Florida Looks to Privatize Some Prisons

A Senate budget proposal in Florida to replace some state prisons with new privately-run ones would lead to such overcrowding that inmates would be released early from prison.

The bill and attached amendments would require the department of Corrections to privatize an unidentified 1,350-bed prison, saving the state about $14 million, and turn over an additional 1,463 work-release beds to private interests at Orlando's Central Florida Reception Center, the South Florida Reception Center and other facilities in Columbia County and in Gainesville — saving a reported $8.2 million according Palm .

The Senate proposals would also mean not filling 2,249 vacant positions within the corrections department, which would force the closing of five state-run prisons. That in turn would mean having to release 2,519 prisoners early to comply with a federal court order preventing prison overcrowding.

Florida has 103,915 the third largest prison population in the country, behind only California and Texas. Florida was one of only 23 states to increase its prison population in 2009. In fact, Florida had the second largest increase in actual prisoners behind only Pennsylvania.

http://www.palmbeachpost.com/news/state/doc-secretary-prison-privatization-could-mean-releasing-inmates-480670.html?cxntcid=breaking_news

U.S. Supreme Court Hears Bloch Sentencing

The U.S. Supreme Court is scheduled to hear arguments today on a sentence out of the Federal Court for the Western District of Pennyslvania. According to the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, Judge Alan N. Bloch sentenced Percy Dillon for selling crack and powder cocaine in 1993.

"I don't say to you that these penalties are fair. I don't think they are fair," Judge Bloch said at the time. "I think they are entirely too high for the crime you have committed even though it is a serious crime."

In 2008,Dillon submitted a motion to get his sentence reduced under a newly enacted amendment designed to address the inequity between powder and crack cocaine guidelines.

Federal prosecutors will argue today before the Supreme Court that the proceedings to reduce crack penalties are not resentencings -- which fall under the findings of United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220 (2005) and require full hearings and defense counsel -- but only a modification.

In its brief, the Department of Justice wrote that the crack reductions are a "one-way ratchet to lower a defendant's otherwise-final sentence.

"Were this court to accept the proposition that district courts must be granted unlimited discretion to make sentence adjustments [in crack] proceedings, every retroactive guidelines amendment would carry the potential to reopen thousands of sentences."

Thus far, 23,000 defendants have sought reductions and 15,000 have been granted, resulting in an average decreased prison time of 25 months, the government said.

The U.S. Sentencing Commission argued in a brief in support of the government that changing the scope of sentence reductions would weigh against making similar guideline amendments retroactive in the future, in part because of the administrative burden that would come with it.


To Read more: http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/10087/1046268-84.stm#ixzz0jfFZjnqw

Handle juvenile lifers cautiously

Youngstown Vindicator
March 8, 2008

There is a renewed urgency to abolish life without parole (LWOP) for juveniles. In the last several weeks The New York Times, among other outlets, have called for a halt in sending juveniles to prison for life with no hope of parole. With mounting public pressure, policymakers would do well to proceed with caution.

Life without parole is not unlike the death penalty. Paul Wright, a former lifer, told The New York Times, “It’s a death sentence by incarceration. You’re trading a slow form of death for a faster one.” Only three years ago the United States Supreme Court banned the execution of juveniles. The decision in Roper v. Simmons resulted in the commutation of 72 juvenile death penalties; a significant majority of those juvenile offenders were re-sentenced to LWOP.

When the U.S. Supreme Court made the landmark decisions in Roper as well as Atkins v. Virginia, banning the execution of the mentally retarded, the justices cited “evolving standards of decency.” In the analysis of evolving standards of decency the court considers the action of state lawmakers to establish a national consensus. When Atkins was argued, 30 states had banned the execution of the mentally retarded. When Roper was argued, the same number of states had banned the execution of juveniles. Today only eight states have banned LWOP for juveniles. California is considering a bill that would eliminate LWOP and limit juvenile sentences to 25 years to life. Michigan, Illinois, Nebraska and Florida are considering similar legislation, which would make a significant number but not a national consensus.

At the time of the Atkins and Roper decisions death penalty abolitionist argued that LWOP was an appropriate alternative sentence to the death penalty. Today, the same arguments made to abolish the death penalty are being incorporated into the argument against LWOP for juveniles.

Juvenile’s brain

Those who are advocating for the end of juvenile LWOP often cite research suggesting that the juvenile brain is not yet fully developed. Supreme Court Justice Anthony M. Kennedy wrote in Roper that juveniles are cognitively immature and therefore less culpable. The brain development argument is being used with more frequency in courtrooms across the country.

