Category: Sentencing

Supreme Court November Arguments

by · Nov 3, 2025 11:32 am

The U.S. Supreme Court’s November argument calendar begins today. It is Monday, Tuesday, and Wednesday this week and next except for Veterans’ Day, next Tuesday.

Here are the criminal and law-enforcement-related civil cases on the docket:

Today, Nov. 3: Rico v. United States.  Whether the fugitive-tolling doctrine applies in the context of supervised release.

Next Monday, Nov. 10: Landor v. La. Dept. Corrections:  Whether an individual may sue a government official in his individual capacity for damages for violations of the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act of 2000.

Next Wednesday, Nov. 12: Fernandez v. United States:  Whether a combination of “extraordinary and compelling reasons” that may warrant a discretionary sentence reduction under 18 U. S. C. §3582(c)(1)(a) can include reasons that may also be alleged as grounds for vacatur of a sentence under 28 U. S. C. §2255.

Next Wednesday, Nov. 12: Rutherford v. United States and Carter v. United States:  Nonretroactive changes in sentencing law as grounds for sentence reduction. Continue reading . . .

Modifying Federal Sentences

by · May 27, 2025 9:10 am

Federal law, 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c), provides a limited authority for a federal judge to modify a previously imposed term of imprisonment. One of the grounds, in subparagraph (1)(A), is that “extraordinary and compelling reasons warrant such a reduction.” Today the U.S. Supreme Court took up the case of Fernandez v. United States, No. 24-556, to decide if reasons that would support a motion to vacate a sentence constitute grounds for a 3582(c)(1)(A) modification. The motion-to-vacate statute, 28 U.S.C. § 2255, is Congress’s substitute for habeas corpus for federal prisoners.

Continue reading . . .

California Legislature Considering Early Parole for Murderers and Rapists

by · May 23, 2025 10:08 am

The California Legislature is considering moving up parole hearings and releases for murderers and rapists. The proponents of this change may be having some difficulty rounding up the votes, and they have employed a legislative trick to buy more time. People with sense need to use this time to tell their representatives to vote down this atrocity instead.

In California, sentences of X-to-life (as opposed to a set term of years) are generally reserved for the very worst criminals. Murderers make up the lion’s share of inmates with these “indeterminate sentences.” Most second-degree murders draw a sentence of 15-to-life, and first-degree murder without special circumstances draws 25-to-life. Some repeated or exceptionally heinous sex crimes also draw similar sentences. The Three Strikes Law — which was substantially narrowed in an initiative in 2012 — also provides an indeterminate sentence for the third conviction of felonies from lists designated “serious” or “violent,” but these lists are considerably narrower than their names imply. Assault with a deadly weapon is not on the “violent” list, for example.

Before 2016, all of the minimums above were real minimums. Credits for good behavior or program participation could shorten fixed-year sentences, but they did not move up the minimum eligible parole dates (MEPD) for the X-to-life sentences, with a few minor exceptions. Proposition 57 passed in that year. The state prison department, called the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR), subsequently claimed that Prop. 57 authorized it to move up MEPDs via credits, untroubled by the fact that the initiative does not contain a single word about MEPDs.

CJLF and three crime victims filed suit over this and other issues with CDCR’s credit regulations. The Sacramento Superior Court agreed with us regarding MEPDs and issued a writ of mandate to cease early parole hearings and early releases. CDCR appealed, and the writ was stayed pending appeal as to the early hearings but remains in effect as to early releases. Oral argument in CJLF v. CDCR, No. C100274, was heard in the Third District Court of Appeal last Tuesday, May 20.

Assembly Member Ash Kalra is wringing his hands over the murderers and rapists being deprived of their early releases. If he cares anything at all about the victims and their families, he hasn’t shown it. So he took an unrelated bill about prison visitation, amended out all its text, and substituted language that would authorize CDCR to move up MEPDs this way. Continue reading . . .

Yes, Murder Is a Violent Offense

by · Mar 21, 2025 12:02 pm

Last year, when the U.S. Supreme Court took up the case of Delligatti v. United States, I noted in this post the absurdity of the question. Today, the Court decided the case. Yes, murder is a “crime of violence” for the purpose of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c).

Justice Thomas wrote the opinion for the Court, joined by six other Justices. So who are two? Continue reading . . .

