Hooray for Realignment: Conrad Murray Could Be Released Early Thanks to Jerry Brown’s Pet Law
I thought about writing about this the second I heard about the conviction, but due to the sensitivity of the topic I have waited until it was brought up by Big Media.
Now it’s fair game:
Cooley used the conviction of Michael Jackson’s personal physician for involuntary manslaughter to highlight the risks realignment brings.
Conrad Murray faces up to four years in prison. But under the realignment law, he would spend that sentence in a county jail rather than a state prison. That’s because under the law, involuntary manslaughter as well as crimes such as drug offenses and identity theft no longer require state prison time.
Cooley said that if the County Jail system reaches capacity, Murray could be a candidate for early release.
“There is going to be a tremendous number of people that should be in jail and will not be incarcerated,” he said. “This is the kind of story that will play out over and over again.”
I warned you about realignment in this post. Now you have a man found criminally responsible for Michael Jackson’s death, and he may go free years before his prescribed punishment is served.
Thanks, Jerry!
i forgot about that issue, but i did wonder how much time he would serve in your prisons with that supreme court decision.
the good news is that his license is taken away, if memory serves.
Aaron Worthing (e7d72e) — 11/11/2011 @ 11:48 amuntil they prosecute Jackson’s retinue and extended family, they won’t have dealt with everyone criminally culpable in his death.
starting with his never to be sufficiently damned father, the number of greedy ba5tards who aided, abetted and fueled the years long in the making murder will undoubtedly both walk untouched and continue to profit from the corpse of the person they killed.
just my POV, YMMV.
redc1c4 (fb8750) — 11/11/2011 @ 12:02 pmYou know how the New York Times famously talked about crime going down “despite” the increase in incarceration?
Maybe we’ll see a story about crime going up “despite” all the criminals being released . . .
Patterico (f724ca) — 11/11/2011 @ 12:06 pmHe will probably end up assassinated by an MJ die-hard. Justice is still served.
The Emperor (2fabb9) — 11/11/2011 @ 12:12 pmIt was mentioned in the news right when he was convicted.
AP story, Wednesday, November 9, 2011:
http://my.news.yahoo.com/crowding-could-impact-jail-time-jacksons-doc-231909817.html
LOS ANGELES (AP) — Michael Jackson’s doctor is guaranteed to spend the next three weeks in jail awaiting sentencing for the pop star’s death.
But the amount of time Dr. Conrad Murray serves after that could be shortened because of the overcrowded prison system in California.
A recently enacted realignment plan diverts nonviolent offenders such as Murray from state prisons to county jails to save money and reduce the state prison population to obey a federal court order.
However, law enforcement authorities have said nonviolent offenders could be released earlier to make room for more serious offenders in county lockups.
Jail overcrowding led to Lindsay Lohan walking out of county jail Monday after spending less than five hours of a 30-day sentence behind bars for a probation violation.
A judge could sentence Murray to a maximum sentence of four years, but it would fall to the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department to decide just how long he actually spends in county jail, based on time served, good behavior and other factors.
Even without realignment, a four-year sentence could be cut in half if Murray stays out of trouble in jail.
Los Angeles County District Attorney Steve Cooley has blasted the realignment plan, saying already overburdened counties can’t handle additional inmates.
In post-verdict comments, Cooley called the new law a “fool’s errand” and said Murray “is probably the first of many, many, many poster-children cases that will reveal how (the law) is potentially a complete failure, a criminal justice disaster and it will impact public safety.”
Terry Thornton, a spokeswoman with the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, declined to comment on how the realignment might affect Murray. Steve Whitmore, a spokesman for the Sheriff’s Department, also declined comment.
Murray was convicted of involuntary manslaughter for supplying an insomnia-plagued Jackson with a powerful operating-room anesthetic to help him sleep as he rehearsed for his big comeback.
Murray, 58, sat stone-faced as he heard the verdict that could send him to prison and cost him his license to practice medicine. He was handcuffed and immediately led off to jail without bail to await sentencing Nov. 29….
Prison terms for non-violent crimes have almost effectively been abolished in California (or reduced by 90%)
Lindsay Lohan is another case in point.
Sammy Finkelman (3a0ae4) — 11/11/2011 @ 12:28 pmPerhaps he can have Lindsay Lohan serve his sentance?
