The U.S. Sentencing Commission has issued its long awaited 15 year summary report on federal sentencing. Law Prof Doug Berman at Sentencing Law and Policy has the details and the important highlights. Links to the actual reports are here.

Wisconsin has one of the strictest "truth in sentencing laws" in the nation. The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel is running a series on them, exposing them for what they are: brutally unfair and extravagently expensive. They also remove incentives and cause untold desperation in prisoners.

A state law that gives criminals virtually no chance for early release will cost Wisconsin taxpayers an estimated $1.8 billion for inmates admitted through 2025 if current trends continue, a Journal Sentinel analysis of prison and court records has found. Wisconsin implemented one of the nation's toughest truth-in-sentencing laws four years ago without ever assessing the cost. Today, thousands of inmates are on waiting lists for prison jobs, education and treatment programs. Wardens report more bad conduct and hopelessness among offenders.

....For crimes that occur on or after Dec. 31, 1999, the law requires offenders to serve every day of their sentences. It eliminates time off for good behavior and adds prison time for bad behavior. Judges must tack on a term of extended supervision equal to at least 25% of the prison time.

Most "truth in sentencing laws" require inmates to do 85% of their time. Not Wisconsin. It's 100%. Not only that, it applies to both violent offenders and non-violent property and drug offenders. It eliminates the role of the parole board. And there is no guideline system requiring judges to sentence in a particular range.

8th Circuit Senior Judge Donald Lay has an op-ed in the New York Times today, Rehab Justice. He argues for federal drug courts, like those in the state system. We need more Judges--and most importantly, Congress--to adapt Judge Lay's reasoning:

Unlike the states, the federal criminal justice system offers no alternatives for nonviolent offenders charged with drug-related crimes. In the federal system, it is almost a certainty that a convicted drug offender will be incarcerated rather than going through a community-based treatment program. It is little wonder then that the federal prison system will continue to be overburdened. Given the success of drug courts in the states, the federal government should study how to modify its sentencing to incorporate elements of the drug court model and to assess the effectiveness of community-based alternatives to imprisonment for nonviolent federal drug felons.

The U.S. Sentencing Commission held a hearing in Washington today at which it solicited proposals from Justice Department officials, law professors and judges about how to remedy the Sentencing Guidelines if, as expected, the Supreme Court invalidates at least a portion of them in the aftermath of its Blakely ruling.

Leave it to the Justice Department to come up with a scheme to lengthen, rather than shorten sentences. It's referred to as the "topless" option:

Under the change recommended by the Justice Department, and appearing to enjoy some support on the commission, minimum sentences will not change. However, judges will have flexibility to give longer sentences, up to the maximum defined by Congress. Judges could decide on a long prison sentence, without adding extra time for specific things like gun possession. The plan was devised by Indiana law professor Frank Bowman. Assistant AG Christopher Wray, in testimony before the Commission today, said:

...the change, called by some the "topless" plan, would "preserve the traditional roles of judges and juries in criminal cases" and would be easy to get through Congress.

A Kansas California judge yesterday told a 24 year old marijuana possessor that he could either go to jail or join the military.

Brian Barr was the victim of a home burglary. He shot and killed the intruder, and all agreed it was a justifiable act. Barr, while waiting for the cops to come, hid his marijuana stash. What upset the Judge was that Barr had a weapon and marijuana in his home.

After announcing that the Probation Department had recommended 240 days in jail, and praising the probation officer assigned to the case, Moody gave Barr the option of enlistment instead. "There's an awful lot of good in this young man," said Moody, citing Barr's record as a student, his civic involvement and his intervention in a Salinas bank robbery last year. Barr's father, William, is the county superintendent of education.

Even the DA was surprised because people in that county are usually sent to drug treatment, not prison. And the military suggestion was never discussed and had never occurred in the county before.

Apparently, this was a common option during the Vietnam war. The Judge said,

...when he was bused to Monterey as a draftee 30 years ago, many of the other young men on board had chosen the Army over jail.

Young Mr. Barr has one month to make up his mind.

Atrocity of the day in Utah today...a 25 year old minor drug dealer was sentenced to 55 years. U.S. District Court Judge Paul Cassell was clearly troubled by the decision, but not enough to take a stand against it:

The judge then urged Mr. Angelos's lawyer, Jerome H. Mooney, not only to appeal his decision but to ask President Bush for clemency once all appeals were exhausted. He also urged Congress to set aside the law that made the sentence mandatory.