Canadian Study Finds Length of Incarceration Decreases Recidivism

by · Mar 4, 2025 1:54 pm

Simon Fraser University in British Columbia has this press release announcing this study in the Journal of Criminal Justice regarding the effect of sentence length on recividism. Overall, studies on this issue have mixed results and generally show little effect either way, as Elizabeth Berger and I describe in this article, which is cited in the new article.

Here is the abstract: Continue reading . . .

Drugs, Treatment, Jail, and Indirect Consequences

by · Oct 18, 2024 11:58 am

The folks in favor of so-called criminal justice “reform” are fond of simplistic slogans such as “treatment, not jail” for drug offenders. However, as this story by Julie Watts at Sacramento’s CBS 13 indicates, “reform” measures can sometimes undermine treatment rather than promote it. This is one more example of a primary cause of bad policy — failure to consider the indirect consequences and considering only the direct consequences.

Once upon a time, drug courts were a key element of criminal justice reform. These specialized courts provide an alternative to people arrested for drug crimes, either possession or low-level dealing. If they agree to treatment and follow through to completion of the program, the criminal charges will be dropped. As described in the story, many people credit these programs with savings their lives.

But what happens when the criminal penalties for low-level drug offenses are lowered so far that the incentive vanishes? Continue reading . . .

Free the Detergent!

by · Oct 2, 2024 5:08 pm

The San Diego Union-Tribune has this editorial, titled Endorsement: Yes on Prop. 36: Time to free the detergent.

The coming landslide win for Proposition 36 will be a triumph for truth over spin. The San Diego Union-Tribune Editorial Board has long supported criminal justice reform. But in real time, we saw the obvious flaws of Proposition 47 — the November 2014 measure that Proposition 36 is meant to fix. It changed many “nonviolent” felonies into misdemeanors in a ham-handed way that incentivized certain crimes.

Eleven months later, The Washington Post dispatched a reporter to San Diego who wrote an unforgettable account showing the incredulity of law enforcement over the new status quo: “instead of arresting criminals and removing them from the streets, their officers have been dealing with the same offenders again and again. Caught in possession of drugs? That usually means a misdemeanor citation under Prop 47, or essentially a ticket. Caught stealing something worth less than $950? That means a ticket, too. Caught using some of that $950 to buy more drugs? Another citation.

Nothing has changed since then — unless you count the emergence of a cottage industry determined to depict Proposition 47 as good no matter what. So store clerks say they’ve stopped reporting thefts because there’s no point? It’s a blip. So store owners are spending heavily to lock up more goods than ever, including detergent? There’s no proof that’s necessary — the corporations in charge have an agenda.

Manipulation of crime statistics, one of our favorite subjects, enters into the picture: Continue reading . . .

Hit Man Sentenced to No Punishment At All for Murder

by · Sep 6, 2024 1:13 pm

AP reports:

A former Mafia hitman already serving life in prison was sentenced to 25 years Friday in the 2018 fatal prison bludgeoning of notorious Boston gangster James “Whitey” Bulger.

Prosecutors said Fotios “Freddy” Geas used a lock attached to a belt to repeatedly hit the 89-year-old Bulger in the head hours after he arrived at the troubled U.S. Penitentiary, Hazelton, from another lockup in Florida in October 2018. Defense attorneys disputed that characterization Friday, saying Geas hit Bulger with his fist.

The Justice Department said last year that it would not seek the death penalty against Geas in Bulger’s killing.

Congress abolished parole in the federal system many years ago, so life in federal prison is life without parole. Gaes’s new sentence is nominally consecutive to his life sentence, meaning it will begin the day he dies. Hence, he has been sentenced to no punishment at all. The government even plea-bargained a clearly premeditated murder down to manslaughter. Continue reading . . .

Cal. Prop. 47 Fix Initiative Ahead Over 2/1

by · Aug 22, 2024 2:03 pm

U.Cal. Berkeley’s Institute for Governmental Studies has a poll taken early this month on three initiatives on that state’s ballot. The press release is here. Proposition 36 is a measure to fix some of the problems resulting from 2014’s Proposition 47. The poll shows Prop. 36 ahead by 56-23 with 21% undecided.

A landslide win would send a strong signal that the state’s voters are waking up to the reality that the claims that going soft on crime actually improves public safety are nonsense.

Early polls showing an initiative ahead generally need to be regarded with caution, as the late breaks in voting tend to be toward “no,” but this is such a strong lead that this tendency may not matter. Continue reading . . .