Criminal Justice Reform Summary
Share this article
ADVERTISEMENT
(comments below)
Comments
Comments
26 responses to “Criminal Justice Reform Summary”
-
What is the rationale for elimination of jury sentencing?
I think I would rather face a jury.
Also, the unmentioned elephant in the room is the Commonwealth’s Attorney. It would be nice to have ones seeking to do justice equally and not needing to posture to rise politically…-
Virginia juries generally hand out harsher sentences than do judges. If you choose a jury trial and the jury finds you guilty, you are in real trouble. Technically, juries only recommend a sentence. Judges can set a lower sentence than the jury recommended, but that does not happen very often.
There are several justifications for not having the jury involved in the determination of sentence. Primarily, judges have access to the voluntary sentencing guidelines, which help reduce sentencing disparity around the state. By law, juries cannot be told the recommendation under the guidelines. Judges also have more flexibility than juries. They can suspend part of a sentence; they can order sentences for multiple charges to run concurrently, rather than consecutively. Juries do not have that flexibility.
The proponents of the bill claim that prosecutors have the upper hand in negotiating plea deals because they can always threaten to request a jury trial. They call this the “jury penalty” for exercising one’s constitutional right.
Although this is a significant move for the Virginia criminal justice system, in a larger perspective, it is not a radical idea. Forty-four states and the federal government do not use jury sentencing; Virginia is one of only six states that do.
-
Thanks for the explanation. I think there is a breakdown in two areas here. First, the Commonwealth’s Attorney. I know the plea bargain overcharging thing is real. This happens on all levels. It is why the Feds bat nearly 100%. It is totally unfair, and I am no bleeding heart liberal.
Second, judicial discretion. I know Judges don’t like to override a jury, but aren’t they supposed to care about justice? When a travesty occurs, aren’t they supposed to be impartial reason? (But shouldn’t the CA have not overcharged?)
OK, three points – legal ethics. An oxymoron in my opinion as currently practiced. Zealous representation, which is a proper aspirational goal, morphs into anything goes – overcharging, discovery abuse, witnesses you know are lying, court whore “experts,” etc…
Physician heal thyself! -
Given the procedures used by 44 other states and the federal government, the Virginia switch to judge sentencing is reasonable. However, there should be public posting of the sentencing rules for specific crimes and each judge’s sentencing decisions. Simple equal protection requirements should dictate this. A convict should not receive substantially different sentencing for the same crime based on which judge he/she gets.
-
Agree. And that’s why we have State rules instead of each locality deciding.
-
As Reagan said “Trust but verify.” We need the sentencing given for each felony case posted by court and by judge.
-
-
Nor should a convict with 50 pounds of marijuana in Arlington County get community service while the same convict would get decades in jail in Goochland County.
Virginia law needs to start putting some serious guardrails around our Commonwealth Attorneys. If juries are too fickle to sentence the guilty then politicized virtue signaling Commonwealth’s Attorneys are too fickle to decide which laws to prosecute and which not to prosecute.
-
-
-
-
A good objective, non-partisan summary per your usual. Thank You!
You did explain in an earlier post the issue of jury sentencing. Can you go over it again?
-
… and prosecutorial misconduct?
-
In California, from 1997 to 2009, there were 707 instances where a judge found that a prosecutor committed misconduct. Only six of those—less than 1 percent—resulted in a public sanction by the state bar. And even that number significantly underrepresents the problem: Most instances of prosecutorial misconduct do not result in a judicial finding in the first place, because the misconduct either goes undiscovered or is not taken seriously by the courts.
In Massachusetts, as of April 2016, only two prosecutors had been publicly disciplined since 1980, despite at least 142 instances over that same period where a judge reversed a guilty verdict or dismissed charges based on a prosecutor’s misconduct. In contrast, over 1,400 non-prosecutors have been disciplined in Massachusetts over roughly the last 15 years. And in Louisiana, the first professional sanction against a prosecutor didn’t occur until 2005.
-
-
HB 5058– Attention criminals, be sure to smash out your brake lights before transporting drugs, dead bodies, or any other thing that you would not want used as evidence against you in a court proceeding.
-
Generally, I agree with you about this bill. The only part of it I like is the prohibition of using the aroma of marijuana as justification for searching a car. As I said in my post, I don’t think this bill will be that effective in stopping racial profiling or stopping folks for the offense of “driving while black”. If a cop wants to stop someone, he can always find a justification. He could say that the driver was weaving in and over the center line, therefore he was suspicious the person was DUI. He could say that the driver failed to come to a complete stop at a stop sign. People doing the things you mentioned do not want to bring attention to themselves; therefore, they better not smash out their brake lights.
-
Do you support prohibiting the aroma of alcohol emanating from the open window of a car as a pretext for a traffic stop?
-
Is that before or after the wreck?
-
-
-
-
I also want to thank these legislators for passing this law that basically means that there is no penalty for running with a loud exhaust.
Apparently, Democrats don’t care about noise pollution.
-
All for pulling loud exhaust, if they’ll pull the Bubbas with pickup trucks having bumpers (or no) 22 inches above the ground.
-
or the ones riding in the back waving flags and shoot paint balls?
-
The latest trend among the shallow end of the gene pool:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7v_DLi3hXxQ&t=5s&ab_channel=SquatTruck
-
It’s funny to me that they intentionally make their truck sound like it’s got a rusted out exhaust, and look like it’s got a blown air suspension.
-
Won’t be funny if you should be unfortunate enough to hit one in the rear end and find his license plate tattooed to your forehead.
-
Not real concerned about that. Everything I own has much better brakes than any of those junkheaps.
-
-
-
-
-
“The bills go even further to require sheriffs and police chiefs to request the records of applicants who have worked for other departments.”
People on this blog wonder why I favor small, constrained government. It’s 2020. The sheer incompetence of not having requested the employment (and other) records of employees who will be issued weapons and provided with arrest powers is staggering. What manner of dimbulb would hire somebody without requesting their records?
-
The bill doesn’t require them to READ the records after requesting them.
Perhaps some funding for “Hooked on Phonics” materials might be needed before that could be a possibility.
-
re: ” What manner of dimbulb would hire somebody without requesting their records?”
The kind that pay lower wages and can’t compete with higher payer jurisdictions and are desperate for personnel.
-
Uh, the same dimbulbs who would “hire” someone who sat behind a cardboard desk on TV shouting “You’re FIRED!”, and believe them?
-
-
“Another major enacted bill that needs highlighting is HB 5099 (and SB 5030) which expressly prohibits the use of no-knock search warrants. Furthermore, the bills require that search warrants be executed during the day, unless authorized for a later time by a judge, for good cause shown.”
I give the GA and the governor two thumbs up for this one.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.