|
“Three Strikes” and Mandatory Minimum Laws: - Are Not The Best Way To Make CT Residents Safer
- Increase The Racial Disparity In Our Prisons
- Add To CT’s Overcrowding Problem
- Require A Significant Increase In Our Prison Costs
- Eliminate Judicial Discretion
- Are Not Supported By Connecticut Residents
A recent study that analyzed state prison and crime data revealed that there was no discernible pattern of states with higher rates of increase in incarceration experiencing more significant declines in crime. Between 1991 and 1998, those states that increased incarceration at rates that were less than the national average experienced a larger decline in crime rates than those states that increased incarceration at rates higher than the national average. Three Strikes Laws are likely to increase the racial disparity in CT’s prisons. Connecticut has the second worst disparity in the US. For every 100,000 people Connecticut incarcerated 211 whites; 2,532 blacks and 1,401 Hispanics . In California, blacks make up 37% of those sentenced under second strike laws and 44% of those sentenced under third strike laws. Similar effects have been produced in other states. In Washington State, although the law is used more sparingly, blacks are less than 4% of the population, but account for 37% of those sentenced under the “three strikes” law. Connecticut ’s prisons are already overcrowded; we have prisons where inmates are sleeping in hallways, gyms and visitation rooms. In one facility, 60 inmates are sleeping on the gymnasium floor and sharing one toilet and sink. These conditions are not only inhumane but also extremely dangerous. In addition, such conditions violate the constitutional prohibition of cruel and unusual punishment. The US Constitution requires that prisoners receive adequate food, clothing, shelter and medical care.” It also requires that prison officials “take reasonable measures to guarantee the safety of inmates.” Farmer v. Brennan, 511 U.S. 825, 832-33 (1994). Connecticut already spends over $670 million on Corrections and currently imprison over 19,000 persons. OFA indicates that these new laws at the very least would cost at least $5 million and if the impact even approaches California’s experience would require the building of new prison facilities that could cost over $500 million. Mandatory minimum sentences shift the authority of crafting appropriate sentences from judges to legislators. Judges are trained to consider the accumulated facts and circumstances of a criminal event and the characteristics of the defendant, and use their institutional wisdom to develop a suitable sentence. If the impact even approaches California’s experience it would require the building of new prison facilities that could cost over $500 million. Mandatory minimum sentences shift the authority of crafting appropriate sentences from judges to legislators. Judges are trained to consider the accumulated facts and circumstances of a criminal event and the characteristics of the defendant, and use their institutional wisdom to develop a suitable sentence. One recent case involving a federal mandatory minimum law illustrates this point. Weldon Angelos was 24 years old when he was convicted of 16 counts of violating federal firearms, drug and money laundering laws in Utah U.S. District Court in December 2003. The charges stemmed from Angelos's sale of three 8-ounce bags of marijuana to an undercover informant. Angelos had a gun during the transactions but never brandished or used the weapon. The three counts of possession of a firearm in a drug transaction are what required the imposition of a mandatory minimum sentence. Angelos faced up to 105 years in prison for his conviction for an offense that would have likely carried a sentence of probation or a few years in jail in state court, according to his attorneys.
U.S. District Judge Paul Cassell sentenced Angelos to the mandatory minimum of 55 years in federal prison, saying he had little choice but to impose a sentence that he called "unjust, cruel and irrational."
A November, 2007 Quinnipiac University Poll found when asked “Do you think a person convicted of a third violent felony should automatically be sentenced to life in prison, or should the sentence for a third violent felony be decided on a case by case basis”, 63% of the respondents said on a case by case basis compared to 35% who thought they should be sentenced to life in prison. US Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy said it well at the Annual Meeting of the American Bar Association in August, 2003, “Our resources are misspent, our punishments too severe, our sentences too long….I can accept neither the necessity nor the wisdom of federal mandatory minimum sentences. In too many cases, mandatory minimum sentences are unwise and unjust.” Unlocking America, The JFA Institute, Washington, DC, November 2007.
State By State Statistics, The Sentencing Project, Washington, DC, 2004.
Gainsborough, J. & Mauer, M. (2000). Diminishing Returns:
Crime and Incarceration in the 1990s . Washington
|
