Life in Prison for Stealing $48?: Rethinking Second-degree Robbery as a Strike Offense in Washington State
| Publication year | 2011 |
I. Introduction
When Stevan Dozier was released from incarceration after fifteen years, he "tried not to look at the prison behind him."(fn1) Instead, he ran forward toward his wife, Lillian, and graciously thanked her for supporting him during his incarceration.(fn2)
After graduating from high school in 1979, "Dozier began getting into trouble and abusing" cocaine.(fn3) As his drug addiction worsened, he became increasingly desperate to support his habit. As a result, "he was arrested after punching a woman during a purse snatching" in 1986 and arrested again for the same crime in 1988.(fn4) Each purse snatching constituted a second-degree robbery conviction.(fn5) Then, in February 1994, Dozier pushed down a sixty-nine-year-old woman and grabbed her purse, which resulted in his third second-degree robbery conviction.(fn6) He was subsequently sentenced to life in prison without parole, pursuant to Washington State's Persistent Offender Accountability Act (POAA), commonly referred to as the "three strikes" law.
Under the POAA, second-degree robbery is considered a "strike of-fense."(fn7) In Washington, strike offenses include a variety of crimes(fn8) from first-degree promoting prostitution(fn9) to first-degree manslaughter.(fn10) Under the POAA, once an offender has three separate convictions of crimes considered strike offenses, the offender receives a mandatory sentence of life without parole.(fn11) Essentially, as in its baseball namesake, under the POAA, three strikes and an offender is out. In 1993, the Washington State legislature adopted this three strikes policy to "[r]educe the number of serious, repeat offenders by tougher sentencing."(fn12) This reasoning is grounded in the notion that repeat offenders commit a "disproportionately high volume of violent crimes."(fn13) For example, at the time of the POAA's adoption, nearly 50% of the criminals convicted in Washington had prior criminal histories.(fn14)
"During [Dozier's fifteen] years in prison, he held down a number of jobs, attended drug and alcohol counseling, and joined the 'Concerned Lifers,' a group of men serving life sentences who convene to discuss social issues."(fn15) Dozier's behavior in prison while serving a life sentence without parole earned him the support of King County Prosecutor Dan Satterberg, the judge who sentenced him to prison Brian Gain, and conservative talk-show host and three strikes coauthor John Carlson.(fn16) After Dozier spent years waiting and hoping, Washington Governor Christine Gregoire granted him clemency "based upon the length of his sentence, the crime he committed, and his behavior in prison."(fn17) Dozier is the first "three-strikes offender to be granted clemency" in Washington.(fn18)
Following Dozier's release in May 2009, two more three strikes lifers have been recommended for conditional clemency.(fn19) Both Al-Kareem Shadeed and Michael Lee Bridges have spent fifteen years in prison, and for both, attempting to steal a wallet was their third strike offense that earned them a life sentence.(fn20) Like Dozier, both men are former drug addicts(fn21) who have now become model prisoners.