The juvenile criminal court system is distinctly different from the adult criminal court system. The juvenile system is not punitive. The focus is on rehabilitation and is oriented toward the treatment of young offenders. However, it has been suggested that some young offenders are not amenable to treatment and are so dangerous that only a lifetime of incarceration would protect the public.

Justice Kennedy wrote in Roper, “It is difficult even for expert psychologists to differentiate between the juvenile offender whose crime reflects unfortunate yet transient immaturity, and the rare juvenile offender whose crime reflects irreparable corruption.” He goes on to write that it is impermissible to render an opinion about antisocial disorders in offenders under age 18. That is precisely the point; the diagnosis should be made after the age of 18 with the ability to keep that rare offender with “irreparable corruption” from harming another innocent person.

LWOP for juveniles convicted of first degree murder should be an option for judges, not a mandatory requirement. Sentences, especially for juveniles charged as adults, should be specifically tailored for each individual offender. This could be effectuated by giving judges the discretion that legislatures rushed to take away when getting “tough on crime.”

A juvenile sentenced to LWOP need not be doomed to a lifetime of hopelessness. Governors across the country have the ability to grant clemency. The pardon is a long accepted method of invoking fairness and justice.

States would do well to follow the lead of Colorado and establish juvenile clemency boards. The board would be charged with reviewing antisocial disorders in offenders now over the age of 18 who were sentenced to LWOP as juveniles. The legislature could establish parameters for consideration and guidelines for recommending clemency to the governor.

The question is not whether some violent juvenile offenders deserve to be locked away for life, but rather, do law abiding citizens deserve the protection that total incapacitation of dangerous offenders affords. Policymakers should not blindly rush to abolish an appropriate sentencing option, without first considering judicial discretion and executive authority.

X Matthew T. Mangino is the former district attorney of Lawrence County. He is a featured columnist for the Pennsylvania Law Weekly. He can be reached at matthewmangino@aol.com)

