Drug offenders could get lighter penalties via Prop. 5
Do drugs control the person or the person control the drugs?
By Paul Sisolak 10/16/2008
Ventura County voters, meet NORA.
Acronymic for the Nonviolent Offender Rehabilitation Act of 2008, NORA is doubly known around California as Proposition 5, a statewide ballot initiative aimed at curbing the drug use of convicted criminals not through imprisonment, but by raising funds for better rehab programs.
If set into motion, Prop. 5 looks to divert offenders of nonviolent crimes linked to drug possession out of jail and into treatment. That’s the big-ticket number voters will be asked to approve next month: Should the state allocate $460 million to enhance such programs?
Law enforcement and legal officials have echoed a resounding no. In Ventura County, they claim Proposition 5 is nothing more than one big drug dealer bill of rights, serving to weaken the judicial and parole systems, empower offenders and hold them less accountable for their crimes.
On the other hand, Prop. 5, according to its supporters, is a step in the right direction toward solving prison overcrowding and providing better drug treatment options
It would also hold offenders more accountable for their addictions, something that tends to be overlooked in today’s justice system, according to one medical professional who supports the proposition. It’s an unforgiving, vicious circle, says Norman
Patton, executive director of Ventura’s Miracle House, for addicts to commit crimes to support their habit, be imprisoned and be released, only to break the law again to support their habit, no better than before.
“Do they want to break the cycle of reoffending,” Patton asks, “or keep the rotation going?”
Prop. 5, prompted by the Drug Policy Alliance, is hoped to expound on Prop. 36, the substance abuse and crime prevention act passed eight years ago, which established similar diversionary alternatives to incarceration for drug offenders. Prop. 5 proposes a three-track operation offering those brought up on drug charges the chance for treatment before incarceration or parole — according to information from the state attorney general’s office, up to 18 months in diversion therapy — depending on the crime and on one’s criminal history.
“It’ll open up more treatment houses and move more people out of incarceration who have drug issues,” says Patton. It becomes a necessary move for a prison community overcrowded at the expense of Californians overtaxed from it, according to the Yes on Prop. 5 deputy campaign manager, Margaret Dooley-Sammuli.
“We’re already spending $10 billion a year on the prison system,” she notes. “We need to implement policies that work.”
But the traditional policies of arrest, trial, conviction and incarceration have been working just fine when it comes to drug enforcement, according to arguments against Prop. 5. Greg Totten, Ventura County’s district attorney, says the initiative could severely compromise the ability of the courts.
“People recognize that for true rehabilitation, whether you have an alcohol or drug problem, you have to have accountability,” Totten said. “What NORA does is remove the criminal justice system’s accountability.”
NORA fuels the misperception, says Totten, of a criminal justice system unsympathetic to solving drug abuse and the criminal behavior it perpetuates.
“Judges genuinely make a serious effort to deal with those defendants who can benefit from rehabilitation programs. Law enforcement officials, we want to see it work,” he said. “But we know you need accountability to see it successful. Judges see it as an erosion.”
Dooley-Sammuli sees Prop. 5 as another option for judges to work with, allowing them to rule on a case-by-case basis which criminals will get treatment, depending on if their crimes were motivated by drug use — and if they are considered nonviolent.
That’s where the line between what is violent and nonviolent can become blurred. Forcible rapes, homicides and aggravated assaults are some of the most significant felonies that wouldn’t fall under Prop 5.
“But there are still other crimes that are significant” among drug users, says Ross Bonfiglio, public information officer for the Ventura County Sheriff’s Department.
According to Kevin Spillane, a spokesman for the No on Prop. 5 effort, NORA could enable people to escape jail time for a long list of crimes — identity theft, auto theft, arson, fraud, even DUIs — if the acquisition of drugs was a factor.
Bonfiglio explained that identity theft is a common offense among methamphetamine users, for one, because it easily supports their habit and, two, because it’s hard to prosecute.
“They’re trying to effectively decriminalize drugs by making it impossible to prosecute them,” says Spillane. “When you’re dealing with an addict, they can’t hold a job, so they pay for their drugs through crime.”
Nevertheless, if it’s understood that certain offenses carry lighter penalties under Prop. 5, those crimes will go up, and the courts will soon find themselves backed up with diversionary caseloads, says Totten.
“It provides a ‘drugs made me do it’ defense to just about anything,” he said.
It’s also important to note the fiscal impacts.
“I think it’s important for voters to note it’s the only measure on the ballot that actually reduces costs to the state,” says Dooley-Sammuli.
DIGG | del.icio.us | REDDIT
Other Stories by Paul Sisolak
Related Articles
Comments
Is it more important to punish the criminal, or to deter the crime?
If the latter, then the question is what is the best deterrence: fear of punishment, or freedom from causation (e.g. poverty from addiction)?
Prop 5 may finally provide adequate resource for effective treatments and the judicial discretion to match.
Addicts may take 5 as a license to steal, but the grip of addiction is such that it can eventually overcome any fear of punishment.
Drugs made me do it"
Rather than take solace in a temporary deterrent effect, it may be better to risk an initial spike in crime to bring addicts into the system for conversion as much as possible into productive citizens. "Drugs made me do it" may not apply to everyone, but mental impairment from drugs certainly makes it difficult to think clearly and see beyond one's appetites.
Dennis