|
Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000), which held that | sentencing factors increasing punishment beyond the maximum | authorized must be treated as elements of crimes to be pleaded | and proved beyond a reasonable doubt rather than as sentencing | factors. Since the "heinousness" standard can be interpreted as | increasing the maximum punishment of up to 20 years to the | "expanded range" of 20 to 40 years, it is potentially | unconstitutional absent legislative correction. |
|
| | The new Title 17-A, section 1252, subsection 2, paragraph A | eliminates the constitutional doubts by replacing the 2-tier | system with a single sentencing range, while preserving the | Supreme Judicial Court's discretion to establish and enforce, | through appellate review, sentencing factors that avoid | excessively harsh sentences. It is not intended that this | change modify current sentencing practices. |
|
| | Section 12 clarifies that if the State pleads and proves | that an actor has 2 or more prior convictions for stalking | under the Maine Revised Statutes, Title 17-A, section 210-A, | the State may not plead and prove further sentencing class | enhancement under Title 17-A, section 1252. |
|
| | Effective January 1, 2004, section 13 eliminates the current | requirement under the Maine Revised Statutes, Title 17-A, | section 1252-B that deductions for good time and meritorious | good time be taken into consideration when a sentencing | alternative involving imprisonment is requested or recommended | by a party or imposed by a court. |
|
| | In 1988 the 113th Legislature enacted the Maine Revised | Statutes, Title 17-A, section 1252-B, which for the first time | expressly precluded a sentencing court from ignoring | administrative awards for good time and meritorious good time | in the sentencing decision and instead required that such | awards be considered. See Public Law 1987, chapter 808, | section 2. |
|
| | Seven years later, in 1995, the 117th Legislature enacted | the Maine Revised Statutes, Title 17-A, section 1253, | subsection 8, which on or after October 1, 1995 markedly | reduced the statutory deductions for good time and meritorious | good time authorized under that same section. See Public Law | 1995, chapter 433, section 4. The resulting disparity in an | administrative award of good time and meritorious good time | for persons committing crimes prior to October 1, 1995 and for | persons committing crimes on and after that date is | illustrated by the following: A person who committed a crime | before October 1, 1995, and subsequently was sentenced to a | term of imprisonment of more than 6 months, and receives | maximum deductions under section 1253, subsections 3, 4 and 5, | or about 180 days a year, will serve about 57% of the term of | imprisonment. A person who |
|
|