A Term Recommendation: Increasing the Maximum Sentence for Armed Robbery

To the esteemed lawmakers and leaders of this great State of Arizona, it is with the greatest respect that the following proposal is submitted for review and anticipated acceptance.

The policy being approached for term recommendation is the current length of sentencing for armed robbery in the State of Arizona. Armed robbery is a class 2 felony, Arizona Revised Statutes 13-1904, which carries a presumptive sentence of five years' imprisonment, A.R.S. 13-701. (Title 13 - Criminal Code, 2007) The maximum sentence applicable in Arizona is 12.5 years for armed robbery with additional and extreme circumstances, in which case the perpetrator is likely facing numerous other charges as well. The issue in front of the esteemed members of the Arizona legislator is whether to increase the maximum length of the sentence or not at this time. It is the authors hope to allow for a balanced decision, which supports the potential increase of maximum sentence length for armed robbery in Arizona.

In 2007 Arizona saw 9,618 robberies which amounts too 151.7/ 100,000 or 1.6 out of every 100 people in the state of Arizona. (State Total- Robberies, 2007) There are various classifications concerning robbery, armed robbery, strong-arm robbery, muggings, and burglary. These classifications are normally set by the Federal Bureau of Investigations utilizing the U.C.R. program. "The UCR Program considers a weapon to be a commonly known weapon (a gun, knife, club, etc.) or any other item which, although not usually thought of as a weapon, becomes one in the commis­sion of a crime. Reporting agencies must classify crimes involving pretended weapons or those in which the weapon is not seen by the victim, but the robber claims to possess one, as armed robbery (3a, 3b, and 3c)." (U.C.R. Handbook, 2004) This means that the total numbers exhibited for robbery as a main category are not necessarily reflective of the total actual armed robberies made. Armed robbery is also considered a dangerous crime, meaning that the danger is inherent in the crime committed due to how the crime is committed, danger is perceived, or violence threatened against the victim. As with any dangerous crime there is a very real threat of physical violence present, while this does not occur in all cases there have been cases that ended quite badly for the victims.

There are several methods of enforcement available concerning crime in general, rehabilitation, incarceration, community justice programs, and restorative justice programs. All of these are valid programs when applied to non-violent crimes, some may work in cases of first time violent offenders as well, it is however the opinion of the author that armed robbery is not one of those. In the case of armed robbery regardless of intent, the potential for grievous injury is possible. It is important to incarcerate dangerous offenders and thereby reduce the risk to society in general. It is important to make a statement showing that violent crimes, and indeed crime in general will not be tolerated in the State of Arizona. A person committing Armed Robbery shows a distinct lack of social awareness and in fact by their actions show a potential willingness to commit potentially greater acts of a violent nature. The current crime related numbers and statistics show an increase in crime since 1998, however, the population has also increased dramatically which by default brings with it the risk of additional crime. It is the intent of the author to show that by doubling the current maximum sentence allowed and publicizing the sentencing and trials of armed robbers we can utilize it as a potential preventative. Arizona has grown with time, as with everything it is important to adapt the laws as well at times.

The Sentencing Reform Act of 1984 requires that the federal sentencing guidelines "reflect the general appropriateness of imposing a sentence other than imprisonment in cases in which the defendant is a first offender who has not been convicted of a crime of violence or an otherwise serious offense...." (Federal Sentencing Policy, 2009) This means that in many cases non-violent crimes may have different sentencing structures. However, with violent crimes i.e. armed robbery, it is imperative to shield the public from the criminal, incarceration is necessary. Extended incarceration has been shown in some studies not to be effective as a deterrent for crime. This does not necessarily mean that extended incarceration for armed robbery should be discounted; in fact, it is the opinion of the author that it should be publicized. It is the lack of knowledge regarding what may occur if you break the law and the glamorized side effects of movie crime etc. that is being seen by youth. By publicizing the result of crime, lengths of incarceration and the true nature of the prison system, (it is punishment and is not a vacation) one can hope that over time longer sentences and the knowledge of that will potentially deter a larger percentage of future crime. Other studies show states with somewhat harsher laws have a lower rate of recidivism and initial crime as well.