Judge Cassell said that sentencing Mr. Angelos to prison until he is 70 years old was "unjust, cruel and even irrational," but that the law that forced him to do so had not proved to be unconstitutional and thus had to stand. The sentence was all the more ironic, he said, because only two hours earlier he had been legally able to impose a sentence of 22 years on a man convicted of aggravated second-degree murder for beating an elderly woman to death with a log. That crime, he argued, was far more serious.

We wrote about the case in September, after a hearing at which Cassell asked both sides:

"Is there a rational basis," he asked, "for giving Mr. Angelos more time than the hijacker, the murderer, the rapist?"

So what was Mr. Angelos' offense?

by TChris

A criminal justice system that desparately needs reform will be under the microscope Tuesday as experts converge in Detroit to discuss "responses to urban violence, including the roles of law enforcement and community involvement, education, the economy and the politics of justice reform." Panels will mix liberals and conservatives "to explore ways to fix a U.S. justice system that relies on imprisoning more and more people."

What were they thinking? Police in Miami used a stun gun on a six year old child. Their purpose: to keep the child from cutting himself on a piece of glass.

Understatement of the month:

"I really can't believe they did that," County Commissioner Joe Martinez told the newspaper. "This might be a good opportunity to review our policy."

Students for Sensible Drug Policy (SSDP) is hosting its 6th Annual National Conference at the University of Maryland at College Park on November 18-20. The conference includes a lobby day on Capitol Hill on Thursday and a DARE Generation Dance Party on Saturday night.

SSDP represents the young men and women whose names the government uses to justify a war that destroys lives, a war that attempts to attain the unattainable objective of an America free of drugs. We want answers from those that wage war in our name.

Details here.

by TChris

Some residents of Los Angeles sent a message to the Los Angeles Police Department by voting against a proposed sales tax increase that would have funded the hiring of additional officers. The message: if you want our money, treat us with respect.

[Edward] Lindsey said he would have voted for the measure if police "were doing what they should do instead of messing with everybody." A few weeks ago, the former GM plant worker said, he was pulled over by police who told him he looked like a suspected gang member. "How the hell can I look like a gangbanger?" Lindsey said. "I'm 74 years old. I'm retired!"

Assemblyman Mark Ridley-Thomas supported the measure, but understands that "a string of police abuse cases dating from before the 1991 Rodney King beating through this year's flashlight beating of Stanley Miller in Compton did not help the cause."

"An agenda that argues exclusively for more cops is not likely to get the response of something that calls for more prevention and more reform," he added. "I think the electorate would respond more favorably to a more holistic look at crime."

Bump and Update: We just learned that Sen. Richard Durbin (D-IL), soon to be the Democratic miniority whip, was instrumental in appropriating $950,000 for Project Ceasefire.

******************
Original Post: 11/7 10:30 am

Chicago's homicide rate is down. Many in law enforcement, as well as civic leaders and criminologists, attribute it to Project Ceasefire.

Violence, like alcoholism or drug abuse, has become a disease in Chicago, a disease that has taken on epidemic proportions. This group of more than a dozen former thugs and gang members prepared to become outreach workers in an aggressive campaign aimed at reining in street violence the same way public health groups have gone after AIDS and tuberculosis.

"To tell people they need to let the street life go, you have to have let it go yourself," Tio Hardiman, the program's community coordinator, told the trainees. "We're trying to change the way people think. What we're trying to say is it's abnormal to shoot someone. There's nothing normal about that."

Project CeaseFire is in nine of Chicago's police districts. The homicide rate in these districts dropped 28 percent this year. In districts without the project's presence, homicides are down 20 percent.

by TChris

Several comments in response to this recent post question the wisdom of hate crimes laws. An editorial in the Pittsburgh Tribune Review argues that basing punishment on motive results in a denial of equal justice:

Even more egregious is the consideration that some victims are more deserving than others based on their race, religion, national origin, color or sexual orientation. Therefore, all are not equal before the law.

Punishment is imposed to meet the needs of society, not of the victim. Victims have no entitlement to equal punishment.

A better argument: hate crimes laws come dangerously close to punishing thought, and freedom of thought is the foundation for all other freedoms.