"Working together to end mass incarceration by improving the effectiveness and fairness of Virginia's criminal justice system"

Parole in Virginia was abolished in 1995, with the implementation of "Truth-in-sentencing" (no parole). Twenty years later, with little to none needed oversight, two (2) systematic sentencing errors/injustices affecting thousands has been allowed to continue and remain uncorrected. Ever

Systematic Sentence Error #1. Jury Trial/Fishback: Between 1995 and 2000, juries were imposing sentences without knowing that Virginia abolished parole in 1995.  Jurors were not informed even in cases when panels asked if there was parole. Jurors had to make crucial sentence decisions without having all the pertinent information. This created sentencing disparities. Some jurors have publicly stated they would have imposed shorter sentences had they known parole was abolished. Not until June 9, 2000, the Appellate court ruling in favor of prisoner, Richard Fishback v. Commonwealth, 260 Va. 104, 532 S.E. 2d 629 a new sentence did this erred judgment came to light. The Supreme Court stated that it “simply defies reason” not to give jurors the information that parole was abolished. However, its ruling did not apply to sentences already imposed (retroactive). Today over 300 "Fishback" eligible cases remain uncorrected, whereas, the incarcerated individuals languish in prison awaiting Virginia legislatures to take action and apply fair sentence. The Virginia legislature has the power to correct this 20-year sentence error that remains uncorrected. We the resident in Virginia support a "special circumstances" parole eligibility with the incorporation the defendant's original sentence guideline (court sealed) to determine a fair and equity sentence.

Systematic Sentence Error #2. Sentencing Guidelines Disparities: Whereas, when parole was abolished in 1995, Virginia Sentence Guideline(s) Subsection B, mandated "shall" that judges " file with the record of the case a written explanation of any departure from the sentence guideline's recommendation. As of April 9, 2018, the Virginia Criminal Sentencing Commission Judicial Departure Reasons report from FY 2007 to FY 2017, over 10,000 cases in which the sentence imposed upon the defendant exceeded the guidelines with no (mandatory) written reason for departure by the district judges (noncompliance.) What’s worse, Virginia law does not allow any form basis of post-conviction relief or be reviewed upon appeal (Subsection F) when the Courts are in noncompliance. To correct these injustices, amend sentencing guideline provision subsections B and F of the statute to read as follows: Subsection F: The failure to follow any or all of the provisions of this section or the inability to pursue any or all of the provisions of this section in the prescribed manner or the failure to impose a sentence within the range recommended by the sentencing guidelines shall be reviewed on appeal. Subsection F: Noncompliance cases from 1995 to July 1, 2018, shall become "special circumstances" parole eligible with time served per the defendant's original sentence guideline recommendation, currently sealed at the sentencing court.

Each one of us can make a difference. Together we can make change. Help correct sentence errors/injustices of the past that remain uncorrected.