Showing posts with label ballot measure 11 attorney. Show all posts
Showing posts with label ballot measure 11 attorney. Show all posts

Wednesday, May 8, 2013

Will The Oregon Legislature Actually Do Something That Makes Sense?!?!

I was turned onto an excellent article (see, here) recently by my fabulous law partner that discussed an old, favorite topic of mine - sentencing reform.  It seems that someone introduced a bill recently (HB 3194 - see it here) that addressed the skyrocketing costs of incarceration and the enormous prison budget in Oregon.

As I have mentioned previously, statistics clearly show that the crime rate has not changed drastically in a very long time.  In the US, it steadily rose after World War II and peaked between the 1970's and 1990's.  It has been in a pretty steady decline ever since.  In other words, any recent hype and talk about crime waves, epidemics and the like are just that - talk.  The overall statistics do not support the need for bigger enforcement budgets, tougher sentencing laws, and all of our politicians, legislatures, and cops do not need to "get tough on crime" because no matter what we have done over the last 15 years or so hasn't made a shred of difference!

What has changed though, is our prison population which, both here in Oregon and nationwide, continues to spiral out of control.  What does that mean?  It means we are constantly having to build and fund bigger prisons for the people we stuff inside them though doing so doesn't seem to have any affect on the crime rates.  Does this make sense to anyone?

For decades now, Oregon has been no stranger to this trend especially since the passage of the draconian Measure 11 long ago.  AND, Oregon is no stranger to the overall trend that we have and continue to stuff so many people into our prisons, we can no longer sustain the cost of that.  So, someone commissioned a study and found that this is as insane as it sounds.  And by insane, I mean the old Albert Einstein definition of insane.

As a criminal defense attorney, I saw first-hand how the prosecutors can use and abuse this statute to force people who committed essentially lower-level crimes into pleas by just threatening or charging them as Measure 11 crimes adding a hefty mandatory minimum sentence to any conviction.  And, for some ridiculous reason, people sentenced under this statute get no good time credit and no access to any prison programs.    Working as an attorney in both the criminal and civil worlds obviously gives me a unique perspective on this issue and, maybe, I'm too close to the issue to see big picture though I'm brash enough to say, "I doubt it!"

Regardless, we hope, someone and something is going to be done about this if this billed gets passed.  Alas, the law and order types (and politicians who prosper on fear mongering to these people) will fight this bill hard telling everyone that we are all in grave danger if we reform some of our sentencing laws and empty some people from our prison population - or, allow them access to some program that might actually better themselves and make their time in custody of some benefit to them, and indirectly, society in general.  That position is perfectly espoused in this editorial which is the counter-point to the article that inspired this post.  What do you think?

Monday, February 28, 2011

Pimpin’ Ain’t Easy



The older I get, the more frustrated I become by what I call the American Ideology of extremism. 

You’re either with us or against us. 

If I listened to what my fellow citizens advised, I would be forced to choose between being an anti-car, anti-business, dreadlock-rocking, vegan-loving, breastfeeding-my-child- until-she’s-six, hate-all-Republicans liberal, or a Palin/Beck-supporting, anti-choice, anti-gay-marriage, anti-union, pro-church-and-state conservative.

UGH!

I’m so tired of it. And yes, my frustration has prompted deliberate facebook posts written solely for the purpose of eliciting angry comments. 

Where are the moderates and why are we so scared?

“Edie, what does this rant have to do with the law?” you ask. Excellent question. “I thought you were a criminal attorney blogging about criminal defense law.” I am, and I’m getting to it. 

Here’s the thing: Nothing exemplifies my point more than the criminal justice system, which is all about black and white. For years, violent offenders got off easy, did little time, got out to commit even more heinous crimes, and generally were not held accountable.

And so the pendulum has swung in the opposite direction. Now, if you “catch a case,” particularly a certain type of case, you’re screwed…for life.

 The best example of this is pimping.


Yes, you heard me: P-I-M-P-I-N-G. Under Oregon law, an individual convicted of promoting or compelling prostitution is required to register as a sex offender. 

The elements of promoting prostitution are as follows:  A person commits the crime of promoting prostitution if, with intent to promote prostitution, the person knowingly:
(a) Owns, controls, manages, supervises or otherwise maintains a place of prostitution or a prostitution enterprise; or
(b) Induces or causes a person to engage in prostitution or to remain in a place of prostitution; or
(c) Receives or agrees to receive money or other property, other than as a prostitute being compensated for personally rendered prostitution services, pursuant to an agreement or understanding that the money or other property is derived from a prostitution activity; or
(d) Engages in any conduct that institutes, aids or facilitates an act or enterprise of prostitution.[1]

The elements of compelling prostitution are as follows:  (1) A person commits the crime of compelling prostitution if the person knowingly:
(a) Uses force or intimidation to compel another to engage in prostitution; or
(b) Induces or causes a person under 18 years of age to engage in prostitution; or
(c) Induces or causes the spouse, child or stepchild of the person to engage in prostitution.[2]

Now, don’t get me wrong. These are serious offenses and often very bad criminal acts; particularly cases involving compelling prostitution. I’m not condoning such behavior. I’m not suggesting that when the evidence proves beyond a reasonable doubt that said individuals committed such crimes, they should not be prosecuted.[3]

However, I don’t understand why someone convicted of one of these offenses should be required to register as a sex offender for the rest of his or her life. I just don’t see a causal connection.

Pimps are assholes. Pimps are terrible people. Pimps take advantage of the most vulnerable members of society – often underage girls who are fleeing terrible domestic circumstances.

But are pimps sex offenders? 

And the thing is, if part of our plan is to rehabilitate criminals, good luck when it involves an individual required to register for life as a sex offender. They can almost never secure legitimate employment. They can almost never secure legitimate housing. The registration requirement pretty much puts a stop to any attempt to lead productive, legitimate lives. 

Assume that there is at least one person out there convicted of compelling or promoting prostitution who has made a transformation; who has made amends for their past life; who has changed; and who wants to do the right thing and volunteer, work hard, pay taxes, serve the community, raise a family. It will be next to impossible for said person to do so.

I realize that to most, this isn’t a pressing issue. And I realize it’s not a very popular issue. The “pimping lobby” isn’t going to appear at the legislature anytime soon to advocate for an end to sex offender registration. 

And I get registration laws as applied to predatory sex offenders. But I don’t get it when it comes to pimps.

I just don’t.

Do you?
  


[1] ORS 167.012
[2] ORS 167.017
[3] Assuming, of course, that the defendant’s constitutional rights were not violated by po-po.