The following material shows the results of studies preformed in several locations. "Fifty studies dating from 1958 involving 336,052 offenders produced 325 correlations between recidivism and (a) length of time in prison and recidivism or (b) serving a prison sentence vs. receiving a community-based sanction. The data was analysed using quantitative methods (i.e., meta-analysis) to determine whether prison reduced criminal behaviour or recidivism. The results were as follows: under both of the above conditions, prison produced slight increases in recidivism. Secondly, there was some tendency for lower risk offenders to be more negatively affected by the prison experience. "(Gendreau and Goggin, 1999) Obviously, there is some small merit to keeping the same length of incarceration or potentially even reducing it for some crimes, again however, in the case of violent crime such as armed burglary one must assess the various factors. What is the cost of a human life, if a person is hurt or killed during the commission of a violent crime than has reduced sentencing helped anyone. On the other hand, if we are able to retain a potential repeat criminal in the system for a longer amount of time are we in fact saving those victims? One must remember the ultimate reason for incarceration is not to pamper the criminals; it is to protect the public and punish the criminals.

Currently in Arizona, as a state we have the lowest rate of recidivism, "Arizona had the nation's lowest rate of recidivism, at 24.5 percent." (Ryan, 2008) Given the actions over the last couple of decades with Sheriff Joe Arpaio and his novel approaches to the criminal justice system it is highly probable that a large reason for the decreased recidivism is based on the amount of publicity that shows the negative side of committing crime in Maricopa county and as a result the State (publicity.) His approaches utilizing peanut butter and jelly sandwiches, and a tent city with interesting uniforms and than publicizing seems to be working in the reduction of repeat offenses his "domain" is the Maricopa County jail, and would not directly relate to the prison system. However, by applying, some of those techniques with extended sentences and the use of publicity it is possible that crime would decrease as well as recidivism over time.

Utilizing the information provided so far it is the recommendation of the author that we look at increasing the maximum incarceration time for armed robbery with stipulations. By simply increasing the incarceration time, we stand to reduce recidivism and new crime. It is understood that there is a balance to be sought when approaching an issue as large as this; however, given Arizona's status as a lower crime, extremely low recidivism rates you will make the correct choice in this matter.

Thank you for your valuable time and if you have any questions regarding this proposal please forward them to the author, at the following city, or telephone number. Your time has been greatly appreciated, again thank you.

Reference page:

Gendreau, Paul and Goggin, Claire (1999). The Effects of Prison Sentences on Recidivism. Retrieved August 3, 2009, from Solicitor General Canada Web site: http://www.prisonpolicy.org/scans/e199912.htm

Federal Sentencing Policy, (2009). UNITED STATES SENTENCING COMMISSION. Retrieved August 3, 2009, from United States Department of Justice Web site: http://www.ussc.gov/general/20090206_Alternatives.pdf

Ryan, Cy (2008). Study suggests Nevada prisons do pretty good job of preventing recidivism . Retrieved August 3, 2009, from Los Vegas Sun Web site: http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2008/aug/20/study-suggests-nevada-prisons-do-pretty-good-job-p/

State Total- Robberies, (2007). ARIZONA. Retrieved August 3, 2009, from FBI U.C.R. Web site: http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2007/data/table_05.html

Title 13 - Criminal Code, (2007). Arizona State Legislature. Retrieved August 3, 2009, from Forty-ninth Legislature - Third Special Session Web site: http://www.azleg.state.az.us/ArizonaRevisedStatutes.asp?Title=13

U.C.R. Handbook, (2004). U .S. Department of Justice. Retrieved August 3, 2009, from Federal Bureau of Investigation Web site: http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/handbook/ucrhandbook04.pdf