Friday, November 9, 2007

Sentences

Johnny James Smith pleaded guilty today to first-degree murder and use of a handgun in a crime of violence before the Honorable Albert J. Matricciani. Smith was sentenced to life suspend all but 30 years with five years supervised probation on count 1 and 20 years, the first five years to be served without the possibility of parole on count 2. Details from the SA's office:
On April 2, 2007, at 2:16 AM, the victim, Darrell Smith, age 21, was found lying face down in the 3600 block of St. Margaret Street, with multiple gunshot wounds to the head and upper torso. The victim was transported to the hospital and died at 2:54 AM. An autopsy was performed and the victim’s death was ruled a homicide. The investigation revealed that the victim and his girlfriend’s former boyfriend were having a continuing argument when they entered 3720 St. Margaret Street. The girlfriend of the defendant lived at 3720 St. Margaret Street. When the defendant found out the victim was in the house, he went to the location and confronted the victim as the two walked out of the residence. The defendant pulled out a revolver and shot the victim multiple times at close range.

Jesse “James” Lynch, also known as James Langley, appeared before Judge Sylvester B. Cox and pleaded guilty to retaliation against a witness and was sentenced to 5 years. He was also found to be in violation of his probation and sentenced to 21 years, suspended, and placed on four years supervised probation upon his release from incarceration on the plea and sentence. Details from the SA's office:
Lynch was convicted of 2nd degree murder and handgun violations and was sentenced on February 9, 2006 to 25 years suspend all but 4 years and placed on 4 years probation upon his release. He was released from prison on January 25, 2007. Shortly after his release, on March 28, 2007 he was charged with riding a dirt bike on North Wolfe Street in the wrong direction, doing wheelies, and then fleeing and eluding when the police officer tried to stop him.

On September 20, 2007 Jesse Lynch went to trial on those charges. During a break in the trial Jesse Lynch was walking by the police officer who charged him and threatened him by stating he would get him back. A Baltimore City jury later acquitted the defendant.

While leaving the courthouse Lynch again saw and spoke to the charging officer and shouted to him, “I’ll get out in a week and I am going to shoot … you.” Based on these actions, the State’s Attorney’s Office filed a criminal information charging Jesse James Lynch with retaliation against a witness.

8 comments:

Anonymous said...

I can't believe im the first to leave a comment here. Isnt anyone outraged at this low-life's boldness...!? He killed someone and because it's Baltimore, he only served a year. Immediately following, he broke more laws and was arrested again. Then, he threatened the life of an officer just for doing his job....in the middle of the friggin courthouse! Is it going to take another loss of life at the hands of this guy for him finally to be put where he belongs!? This city is insane. The criminal justice system should be held civilly liable for the next victim's suffering because it's as a result of them that murderers get two, three, four chances at felonies.

ppatin said...

That's why I'm such a fan of capital punishment...

Anonymous said...

Anonymous: did you vote for O'M or Sheila Dixon? If you did, it's your fault also.

They are responsible for the incompetent police force who build crappy cases and force the State's Attorney to offer mild sentences instead of going to trial and almost surely losing.

Would you rather this guy have won the trial or gotten a 25 year suspended sentence?

ppatin said...

It's not quite as simple as bad police making bad cases. Remember that the State's Attorney's office and the court system are massively overburdened. Even if every case was rock-solid they would still have to plead most criminals out because they do not have the resources to take more than a fraction of all cases to trial.

Carol Ott said...

Even if every case was rock-solid they would still have to plead most criminals out because they do not have the resources to take more than a fraction of all cases to trial.

And nowhere to put the criminals once they're convicted. Baltimore City alone would overburden the prison system, never mind the rest of the state. More prisons = even more taxes.

ppatin said...

In the long run I suspect that more prisons and tougher sentences would save the taxpayers money.

Anonymous said...

Longer sentences will stop crack addicts from using crack?

95% of cases in Baltimore are drug cases.

Studies have shown incarceration as a deterrence is almost completely worthless in getting people not to use drugs.

Sorry, but your - or anyone else's - "suspicions" shouldn't guide Baltimore in solving its probelms.

Maybe our problem is that the people running the show are using their "suspicions" (or worse) to solve our problems - and this clearly results in utter failure.

ppatin said...

The War on Drugs is a completely separate issue. I think that drug prohibition is doomed to failure, and no amount of incarceration will make illegal drugs go away. I'm talking about imprisoning people who commit crimes like assault, armed robbery and carjacking. Right now those crimes are punished with a slap of the wrist 90% of the time in Baltimore. If a first time armed-robbery conviction was guaranteed to land you in prison for a decade we would be a much safer city.