5 ms·

It is truly amazing how fucked up our system is. If they actually believed you "deserved" 99 years, then bargaining down to 6 months suggests that all they real

It is truly amazing how fucked up our system is. If they actually believed you "deserved" 99 years, then bargaining down to 6 months suggests that all they really care about is artificially inflating and maintaining their "conviction" rate and not actually, you know, justice or something. Thank you for sharing your experiences, I rarely get the opportunity to discuss things like this. Best of luck to you going forward!

moron4hire 13y ago
That's the maximum possible sentence that can be applied in any circumstance, but it would not have been possible for him to get it. There is a table for each class of crime that cross references the severity of the crime, the number of crimes committed by the person before, and a very small plus or minus factor for how much the judge likes or dislikes you. As a first-time offender, he would have only been eligible for the minimum category, and unless he was a complete dickhead in the courtroom, the judge almost certainly wouldn't have given the minimum of the category. A few months, at the most. This "99 years" bullshit is just gungho DAs trying to scare the shit out of the populace and assert their badassery.
- swalkergibson 13y ago
  You are correct, that is the maximum. Here is the minimum for Aggravated Robbery (a first degree felony): "Sec. 12.32. FIRST DEGREE FELONY PUNISHMENT. (a) An individual adjudged guilty of a felony of the first degree shall be punished by imprisonment in the Texas Department of Criminal Justice for life or for any term of not more than 99 years or less than 5 years. (b) In addition to imprisonment, an individual adjudged guilty of a felony of the first degree may be punished by a fine not to exceed $10,000. Acts 1973, 63rd Leg., p. 883, ch. 399, Sec. 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1974. Renumbered from Penal Code Sec. 12.31 by Acts 1973, 63rd Leg., p. 1124, ch. 426, art. 2, Sec. 2, eff. Jan. 1, 1974. Amended by Acts 1979, 66th Leg., p. 1058, ch. 488, Sec. 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1979; Acts 1993, 73rd Leg., ch. 900, Sec. 1.01, eff. Sept. 1, 1994. Amended by: Acts 2009, 81st Leg., R.S., Ch. 87, Sec. 25.146, eff. September 1, 2009." I don't know about you, but 5 years seems like a pretty ridiculous risk if 6 months was on the table. That is their game. Prosecutors do not like to go to trial because juries are unpredictable. However, they have the overwhelmingly stronger bargaining position of being able to lock you up and throw away the key. http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/Docs/PE/htm/PE.12.htm http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/Docs/PE/htm/PE.12.htm
  - jpatokal 13y ago
    Yup. There was an interesting story on HN a few months back about the parallels between plea bargaining and the Inquisition: faced with either, it's very much in your interest to confess and plead guilty, even if you're innocent. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5058703 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5058703
- gst 13y ago
  In the same situation I'd probably acted the same. Yes, it's likely that the actual sentence would have been much lower. But there's still a very significant chance of spending the rest of your life in jail.
  - tptacek 13y ago
    There was no chance of him spending the rest of his life in jail. That is the point of the preceding comment. Requisite Popehat post: http://www.popehat.com/2013/02/05/crime-whale-sushi-sentence-eleventy-million-years/ http://www.popehat.com/2013/02/05/crime-whale-sushi-sentence...
    - swalkergibson 13y ago
      Those are federal sentencing guidelines. I am not entirely he was charged with a state offense whose mandatory minimum sentence for the count was 5 years. According to the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Federal_Sentencing_Guidelines http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Federal_Sentencin... wiki, state judges are not bound at all to these guidelines. You are absolutely right, he would probably not have spent the rest of his life in jail. However, staring down the barrel of a minimum 5 year imprisonment with the possibility of more, depending on whether or not the judge had a bad day seems way too risky. In my opinion, there should be no mandatory minimum sentences. Each action is literally taken on a case-by-case basis, so what purpose do they serve other than to force defendants into plea bargains?

moron4hire 13y ago

That's the maximum possible sentence that can be applied in any circumstance, but it would not have been possible for him to get it. There is a table for each class of crime that cross references the severity of the crime, the number of crimes committed by the person before, and a very small plus or minus factor for how much the judge likes or dislikes you. As a first-time offender, he would have only been eligible for the minimum category, and unless he was a complete dickhead in the courtroom, the judge almost certainly wouldn't have given the minimum of the category. A few months, at the most. This "99 years" bullshit is just gungho DAs trying to scare the shit out of the populace and assert their badassery.

swalkergibson 13y ago
You are correct, that is the maximum. Here is the minimum for Aggravated Robbery (a first degree felony): "Sec. 12.32. FIRST DEGREE FELONY PUNISHMENT. (a) An individual adjudged guilty of a felony of the first degree shall be punished by imprisonment in the Texas Department of Criminal Justice for life or for any term of not more than 99 years or less than 5 years. (b) In addition to imprisonment, an individual adjudged guilty of a felony of the first degree may be punished by a fine not to exceed $10,000. Acts 1973, 63rd Leg., p. 883, ch. 399, Sec. 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1974. Renumbered from Penal Code Sec. 12.31 by Acts 1973, 63rd Leg., p. 1124, ch. 426, art. 2, Sec. 2, eff. Jan. 1, 1974. Amended by Acts 1979, 66th Leg., p. 1058, ch. 488, Sec. 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1979; Acts 1993, 73rd Leg., ch. 900, Sec. 1.01, eff. Sept. 1, 1994. Amended by: Acts 2009, 81st Leg., R.S., Ch. 87, Sec. 25.146, eff. September 1, 2009." I don't know about you, but 5 years seems like a pretty ridiculous risk if 6 months was on the table. That is their game. Prosecutors do not like to go to trial because juries are unpredictable. However, they have the overwhelmingly stronger bargaining position of being able to lock you up and throw away the key. http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/Docs/PE/htm/PE.12.htm http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/Docs/PE/htm/PE.12.htm
- jpatokal 13y ago
  Yup. There was an interesting story on HN a few months back about the parallels between plea bargaining and the Inquisition: faced with either, it's very much in your interest to confess and plead guilty, even if you're innocent. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5058703 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5058703
gst 13y ago
In the same situation I'd probably acted the same. Yes, it's likely that the actual sentence would have been much lower. But there's still a very significant chance of spending the rest of your life in jail.
- tptacek 13y ago
  There was no chance of him spending the rest of his life in jail. That is the point of the preceding comment. Requisite Popehat post: http://www.popehat.com/2013/02/05/crime-whale-sushi-sentence-eleventy-million-years/ http://www.popehat.com/2013/02/05/crime-whale-sushi-sentence...
  - swalkergibson 13y ago
    Those are federal sentencing guidelines. I am not entirely he was charged with a state offense whose mandatory minimum sentence for the count was 5 years. According to the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Federal_Sentencing_Guidelines http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Federal_Sentencin... wiki, state judges are not bound at all to these guidelines. You are absolutely right, he would probably not have spent the rest of his life in jail. However, staring down the barrel of a minimum 5 year imprisonment with the possibility of more, depending on whether or not the judge had a bad day seems way too risky. In my opinion, there should be no mandatory minimum sentences. Each action is literally taken on a case-by-case basis, so what purpose do they serve other than to force defendants into plea bargains?