Pubdate: Fri, 20 Aug 1999 Source: Milwaukee Journal Sentinel (WI) Copyright: 1999, Milwaukee Journal Sentinel. Contact: 414-224-8280 Website: http://www.jsonline.com/ Forum: http://www.jsonline.com/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimate.cgi Author: Richard P. Jones of the Journal Sentinel staff REVAMP IN CRIME SENTENCING URGED Truth-in-sentencing prompts new categories Madison - Serious crime in Wisconsin - everything from murder to bomb scares - would be reclassified under nine categories with new sentences under recommendations a special committee was poised to make today to the Legislature. For nearly a year, the Criminal Penalties Study Committee has been reviewing the state criminal code, felony by felony, in an effort to make the punishment fit the crime under Wisconsin's new truth-in-sentencing law. It's the first comprehensive review of the criminal code in about 50 years. The 18-member panel is expected to take a final vote today on its recommendations and send them to the governor and Legislature by Aug. 31. The committee was created after the Legislature last year passed the truth-in-sentencing law, which eliminates parole and makes criminals serve their entire prison terms behind bars. The law, which takes effect Dec. 31, calls for a study of the criminal code in an attempt to restore some balance after years of anti-crime measures, creating new crimes and enhancing penalties on existing offenses. Among the recommendations outlined Thursday by the chairman, Eau Claire County Circuit Judge Thomas Barland, was a new classification system for serious crimes. "One of our charges was to bring more rationality to the classification of crimes, so that like crimes with similar consequences are classified alike," Barland said. The criminal code now has six classes of felonies. Class A, the most serious, includes homicide as well as other offenses, such as taking a hostage, and provides for a sentence of life in prison. The remaining existing categories, some offenses they include and maximum prison terms are: Class B - armed robbery, first-degree sexual assault and kidnapping, 40 years; Class BC - second-degree sexual assault, incest with a child, 20 years; Class C - robbery, burglary, first-degree reckless injury, 10 years; Class D - battery, car theft, injury by intoxicated use of a vehicle, five years; and Class E - second-degree reckless injury, bomb scares, two years. People convicted of these crimes before Dec. 31 are eligible for parole after serving only a quarter of their sentence and are automatically released after serving two-thirds of their sentence. Once the law kicks in, however, judges would set a prison term that offenders must serve, plus a period of extended supervision by the state once they are released from prison. The committee is expected to recommend nine classes of felonies: Class A: A maximum sentence of life in prison, the same as the current law. Class B: A maximum prison term of 40 years, plus as many as 20 years of extended supervision. Someone convicted of first-degree sexual assault or armed robbery, for example, could get a maximum 60-year sentence: 40 years in prison and 20 years under state supervision. Class C: 25 years in prison and 15 years under extended supervision. Class D: 15 years in prison and 10 years under supervision. Class E: 10 years in prison and five years' supervision. Class F: 71/2 years in prison and five years' supervision. Class G: Five years in prison and five years of supervision. Class H: Three years in prison and three years' supervision. Class I: 18 months in prison and two years' supervision. Under the soon-to-expire system, judges would add years to a prison sentence, knowing that the offender would be released early, especially given Wisconsin's severely crowded prison system. With truth in sentencing, judges no longer have to pad sentences, because inmates can't get out early on parole. Whether they will adjust their sentences accordingly, however, has been one of the most troubling questions of the truth-in-sentencing debate. Judges run the risk of appearing soft on crime if they adjust their sentences, and Barland said that concern has been expressed by many colleagues on the bench. He said it's possible judges won't adjust the sentences they hand down, which means the inmate population could grow at an even faster rate. "That could happen, and there's two things that have to be done to reduce the likelihood of that happening," Barland said. "One is enhancing probation, so it is a more attractive choice to the sentencing judge on these shorter sentences." Among the committee's recommendations is improving probation as an option for judges by increasing the number of agents, requiring more-intense supervision of offenders on probation, and providing more temporary cell space. "The second is educating judges and the public, so that the public understands the problem and not place unrealistic pressure upon the judge to sentence for longer periods of time," Barland said. - --- MAP posted-by: Don Beck