NCJ Number
58349
Journal
University of Toledo Law Review Volume: 10 Issue: 2 Dated: (WINTER 1979) Pages: 606-640
Date Published
1979
Length
35 pages
Annotation
AN EXAMINATION OF TEXAS HABITUAL CRIMINAL LAWS, IN PARTICULAR USE OF THE LIFE SENTENCE FOR HABITUAL CRIMINALS, ARE EXAMINED ALONG WITH THEIR APPROVAL BY THE FIFTH FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT.
Abstract
THE CASE IS THAT OF RUMMEL V. ESTELLE, (1978), ORIGINALLY HEARD IN TEXAS AND EVENTUALLY DECIDED BEFORE THE FIFTH FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT. THE COURT RULED THAT THE TEXAS LAW MANDATING LIFE IMPRISONMENT FOR THE THIRD OFFENSE OF A PARTICULAR CRIME WAS LEGAL. RUMMEL ARGUED THAT HIS LIFE SENTENCE FOR THE THIRD CONVICTION OF CASHING A CHECK UNDER FALSE PRETENCES WAS CRUEL AND UNJUST. THE PARTICULAR LAW HAD BEEN UPHELD BY THE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF SPENCER V. TEXAS, (1967), A CASE DEALING WITH MURDER WITH MALICE. RUMMEL ARGUED THAT THE USE OF THE SAME STATUTE FOR A LESS SERIOUS CRIME WAS CRUEL AND UNUSUAL. THE FIFTH CIRCUIT COURT FOUND THAT, THOUGH THE SENTENCE SEEMED HARSH, IT MUST BE UPHELD FOR TWO REASONS. THE FIRST WAS THAT THE LAW WAS NOT PROVEN TO BE ROOTED IN ILLOGIC. THE SECOND WAS THAT SINCE TEXAS DID NOT HAVE A LIFE WITHOUT PAROLE LAW, IT WAS UNLIKELY THAT RUMMEL WOULD ACTUALLY SERVE A LIFE SENTENCE. A DISCUSSION OF WHETHER RECIDIVISM ITSELF IS A CRIME IS PRESENTED; IT CONCLUDES THAT THE TREND, AS SHOWN IN REPEAT OFFENDER LAWS IS TO ADOPT THIS IDEA OF RECIDIVISM. THE ARTICLE INCLUDES FOOTNOTES. (KCP)