Plea deals must reflect crime committed, judges demand

9-18-15 Ohio:

Judge Michael P. Donnelly had seen enough by the time his spreadsheet of plea deals in sexual-assault cases reached nearly 200.

In each case, the defendant pleaded guilty to a lesser crime that bore no factual resemblance to what occurred, allowing many to avoid sex-offender registration requirements.

Many rape cases involved pleas to aggravated assault, a crime involving serious bodily harm in which the defendant was provoked by the victim — a scenario common in a drunken bar fight but wildly inconsistent with rape.

“It’s sidestepping the truth. It’s legal fiction, nothing more than a lie,” said Donnelly, a Cuyahoga County Common Pleas Court judge. “No one can defend this process. There is no ethical defense.”

With Donnelly leading the charge for change, the Ohio Supreme Court — unless legislators object — could amend court rules to require charges in felony plea deals to be factually based — to reflect what actually occurred.

“Ending the charade” would promote transparency and foster public accountability in the justice system, Donnelly said. “We can't be allowing pleas to something that everyone knows didn’t happen.”

Sex offender treatment available, not always mandatory

12-4-2009 Ohio:

CLEVELAND – As the women found dead in and around the home of accused rapist/murderer Anthony Sowell’s home on Imperial Avenue have been identified and laid to rest by their loved ones, many people – particularly women – are left wondering if there are any more men capable of committing such crimes wandering the streets and, if so, how many?

To gain some insight, let’s consider a few already known facts in this case.

One, the accused has a history of rape as he served 15 years in prison after a victim escaped then reported him. Secondly, he was a registered sex offender.

Third, we know he received no treatment while in prison or upon release.

Now, when you examine the Cuyahoga County Sheriff’s Department registry of sex offenders, you’ll find that 2,406 sexual offenders ranging between the three-tiered types of offenses are listed in Cleveland alone. Even Beachwood has 10 while Pepper Pike has one.

Sex offenses include everything from soliciting for sex to rape and, of course, having sex with minors. Tier 1, the lowest, is anything other than a Tier II or Tier III offense.

However, the real questions become: Are there any organizations or support groups to assist men plagued with these kinds of issues as well as what kind of treatment do they receive while in prison? Also, is anyone looking at why people commit such crimes and how to prevent them from recurring?

Ohio Public Defender's Office and Cases

July 2009:

In essence this is a link to the Ohio Public Defender's website where they list all cases, past and present, that fall under SB-10 which is the changes made to Ohio law based on the Adam Walsh Act.

In addition, they have links to Ohio state courts and forms necessary to appeal decision of reclassification based on the Adam Walsh Act.

Finally they also show some relevant cases in other states that folks may use in their quest.

There is a fine list of document available in their "Other Section" one being "Guide to Ohio’s Sex Offender Registration and Notification Laws “SORN”"

eAdvocate

OH- REPORT TO THE OHIO CRIMINAL SENTENCING COMMISSION: SEX OFFENDERS

January 2006

INTRODUCTION
The effective management of sex offenders has been an ongoing concern for policymakers nationally. In summer 2005, the Ohio Criminal Sentencing Commission created a Penalty Review Subcommittee to examine the research and current statutes in Ohio to determine if there was a need for recommendations to improve Ohio’s management of sex offenders. The purpose of this report is to provide information on sex offenders in Ohio’s prisons and discuss what works in effectively managing this population.

The first section provides a statistical snapshot of the offenders in 1999 at Ohio’s Sex Offender Risk Reduction Center (SORCC), sentencing information for calendar year 2003 offenders, and length of stay information for sex offenders released from the system in the past five years. The data given is designed to provide background information for the review of policy.

The second section of the report is a discussion of what works based on 15 years of research on sex offender assessment, treatment, and recidivism. Canadian and British researchers have been trying to identify the characteristics of the “sexual predator,” or the sex offender who is violent and causes the most harm to society. Colorado has had a sex offender management and containment approach since 1992 when the legislature created the Sex Offender Management Board as an oversight board for policy. The Board has completed several research studies on the effectiveness of treatment and management of sex offenders. This research indicates that with effective treatment and close supervision of offenders in the community, steps can be taken to reduce the likelihood they will reoffend. Finally, research on recidivism is presented together with an Ohio study which followed a 1989 cohort of offenders for 10 years.

The final section looks at sex offender registration and notification nationally and in Ohio. The report highlights current research on the effectiveness of SORN legislation in implementing the policy purposes and reducing recidivism of sex offenders in the community. Information on program implementation in Ohio has also been provided. ..more.. by Office of Criminal Justice Services, Executive Director Karhlton F. Moore

OH- Five Year Recidivism Follow-Up Of Sex Offender Releases

August 1996

INTRODUCTION
The purpose of this report is to determine baseline recidivism rates for sex offenders releasedfrom Ohio’s prisons. This information is important in understanding the proportion of sex offenderswho return to Ohio’s prisons, as well as the nature of their recidivism crimes.

METHODOLOGY
The 1989 Ohio prison release population was identified in order to establish a five yearfollow up period. This included three different release type populations. The first group, expirationof definite sentence, or flat time offenders, were those who received a definite (flat) sentence for athird or fourth degree felony and were released without any further supervision once they had servedtheir sentence. The second group of offenders released were parolees. These offenders had beengiven an indeterminate sentence, (i.e., 5 to 25 years) and were subsequently approved by the ParoleBoard to be released into the community with supervision before completing their maximumsentence. The last group of offenders was given a suspended sentence. These offenders had beenplaced in prison for a short time, and then granted shock probation by a judge. They also were placedunder community supervision.

Of those released from Ohio’s prisons in 1989, 848 were identified as sex offenders. For the purposes of this study, sex offenders were defined as those inmates whose commitment offense wasany of the following offenses: ..more.. by Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction

OH- Ten-Year Recidivism Follow-Up Of 1989 Sex Offender Releases

April 2001:

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The baseline recidivism rate of sex offenders followed-up for ten years after release from prison was 34%. (That is both sex offenses and non sex offenses and technical violations.)

This rate was comprised of:
Recommitment for a New Crime 22.3% (Sex Offense 8.0% -and- Non-Sex Offense 14.3%)

Recommitment for a Technical Violation 11.7% (Sex Offense 1.3% -and- Sex Lapse 1.7% -and- Non-sex Related 8.7%)

The total sex-related recidivism rate, including technical violations of
supervision conditions, was 11.0%.

Recidivism rates differed considerably based on a victim typology:

Sex Offender Type	General Recidivism	Sex Recidivism
Rapists (adult victims)	56.6%	17.5%
Child Molester – extrafamilial	29.2%	8.7%
Child Molester – incest	13.2%	7.4%

Sex offenders who returned for a new sex related offense did so within a few years of release. Of all the sex offenders who came back to an Ohio prison for a new sex offense, one half did so within two years, and two-thirds within three years.

Paroled Sex offenders completing basic sex offender programming (level 1) while incarcerated appeared to have a somewhat lower recidivism rate than those who did not have programming. This was true both for recidivism of any type (33.9% with programming recidivated compared with 55.3% without programming) and sex-related recidivism (7.1% with programming recidivated compared with 16.5% without programming). ..more.. by State of Ohio, Department of Rehabilitation and Correction