Interesting editorial from the Dallas Morning News.
I'm interested on what the good citizens of the Loop 298 feel about this.
It's usually not anyone's place in Dallas to tell Tyler jurors what to do or not to do in dealing with felons in their community. Smith County's law-enforcement officials are not accountable to outsiders on how they prosecute cases.
But here's the big "but": In sending defendants off to state prison, every county pushes the incarceration cost onto the rest of us. It costs roughly $50 a day to house offenders in Texas prisons.
And so it got our attention big time when a jury in Tyler sentenced a man to 35 years recently for possessing 4.6 ounces of marijuana, a sentence that tests our tolerance for prosecution of drug laws.
Let's be clear: Most of Texas' state prisoners deserve their punishment or need to be put away to protect society. About half the prison system's head count consists of violent offenders, and another 17 percent stole something or cheated somebody out of money.
Then there are the drug offenders, who constituted about 19 percent of the population of more than 155,000 inmates last year. Those convicted of possession alone made up about 11 percent.
A recent addition to that population is one Henry Walter Wooten, 54, of Tyler, who had the poor judgment to stand around a park with a joint in his mouth and baggies of weed in his pockets. Cops found more in his car.
Bottom line: guilty as charged on possession charges and guilty for sure of first-degree stupidity.
If Wooten's record had been clear, the amount of pot might have gotten him no more than two years behind bars. But two convictions from the 1980s – one for packing a gun, another for dealing drugs – boosted the sentencing range. And the fact that he was within 1,000 feet of a day care center added more years, to a maximum of life.
The prosecutor asked for 99 years, to set a precedent for punishing such crimes in Tyler. That kind of precedent would have been grotesque. From our vantage point, 35 years still is too costly and out of proportion to the crime, considering that it was a nonviolent offense. Plus, Wooten will serve more – unserved time from his previous drug conviction – since he was on parole at the time of his marijuana bust.
What's the proper sentencing range? Something far less than the rest of his life, which could be the case now and could stick the state with the tab for health care in Wooten's last years.
In recent years, the state of Texas has been moving in the right direction in expanding drug-treatment programs to break the costly cycle of incarceration and avoid the need to build more prisons.
Testing the upper limits of sentencing laws for nonviolent drug crimes may help rid streets of local riff-raff, but the cumulative effect is a state prison system of unaffordable and unreasonable proportions.
I'm interested on what the good citizens of the Loop 298 feel about this.
It's usually not anyone's place in Dallas to tell Tyler jurors what to do or not to do in dealing with felons in their community. Smith County's law-enforcement officials are not accountable to outsiders on how they prosecute cases.
But here's the big "but": In sending defendants off to state prison, every county pushes the incarceration cost onto the rest of us. It costs roughly $50 a day to house offenders in Texas prisons.
And so it got our attention big time when a jury in Tyler sentenced a man to 35 years recently for possessing 4.6 ounces of marijuana, a sentence that tests our tolerance for prosecution of drug laws.
Let's be clear: Most of Texas' state prisoners deserve their punishment or need to be put away to protect society. About half the prison system's head count consists of violent offenders, and another 17 percent stole something or cheated somebody out of money.
Then there are the drug offenders, who constituted about 19 percent of the population of more than 155,000 inmates last year. Those convicted of possession alone made up about 11 percent.
A recent addition to that population is one Henry Walter Wooten, 54, of Tyler, who had the poor judgment to stand around a park with a joint in his mouth and baggies of weed in his pockets. Cops found more in his car.
Bottom line: guilty as charged on possession charges and guilty for sure of first-degree stupidity.
If Wooten's record had been clear, the amount of pot might have gotten him no more than two years behind bars. But two convictions from the 1980s – one for packing a gun, another for dealing drugs – boosted the sentencing range. And the fact that he was within 1,000 feet of a day care center added more years, to a maximum of life.
