prison "19 yrs to life"--what determines the time?

Factual Questions
1

You see headlines every day: " man found guilty-- sentence is 19 years to life"
So which will it be: 19 years, or life? There’s a big difference.
Who decides? and how?*

Take today’s news for example: music producer Phil Spector’s murder of a movie star in his bedroom.
He’s guilty of 2nd degree murder and the judge said “the court sentences you to the term required by law of 15 years to life”, plus 4 years for the handgun statute, “for a total of 19 years to life”

So who decides the total time? The parole board in prison 19 years from now? and what criteria do they use?

And for a GD type follow up question: why is the sentence so vague? It could be only 15 years, or , say, 65 years (for a 20 year old convict). That’s a huge variation. I can see why the law is written vaguely (to allow variations for individual cases)-- but why does the judge in this case leave it so vague? The judge has heard all the evidence and knows how dangerous the man is to society. Shouldn’t he be authorized (or even required) to recommend a specific sentence, based on what he feels is appropriate?

In the Spector case, the judge did make his own recommendation in one aspect: the additional sentence. The judge said "for the enhancement statute 225A… (use of the handgun) "the court selects 4 years. So if the judge makes a specific sentence on one small item, why is the main sentence left so vague?

(Obviously if a convict behaves badly in prison they can deny parole…but if he obeys all the rules and never gets into trouble, how do they decide when to release him? The parole board 19 years from now will know nothing about the circumstances of the crime, or what type of character the prisoner had when he was a free man.

*(yeah…this should be a simple question to answer. But a quick Google and wiki search on “determine prison sentences” , and similar terms, got me lots of legal jargon, but no simple answer)

2

The parole board, usually.

If the prisoner can prove that he’s been reformed, he’ll be paroled.

3

The search phrase you’re looking for is “indeterminate sentence.” And yeah, it’s up to the parole board, which decides whether to spring the guy depending on how well he’s behaved in prison, how “rehabilitated” they think he is, what his prospects on the outside are, and so on.

4

Brilliant user name / thread topic combo goin’ on right there, y’all.

5

Yup, pulled the wool right over the eyes of those dopey do-gooders on the board. Came right back to the SDMB to re-offend.

6

welcome to the boards, EO! we like offenders like you :slight_smile: *

okay, so now I’ve learned a little about parole boards…but I still think the judge should have more influence…He sat on the case and knows all the evidence–he should be more qualified to know if a guy is dangerous to society than a parole board 19 years later who can only know how the guy acted within prison.

  • oops! on edit, I see you’ve been around here about as long as I have…
7

Ah, but it’s the parole board in 19 years that can determine if he’s found Jesus. Or, alternatively, if he’s been in regular knife fights.

8

Or if he is Jesus. (When these cons get religion they get it in a big way.) :slight_smile:

9

A hijack perhaps, but tangentially related…

In any debate about atheism, someone is bound to trot out the statistics that show that atheists are significantly underrepresented in the prison population. This is held up as proof that atheists actually have *higher *moral standards than believers.

It disregards the fact that “finding Jesus” makes parole more likely. There’s no way to tell how many of the “reborn” are just good actors! I’m pretty sure if I came up before a parole board, I could do a reasonably convincing impersonation of a born-again Christian.

10

Prisoners in most national systems are assessed and have to take part in sentence planning, or some equivalent.

This is a process which produces a prisoner report at regular intervals, and it evaluates the circumstances of the prisoner, what led them to their offence, and what are the triggers.

From this it will then be determined what programs the prisoner has to complete, which could include detox, anger management, psychology, or perhaps sex offender programs - whatever.

The faster the prisoner completes these programs, and to the parole board satisfaction the earlier they could be considered for release.If they are less compliant, or do not make progress, then release is delayed or denied, it is an incentive to behave.

The system is something of a moving target, prisoners do not always make constant positive progress especially druggies, and some programs must be refreshed periodically. Once one program is done, others will often then be added, and usually a prisoner can only take one route through, they can’t do more advanced levels of rehab until they have completed the formative levels. It means they may start off with only two or three targets, but soon they will have more, rather like Colonel Cathcart in Catch 22 who keeps on adding more missions.

