Criminal Law & Process – Page 47 – Marquette University Law School Faculty Blog

Earned Release From Prison: Judges Not Necessarily the Best Deciders

Post author:Michael M. O'Hear
Post published:August 12, 2013
Post category:Criminal Law & Process Judges & Judicial Process Marquette Law School Public Wisconsin Criminal Law & Process

In 2009, Wisconsin expanded release opportunities for prisoners and established a new Earned Release Review Commission to handle the petitions. Just two years later, however, the legislature reversed course, largely repealing the 2009 reforms and abolishing the ERRC. The 2011 revisions effectively returned authority over “early” release to judges. Critics of the ERRC, an appointed body, maintained that it was more appropriate to give release authority to elected judges.

However, last month’s Marquette Law School Poll indicates that Wisconsin voters would actually prefer to put early release into the hands of a statewide commission of experts rather than the original sentencing judge.

Among the 713 randomly selected Wisconsin voters who participated, a 52% majority stated that release decisions should be made by a commission of experts, as opposed to only about 31% who favored judges. An additional 13% stated that both options were equally good. The Poll’s margin of error was 3.7%.

We asked several questions to try to identify more specifically the perceived strengths and weaknesses of both options.

Second Chance for Juveniles: Raising the Age of Juvenile Court Jurisdiction in Wisconsin

Post author:Kelli Thompson
Post published:July 31, 2013
Post category:Criminal Law & Process Public

Under current Wisconsin law, an individual charged with a crime is under the jurisdiction of juvenile court only if he or she is younger than 17. For several years, legislation intended to increase this age to 18 has been introduced, but has not been passed by the legislature . . . yet.

This legislative session, a new effort is underway to treat children under 18 as juveniles if they have not been previously adjudicated delinquent, they have not been convicted of a crime, or they are presently charged with a non-violent offense. Research and experience has shown that harsher criminal sanctions do not break the cycle of recidivism and that the consequences of a criminal record are detrimental to the future development and success of children. Returning 17-year-olds to the juvenile justice system is more likely to have a better outcome for both the child and our society as a whole.

The biggest impediment to making this change has been the fiscal impact to counties, which pay the costs of juvenile detention. The current draft legislation seeks to mitigate the fiscal impact while beginning the process of more appropriately treating juveniles in the criminal justice system.

Truth in Sentencing: We Like the Symbolism, But Have Mixed Feelings About the Practical Policy

Post author:Michael M. O'Hear
Post published:July 26, 2013
Post category:Criminal Law & Process Public Wisconsin Criminal Law & Process

Two-thirds of Wisconsin voters support truth in sentencing, the 1998 law that abolished parole in the state and required prisoners to serve the full term of their sentences. At the same time, a majority of Wisconsin voters (54.5 percent) agreed that once a prisoner serves half of his term, he should be released and given a less costly form of punishment if he can demonstrate that he is no longer a threat to society. These seemingly inconsistent opinions point to complex, mixed feelings about sentencing policy in the state.

The numbers come from the Marquette Law School Poll, which earlier this week released the results of its latest survey of Wisconsin voters regarding politics and public policy. This edition of the poll included a rich array of questions relating to truth in sentencing. (Full disclosure: I collaborated in the design of these questions with Poll Director Charles Franklin and Professor Darren Wheelock of the Marquette Social and Cultural Sciences Department.)

The poll results this year were remarkably consistent with results from a year ago, when some of the same questions were posed. Last July, 63% supported truth in sentencing, while 55% supported release opportunities at the half-way mark. An even more decisive two-thirds majority supported awarding credits toward early release to recognize prisoners’ rehabilitative accomplishments, which also violates truth in sentencing (at least in the particularly hard-line way in which it was adopted in Wisconsin).

What gives?