't uncovered for me)? Is the suspicion that this is some odd compromise verdict, with the jury not being sure whether there was reasonable doubt, and deciding to convict but free instead of convicting and imprisoning or acquitting? Note, incidentally, that Texas is one of several states (about five, I think) that provides for jury sentencing as at least an option in noncapital cases. In most states, sentencing in noncapital cases is done by the judge.