ILNews

Lawmakers discuss sentencing

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

At the Oct. 19 meeting of the Indiana Criminal Code Evaluation Commission, lawmakers heard proposals that aim to reduce the number of inmates housed in the Indiana Department of Correction. Presented for review were plans to assign more offenders to community rehabilitative programs and to restructure felony classes.

Deborah Daniels, a partner with Krieg DeVault, presented recommendations from the commission’s work group. She said that Indiana’s current system of classifying felonies as A, B, C or D class may lead to sentences that are inappropriately harsh for a given offense. As an example, she said that dealing in less than three grams of cocaine or a narcotic is currently a Class B felony, but that anything more than three grams – whether that’s four grams or 20 grams – automatically makes the crime a Class A felony.

Daniels said the working group proposes felonies to be assessed in levels, numbered one through six, with a Level 1 felony being assessed only for meth lab explosions causing serious bodily injury to someone other than the manufacturer or causing property damage in excess of $10,000. Under the working group’s Felony Proportionality Proposal, dealing less than three grams of cocaine would be a Level 5 felony; between three and 10 grams would be a Level 4 felony; between 10 and 28 grams would be a Level 3 felony; and an amount higher than 28 grams would merit a Level 2 felony.

The commission discussed sentence enhancements, with Sen. Lindel Hume, D-Princeton, interjecting.

“It concerns me that we have this 1,000 feet from a school enhancement,” he said. He said he knows of instances where police who have arrested someone on a drug offense have offered that offender a reduced sentence if he or she can stage another deal. And Hume said that police sometimes try to ensure that a staged drug deal is within 1,000 feet of a school, resulting in an enhanced sentence, which Hume said is bordering on entrapment.

“If it’s at midnight and you’re within 1,000 feet of a school, there are no children that will be present,” Hume said. Daniels said that a better approach may be to rewrite that enhancement to specify that a child would have to be within 1,000 feet of the drug deal for the enhancement to apply.
 

foley-ralph-mug.jpgFoley

Rep. Ralph Foley, R-Martinsville, said, “Through the years, I’ve become less enamored with geography as a criminal element, unless it puts other people or children at risk.”

Daniels also offered revisions to marijuana charges, which would reclassify as misdemeanors several offenses that are currently felonies. Driver’s license suspension would no longer accompany marijuana charges, as she said the working group felt that added punishment “did more harm than good.”

Daniels said the working group would try to have sentencing terms drafted before the committee’s next meeting on Nov. 2.

Reducing recidivism

Foley discussed a potential addition to Indiana Criminal Code Section 11-13 that would create a Probation Improvement Fund at the county level to be administered by the DOC. Using appropriations from the General Assembly, along with donations, gifts and money transferred from other funds or accounts, Foley said the fund would enable county probation departments to develop and use progressive sanctions for dealing with probation violations. It would also be designed to help departments address the needs of offenders with substance abuse and mental health problems.

“There are D felons that need to go to prison, and we should make that determination on the local level,” Foley said. “If the D felon should not go to prison for a commitment of at least one year, then that needs to be handled in the community.”


head-randy-mug.jpg Head

Sen. Randy Head, R-Logansport, said that based on his past experience as deputy prosecutor he saw the merit in Foley’s proposal.

“You’re absolutely right that sometimes D felons need to go to the department of correction,” he said. “The beauty of this is it gives each county the flexibility it needs to deal with different situations.”

Head said that when an offender is picked up for a probation violation, by the time he’s “processed” he gets credit for time served and ends up feeling like he’s gotten away with the undesirable behavior. Immediate sanctions – like a few days in a jail for a drug offender who tests positive for a controlled substance – would be much more effective in deterring repeat offenses, Head said.

At its Oct. 4 meeting, Randy Koester, deputy commissioner of the DOC, explained that the DOC reduced parole and probation revocations for technical violations, increased the number of counties with community corrections programs and requested prosecuting attorneys and criminal court judges in each county to consider other sanctions besides prison for persons sentenced for nonviolent crimes.

Foley said an important step in preventing recidivism is recognizing that offenders who remain in their communities may be able to benefit from supports and services in a more immediate fashion. While the DOC has several rehabilitative programs for offenders, the time it takes for inmates to be processed, sent to DOC facilities and participate in the programs may be longer than the inmate’s incarceration, which in turn leads to people being unable to complete the program.

Tim Brown, director of legislative services for the DOC, said that the DOC’s outpatient substance abuse treatment is completed in three phases and that offenders must be able to complete Phase 1 (two to four weeks), Phase 2 (an average of three months) and part of Phase 3. Literacy programs take an average of six months to complete, and GED diploma programs take about six to nine months to complete.

“We need at the very minimum eight to nine months to effectively get an offender into any type of programming at the DOC,” Brown said.

Foley’s proposal also called for a Substance Abuse Treatment Fund and a County Offender Fund which would be used at the local level to defray the costs of housing an inmate, to support community corrections programs and to support problem-solving courts and work release programs.

“I have become convinced that we can do a better job of probation. Swift and certain sanctions are meaningful,” Foley said. He explained that the proposed changes are based on what has worked in other parts of the country.