The prosecutor asked for 99 years, to set a precedent for punishing such crimes in Tyler. That kind of precedent would have been grotesque. From our vantage point, 35 years still is too costly and out of proportion to the crime, considering that it was a nonviolent offense. Plus, Wooten will serve more – unserved time from his previous drug conviction – since he was on parole at the time of his marijuana bust.
What's the proper sentencing range? Something far less than the rest of his life, which could be the case now and could stick the state with the tab for health care in Wooten's last years.
In recent years, the state of Texas has been moving in the right direction in expanding drug-treatment programs to break the costly cycle of incarceration and avoid the need to build more prisons.
Testing the upper limits of sentencing laws for nonviolent drug crimes may help rid streets of local riff-raff, but the cumulative effect is a state prison system of unaffordable and unreasonable proportions.
25 comments:
I agree that putting people in prison is very expensive for everyone, that is why i am in favor of corporal punishment. I have heard from people that have been incarcerated that "it's not that bad in there, you get fed,clothed, a bed, and even some play time with your friends." Does this sound like a person who has learned their lesson? I think not. If this person had been been put to hard labor or worse thy would not be so willing to go back. But on the other side the system is not perfect in determining who is guilty. So at this point in time i think the way things are set up is the best its going to get for now partner.
It seems that it was appropriate for the man to be arrested due to having marujuana on him as well as smoking it on public property. Though, bringing up events that happened long ago, seems a bit ridiculous to give him a life sentence in prison, when we, as tax payers, have to pay for his necessities as well as shelter when no violent act was made.
99 years?! Overkill! they should chill out a bit
so the main purpose of such a long sentenceing is to provide some sort of statement to make other drug users fearful, in this case 35 years is too costly for Texas prisons especailly for this sort of crime compared to others.
I fully agree with the incarceration of these criminals. The youth of America has sadly been infected with a growing drug problem, and I don't think any monetary reasons would justify keeping drug "dealers and doers" on the street. Yes, we should definitely look to the root of the problem and offer counseling and other programs to help these people, but if these people are going to break the law out in the open within reasonable distance of a daycare center, they deserve to be punished. I'm be willing to fork out money to keep the riffraff "druggies" off of our streets and away from our children.
I think that inorder to be fair accross the board that the jail time must remain the same for all drug offenders. It cannot be based on the amount he had it must be based on the fact that he had it. I do not think a life sentence is appropraite at all though. It is too costly and rehab would just over all be better for the prisoner and for the government.
ok! stupid that that guy would just smoke some weed in public like that haha but dang giving him a sentence of 35 years seems like way too much he didn't do harm to anyone, not even himself. the sentence should be dropped down.
I think this is an insane waste of money. I understand that possession is a crime and it needs to be punished, but on a separate note, prison isn't much of a punishment anymore. Inmates live pretty well. All that aside though, if he wasn't making any attempt to sell the drugs and wasn't being violent a small sentence on top of his parole violation should be sufficent.
Well at least we know what some of our tax dollars are going too. The cost of housing and taking care of inmates is ridiculous, but honestly this guy has gotten in some trouble in the past. His sentence should be more than two years but no more than ten. After that you are just wasting money on a man who will never get out of prison. Some new way on how to convict drug addicts and sellers needs to be established. But until then lets just keep wasting our money on more less subjective crimes like this.
Instead of throwing drug-users into jail, we should continue to expand the drug-treatment programs to help incorporate and produce functional citizens into society.
I do not advocate the use of drugs, but if the state were to legalize drug use, they could perform a complete turn-around of the cost problem they face right now. Instead of spending millions of dollars enforcing drug laws and incarcerating those who possess them, they could make a killing on the regulation and taxation of drugs which would benefit everyone in the state.
Repeated offenders should of course serve the hard time in the slammer. but of course some of these cases are a bit overly dramatic in the punishment. If we were in California the punishment of possession of marijuna would be far less harsh.
