Krasner Says Cost of Incarceration Should Factor in Sentencing
Krasner said the policy is aimed at bringing "balance back to sentencings."
March 15, 2018 at 05:16 PM
4 minute read
Larry Krasner.
Along with the usual factors that prosecutors consider before recommending a sentence, such as a defendant's prior criminal history and the severity of the crime, assistant district attorneys in Philadelphia should now also consider how much each jail sentence would cost the taxpayer, according to a new policy outlined by District Attorney Larry Krasner.
On Thursday, Krasner said the cost of incarceration will be considered by prosecutors when making their sentencing recommendations. According to the District Attorney's Office, Philadelphia will apparently be the first prosecutors' office in the United States to institute a cost-efficiency policy in sentencing.
During a press conference announcing the changes, Krasner said the policy is aimed at bringing “balance back to sentencings.”
“Fiscal responsibility is a justice issue,” Krasner said. “A dollar spent on incarceration should be worth it. Otherwise that dollar may be better spent on addiction treatment, on public education, on policing, and on other types of activity that makes us all safe.”
The new sentencing considerations will be based on the estimation that inmates cost taxpayers $42,000 a year. According to the policy, ADAs will be expected to weigh how much each proposed prison sentence would cost, and then explain why a jail sentence, rather than an alternative sentence, such as addiction treatment, justifies the incarceration cost.
At the press conference Thursday, Krasner was dismissive of suggestions that the changes would embolden criminals, saying that the notion of sentences as deterrents has not worked and that many people who might be affected by the changes have addiction or judgment issues and would likely not be aware of the policy anyway.
“We are not concerned this is going to produce a zombie invasion of crime,” he said. “It's doubtful people would be aware these policies exist.”
Prosecutors, however, were admittedly unsure exactly what the long-term outcome of the new policy will be.
At the start of the press conference, Krasner said the efforts were “designed to end mass incarceration,” but Carolyn Engel Temin, a top deputy in his office, used less sweeping language.
Temin said cost of incarceration would not be the single decisive factor in making sentencing recommendations, but the DA would incorporate costs along with other factors.
“It's a factor to be considered. It does not mean that this is the reason for deciding a certain sentence is appropriate,” Temin said. ”We aren't designing it to do anything special with regard to a specific case.”
Another top deputy, Robert Listenbee, said that, in conjunction with other new initiatives, such as no longer seeking bail for certain crimes, the change is part of the office's overall efforts toward ending mass incarceration. However, he noted, the sentencing determinations will ultimately remain in the hands of the judges.
“Judges will then decide how they want to address these issues, both in the courtroom and also in the policy situations that they are part and parcel of,” Listenbee said.
All three said what they hoped the new policy would bring about is that ADAs will be more mindful of how they make their sentencing recommendations.
“ADAs will be more careful with what they recommend,” Krasner said. “We want them to be independently active, moral agents with their own moral compass, who use their discretion, like real professionals. That has to be developed and it won't be developed if we continue to have a system where years are not compared to money, are not compared to their other uses.”
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllJefferson Doctor Hit With $6.8M Verdict Over Death of 64-Year-Old Cancer Patient
3 minute readPhila. Med Mal Lawyers In for Busy Year as Court Adjusts for Filing Boom
3 minute readPhila. Jury Hits Sig Sauer With $11M Verdict Over Alleged Gun Defect
3 minute readPhila. Attorney Hit With 5-Year Suspension for Mismanaging Firm and Mishandling Cases
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Judge Denies Sean Combs Third Bail Bid, Citing Community Safety
- 2Republican FTC Commissioner: 'The Time for Rulemaking by the Biden-Harris FTC Is Over'
- 3NY Appellate Panel Cites Student's Disciplinary History While Sending Negligence Claim Against School District to Trial
- 4A Meta DIG and Its Nvidia Implications
- 5Deception or Coercion? California Supreme Court Grants Review in Jailhouse Confession Case
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250