Harvard Prison Legal Assistance Project

Harvard Law School

Category: Sentencing (page 2 of 3)

We Can’t Afford to Ignore Drug Addiction in Prison

September 5, 2014 / / Comments Off on We Can’t Afford to Ignore Drug Addiction in Prison

As the drug epidemic continues to grow and drug offenders continue to pile up in prison, we are faced with the undeniable truth that sending addicts to jail is not going to solve the drug problem. The “War on Drugs” specifically focused on eliminating the supplier while completely ignoring the addicts and the depths of addiction. What we should have focused on was prevention and treatment for drug addicts, but instead of treating the addict as the sick and vulnerable human being they truly are, we punished them for having a problem. As new research comes to light about the brain and addiction, I hope it will change people’s opinions about addicts and the right way to heal them. In the article, it states that when a person becomes an addict, it physically changes their brain chemistry and make up. Instead of receiving signals that they need food or water, they get a message that they need their drug to satisfy the physical dependence. Without proper treatment and counseling for addicts they will go straight back to the thing that makes them feel better; their drug.

How many times are we going to arrest and release a drug offender until he or she passes away from this harrowing health problem? When people are sick, we provide them with care. It is irrational to believe that locking up a sick person will cure their disease, so why do we believe this is true for drug offenders? The scariest part of releasing a drug offender is knowing that their need for their drug grew stronger every day they sat in that jail, but their tolerance for the drug was decreasing at the same time. For some, the drug becomes stronger than them. And for the unfortunate, the drug wins. It’s time to stop letting the drug win and stop letting it overcrowd our prisons.

Link to the Article

For more information about prisoners and drug treatment, please visit:

The Anonymous People Documentary Website 

Or:

Justice Policy Institute

 

Juvenile LWOP: “throwaway people?”

May 25, 2012 / / Comments Off on Juvenile LWOP: “throwaway people?”

A number of groups are devoted to reforming youth sentencing. But in the realm of criminal justice activism, life sentences have not been a focus (indeed, many opponents of the death penalty have pushed life without parole as the best alternative to executions). “A good deal of [advocacy] focuses on removing low-level, nonviolent offenders from jails and prisons because they comprise such a large proportion of the incarcerated population,” says Ashley Nellis, an analyst with the Sentencing Project. Whereas the obvious excesses of the drug war have met resistance, when it comes to violent crimes, even young defendants have comparatively few advocates in their corner.

From The Nation’s recent article on juvenile life without parole. Read here.

Everybody is talking about sentencing

February 18, 2012 / / Comments Off on Everybody is talking about sentencing

This week, the U.S. Sentencing Commission held a hearing in Washington, D.C. on federal sentencing after U.S. v. Booker, the Supreme Court decision that made the sentencing guidelines advisory instead of mandatory.  Families Against Mandatory Minimum’s VP Mary Price testified that judges are using their discretion wisely and need to be able to continue to give individualized sentences. You can read her testimony here.

FAMM released this statement on President Obama’s new budget proposal, which endorsed the idea of expanding good time credit and compassionate release.

HLS professor and former judge of the U.S. District Court for Mass. Nancy Gertner was counsel of record in an amicus brief (PDF) submitted to the U.S. Supreme Court in Dorsey v. U.S. and Corey Hill v. U.S.  These decisions will determine whether the Fair Sentencing Act of 2010 applies to defendants sentenced after the law was enacted, but whose crimes were committed beforehand. Gertner co-wrote the brief, which argues that denying such application will further “damage the legitimacy of the sentencing process,” with another former federal judge, Paul Cassell. Both authors sentenced defendants under the mandatory-minimum provisions of the 1986 Act, and have written previously to express their deep concerns about the damaging effects and racism of mandatory-minimum penalties for non-violent drug offenders.

Finally, FAMM President Julie Stewart recently published this op-ed in the Huffington Post last week. At a time when some Congress members argue that more prosecutorial discretion will reduce racial disparity, it calls attention to a powerful new study that suggests that much responsibility lies with prosecutors, not judges, for the disparity in sentences between black and white offenders.

Massachusetts sentencing bills are… still in negotiation

February 16, 2012 / / Comments Off on Massachusetts sentencing bills are… still in negotiation

For those of you following the current controversy over Massachusetts sentencing bills, Families Against Mandatory Minimums has this update:

  • As of last month, the conference committee that was trying to negotiate a compromise between the Senate and House sentencing bills had not made progress.  As you know, the Senate bill included mandatory minimum reforms (along with many other issues) while the House bill only addressed habitual offenders.
  • The House leadership then announced that the House of Representatives would be debating and voting on a second sentencing bill that covered some of the other issues from the Senate bill.
  • But by early February, the House leadership said that the House members of the conference committee could negotiate a final bill after all, without the need for the House to take up a second sentencing bill.  FAMM members did a terrific job of writing to their representatives in the House, urging them to include drug sentencing reforms.
  • Meanwhile, there has been an outpouring of concern about changes to the habitual offender law (also called the “three strikes” law) that both the House and Senate passed.   FAMM has joined community leaders, clergy and activists in speaking out against mandatory maximum sentences.  Click here for our fact sheet. (Lowell area members, we hope to see you at tonight’s community forum.)
  • Opposition to the habitual offender parts of the bills has slowed down the conference committee’s work – and rightly so.  This is a critical criminal justice issue that needs to be fully considered.