AD-RtR/OS! (556f44) — 11/11/2011 @ 12:59 pmIn my opinion, Murray is not likely eligible for realignment treatment and should be sent to prison if he is not given probation. The reasons for this are a little technical, but I’m going to get technical.
I realize that anyone reading this will bet on Steve Cooley and Patrick over JRM, and you might be right.
And the view that involuntary manslaughter may be sentenced to local imprisonment is true, in those cases in which it is not a strike. However, involuntary manslaughter is often a strike, and appears to me (based on my limited knowledge of the case) to be a strike in this specific case. At the very least, it seems that surrendering on the issue is misguided.
Realignment under PC 1170(h) allows for local imprisonment for more than a year in some fairly spectacular scenarios; we have two recidivist drug dealers facing 20+ years who will serve locally rather than state prison. The threshhold questions are twofold:
1. Was the section rewritten to make the person eligible for local imprisonment? Some non-strikes were not. And, it appears, at least one (usual) strike was amended: PC 192(b), involuntary manslaughter. The code specifically provides for the sentence to be served under 1170(h), which is local imprisonment. We’re past step one.
2. There’s an exception to the above: If D is convicted of a serious felony (a strike), he’s going to state prison. Involuntary manslaughter is, in fact, a strike in those cases in which the decedent is not an accomplice and the death was personally inflicted.
People v. Gonzales (1994) 29 Cal.App.4th 1684 specifically talks about manslaughter (in that case, vehicular manslaughter) and also notes that the prior cases indicating involuntary manslaughter is a non-strike appear to have been wrongly decided. The California Supreme Court, in People v. Equarte (1986) 42 Cal.3d 456 rejected the type of analysis done in People v. Cook, the 1984 case which indicated that involuntary manslaughter was a non-strike.
However, you need to then show two extra things to make your strike: First, that the deceased was not an accomplice. Jackson was not a legal accomplice in this case.
Second, you have to show that the death was personally inflicted. Personal infliction and legal causation are different. There’s case law on vehicular manslaughters; if I drunkenly cut off Steve who veers into Larry and kills him, I am guilty of the manslaughter – but not of the strike. If I hit Steve and kill him (or hit Steve’s car, which hits Larry’s car and kills Larry) I’m guilty of a serious felony.
So the question is whether Murray directly caused the death by administering the anesthetic which killed Jackson. In these cases, proof can be shown from the record (a jury finding on the specifics is unnecessary.) (See, for instance, People v. Johnson (1991) 233 Cal.App.3d 1541, 1548; People v. Purata (1996) 42 Cal.App.4th 489.) Additional evidence indicating these facts can be there without a jury finding.
I recognize that there was an issue as to whether Murray personally administered it and the prosecution argued that it didn’t matter. Which it didn’t, as far as the conviction. But it matters as to his eligibility. If I am wrong that there was evidence that Murray administered it, then my analysis on this specific case is also wrong.
FWIW,
–JRM
JRM (de6363) — 11/11/2011 @ 6:42 pmOne other note: I think that the argument that the language of 193(b) overrides the strike rule for 1170(h) is quite weak. I think the analysis is properly stepped the way I did it; that appears to be the way 1170(h) calls for it to be done.
–JRM
JRM (cd0a37) — 11/11/2011 @ 7:29 pmI don’t see why I should care. He’s not a danger to the public. He didn’t intend to do anything wrong. He was reckless, and needs to be punished in order to create an incentive for people to be more careful when dealing with very dangerous things. OK, he’s been convicted and sentenced; goal served. Getting out early won’t change that.
Milhouse (ea66e3) — 11/12/2011 @ 9:34 pm1) He’s not a danger to the public, at least not in comparison with the violent criminals Cal corrections is jammed with.
2) Was causing the death of Michael Jackson was actually a crime and not a public service? If Jerry Sandusky’s physician had “accidentally” overdosed him in 1998, would that have been a crime?
Rich Rostrom (a1750d) — 11/13/2011 @ 3:14 pmSomething that makes big political differences that a citizen has no control, nor knowledge of..
truth seeker (564935) — 11/15/2011 @ 4:52 ami’m not looking for Obama bashings either…