|
|
| Legislature seeking more info on bills |
| By scindependent.com |
| Published: 04/14/2011 |
|
PROVIDENCE - At a hearing last week, the House Judiciary Committee pulled for further study proposed legislation aimed at preventing inmates convicted of certain violent crimes from earning good-time credits while incarcerated. In holding the bill for further study, the committee determined more dialogue between stakeholders was needed before it voted on the legislation. State Rep. Teresa Tanzi (D-Dist. 34) of Narragansett and South Kingstown introduced the legislation to the House, while an identical bill introduced by Sen. V. Susan Sosnowski (D-Dist. 37) of South Kingstown passed the Senate Judiciary Committee last week. Attorney General Peter F. Kilmartin drafted the bill after news surfaced that convicted child killer Michael Woodmansee was scheduled for release from prison this summer, 11 years earlier than expected, because of a program that awards inmates credits off of their sentence for good behavior while incarcerated. Woodmansee was sentenced in 1983 to 40 years in prison for the Peace Dale murder of 5-year-old Jason Foreman. If released this summer, he would have served slightly less than 29 years of his sentence. At Thursday's hearing, testimony against the legislation harped on the fiscal and structural impact the legislation would have. Last week, the Department of Corrections submitted to the State Budget Office a report on the legislation's financial impact. The details of that report were not made public when the Independent went to press, but Department of Corrections Director A.T. Wall said during testimony the impact would be substantial. "I will say this: We already know that the number of full-time employees and the cost of Corrections will be driven upward by this bill, and not in small amounts," Walls said. "That much I can say for certain today." The bill also states than any inmate eligible to receive good-time credits could earn up to 12 days a month, awarded at the discretion of the director of Corrections. Wall disagreed with what he called an overlying presence of the bill, which would force the department to take into account the circumstances of the inmate's crime when deciding whether to award good time. Wall said he believed it was the judiciary's responsibility to issue sentences, and asking his agency, which operates under the executive branch, to do the same, was a separation of powers issues. "At the time of conviction, the offender is punished by being sent to prison. This bill asks the Department of Corrections to punish the inmate not on behavior, but on the nature of the crime," he said. In terms of logistics, Wall said determining good-time credits on a case-by-case basis would be nearly impossible. "It removes predictability and stability," he said. "Every month everyone in the system wonders if I'm going to give them five days or three days." If the bill becomes law, the Parole Board would be responsible for supervising any inmate released on good behavior for the balance of their sentence. At Thursday's hearing Dr. Kenneth R. Walker, chairman of the Parole Board, said the current makeup of the department couldn't handle the drastic increase in parolees. Of the seven members of the Parole Board, the chairman is the only full-time employee. Walker said if the legislation passes, the six other members would need to become full time, which the state couldn't afford. "The State of Rhode Island can't possibly pay those individuals the sum of money it would take to keep them on board," said Walker. Bruce Reilly, with inmate rights activist group Direct Access for Rights and Equality, drew from his experiences while incarcerated in testifying against the legislation. He argued that the ease with which inmates could earn good time has been overstated. Under current law, inmates can shave a total of 17 days a month off of their sentence: 10 days for good behavior, two days for maintaining employment and another five days for attending prison programs. Reilly said hardly anyone earns 17 days a month. "It's like saying every baseball player can hit a home run every time up. It just doesn't happen," he said. For instance, when an inmate is sent to solitary confinement for 30 days, he or she will lose one good-time day for each day of confinement. Reilly pointed out that it was reasonable to suggest someone could lose one year of good-time credits for being disciplined four times in one year. "This is not like giving out candy," he said. He previously served 14 years of a 20-year sentence for second-degree murder. When he was paroled, he had accrued nearly three years of good-time credits. Reilly reminded the committee that because he was convicted of second-degree murder, he would have been eligible accrue good-time credits. "There is a big range in what we consider to be an egregious offense," said Reilly. "You can't just look at their charges and think you know them." Read More. |
MARKETPLACE search vendors | advanced search
IN CASE YOU MISSED IT
|
Comments:
No comments have been posted for this article.
Login to let us know what you think