Igniting Your Thoughts
Readings
- Read Chapter 3 in Schmalleger and Smykla's Corrections in the 21st Century.
- Read the following short newspaper article concerning an early test case for California's "Three-Strikes" sentencing model:
Man Gets Third-Strike Term Of 25-to-Life for Pizza Theft, from News Briefs in Los Angeles Times
Man Gets Third-Strike Term Of 25-to-Life for Pizza Theft
Los Angeles Times
TORRANCE, Calif.
Jerry Dewayne Williams was sentenced to prison for 25 years to life Thursday under California's "three strikes" law for stealing a slice of pepperoni pizza.
The 27-year-old Williams sat silently as Torrance Superior Court Judge Donald F. Pitts levied the sentence, citing Williams's five prior felony convictions, his habit of finding trouble, and the 1994 "three strikes" law as reasons for the punishment. Before announcing the sentence, Pitts had denied a defense motion filed by Williams' attorney, Deputy Public Defender Arnold T. Lester, which argued that a 25 years to life sentence for stealing a piece of pizza constituted cruel and unusual punishment.
Williams, a 6-foot-4 warehouseman, was arrested near Craig's ice cream shop at the Redondo Beach Pier last July. He and a friend, prosecutors would contend, somewhat intoxicated and possibly playing a game of Truth or Dare, approached four youngsters dining on an extra large pepperoni pizza. Both of the men asked for a piece, and when they were told no, each took a slice anyway.
In January a jury found Williams guilty of petty theft. Typically a misdemeanor, that charge was bumped up to a felony because of his prior convictions for robbery, attempted robbery, unauthorized use of a motor vehicle and possession of a controlled substance.
Williams has become a poster-child of sorts for forces who say the "three-strikes" law is uneven, needlessly punitive and so costly the public will eventually have to reconsider it.
"No matter how many pizza thieves it sends to prison, this law is not going to make our streets safer," said Allan Parachini, spokesman for the American Civil Liberties Union.
Note: This article originally appeared in The Tech, issue 8 volume 115. It may be freely distributed electronically as long as it includes this notice but cannot be reprinted without the express written permission of The Tech. Write to archive@tech.mit.edu for additional details.
Reflection
|
Do you believe such sentences deter former offenders from committing more crimes (i.e. recidivating)? Do you think such sentences make communities safer?
|
Sentencing Philosophy
The philosophy underlying criminal sentencing is that people must be held accountable for their actions and the harm they cause. Western society has a long tradition of sentencing criminal offenders to some form of punishment. Some writers have suggested that society will always need to punish criminals because punishment is a natural response to those who break social taboos (Schmalleger & Smykla, 2007:73-4). However, an equally convincing argument can be made for the criminal sentence serving as a rehabilitative or reformative tool; one that is designed to not simply reprimand offenders for their wrongdoing, but rather to also help offenders understand their behavior and refrain from committing similar acts in the future. That being said, there are several goals associated with criminal sanctions in the United States.
Sentencing Goals
The goals of criminal sentencing today are (1) revenge, (2) retribution, (3) desert, (4) deterrence, (5) incapacitation, (6) rehabilitation or reformation, and (7) restoration. (Schmalleger & Smykla, 2007:74). It is important to understand that sentence goals are not mutually exclusive; that is, a sentence can have, at its core, more than one of the goals listed above. For example, a typical term of incarceration in a state prison in the U.S. by definition achieves the goal of incapacitation and, potentially, the first 4 goals listed above. But within prison walls exist programs to rehabilitate and reform offenders in preparation of their release from the institution. Further, new programs in restorative justice in some prisons serve as opportunities for reconciliation between offenders and victims. Thus, when considering the goals (presented in detail as Exhibit 3-1 in the textbook), it should be noted that few criminal sentences are imposed that try to serve only one goal.