I believe that Texas is doing the right thing to make the people of the state less financially accountable for incarceration- especially for non-violent cases. I do hold my view that citizens who do illegal things, deserve to face the consequence, but the question is who else has to face the consequence as well as the convicted. It will help boost the State's financial status when there is less money being aimed towards building state prisons to hold more convicts, and it will be more human for the convicted because they will be receiving a conviction that will help make them better; like Henry Walter Wooten, who will receive more help through drug-treatment programs, instead of just jail.
The criminal jurisprudence system does need reform. One of the reforms should include sentencing guideline. If a person is proven guilty than that person will receive similar sentence anywhere in the state without violating any of the “rights” this person may have under federal statute. The sentence should conform to the limitation and restriction based on eighth amendment, “Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.” The sentence of 35 years imprisonment for possessing 4.6 ounces of marijuana appears to be harsh and unusual. Sometimes, offender may not have financial resources to appeal such a decision and it goes unchallenged. Illicit addictive drugs are a menace to the society. Every criminal must be sentenced irrespective of the state’s economy with “appropriate and reasonable” punishment along with measures to rehabilitate individual.
I'm thinking 10 years as a hight for this case. 35 is wayyy too much!!! It's a suitable amount of time for a drug LORD, but for just being i.p.? naww 35 years is half a lifetime... too much.
It's an interesting argument. The obvious solution to me is to limit sentences for drug convictions. The conflict, however, is the idea that the punishment should not depend on a budget. It should depend on the crime. The fact that it is not a violent crime stands out to me but the law shouldnt have to change just because the economy is changing.
i think that the conviction is not right. yes, he did have illegal substances which was stupid on his part. but the length of his sentence is just way too long. just because he does drugs does not make him a bad or harmful person.
I feel this sentencing was kind of ridiculous. Yes, the man broke the law, and yes, his record wasn't clean, and yes, he was incredibly, incredibly stupid, but 35 years? That seems a bit over the top. Especially now that the tax payerts and the state itself must now pay for this man's idiodic mistakes.
I do not think that people should go to jail for possession alone especially if all that they possess is marijuana. If they possess drugs other than marijuana I think they should be able to be sent to a rehabilitation program but not to jail. If they are selling drugs then I think that they should be able to be sent to jail. Also if the United States legalized marijuana and taxed it, they could make at least $50.00 a day instead of spending $50.00 a day on people in jail for possessing marijuana.
I agree that the 35 years is a little harsh if he was just possessing marijuana but the fact that the man was less concerned with keeping prisoners out of prison period and more concerned with the cost he was going to pay concerns me. It is through a better prison system and assimilation into society that we should focus on not on the financial burden a repeat offender is going to place on us in 35 years.
I think the sentence is definitely too extreme. Sure he's commited other crimes in the last 30 years... but none of them were violent. I think drugs are terrible and destroy lives, but on the whole, it's only the users life and those of their family. And marijuana is even one of the more benign, with an off chance of being legalized. All that to say, the punishment is too extreme for non-violent, even repeated non-violent, crime. He obviously just wants to smoke his joint.
I completely agree that possesion deserves punnishment. However I do think that the government could find less costly ways to enact this punnishment. I think that the coslty prison punnishment should be kept for more violent crimes and criminals. Please do not confuse what I'm saying to mean that I dont think that they need severe punnishment for ddrug convictions because they do. I just think there could be another way to go about it.
I totally agree with the editorial. While yes, Wooten should be punished more severely for violating his parole and also for being really stupid, there seem to be more important crimes than that of possessing weed. Tax payers, I believe would be outraged if they knew that their money was being used to feed, shelter, and technically house a man who was standing "around a park with a joint in his mouth."
I think that while these offenders deserve their first sentence, bringing them in more than once is kind of a waste of money. The money that is being spent on people's second and third drug related offenses is preventable through aggressive drug treatment. That money should be spent fueling these endeavors.
That is way too many years. Rapists get a shorter sentence than that! They need to put people in prison that long for more serious matters.
Post a Comment