What charges are possible in the bizarre case of the 18-year-old kidnapping of Jaycee Dugard? What sentences are available in the event of a conviction? A recent story is here in the San Jose Mercury-News.
Let's assume that Phillip Garrido does not get off with an insanity plea. California follows the strict M'Naughton rule. P.C. 25(b). On the question of whether he did it, he had little enough chance of beating the rap to start with and blew what little he had with a call to a television station. (No Miranda required, thank you.)
With old cases, we have to consider the statute of limitations. The general rule for felonies is 3 years. P.C. 801. It is 6 years for crimes punishable by terms of 8 years or more. P.C. 800. There is no limit for crimes punishable by death or life imprisonment with or without possibility of parole. P.C. 799. Relatively recent enactments extending the limits for sex crimes against children cannot constitutionally be applied to cases where the time had run prior to the enactment. Stogner v. California, 539 U.S. 607 (2003).
Simple kidnapping, P.C. 207, is punishable by up to 11 years where the victim is child. P.C. 208(b). That charge would be barred unless it can be shown that the crime continued the whole time, which could be a tough sell. Also expired, regrettably, are the sex crimes against Jaycee as a child. We need the Little Lindbergh Law, P.C. 209:
Let's assume that Phillip Garrido does not get off with an insanity plea. California follows the strict M'Naughton rule. P.C. 25(b). On the question of whether he did it, he had little enough chance of beating the rap to start with and blew what little he had with a call to a television station. (No Miranda required, thank you.)
With old cases, we have to consider the statute of limitations. The general rule for felonies is 3 years. P.C. 801. It is 6 years for crimes punishable by terms of 8 years or more. P.C. 800. There is no limit for crimes punishable by death or life imprisonment with or without possibility of parole. P.C. 799. Relatively recent enactments extending the limits for sex crimes against children cannot constitutionally be applied to cases where the time had run prior to the enactment. Stogner v. California, 539 U.S. 607 (2003).
Simple kidnapping, P.C. 207, is punishable by up to 11 years where the victim is child. P.C. 208(b). That charge would be barred unless it can be shown that the crime continued the whole time, which could be a tough sell. Also expired, regrettably, are the sex crimes against Jaycee as a child. We need the Little Lindbergh Law, P.C. 209:
(b) (1) Any person who kidnaps or carries away any individual to commit robbery, rape, spousal rape, oral copulation, sodomy, or any violation of Section 264.1, 288, or 289, shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for life with the possibility of parole.That should do it. The possibility of parole should not bother us too much in this case. Assuming any rationality at all on the parole board, there is no real possibility. Garrido should never see the outside of the prison wall again.
(2) This subdivision shall only apply if the movement of the victim is beyond that merely incidental to the commission of, and increases the risk of harm to the victim over and above that necessarily present in, the intended underlying offense.
P.C. 209 does need some maintenance, though. Subdivision (b), kidnapping for rape, lacks some the provisions of subdivision (a), kidnapping for ransom. There should be an LWOP sentence for cases of great bodily injury, as there is in (a). LWOP should also be available for cases of extended confinement, such as this one, under both subdivisions. Hopefully someday we will have a legislature under the control of persons of sense, and these and other needed changes can be made.
Leave a comment