 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Stewart v. State11/21/2001
In the early morning of November 8, 1999, a woman robbed the Carrs grocery on Jewel Lake Road in Anchorage. The robber ran from the store and got into a vehicle driven by Morris B. Stewart. Police officers pursued Stewart through the streets of Anchorage. Stewart, traveling at speeds of up to 55 miles per hour, ran several red lights and stop signs until he was finally boxed in and stopped near the corner of 20th Avenue and Ingra Street (several miles from the site of the robbery). At the ensuing trial, Stewart was acquitted of complicity in the robbery, but he was convicted of the class C felony of first-degree failure to stop at the direction of a police officer, AS 28.35.182(a).
At the time of these events, Stewart was 67 years old, and he was on probation from a 1998 conviction for felony driving while intoxicated. All told, Stewart had nine prior felony convictions, so he was a "third felony offender" for presumptive sentencing purposes. Because he was a third felony offender, Stewart faced a 3-year presumptive term for failing to stop. He also faced the revocation of his suspended term of imprisonment from the previous year's felony DWI conviction.
Superior Court Judge pro tempore Stephanie Rhoades found that the State had proved five aggravating factors under AS 12.55.155(c). (These aggravators are not contested on appeal.) Based on these aggravators, Judge Rhoades sentenced Stewart to the maximum term - 5 years' imprisonment - for failing to stop. She also revoked Stewart's felony DWI probation and imposed 19 months of previously suspended jail time. Judge Rhoades imposed these two sentences consecutively. (In fact, she was required to impose them consecutively.) Thus, Stewart received a composite sentence of 6 years, 5 months' imprisonment.
Stewart contends that this sentence is excessive. To resolve this contention, we must first decide whether Judge Rhoades could properly characterize Stewart as a "worst offender" (thereby justifying imposition of the 5-year maximum sentence for the crime of failing to stop at the direction of the police), and we must next decide whether Judge Rhoades could properly find that the public safety required a composite sentence exceeding 5 years.
Judge Rhoades found that Stewart's present offense was a "garden variety" act of eluding the police. However, based on Stewart's lengthy record of convictions and recidivism, Judge Rhoades concluded that Stewart was a career criminal who could neither be rehabilitated nor deterred, and that he was therefore a "worst offender" for sentencing purposes. Stewart himself concedes that he is "past the point of either deterrence or reformation".
The Alaska Supreme Court has stated that defendants should not receive the maximum sentence for their most serious crime unless they are among the group of "worst offenders". A defendant can be classified as a "worst offender" based on the circumstances surrounding the defendant's present offense, or on the defendant's criminal history, or both. Stewart's lengthy record of criminal convictions supports Judge Rhoades's conclusion that Stewart is a worst offender - thus justifying her decision to impose the 5-year maximum sentence for failing to stop.
The remaining question is whether Judge Rhoades was justified in imposing a composite term longer than 5 years. Under Mutschler v. State, 560 P.2d 377 (Alaska 1977), a defendant should not receive consecutive sentences exceeding the maximum sentence for the defendant's most serious crime unless the sentencing judge finds that this length of imprisonment is necessary to protect the public. We have consistently required adherence to this sentencing guideline.
<
Page 1 2 Alaska DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|