Battle intensifies over criminal justice reform
The battle over criminal justice reform efforts is heating up at the state Capitol as House lawmakers prepare for possible key committee votes Friday on measures that seek to lower the state’s incarceration rate by decreasing penalties for nonviolent crimes.
Proving to be particularly contentious is House Bill 2281, which seeks to decrease the number of people incarcerated for low-value property crimes by making the theft of items valued at less than $1,000 a misdemeanor rather than a felony. The current felony threshold is $500.
The bill also takes a tiered approach to the length of potential sentences to be handed down for thefts greater than $1,000 with longer sentences possible for crimes where the value of items stolen is greater.
Former House Speaker Kris Steele, a staunch reform advocate, said the bill brings logic to property crime sentencing by making sure punishments aren’t overly harsh based on the value of the property taken.
“Right now, we’re sending people to prison for small dollar amount thefts when there are more effective alternatives available,” Steele said. “The bill is especially important for reducing the female incarceration rate. Too often, we see mothers battling addiction or poverty sent to prison and branded a felon for low-value property crimes, like stealing diapers, or paper crimes, like hot checks. This breaks up families and has a ripple effect far beyond the individual who is incarcerated. The bill will be a big step toward breaking that cycle and reserving prison beds for the dangerous offenders who need to be there.”
Expressing concerns about the measure is the Oklahoma District Attorneys Council.
Trent Baggett, executive coordinator of the District Attorneys Council, sent a message to House members saying prosecutors were concerned that the bill “tends to minimize the impact of stealing items of lesser value or stealing from poor people.”
“It penalizes persons more harshly for stealing items from people who can afford more expensive items,” Baggett wrote. “While this may not have been the drafters intent, that is the practical effect.”
Baggett also complained that the bill would complicate prosecutors’ jobs by making them spend “scarce resources” determining the value of stolen property and that provisions related to the theft of drugs were problematic. Steele questioned the reasoning behind Baggett’s arguments.
Prosecutors must determine the value of items now to determine whether a theft is a misdemeanor or felony and the process of determining value would remain unchanged, he said.
As for the argument that the bill would unfairly impact poor crime victims, Steele said, “the idea is to treat those who do greater damage to the community and victims, such as organized property theft rings, more severely than those whose crime has a lesser impact, such as shoplifters.”
Roy Williams, president of the Greater Oklahoma City Chamber, said he believes it is time for prosecutors and lawmakers to look at the high cost of locking up so many people.
“We’re headed down a path that we cannot afford,” said Williams, who participated in the governor’s task force that studied criminal justice reform.
Williams said Oklahoma has stronger penalties and longer sentences for crimes than most states, but it hasn’t resulted in a lower crime rate.
“There’s no correlation that if you’re harder on crime, you have a lower crime rate,” he said.
“We’re continuing to incarcerate more and more people and we’re beyond the capacity of the prison system,” Williams said. “What is being overlooked by a lot of people is the economics of this. If we’re going to continue to lock up everybody, how are we going to pay for it? Is that going to be money that we’re not going to spend on education and transportation?”