Blog
50 Founders Plaza
East Hartford, CT 06108
50 Founders Plaza
East Hartford, CT 06108
People who are arrested or convicted of sexual offenses, such as sexual assault or crimes against children, often face significant difficulties. In addition to criminal penalties that may include long periods of incarceration and large fines, those who are convicted of sex crimes will usually be required to register as sex offenders. This can impose limitations on where they can live, and it may make it difficult or impossible to find employment. Unfortunately, many people encounter confusion about which laws apply to them, including their requirements when moving to a different state. These issues have been illustrated in an ongoing court case in Indiana involving six defendants who have argued that the state's sex offender registration law treats them unfairly.
The state of Indiana enacted the Sex Offender Registration Act (SORA) in 1994, and in addition to requiring people convicted of sex crimes in the state to register as sex offenders, it also requires people convicted of these offenses in other states to register in Indiana if they will live or work in the state. However, the law placed additional requirements on people from other states; namely, those who were convicted of sex offenses or required to register as sex offenders in other states are required to register as sex offenders in Indiana, even if they committed offenses prior to when SORA went into effect.
The system of mass incarceration in the United States has led to large numbers of people being imprisoned. At any given time, around 500,000 people are being held in prisons throughout the United States, and more than 10 million people are admitted to prisons each year. As the prison system strains to house and provide care for all of these prisoners, criminal justice advocates are calling for other solutions, including alternatives to incarceration. Since 2020, the use of home confinement has increased, and it may provide a more cost-effective and humane solution that will improve public safety.
In 2020, Congress passed the Coronavirus Aid, Relief and Economic Security (CARES) Act, which allowed for the use of home confinement for federal prisoners who were at risk of serious illness due to the spread of COVID-19 in prisons. Home confinement was used for prisoners who were most vulnerable, including those who are elderly or who have significant health issues. This program has been very successful, giving many prisoners the opportunity to reintegrate into the community and remain safe from harm.
The First Step Act (FSA) is a federal law that was passed in 2018, and it was meant to help federal prisoners re-enter society successfully after being released. Unfortunately, there have been problems with the implementation of the FSA, and many prisoners have been unable to fully make use of the programs that should be available to them and earn credits that allow them to be released early. Those who are facing criminal charges and those who have been convicted of federal offenses will need to understand how this law affects them and how they can take steps to demonstrate that they are eligible for early release.
Of the 150,000 people incarcerated in federal prisons in the United States, around 24,000, or 15 percent, are classified as minimum security prisoners. These prisoners should have been afforded rights under the FSA that would allow them to earn credits against their incarceration time and be released to home confinement or other forms of less restrictive custody. Unfortunately, the COVID-19 pandemic has affected many minimum security prisoners' ability to be released early.
While there are numerous situations where people may face criminal charges, some of the most serious cases involve crimes against children. Possession or distribution of child pornography is taken very seriously by law enforcement, and these cases often result in federal charges. However, these cases can also result in confusion about the penalties that may apply following a conviction. Recently, a ruling by the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals addressed how sentencing is handled when considering possession of video depictions of child pornography as opposed to still images.
In the case in question, United States v. Phillips, a man was convicted of possessing 172 images and 92 videos that depicted child pornography. Under the United States Sentencing Guidelines, the sentences in these cases are based on the number of images that a person possessed. However, this leads to some ambiguity, since videos are different than still images. To address this issue, the Sentencing Guidelines include commentary stating that a 75-to-1 ratio should be used for videos. That is, one video should be considered to be equivalent to 75 images. Based on this rule, the defendant in this case was given the maximum sentence enhancement, and he was ultimately sentenced to 151 months in prison.
Drunk or intoxicated driving is illegal. The use of alcohol or other intoxicating substances can significantly affect a person's ability to operate a vehicle safely. A person who is under the influence of drugs or alcohol is much more likely to be involved in a car accident that could result in the injury or death of others. Because of these risks, police officers may pull over drivers who appear to be intoxicated, and if they have probable cause to believe that a person has violated the law, they may perform an arrest, and the person may be charged with driving under the influence (DUI).
However, many people are unsure about how much alcohol they will need to drink to be considered legally intoxicated. An understanding of the blood alcohol concentration (BAC) levels that people are likely to experience after consuming alcohol and the effects that this can have on them can help people know when they are intoxicated and when they may face DUI charges if they drive after drinking.
