In the past few blogs, we’ve focused on creative sentencing via the criminal sentences handed out by Ohio Judge Michael Cicconetti. In Judge Cicconetti’s words, he offers “personal” punishments instead of sentencing offenders to jail. For example, one offender choice to walk 30 miles because she chose to stiff a cab driver out of $100 for a 30-mile cab trip. An offender convicted of drunk driving viewed the bodies of those who died in fatal car crashes. This blog will focus on another creative sentence Judge Cicconetti offered.
Alyssa Morrow left Moose, her 7-year-old Pit Bull, alone for one week in a house. She didn’t check on him. The dog was discovered by police after a tip from a neighbor. The ABC News outlet compared the conditions the dog was left in to an episode of “Hoarders.” Moose was put up for adoption and Morrow was charged with animal neglect. Animal neglect is a type of animal cruelty where an individual doesn’t provide adequate care for animals they own and/or care for.
Her Creative Sentence
Judge Cicconetti gave her two sentencing options. The first option was 90 days in jail. The second option was to spend eight hours in a place considered god-awful, stinky, and smelly: a local dump. Her job at the local landfill would be picking up trash.
She told “Nightline” during an interview that she’d rather be working in a dump than in jail. So she couldn’t complain.
It’s not the judge’s first creative sentencing in an animal cruelty case. He gave one offender who shot his Great Dane the option of jail or dressing up like a dog and visiting five elementary schools. He had to teach children about safety. Part of his creative sentence included paying the Humane Society the cost of treating his animal. The Great Dane was later euthanized.
He also sentenced a woman who abandoned kittens in the woods to the same fate. She had to spend one night in a remote wooded area. She had no food, water, or entertainment.
Cicconetti’s Sentence Wasn’t Harsh Enough
Kudos to the judge for thinking of a punishment that placed the offender in the victim’s position. No dog should be left in filthy living conditions. However, the sentence didn’t go far enough. Instead of eight hours, she should’ve been sentenced to eight days at the local dump. Spending eight hours only gave her a taste of what it was like for her dog.
Of course, people would probably agree with Cicconetti. It doesn’t matter how long she spent in a dump, she learned her lesson. Granted, she’ll probably never leave a dog alone in filthy conditions again. However, she should’ve spent more time in the dump than just eight hours.
This does bring the issue of the Eight Amendment into play. The creative sentence can’t be too cruel or unusual. Maybe ordering her to spend more than one day in the local dump would have been a violation of her Eighth Amendment rights, as it might be too cruel to leave someone in a dump for over a week.
A Matter of Stopping the First-Time Offenders from Reoffending
According to the judge, he’s not a believer in the prison system. Small-time offenders can turn into big-time criminals. Sending an offender to county jail can keep him from harming others for a period of time, but most return to their old ways.
Judge Cicconetti told media outlets that he usually picks offenders for his creative sentences based on:
- Age of the offender
- First time offense
- Remorse
What about those who aren’t remorseful? Creative sentences may help them the most. The offenders who aren’t remorseful need to experience some eye-for-an-eye type of justice. Maybe it would make them think about reoffending. Creative sentences could help those who think they can do the time or believe jail is a badge of honor.
More judges should be like Judge Cicconetti. Judges could apply the law as they are supposed to or think about stopping criminal activity before it becomes worse. Every day on the news, someone is arrested for some serious crime. Most of the time the anchor mentions the long wrap sheet, or criminal history, the person had.
Maybe if more local judges were like Judge Cicconetti, the focus wouldn’t be on crime and punishment. Instead, it would be focused on decreasing recidivism. After all, the national average of recidivism is 75 percent. Judge Cicconetti’s defendants have a 10 percent rate of recidivism. Obviously, he’s doing something right.
Authored by Taelonnda Sewell, LegalMatch Legal Writer
Comments