In 1983, a young man named Michael was brought before a Pennsylvania court on charges of armed robbery: he had stolen 50 dollars to a taxi driver using a toy gun. A few days later he was arrested and subsequently convicted. Although the trial judge sentenced Michael to 6 months in prison and required him to repay the $50, the prosecutor asked for the minimum 5-year sentence required by state law. The trial judge declared the mandatory sentencing law unconstitutional, and Michael served his sentence in prison and repaid the money. Four years later, the state Supreme Court ordered the trial judge to sentence Michael to 5 years in prison. The trial judge refused and resigned. The judge to whom the case was reassigned allowed Michael to remain free pending another appeal to the State Supreme Court. Michael realized the futility of his court case and quietly disappeared, and is still at large today. Recently, one of the most popular proposals in an attempt to crack down on crime has been the proposed "three strikes and you're..." formula. This law, already in force in Washington state and California, requires those convicted of three violent crimes are sentenced to life in prison without parole. This proposal has received widespread support from federal and state politicians, including President Bill Clinton, Senator Bob Dole and Governor Mario Cuomo most crimes are committed by 6% of "hard core" criminals and that crime can be reduced by taking these criminals off the streets. Unfortunately, the proposal does not take into account several important flaws in the law and its implementation. The first problem of the proposal is its principle of removing judicial discretion, severely hampering the judge's ability to tailor the punishment to the crime A man in Washington faces life in prison if convicted of his third crime: stealing $120 from a sandwich shop by wearing a hat. finger in his pocket and pretending to have a gun. His two previous convictions were for similar crimes. While it is certainly true that some incorrigible criminals deserve life in prison, it is patently unfair to create a sweeping standard that forces courts to sentence offenders to life in prison for relatively minor crimes. The three strikes law gives the judge no discretion in cases like that of the Washington man, or Michael.
tags