Minors who are accused of committing criminal offenses often struggle to be treated fairly as they navigate the justice system. Juvenile justice cases typically focus on rehabilitation rather than punishment, and minors are often able to participate in programs meant to help them avoid future criminal activity and ensure that they can have a positive impact on their communities. Juvenile offenders may receive counseling or drug treatment, and they may be sentenced to community service or probation that will allow them to continue living in their homes and attending school. Incarceration in a juvenile detention facility may be appropriate in some cases, but minors will often be given opportunities that will allow them to return to their homes and reintegrate into society.
However, there are some situations where minors’ cases may be transferred to adult court, leading to incarceration in adult prisons and other harsh punishments. Juvenile offenders who are tried as adults often face significant difficulties that limit their opportunities and lead them to re-offend. Because of this, criminal justice advocates are calling for new laws to be passed that will put an end to automatic transfers of juvenile offenders to adult courts and ensure that minors can be treated fairly in the justice system.
The United States has the highest incarceration rates of any country in the world. There are nearly two million people who are held in jails and prisons at any given time, and in many cases, these prisoners are subject to abuse and inhumane treatment. Criminal justice advocates have been calling attention to the conditions in U.S. prisons for years, and they have sought to put reforms in place to protect the rights of prisoners and focus on rehabilitation rather than punishment. In a positive sign, the person who was recently appointed as the director of the federal Bureau of Prisons is looking to implement some of these reforms.
Collette Peters was named the director of the Bureau of Prisons in July of 2022. She had previously served as the director of the prison system in Oregon, where she sought to ensure that prisons were "normal and humane" while also reducing the overall prison population. She plans to implement some of these same policies in the federal prison system and focus on the rehabilitation of prisoners so that they can reintegrate into their communities after being released.
For parents, one of the worst things to contemplate is the possibility that their children will be taken away from them. While most parents will never be in this position, those who learn that they are being investigated by child protective services will be understandably concerned about how they can protect their rights and avoid problems that will affect their families.
When social workers knock on the door of a family's home and demand to search the premises for evidence that children have suffered abuse or neglect, parents will often be unsure about how to respond. In many cases, parents and children are subject to unfair, humiliating treatment. They may not be informed about their rights, and they may be threatened with consequences if they do not comply with all requests made by social workers.
Throughout the United States, child protective services agencies perform around 3.5 million searches of family homes each year. Most of these searches are based on reports of suspected child abuse or neglect by "mandated reporters," such as teachers, childcare providers, doctors, or police officers. However, actual instances of physical or sexual abuse of children are uncovered in only around 5 percent of all cases. This means that millions of families are subject to invasive searches and unnecessary legal proceedings that cause significant disruptions to their lives. Minorities are disproportionately affected by these issues, with Black and Hispanic families making up the majority of people who are investigated by child protective services.
When a person is convicted of a crime, they may be sentenced to a period of electronic monitoring, or EM. This means that they will be required to wear an electronic device that tracks their movements and alerts authorities if they leave a specified area. For years, prosecutors and legislators have touted electronic monitoring as an effective alternative to prison that ensures that people comply with requirements put in place by the court while avoiding any further criminal activity. However, a recent report by the ACLU has found that electronic monitoring programs have failed to meet these goals, and they are actually more likely to result in injustice for people who have been accused or convicted of crimes.
The use of electronic monitoring has expanded significantly over the past 20 years, increasing by 140 percent between 2005 and 2015. It has become even more prevalent in the years since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic as officials have attempted to reduce prison populations to limit the spread of the virus. EM is regularly used during pre-trial release, for those who have been sentenced to probation, and when prisoners are released on parole. Those who are being monitored will often face restrictions on where they can go during different times, and they are subject to constant surveillance over their private lives.
The United States has one of the most extensive prison systems in the world, with nearly two million people being held in confinement in federal and state prisons, local jails, and other correctional facilities. While the total prison population has decreased in recent years, the number of people in the U.S. who are incarcerated continues to outpace other countries. As people continue to be convicted of crimes and imprisoned, advocates have questioned whether the prison system is serving its purpose of keeping people safe. A recent book by a former editor of the New York Times and an advocate for criminal justice reform has looked at how the focus on punishing people rather than helping prevent future crimes has led to an increasingly larger prison system that does not actually improve public safety.
What's Prison For?, a book written by Bill Keller, looks at the issues that have led to the current system of mass incarceration in the United States. When the "war on drugs" began in the 1970s, the rates of incarceration began to increase, and this issue became worse due to laws passed in subsequent decades. The Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1986 put mandatory minimum sentences in place for many drug crimes, as well as disproportionate punishments for offenses related to crack cocaine, resulting in many Black defendants receiving longer sentences than white offenders charged with similar crimes.
50 Founders Plaza