In addition, the prisoners home circumstances will always be considered, family support and that kind of thing, along with educational and employment skills.

It is often a difficult climb up, and easy to fall back down, longer term prisoners often dislike younger short termers who may have fewer conditions placed on them, it can take a long termer a long period of good behaviour and hard work to get into a lower security and easier prison than some young idiot on a shirt sentence. Short termers need to keep a civil tongue when dealing with long termers for this reason among others.

Once released most prisoners are also under supervision and if they break those conditions set upon them to maintain their freedom, then they will be recalled back to prison - its a big problem with licence recalls in the UK as it contribute to the growing prison population.

11

Some crimes have minimum sentence laws, which restrict judges. Judges most times don’t like this. They want to weigh each crime individually. The public sees a murder and basically says “throw away the key.”

As awful as murder is, not every murder is the same. For instance, a true “Crime of Passion” shows that that murder is unlikely to repeat that crime.

By using wide open sentences, the judge is allowing future judges to review the case.

Like in Leopold and Loeb, at the time the judge made it clear in his statements that he didn’t want to see either one released (Loeb was murdered in jail). But the way he sentenced them to jail, it left it open to interpretation.

Indeed after nearly 40 years in prison Leopold was able to make a case for his release. The original judge being long since dead, wasn’t around so people begain to ask, if the original judge wanted “no parole,” why didn’t he sentence them like that. Indeed the original judge said that the youth of Leopold and Loeb was the only thing that saved them from the hangman’s noose.

12

Is it possible he can serve LESS than 19 years?

Don’t prisoners get reviews as early as 1/3 into their sentences? I’ve read about people being let out after serving half of their sentences.

13

Were the stories you read about Texas prisoners? We do it a little differently than some of the other states. Here you get sentenced for a set period of years, with parole eligibility coming at some point less than the entire sentence. Say you go to prison on a possession with intent to deliver case on a sentence of 20 years. You’re eligible for parole after someting like 4-6 years (going on memeory here, mind you) and can parole out in considerably less than your total sentence. If it’s a more serious aggravated (or “3g”) charge, you have to serve at least half of your sentence up to a max of 30 years before you’re parole eligible, so for a 20 year sentence for aggravated assault with a deadly weapon you have to serve at least 10 years before you’re parole eligible.

14

[Ron White]
In Texas, if 3 or more credible witnesses see you commit a capital crime, you go right to the front of the line on death row. Other states are doin’ away with the death penalty, my state’s puttin’ in an express lane.
[/Ron White]

:slight_smile:

15

Not in this case- Spector will not be eligible for his first parole hearing until 2028.
ETA- unless he dies between now and then.

16

I am interested in this as well, and as a follow up:

Would such a person be on parole for life, or could that be ended after 19 years as well?

17

Meaning he’ll be 89 years old before he even gets his first hearing.

18

My two favorite sentencing stories (both probably apocryphal):

  1. A judge sentences a 70-year-old man in a serious white-collar crime case to 20 years. The defendant says, “Your Honor, I’m an old man. I’m not sure I can serve a sentence that long.”

The judge smiles and says, “Just do your best.”

  1. Another judge begins the sentencing hearing by telling the aghast defendant, “Your parole officer hasn’t been born yet.”
19

You’re thinking about “good time”. This is a reduction in sentencing that many prisoners are eligible for by not breaking any prison regulations. A common formula is that you get one day off your sentence for every three days you don’t break any rules. So if you have a nineteen year minimum sentence, you could reduce that minimum to twelve years and eight months by never breaking any rules. A two thirds reduction like you mentioned would be pretty high but may be possible in some states.

20

Not sure how much “good time” will matter with a murder 2 conviction… or if it applies at all.

ETA- no, wait, I think he IS talking about parole hearings starting after only 1/3 of the sentence is served. Many people could be eligible for parole pretty early on- they just may not get it.