Switch to ADA Accessible Website
Orlando Criminal Lawyer

Does The Conviction of Michelle Carter Open the Door to Prosecuting Anyone Who Openly Supports Euthanasia?


The trial of Michelle Carter garnered news headlines and even prompted the production of a documentary because the minor was convicted of involuntary manslaughter and sentenced to serve jail time after text messages revealed that she had encouraged her boyfriend Conrad Roy, who had long suffered from depression and had previously tried to commit suicide, to kill himself. The two had shared an intimate relationship concerning mutual mental health problems that they both shared.

Carter’s attorneys have now filed a certiorari petition to the U.S. Supreme Court, which has scheduled a conference in her case for next month.  They argue that not only had she not taken any actual actions that had caused Roy’s death, but that her statements were protected by the First Amendment and her conviction for mere “words” was completely unprecedented. In addition, her conviction conflicts with a number of decisions by other state supreme courts.

Is This Prosecution Based On Moral Opinion?

In addition to First Amendment concerns, there are a number of other concerns associated with the precedent set by convicting Carter; most significantly that her case arguably involves a certain amount of moral judgment concerning the rights and wrongs of suicide and assisted suicide. Specifically, many are now concerned that the decision, as it stands, could open the door for prosecutors to bring charges against family members who encourage terminally ill relatives to end their suffering by committing suicide. The decision has already been used to charge others with manslaughter in association with suicides.

Indeed, it is this potential Pandora’s box that could lead to widespread prosecution of those who, even as a matter of personal religious belief, strongly believe that certain individuals in pain have the right to take their own lives that is of significant concern in this case. There is no question that it opens the door for potential unwarranted prosecutions all based on the discretion of the prosecutor in a given context. Simply because a state has an interest in preventing suicide they cannot prohibit the expression of an idea and criminalize speech based on its message.

Does This Survive Strict Scrutiny?

In order for governments to place any restriction on speech, a compelling government interest must exist, where whatever restriction that has been put in place is narrowly drawn so as to serve that specific interest. In this case, the application of involuntary manslaughter is both unconstitutionally vague and not narrowly tailored; in fact, it could easily be applied to any speech that causes someone else to commit suicide.

Contact Our Florida Civil Rights & Criminal Defense Attorneys

If you are facing criminal charges as a result of exercising one of your basic civil rights, contact our Orlando criminal defense attorneys at the Baez Law Firm today to find out how we can aggressively fight for your rights.







  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn

Miami Office

1200 Brickell Avenue, Suite 1410
Miami, FL 33131
Office: 305-999-5100
Fax: 305-999-5111

Orlando Office

250 N Orange Ave, Suite 750
Orlando, FL 32801
Office: 407-705-2626
Fax: 407-705-2625

Email Us

Fields Marked * Are required

DISCLAIMER: Completing and submitting this form or otherwise merely contacting The Baez Law Firm or any individual at the firm will not establish an attorney/client relationship. Our firm cannot represent you until we determine that there would be no conflict of interest and that we are otherwise able to accept representation of your case. Please do not send any information or documents until a formal attorney/client relationship has been established through an interview with an attorney and you have been given authorization in the form of an engagement letter with The Baez Law Firm. Any information or documents sent via this form or otherwise prior to your receipt of an engagement letter will not be treated as confidences, secrets, or protected information of any nature. Submitting information regarding your potential case will not bar The Baez Law Firm from representing or continuing to represent a person or entity whose interest are adverse to your in condition with your case.

protected by reCAPTCHA Privacy - Terms
Please review the highlighted fields. They are required.
DISCLAIMER: This website contains information about The Baez Law Firm that includes testimonial statements from persons who are familiar with the firm's services. The testimonials shown are not necessarily representative of every person's experience with us. Testimonials from every client are not provided. As no two situations or persons are identical, the facts and circumstances of your situation may differ from those for which testimonials are shown. This website also includes information about some of the past results that we have obtained for our clients. Not all results are provided, and the results shown are not necessarily representative of all results obtained by us. No two situation are exactly alike; every person's situation is unique and the outcome for each person depends on the individual facts.

The information on this website is for general information purposes only. Nothing on this site should be taken as legal advice for any individual case or situation. This information is not intended to create, and receipt or viewing does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship.
MileMark Media - Practice Growth Solutions

© 2015 - 2024 Baez Law Firm. All rights reserved.
This law firm website and legal marketing are managed by MileMark Media.

Contact Form Tab Contact Form Tab