No Rush to Judgment

Matthew T. Mangino
Pennsylvania Law Weekly
March 31, 2008

Only days into the New Year a 12 year-old Florida boy was arrested for the murder of his 17 month-old cousin. He beat the toddler to death with a baseball bat. The boy told police the victim, a little girl, was making noise while he watched a cartoon on television.
If the state’s attorney had decided to charge the boy as an adult and he was convicted of first degree murder the court would have been required to impose a sentence of life in prison without the possibility of parole (LWOP). Although the boy was not charged with first degree murder, the prospect of a 12 year-old boy being sentenced to LWOP has rekindled the debate about sentencing juveniles as adults.
Life without parole is not unlike the death penalty. Paul Wright, a former lifer, told the New York Times, “It’s a death sentence by incarceration. You’re trading a slow form of death for a faster one.” Only three years ago the United States Supreme Court banned the execution of juveniles. The decision in Roper v. Simmons resulted in the commutation of 72 juvenile death penalties; a significant majority of those juveniles on death row were re-sentenced to LWOP.
In the last several months, articles in the New York Times, Chicago Tribune, and Detroit Free Press have written about halting the practice of sending juveniles to prison for life with no hope of parole. The USA Today recently published an op-ed calling for reform in sentencing juveniles. With mounting public pressure, policy makers would do well to proceed with caution.
The surge in juvenile LWOP sentences is a relatively new phenomenon. Prior to 1980, juveniles sentenced to LWOP were extremely rare. As violent crime rates soared in the 1980’s the rallying cry in state legislatures across the country was “adult crime, adult time.” Criminologists warned of the “superpredators;” those uber-violent juveniles without remorse who kill at will.
Forty-two states authorize sentencing juveniles to LWOP. Fourteen states allow a minor to be tried as an adult at any age. Pennsylvania is one of those states and also leads the nation in juveniles serving LWOP. Pennsylvania has at least 330 offenders who were sentenced to LWOP as juveniles. Across the country more than 2,250 offenders are serving life sentences in adult prison for crimes committed as minors.
When the U.S. Supreme Court made the landmark decisions in Roper as well as Atkins v. Virginia, banning the execution of the mentally retarded, the justices cited “evolving standards of decency.” In the analysis of evolving standards of decency the court considers the acts of state lawmakers to establish a national consensus. When Atkins was argued, 30 states had banned the execution of the mentally retarded. When Roper was argued, 30 states had banned the execution of juveniles. Today, only eight states have banned LWOP for juveniles. In 2006, Colorado became the most recent state to repeal juvenile LWOP.
How did Pennsylvania become the nationwide leader in locking away juveniles for life? Following former Governor Tom Ridge’s special legislative session on crime in 1995, juvenile law changed dramatically. Most significant was the change in charging juveniles as adults. Prior to 1995, district attorneys had to request “certification” from the court to charge a juvenile as an adult. Today, district attorneys must charge a juvenile as an adult for specific offenses and the juvenile can request “decertification” to juvenile court.
According to the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette the number of juveniles committing murder nationwide dropped by nearly 55 percent between 1990 and 2000, yet the percentage of juveniles receiving LWOP increased by 216-percent. Fifty-nine percent of juveniles serving life had no previous criminal record and one in four were convicted of felony murder. The offender may have been a getaway driver, lookout or an accomplice in a robbery gone bad. Felony murder holds all offenders involved to the same level of responsibility as the primary perpetrator.
California has also been prodigious in imposing life sentences on juvenile offenders. A juvenile charged and convicted of murder as an adult with any of a long list of special circumstances can be sentenced to LWOP. There are currently 227 juveniles serving LWOP in California. California is considering a bill that would eliminate LWOP and limit juvenile sentences to 25 years to life. California is not alone. Illinois, Florida, Nebraska and Michigan are also considering similar legislation, a significant number but not exactly a national consensus.
A case in Rhode Island points to the consequences of having inadequate options with regard to sentencing dangerous juvenile killers. In 1987, thirteen-year-old Craig Price murdered his neighbor. He stabbed her 58 times. Two years later, Craig stabbed and murdered Joan Heaton and her eight and ten-year-old daughters. At the time in Rhode Island children charged with a crime under 16-years-of-age could not be transferred to adult court.
Although Price nonchalantly confessed to the four murders he could not be held beyond the age of 21. Rhode Island had two juvenile lifers; both were over the age of 16 when they committed their offense. The law in Rhode Island has since been amended to address juveniles under the age of 16 who kill.
Many involved in Price’s prosecution argued that he was a dangerous serial killer and should be locked up for life. They fought to keep Price in prison where he remains today. The latest maneuver to keep Price in prison was a contempt of court sentence of 25 years for failure to submit to a court ordered psychiatric evaluation.
Lionel Tate was a twelve -year-old Florida boy who, in 1999, was convicted of first degree murder and sentenced to life in prison. Tate brutalized a six year-old girl, later arguing he accidentally caused her death while imitating wrestling moves. He spent five years in prison. In 2004, a Florida appellate court overturned his conviction on grounds that his competency had not been properly evaluated before his trial in 2001. He later pled guilty to second degree murder and was sentenced to 10 years probation. He was released to his mother four days before of his 17th birthday. According to The New York Times, Tate’s lawyer said the teenager “posed no risk of flight or danger.”
Within months Tate was cited for violating his probation. He was out after curfew and armed with a knife with an eight-inch blade. Fourteen months later, armed with a gun, Tate robbed a pizza delivery man. He received a 30 year sentence for his latest probation violation. He recently pled guilty to armed robbery. With all the notoriety and the outcry for Tate’s release, he could have ended up right where he started, and perhaps where he belongs, in prison for life.
Abolishing juvenile LWOP eliminates an appropriate sentencing option in some cases. In Pennsylvania, LWOP for juveniles convicted of first degree murder should be an option not a mandatory requirement.
Sentences, especially for juveniles sentenced as adults, should be specifically tailored for each individual offender. Judges in Pennsylvania should have discretion to sentence juveniles to something other than LWOP following a conviction of first degree murder. The idea in Pennsylvania that the juvenile lookout in a robbery gone badly should receive the same sentence as a juvenile serial killer doesn’t make good sense or good law.
A juvenile sentenced to LWOP need not be doomed to a lifetime of hopelessness. The governor has the ability to grant clemency. Pennsylvania should follow the lead of Colorado and establish a juvenile clemency board. The board would be charged with the unique process of reviewing offenders who were sentenced to LWOP as juveniles. The legislature could establish parameters for consideration and guidelines for recommending clemency to the governor.
A solid approach to reconsidering LWOP for juvenile killers would include due consideration of public safety. This is not just a question of whether some violent juvenile offenders deserve to be locked away for life, but rather, do law abiding citizens deserve the protection that total incapacitation of dangerous offenders affords? Policy makers should not abolish LWOP without first deliberating the merits of judicial discretion and executive authority as appropriate corrective measures.
(Matthew T. Mangino is the former district attorney of Lawrence County. He can be reached at matthewmangino@aol.com)

