Miss. inmate says law extends jail time

[lionessden]

http://www.desototimes.com/articles/...a097203114.txt

Miss. inmate says law extends jail time


By Jack Elliott, Jr.
Associated Press (Updated: Tuesday, October 14, 2008 5:49 AM CDT)



The state Court of Appeals unanimously has given Mississippi inmate Van Gray the chance to argue he's losing the chance to earn time off his sentence because of how the Legislature wrote a 2004 law.

From time to time, the Mississippi courts have been asked to clarify lawmakers' intentions. Generally, new laws are supposed to be prospective – or pertaining to the future. However, legislators inadvertently have enacted some laws that had a retroactive impact – affecting matters that occurred in the past.

Gray was charged in October 2001 with selling less than 0.1 gram of cocaine to an undercover officer in Lamar County. He pleaded guilty in October 2004 and was sentenced to 15 years, with eight years suspended.

Between Gray's arrest and sentencing, the Legislature enacted a law that eliminated earned time and trusty status for drug offenders.

Gray's argument was that the way corrections officials applied the law eliminated his chance to earn time off his sentence by working or by just being a good inmate.

Lawmakers enacted the law as a way to allow nonviolent prisoners to earn a day off a sentence for every day worked in a trusty program. Previously, inmates had been allowed one day off for every three days worked.

Supporters said the change would get more nonviolent offenders out of prisons, freeing beds for other inmates backed up in local jails.

Gray said the law, as written, prevented him from achieving trusty status and denied him the ability to earn additional time off and, thus, was an increase in punishment.

Appeals Judge Donna M. Barnes said Gray raised a valid point about how the law was being applied to inmates whose drug arrests occurred before the statute took effect in April 2004.

Gray's argument is not unique.

In 1995, the Legislature enacted a law ordering nearly all convicts to serve at least 85 percent of their sentences. By 2000, the Legislature removed that requirement for first-time nonviolent offenders, enabling those convicts to qualify for parole after serving a fourth of their sentences.

Before 1995, an inmate could be eligible for parole consideration after serving 25 percent of a sentence. A Hinds County judge ruled the constitution does not allow a penalty to be changed after a crime is committed but before the punishment is imposed.



The Mississippi Supreme Court in 1996 agreed the law had the effect of "increasing the punishment beyond what was prescribed when the crimes were committed" and "eliminated any possibility for parole for all offenders who were sentenced on or after July 1, 1995, yet who committed their crimes before July 1, 1995."

The U.S. Supreme Court in 1995 in a California case noted that the U.S. Constitution bars states from enacting "ex post facto laws" — any law that creates a new offense or changes the punishment, to the detriment of the accused, after the commission of a crime.

Barnes, writing for the entire Mississippi Court of Appeals, said Gray deserves a hearing to determine whether he was hurt by the 2004 law.

Prosecutors had said because Gray was not a trusty when the new law took effect, the application of the new law to him did not constitute an ex post facto violation.

Barnes said the trial judge should obtain information about how the trusty program works, how many prisoners like Gray are granted trusty status and what the requirements are for trusty-earned time.

Without that information, Barnes said a court cannot determine whether Gray has been subjected to an improper retroactive law.

Jack Elliott, Jr. is a writer for Associated Press

Copyright © 2008 Desoto Times, All Rights Reserved.
Contact the Webmaster

[smithdb2008]

This Post clears up alot of questions for me