Massachusetts Considers Raising the Age at which Defendants are Sentenced as Adults

February 8, 2012 / / Comments Off on Massachusetts Considers Raising the Age at which Defendants are Sentenced as Adults

Brandon Kennedy, who went to jail for 28 months on drug charges when he was 17.

Massachusetts is one of only 13 states where criminal cases involving 17-year-olds are handled in the adult justice system rather than juvenile justice system. Fortunately, though, this may change; the state legislature is considering a bill that would increase the age of criminal responsibility in Massachusetts to 18. This follows on the heels of a recent Citizens for Juvenile Justice Report showing that there is a 47 percent greater likelihood of a teen being arrested again if the adolescent is charged in the adult system versus the juvenile system. The report also said younger inmates are more likely to be sexually victimized.

Currently, 500 17-year-olds are sent to adult jails or prisons in Massachusetts every year.

Click here to read more and hear WBUR’s radio coverage.

Three strikes in Massachusetts

February 8, 2012 / / Comments Off on Three strikes in Massachusetts

There’s a lot of news and action circulating about the three strikes bill here in Massachusetts. Luckily, Blackstonian just released a special edition on the legislation, featuring Judge Gertner and Charles Ogletree among other prominent thinkers and activists. For more on the issues, visit Smart on Crime MA.

Federal sentencing and the GOP

January 31, 2012 / / Comments Off on Federal sentencing and the GOP

This article‘s discussion of mandatory sentencing guidelines versus discretion shows how stuck the debate is and conveys how depressingly racism will shape both approaches, quite aside from aspirations to create uniformity in sentencing or to reserve a place for consideration of particular contexts.

More press urges MA legislature to rethink enacting Three-Strikes bills

January 6, 2012 / / Comments Off on More press urges MA legislature to rethink enacting Three-Strikes bills

The editors of the Boston Phoenix weigh in on what Three-Strikes legislation would mean for Massachusetts, in a way consonant with the article discussed in this earlier post.

Massachusetts, a resource compendium for thinking about Juvenile Life without Parole

January 4, 2012 / / Comments Off on Massachusetts, a resource compendium for thinking about Juvenile Life without Parole
Take a look! The Coalition for Effective Public Safety has compiled the following recent articles urging Massachusetts to reconsider its law on Juvenile Life without Parole:
January 3, 2012
  • Letter to the Editor from David Fassler, Clinical Professor of Psychiatry at the University of Vermont:
  • Letter to the Editor from Jody Kent Lavy, Director of the National Campaign for the Fair Sentencing of Youth:
December 31, 2011
  • Forgotten Change: State Fails to Measure Impact of Historic Juvenile Justice Reform. Follow up article by the New England Center for Investigative Journalism on JLWOP in Massachusetts:

December 27, 2011
  • For teens guilty of murder, penalties can vary widely. Article in the Boston Globe by the New England Center for Investigative Journalism on JLWOP in Massachusetts.
  • ‘Our Youngest Killers’: Juvenile Sentencing Varies Widely Report Shows. Coverage by WBUR, Boston NPR, of JLWOP in Massachusetts:

December 25, 2011
  • If sentences vary too widely, court should make corrections. Boston Globe editorial supporting greater judicial discretion in JLWOP cases and the review of Joe Donovan’s case and a sentence reduction:

New Massachusetts Three-Strike bills bode poorly for its already overcrowded prison system

January 4, 2012 / / Comments Off on New Massachusetts Three-Strike bills bode poorly for its already overcrowded prison system

In this article in Metrowest, Leslie Walker and Jean Trounstine warn about the possible consequences of two Three-Strikes bills recently passed by the Massachusetts House and Senate for the already overcrowded Massachusetts prison system. With the prison population average at 143% over capacity and reaching levels of over 330% the intended capacity, these bills will further increase overcrowding and state spending on prisons by increasing both the number of sentences of life without parole and the likelihood of prisoners reoffending by making resources shown to decrease recidivism more scarce. The authors point out that by contrast, Mississippi, Kentucky, South Carolina and Texas are reducing crime, prison populations and state corrections spending all at once with smart prison reform reducing sentences for non-violent offenders.

Older posts Newer posts

Privacy Statement 

© 2024 Harvard Prison Legal Assistance Project

Theme by Anders Noren — Up ↑