11-year-old Alleged Killer to be Tried as an Adult

Lawrence County Judge Dominick Motto has given the green light to prosecutors who are pursuing Jordan Brown as an adult for the murder of his father's girlfriend. Judge Motto found that Brown would not be amenable to treatment within the nine years he would be under the jurisdiction of the juvenile courts if tried as a juvenile.

If convicted of first-degree murder, Brown faces life in prison. According to the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, he would become the youngest person in the United States to serve a mandatory life sentence in prison without parole.

Brown was 11 years old when he allegedly shot his father's girlfriend. She was pregnant and asleep when she was shot in the head with a 20-gauge shotgun. In denying the defendant's request to transfer the case to juvenile court, Judge Motto wrote, "(The) defendant . . . killed his father's fiancee who was 8 1/2 moths pregnant, by administering a shotgun blast to the head. The evidence further shows that the defendant acted alone and without provocation from the victim. Further a degree of sophistication was shown in concealing evidence of the commission of the crime."

Judge Motto further wrote, "Experts from both the defendant and the Commonwealth have agreed that in order for rehabilitation to occur in the Juvenile Court System, Defendant must take responsibility for the offense and at this juncture, has failed to do so."

Forty-two states authorize sentencing juveniles to life without parole(LWOP). Fourteen states allow a minor to be tried as an adult at any age. Pennsylvania allows a child of any age to be tried as an adult for murder. Pennsylvania also leads the nation in juveniles serving LWOP. Pennsylvania has at least 330 offenders who were sentenced to LWOP as juveniles. Across the country more than 2,250 offenders are serving life sentences in adult prison for crimes committed as minors.

To read more: http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/10088/1046524-100.stm#ixzz0jbHgCVq0

More on life without parole: http://www.vindy.com/news/2008/mar/09/handle-juvenile-lifers-cautiously/

Georgia Supreme Court: Defense Counsel be Damned

Legal fees be damned says the Georgia Supreme Court in a recent death penalty decision. Jamie Weis has been in jail for more than three years awaiting trial for the murder a 73 year-old woman. The state has run out of money to pay for Weis' defense.

The Supreme Court was asked to dismiss the charges or order the state to forgo seeking the death penalty. The Court did neither and apparently Mr. Weis will stay in jail until an attorney proceeds on his behalf pro bono or the state gets some money.

According to the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, Wies had two court appointed attorneys. The state ran out of money so a judge appointed two full-time public defenders. Weis refused to cooperate with the public defenders and they withdrew. Money was later earmarked for private counsel, but never actually paid. Thus Weis sits in prison without counsel.

The majority opinion suggested that if Weis had a problem with the competency of counsel--one public defender was not death penalty certified--he could raise the issue on appeal, after he was convicted of murder. Probably not Weis' best option.

The dissenting opinion suggested, "The bottom line here is that the state should not be allowed to fully arm it prosecutors while it hamstrings the defense and blames defendant for any resultant delay." Unfortunately for Weis, that option got only three of seven votes on the Georgia Supreme Court.

To read more: http://www.ajc.com/news/georgia-politics-elections/state-high-court-rejects-403593.html

Has the Tide Turned in New York City: Murder is on the Rise

Murders are up sharply in New York City this year, with startling increases in gun crimes across the city, reports the New York Daily News. The citywide murder total increased 22.8 percent in the first 11 weeks of the year over the same period in 2009, from 79 homicides to 97 as of March 21, 2010. Shootings are up citywide, with 293 people injured by gunfire this year, a 16.3 percent increase from the total of 252 recorded by March 21 last year.

There were 466 murders in New York last year, the lowest year-end total since the police department started its tracking method in 1963.

Police officials have long credited the dramatic recent drop in crime to Operation Impact, which floods felony-prone areas with uniformed rookies. Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly has warned that proposed budget cuts could further imperil NYPD's effectiveness by reducing manpower.

To read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/ny_crime/2010/03/26/2010-03-26_bloody_start_to_10_spike_in_killings__shootings_has_folks_worried.html#ixzz0jJyuyZVX