Pubdate: Mon, 15 Mar 2004 Source: Tampa Tribune (FL) Copyright: 2004, The Tribune Co. Contact: http://www.tampatrib.com/ Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/446 Note: Limit LTEs to 150 words Author: Robert Batey Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/prison.htm (Incarceration) Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/find?199 (Mandatory Minimum Sentencing) Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/opinion.htm (Opinion) PROBATION CRACKDOWN AN OVERREACTION The arrest of Joseph Smith in the rape and murder of young Carlie Brucia - which occurred while he was on probation for a previous crime - has focused attention on Florida's law of probation. Spurred on by the media, our representatives in Tallahassee have proposed several welcome changes in that law, including greater supervision for all probationers and more drug treatment programs for addicts like Smith. But amid these good suggestions is one proposed change that would have shockingly bad results. Legislation pending before the Florida Legislature would establish a five-year mandatory minimum sentence for any probationer who commits any crime, even a misdemeanor, while on probation. So if a person on probation for a breaking into a car shoplifts a candy bar, he is going away for at least five years - and we will be paying the bill. A recent Associated Press story gives an inkling of how much this proposed legislation might cost. In recent years California has cracked down on parole violators - so much so that the state now houses about 40 percent of all the imprisoned parole violators in the country. The additional cost of imprisoning these violators is $1.1 billion annually, almost a quarter of the total California spends on incarceration. And what did California get for this massive expenditure? Its crime rate is about the same as those of other populous states that imprison substantially fewer parole violators. Consider The Cost In Florida there are thousands more people on probation than on parole. If we begin sending probation violators to prison - each for five years minimum - our prison budget will soar even more than California's did. Our legislative leaders think they have a budget crisis now, but it is nothing compared with what will happen if this mandatory minimum sentence is adopted. There are only two limitations to the proposed legislation. One is that the probationer has to have been convicted - at any time in his or her life - of a "forcible felony." That term seems to require a serious crime, but as defined by Florida law, "forcible felony" includes picking up a knife during a domestic dispute, taking something through the open window of a car, snatching the purse of a woman slumbering at a bus stop, or climbing over a fence to steal a bicycle from a back yard. The other limitation is that the crime for which the defendant is on probation must be punishable by up to five years' imprisonment. But that is true of every felony in Florida, including purchasing any amount of marijuana, cockfighting, possessing a still and tampering with a car's odometer. What about the few cases where such a sentence is necessary? Florida's judges already have the power to act in those instances, to give the sentence this proposed statute would require. And you can bet that after Carlie Brucia's rape and murder resulted in such vigorous criticism of the judge who failed to revoke Joseph Smith's probation, all our judges will be quick to use that power. In short, the proposed five-year mandatory minimum sentence for probation violators is both incredibly costly and totally unnecessary. Our legislators would be foolish to include it in any reform of Florida's law of probation. - -- Robert Batey is a professor of criminal law at Stetson University College of Law. - --- MAP posted-by: Jackl