It’s time to get creative in finding ways to cut expenditures. One obvious place that doesn’t seem to have been looked at is the criminal code.
Property crimes are divided into misdemeanors and felonies primarily by dollar amount. The first amount was established in 1971, when $100 was set as the maximum dollar value for a misdemeanor. That amount was raised to $250 in 1987. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, using their CPI calculator, that $100 in 1971 was worth $280 in 1987. This amount hasn’t changed since. It was 16 years for the first increase. Now, it’s been over 20 years, and inflation has made that $250 in 1987 worth $467 today.
If the maximum dollar value of stolen property for a misdemeanor was to be raised to $500, it would have an impact on criminal justice costs. As misdemeanors, many cases could be diverted by the district attorney, which would keep it off the trial dockets. It could mean different, less expensive, levels of probation supervision. It could mean the costs of indigent representation would decrease as well, if there were no possibility of jail time, no appointed counsel would be necessary.
Also, it would be a change to keep fairness in the system. If a kid in high school steals an iPod, it’s automatically a felony because of the retail value. The same holds true for a cell phone. Many kids end up with felonies on a first offense simply because of the value of the item, and as we are all aware, cell phones and iPods are ubiquitous.
If the dollar amount for felonies was adjusted to reflect the rate of inflation over these years, it would restore some fairness into the criminal code, and not let inflation make felons out of those who are guilty only of misdemeanors.
Do you think that an employer would find a distinction in larceny under $500 and larceny over $500? In these days of extreme competition for the most menial jobs, employers would most likely not take a chance on anyone who has a record of crimes involving dishonesty. I would not take a chance on someone who helped themselves to someone else’s property; I would rather hire a reformed drug addict, drunk driver, or someone found guilty of an assault than one who has shown that they cannot be trusted.
<
p>By the way, many felonies are disposed of in the District or Municipal Courts of this Commonwealth. If someone were charged with larceny over $250 and the item was an ipod, that matter would very rarely find its way into Superior Court.
Of course most of these larcenies stay in district court, but larceny over $250 is a felony regardless of what court it gets prosecuted in (it’s known as concurrent jurisdiction). It might not matter to an employer who views a thief as a thief, it matters in sentencing for the offender. It matters to those who receive public housing and/or housing vouchers who might have a family member with sticky fingers who could cost them their housing if they are convicted of a felony.
<
p>It also has a huge impact in the juvenile courts, where conviction of a felony can end an education. Do you really want to end someone’s education over the theft of an ipod or cellphone?
<
p>It’s basically a question of fairness. This dollar amount has been raised before, and it’s time to do it again.
In my work, I see people all the time stealing stupid crap. Blu-rays are the biggest one. I see more of those grow legs and walk out the door than be purchased at probably a rate of 30-1. Sometimes I feel like we need more creative or harsher punishment for these people, but I recognize money could be saved by raising the amount for felony status.
Please tell me how this reduces costs. I do not see one difference. Again, a high percentage of felonies are already resolved in the District or Municipal courts and your ipod or cellphone scenarios are precisely the kind that would be so resolved. Many people charged intitially with felonies have those charges reduced to misdemeanors. Juvenile records are not provided in the records when an employer or a school requests CORI information. Regarding your fairness argument, the theft of five hundred dollars should not be a misdemeanor. If you stole something worth $499 from me I would be seriously impacted. This represents more than one week of take home income for many people in our society. It represents many families’ monthly grocery costs. Stealing is wrong and the laws are lenient enough.
The last time the dollar amount for a felony was adjusted was over 20 years ago. That $250, when it was set, is now worth just a little under $500. Yes, many felonies get reduced, but it’s not guaranteed, and varies depending on which prosecutor is handling the case. Some will, some won’t. And many high school students are 17 and older, and schools will get their CORI’s. And schools find out about juvenile records, which is why there are statutes that allow schools to permanently exclude, under certain circumstances, students convicted of felonies.
there is no finding of guilt unless said juvenile is transferred to the adult system. CORI requests will not include juvenile information unless it is the raw CORI data that is only available to the courts, certain social service agencies like the DSS and to the police. If you requested CORI information for a prospective employee you would not receive ANY juvenile information.