Shadeed, now forty, was twenty-four when he was sentenced to life in prison after attempting to steal a wallet from a high-school teacher.(fn22) His prior strike convictions consisted of robbery, the first for $2 and the second for less than $150.(fn23) According to Shadeed's attorney, the victim of his third strike offense told Shadeed's trial judge that "a life sentence was a waste of the young man's life."(fn24) Within his first year of incarceration, Shadeed earned his high school diploma.(fn25) Additionally, he "took classes in writing and business, . . . consistently attended Narcotics Anonymous meetings, and participated in a series of programs that brings victims and offenders together."(fn26)
Similar to Shadeed, Bridges, now forty-eight, was "an alcoholic and cocaine addict in 1994" when he attempted "to steal a man's wallet that would have netted him $48."(fn27) He grabbed the victim's wallet and pushed him away with sufficient force to constitute second-degree rob-bery.(fn28) Bridges had previously been convicted of second-degree robbery in 1987 and 1989-before the POAA was even enacted.(fn29) Accordingly, his 1994 attempt was his third strike because the POAA is retroactive and includes crimes committed prior to its enactment.(fn30) "Since being sentenced to life in prison, Bridges has undergone drug and alcohol treatment, become a Christian and worked to be a good father to his now-16-year-old son . . . ."(fn31)
For each of these men, his third and final strike was second-degree robbery.(fn32) "None of the three men used weapons or caused serious injury to their victims."(fn33) Without the application of the POAA, these defendants would have served between fifteen months and ten years in prison for their third second-degree robbery convictions.(fn34) But because second-degree robbery has been categorized as a "most serious offense" for the purposes of the POAA, these men were sentenced to life in prison without parole-the same sentence that Gary Ridgway, the Green River Killer, received after pleading guilty to forty-nine murders.(fn35)
The Washington State legislature should remove second-degree robbery as a final strike because of the large sentencing disparity between the POAA's mandatory sentence of life without parole versus the Washington State Sentencing Guidelines Commission's sentencing range for this offense. But second-degree robbery should remain as a first or second strike offense to serve the goal of deterrence, and failing that, to ensure the incarceration of offenders whose crimes escalate in violence.
This Comment begins by discussing the history of three strikes legislation both nationally and in Washington State and explains why three strikes laws became popular in the mid-1990s. Part II also addresses the elements and sentencing of second-degree robbery under Washington's current sentencing structure. Part III provides an overview of the sentencing process in Washington State, including the background of the Washington Sentencing Guidelines Commission and its goals; the role of both the governor and the Washington State Clemency and Pardons Board in granting clemency; and the severity of life in prison without parole. Part IV addresses why the POAA should be amended to better align with the reality of how Washington prosecutors use second-degree robbery as a strike offense. Part IV also assesses the disconnect between the outcomes and the goals behind three strikes laws, and the politics behind criminal sentencing legislation including Washington State Senate Bill 5292 and Senate Bill 5236.
II. Background
Three strikes legislation became increasingly popular in the mid-1990s. This Part first outlines the reasons behind the widespread emergence of three strikes legislation during this time. Next, this Part discusses how and why three strikes legislation was adopted in Washington State as well as the goals behind the legislation. Finally, this Part concludes by discussing the elements and sentencing of second-degree robbery in Washington State.
1. Three Strikes Legislation Nationally
During the early 1990s, three strikes legislation was publicized as "a new way to fight crime in America."(fn36) But prior to the 1990s, many states had already enacted laws similar to three strikes laws called "habitual offender" laws.(fn37) For example, Washington State had a Habitual Criminal Statute.(fn38) that became ineffective after the Sentencing Reform Act of 1981.(fn39) The main difference between a habitual criminal statute and a three strikes law is semantic. For example, a habitual criminal statute focuses on the "status" of the criminal if he commits a certain number of crimes; the status as a "habitual criminal" is what determines his punishment. Conversely, a three strikes law may refer to the offender as being habitual, or "persistent" as in Washington, but shifts the focus from status to the number of crimes the offender commits.
In 1993, Washington was the first state in the nation to adopt a three strikes law, the POAA.(fn40) The POAA was "modeled after and more narrowly drafted than Washington's habitual criminal statute," (fn41) which applied after the third conviction of any felony. Subsequently, between 1993 and 1995, twenty-four states and the federal government.(fn42) adopted similar three strikes laws.(fn43)
Three strikes legislation is rooted in the notion that repeat offenders, "who represent a relatively small component of the offender population, commit a disproportionately high volume of violent crimes."(fn44) For example, three strikes supporters often rely on federal statistics that show " percent of criminals commit about 70 percent of all crimes."(fn45) Hence, crime rates should decrease if these persistent offenders are imprisoned for a lengthy amount of time.(fn46) Additionally, proponents of three strikes laws hope that offenders will be less likely to commit a crime when they know the punishment could increase.(fn47) A potential deterrent effect exists when a person is convicted of a strike offense because both...
To continue reading
Request your trial