Monthly Archive: November 2022

A Severity-Weighted Index of Violent Crime

In debates over criminal justice policy, people are constantly referring to crime indexes for the question of whether crime is up or down and by how much. But there are problems with the official indexes. One of them is that indexes tend to be dominated by the least serious crime chosen for inclusion in the particular index. Crimes are simply counted, and because the frequency of crimes tends to be inversely related to their severity, the less serious crimes dominate.

For example, the FBI’s index of violent crime includes murder (and voluntary manslaughter), rape, robbery, and aggravated assault. Murder is the most serious, followed by rape, but the other two are much more common. As a result, the violent crime index is largely a measure of robbery and aggravated assault, and it relatively insensitive to changes in the rates of murder and rape.

One alternative is an index with crimes weighted according to their severity. I have seen such indexes in other countries and for some jurisdictions within the United States, but none for the United States as a whole. Here is a first cut at a severity-weighted index of violent crime in the United States. Continue reading . . .

CA Arsonist Sets New Fires After Early Release

A Southern California man convicted on 16 counts of arson in 2021 and sentenced to five years in prison, has been rearrested for setting at least eight fires in North Hollywood last Wednesday.  Eric Leonard of NBC Los Angeles reports that 35 year-old David Rivas was released from prison on October 7 after serving 1/3 (18 months) of his sentence.  Arson is considered a serious crime under California law, but sentencing reforms, including Governor Jerry Brown’s Proposition 57, have given the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation the authority to grant early release of criminals, even those with priors for rape and murder.  Rivas is being held without bail, and faces trial on seven counts of arson.   Anybody confused about why there is so much crime in major California cities?

Jones v. Hendrix Argument

The U.S. Supreme Court has concluded its oral argument in Jones v. Hendrix.  The question is whether federal prisoners who have already had an appeal and one or more collateral reviews of their convictions can use the “saving clause” of 28 U.S.C. §2255(e) to bring habeas corpus petitions in certain cases in which Congress has forbidden a successive 2255 petition.

The claim is that 2255(e) preserves claims that were traditionally cognizable in habeas despite the 1996 amendment that limited successive petitions. It is difficult to make a prediction from argument. Several of the justices said little or nothing. However, I was encouraged that some justices questioned what point in habeas history we should be looking at. The availability of habeas corpus has varied widely throughout history. The kind of claim at issue in this case would not have been cognizable in early America, as documented in our brief in this case. Continue reading . . .