|
|
| Court ruling to free inmates |
| By Delaware State News |
| Published: 01/31/2005 |
|
Delaware Attorney General M. Jane Brady revealed last Monday that because of a recent court decision, nearly 200 inmates serving life sentences for murder, rape and kidnapping would be eligible for release, some as soon as today. "Everybody thought these individuals would be in jail for life unless they were paroled,'' Ms. Brady said. "Now the Delaware Supreme Court has interpreted the law to mean that life isn't life. They are saying it's 45 years and that a 45-year sentence can be reduced by good time credit. "The practical effect (will) reduce these life sentences to as little as 26 years despite denial of parole. We think there's between 189 and 195 inmates that would qualify for consideration under this ruling.'' Ms. Brady emphasized the high court's ruling does not affect sentences imposed for crimes committed after June 30, 1990, nor does it affect inmates convicted of first-degree murder who were sentenced to life in prison without possibility of parole. Rep. Wayne A. Smith, R-Brandywine Hundred, said he is "outraged'' by the court's decision and vowed to take the matter to the General Assembly for corrective action as soon as possible. "We can't (let) loose all these dangerous criminals on the people of Delaware,'' he said. "It is outrageous that the court apparently ignored the legislature's writing of our sentencing statues in reaching this appalling decision. "I think it is constitutionally obscene to have the court interpret a legislative action and then say, 'Here's what you should have done.' This is a travesty. It is unconscionable in my mind.'' Ms. Brady said the Supreme Court based its decision on the case of Ward T. Evans, an inmate who was convicted Sept. 29, 1982, of first-degree rape and sentenced to life in prison with the possibility of parole. Although Evans was denied parole three times between 1993-99, he filed a motion with Kent County Superior Court on Jan. 8, 2004, claiming his sentence was illegal. According to court documents, Evans argued that under the conditional release clause in the Delaware Code, he was entitled to have a conditional release date calculated as if his life sentence was a 45-year term. The Superior Court denied Evans' motion, so he appealed to the state Supreme Court. The high court agreed to hear Evans' appeal, noting that the case presented "issues of statutory interpretation,'' which the court said it would be reviewing for the first time. In its Nov. 24, 2004, opinion, the court agreed with Evans that his sentence, as applied by the Department of Correction, was illegal because it did not provide a conditional release date. According to the justices, DOC listed Evans' maximum release date as "death'' and his maximum sentence, less good time, as "life.'' "Evans (argued) that the conditional release statute incorporates the definition of a life sentence that is set forth in the parole statute, and that under that latter definition, his life sentence must be fixed as a 45-year term for purposes of calculating his conditional release date,'' the court said. In interpreting the Delaware Code, the court determined Evans was correct because one section defined a life sentence as "a fixed term of 45 years.'' Another section, meanwhile, said an inmate is entitled to conditional release when a maximum sentence ends, less any merit/good time credits earned. "As such, (Evans') sentence is illegal because Evans' maximum release date does not reflect (a) 45-year term,'' the court said. The court said the ruling would not apply to crimes committed after June 30, 1990, when Delaware's Truth-in-Sentencing Act took effect. "That act prospectively eliminated good time credits for inmates serving a life sentence imposed for a Class A felony,'' the court said. "By eliminating such good time credits, the General Assembly intended that a life sentence imposed for a Class A felony would no longer be considered a term of 45 years, but rather would be a natural life sentence.'' Ms. Brady said the court denied the state's motion to have the case re-argued two weeks ago. She said her office is now working to identify which offenders are eligible for release and how soon. |
Comments:
Login to let us know what you think
MARKETPLACE search vendors | advanced search
IN CASE YOU MISSED IT
|
This article exposed what it is like to exist in today’s correctional institutions. I enjoy reading articles like this one and articles from author Hamilton Lindley who is an expert at persuasion, influence and leadership from his Waco, Texas base. There are a lot of important lessons to be learned here for sure. Thank you for the insight.