Foley said it’s important to keep in mind that many of the people who are being picked up on probation violations are men with low-level drug offenses who have child support obligations and families that need their help. Keeping them connected to the community rather than in the DOC is better for society in general, he added.•
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Have been seeing this wonderful physician for a few years and was one of his patients who told him about what we were being told at CVS. Multiple ones. This was a witch hunt and they shold be ashamed of how patients were treated. Most of all, CVS should be ashamed for what they put this physician through. So thankful he fought back. His office is no "pill mill'. He does drug testing multiple times a year and sees patients a minimum of four times a year.

  2. Brian W, I fear I have not been sufficiently entertaining to bring you back. Here is a real laugh track that just might do it. When one is grabbed by the scruff of his worldview and made to choose between his Confession and his profession ... it is a not a hard choice, given the Confession affects eternity. But then comes the hardship in this world. Imagine how often I hear taunts like yours ... "what, you could not even pass character and fitness after they let you sit and pass their bar exam ... dude, there must really be something wrong with you!" Even one of the Bishop's foremost courtiers said that, when explaining why the RCC refused to stand with me. You want entertaining? How about watching your personal economy crash while you have a wife and five kids to clothe and feed. And you can't because you cannot work, because those demanding you cast off your Confession to be allowed into "their" profession have all the control. And you know that they are wrong, dead wrong, and that even the professional code itself allows your Faithful stand, to wit: "A lawyer may refuse to comply with an obligation imposed by law upon a good faith belief that no valid obligation exists. The provisions of Rule 1.2(d) concerning a good faith challenge to the validity, scope, meaning or application of the law apply to challenges of legal regulation of the practice of law." YET YOU ARE A NONPERSON before the BLE, and will not be heard on your rights or their duties to the law -- you are under tyranny, not law. And so they win in this world, you lose, and you lose even your belief in the rule of law, and demoralization joins poverty, and very troubling thoughts impeaching self worth rush in to fill the void where your career once lived. Thoughts you did not think possible. You find yourself a failure ... in your profession, in your support of your family, in the mirror. And there is little to keep hope alive, because tyranny rules so firmly and none, not the church, not the NGO's, none truly give a damn. Not even a new court, who pay such lip service to justice and ancient role models. You want entertainment? Well if you are on the side of the courtiers running the system that has crushed me, as I suspect you are, then Orwell must be a real riot: "There will be no curiosity, no enjoyment of the process of life. All competing pleasures will be destroyed. But always — do not forget this, Winston — always there will be the intoxication of power, constantly increasing and constantly growing subtler. Always, at every moment, there will be the thrill of victory, the sensation of trampling on an enemy who is helpless. If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face — forever." I never thought they would win, I always thought that at the end of the day the rule of law would prevail. Yes, the rule of man's law. Instead power prevailed, so many rules broken by the system to break me. It took years, but, finally, the end that Dr Bowman predicted is upon me, the end that she advised the BLE to take to break me. Ironically, that is the one thing in her far left of center report that the BLE (after stamping, in red ink, on Jan 22) is uninterested in, as that the BLE and ADA office that used the federal statute as a sword now refuses to even dialogue on her dire prediction as to my fate. "C'est la vie" Entertaining enough for you, status quo defender?

  3. Low energy. Next!

  4. Had William Pryor made such provocative statements as a candidate for the Indiana bar he could have been blackballed as I have documented elsewhere on this ezine. That would have solved this huuuge problem for the Left and abortion industry the good old boy (and even girl) Indiana way. Note that Diane Sykes could have made a huuge difference, but she chose to look away like most all jurists who should certainly recognize a blatantly unconstitutional system when filed on their docket. See footnotes 1 & 2 here: http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-7th-circuit/1592921.html Sykes and Kanne could have applied a well established exception to Rooker Feldman, but instead seemingly decided that was not available to conservative whistleblowers, it would seem. Just a loss and two nice footnotes to numb the pain. A few short years later Sykes ruled the very opposite on the RF question, just as she had ruled the very opposite on RF a few short years before. Indy and the abortion industry wanted me on the ground ... they got it. Thank God Alabama is not so corrupted! MAGA!!!

  5. OK, take notice. Those wondering just how corrupt the Indiana system is can see the picture in this post. Attorney Donald James did not criticize any judges, he merely, it would seem, caused some clients to file against him and then ignored his own defense. James thus disrespected the system via ignoring all and was also ordered to reimburse the commission $525.88 for the costs of prosecuting the first case against him. Yes, nearly $526 for all the costs, the state having proved it all. Ouch, right? Now consider whistleblower and constitutionalist and citizen journalist Paul Ogden who criticized a judge, defended himself in such a professional fashion as to have half the case against him thrown out by the ISC and was then handed a career ending $10,000 bill as "half the costs" of the state crucifying him. http://www.theindianalawyer.com/ogden-quitting-law-citing-high-disciplinary-fine/PARAMS/article/35323 THE TAKEAWAY MESSAGE for any who have ears to hear ... resist Star Chamber and pay with your career ... welcome to the Indiana system of (cough) justice.

ADVERTISEMENT