Stringer scandal threatens AZ reform
Accusations could hinder sentencing-law changes
The cloud of controversy hanging over Arizona state Rep. David Stringer could threaten more than his political career.
Advocates for leniency in Arizona’s strict criminal-justice system say they worry recent scandals surrounding the state representative could hinder this year’s efforts to overhaul sentencing laws at the Legislature.
Stringer, R-Prescott, has long been one of the most vocal Republicans pushing for changes, arguing the state’s vast prison population shows the need to rehabilitate offenders, not penalize them.
His support could be crucial because few GOP lawmakers have traditionally supported the effort, and their votes are needed to pass new laws.
But Stringer’s backing could now be a political liability.
Stringer faces a House Ethics Committee investigation over two complaints triggered by revelations he was
charged with sex crimes in 1983 and accepted a plea deal. Racist comments about immigrants and black people already had spurred two waves of calls for his resignation last year.
Joe Watson, spokesman for American Friends Service Committee-Arizona, told that reformers are “concerned that opponents of criminal-justice reform may attempt to sink common-sense legislation by simply invoking Rep. Stringer.”
He said the criminal- and social-justice group “hopes elected representatives won’t fall for it” and will instead remember that revamping the justice system is about helping the thousands of families negatively affected by current laws.
“Reform is bigger than any one person,” Watson said.
Republican votes critical for passage
Though Stringer is just one of 90 votes in the state Legislature, his support is significant.
This session, Stringer has sponsored at least 11 criminal-justice bills, including measures he either introduced or has co-sponsored.
The GOP establishment in Arizona traditionally has resisted efforts to repeal mandatory-minimum sentencing laws and other changes that would lessen how harsh the legal system is on offenders.
Republican opposition has softened somewhat in recent months, with lawmakers such as House Speaker Rusty Bowers, R-Mesa, indicating their interest in changes.
But much of the party still opposes adjustments to mandatory-minimum sentencing laws, for instance, as Republican prosecutors including Maricopa County Attorney Bill Montgomery and Yavapai County Attorney Sheila Polk reject them.
That makes every Republican crucial to getting something done.
And it isn’t hard to find examples of how Stringer’s situation already has affected the debate.
Concerns about racist comments have twice led speakers of the House, Bowers and his predecessor, former Speaker J.D. Mesnard, to dissolve criminal-justice committees Stringer was slated to chair.
In December, Bowers announced he vote had disbanded the Sentencing and Recidivism Reform Committee and assigned its work to another committee.
Stringer: Reform efforts motivated by own experience
Scrutiny of Stringer intensified after the published an explosive report last month that revealed he was charged with several offenses, at least one of which related to child pornography, in 1983.
He has defended himself by asserting the allegations were false, saying his own experiences with an unfair justice system explain “why I am a crusader for criminal-justice reform.”
“It is because I was a victim of false accusations, but escaped the worst of consequences, that I have chosen to spend the rest of my career helping others,” Stringer told Prescott eNews, an outlet in which he is an investor, according to its website.
He has said that he was never convicted of a crime, though court records obtained by the show the court entered a judgment of guilt on some combination of charges.
Stringer also said “any kind of porn allegations were completely dismissed,” but the disposition of that charge or charges is unclear from records obtained by the
He said he took a plea of “probation before judgment,” a Maryland sentence that allows someone to have a charge cleared after completing probation. He was sentenced to 5 years of probation.
“There is no guilty plea, no conviction,” Stringer told Prescott eNews. “I have no record. I have done nothing wrong.”
Many details of his 1983 case are unknown given the matter was reportedly expunged, meaning records of the case were erased.
It’s also unclear whether Stringer disclosed his plea deal when he applied for admission to the State Bar of Arizona. He has been a licensed attorney in Arizona since 2004, according to online records.
Applicants must disclose whether they have been arrested, taken into custody, indicted, charged or pleaded guilty to a crime, regardless of whether the matter was expunged.
Rick DeBruhl, a spokesman for the State Bar, said the organization is investigating what Stringer disclosed when he applied to practice law. But that effort could be moot because the Arizona Supreme Court no longer has a copy of Stringer’s 2003 application.
Stringer told the Arizona Daily Independent, a conservative blog, that he’s always complied with disclosure requirements with his applications to practice law.
Reformers ‘scared that good ideas will be lost’
Stringer’s influence isn’t limited to his vote. He has sponsored key bills that advocates worry could now get shelved.
The news of Stringer’s sex-crime charges immediately cast a shadow over House Bill 2300, for instance. That proposal would allow registered sex offenders to return to the courts after five to 10 years, depending on how old they were when they were convicted, and ask for removal from the registry.
Mikel Steinfeld, a lawyer with Arizona Attorneys for Criminal Justice, said advocates pushed for the bill long before the scandal and are “scared that good ideas will be lost just because of the controversy surrounding one person.”
“As long as I can remember, there have been people in the criminal-defense community who have wanted to change this,” he said. “People are being saddled with a lifetime burden for what sometimes is essentially a one-time mistake, and sometimes, it’s a one-time mistake that’s not even rising to the level of a felony.”
Steinfeld said low-level offenders, such as those caught urinating or engaging in consensual sexual activity in public, served as the primary motivation for reformers. But he believes “even those who are convicted of an offense that rises to a higher level could turn their lives around and become the type of exception we want to recognize.”
The legislation would require an offender prove that he or she “has not committed a sex offense since being required to register, is not likely to re-offend and is not a danger to the safety of others” when petitioning for removal from the registry.
It has other safeguards, such as allowing any victims to speak in response to the petition.
But fellow lawmakers said the issue of making Arizona’s justice system fairer was never about Stringer himself.
House Minority Co-Whip Reginald Bolding, D-Phoenix, said major legislative efforts will move ahead without Stringer, because there are more Republicans working on them than before.
“I don’t think Rep. Stringer convinced any of his colleagues ... to do that because how great of an orator he was,” Bolding said. “They’re doing it because they believe in the issue.”
Bolding called for a vote to expel Stringer on the House floor last week but was blocked by Republicans, who said the controversies should be vetted by the House Ethics Committee first.
Bolding subsequently filed an ethics complaint against Stringer, citing his past sex charges and the series of racist comments he made last year.
Among GOP lawmakers who’ve sponsored major justice-reform bills this year is Rep. Ben Toma, R-Peoria. He said he hopes committee chairs will decide which bills get heard based on their merits, not their affiliation with Stringer.
Toma is sponsoring House Bill 2362, which would allow a court to expunge or erase a person’s records of criminal conviction. Arizona currently has no expungement law, and reform advocates say the option can be a critical tool to help rehabilitated offenders move on from their mistakes.
Stringer is one of a handful of GOP co-sponsors.
“I truly believe in this legislation, and I hope that we can get it done this year,” Toma said. “I think that, generally speaking, criminal justice has broad support all the way around.”
Toma said he’s disappointed with how Democrats approached the Stringer controversy, as they’ve pushed for expulsion before an ethics investigation.
“To jump on something that has been expunged and to push to expel a member, and to, at the same time, push that we create an expungement statute in Arizona seems to be a bit hypocritical,” he said.
“We shouldn’t be rushing to judgment, no matter how bad something is.”
The House Ethics Committee has hired an outside law firm to investigate the allegations against Stringer. Chairman T.J. Shope, R-Coolidge, said Thursday that the investigation will be “timely, impartial and thorough.”
“I would urge anyone who has information relevant to this investigation to contact the committee,” he said.