SB1199: Protecting Families: The Impact of Lauria and Ashley’s Law

How SB1199 could have changed sentencing

This article was written with the assistance of ai software*

Photo byHarry SheltononUnsplash

What did SB1199 want to accomplish?

SB1199 called "Lauria and Ashley's Law," is a new rule that would have added more serious consequences for people who help commit murder.

It wanted to change the law in Oklahoma to include crimes like "accessory to murder in the first degree" and "accessory to murder in the second degree." If someone is convicted of these crimes, they would have had to serve at least 85% of their prison sentence before they could ask for parole (early release).

This law meant to make sure people who are involved in very serious crimes, like helping with a murder, spend more time in prison.

Who would have benefited from this law?

✔️If Senate Bill 1199, or "Lauria and Ashley's Law," had passed, it would have benefited victims' families and communities impacted by serious crimes like murder.

By requiring those convicted of being an accessory to murder to serve at least 85% of their sentence before becoming eligible for parole, it would have ensured that these offenders stayed in prison longer. This might have provided a sense of justice and safety to those affected by such crimes, as it would have made it harder for convicted individuals to get out of prison early.

✔️Law enforcement agencies and prosecutors also would have benefited, as the law would have given them stronger tools to hold individuals accountable for their involvement in violent crimes.

Overall, the law would have created a tougher punishment for people who assist in murders, reflecting a more serious approach to handling such crimes.

What are some concerns people might have had about this law?

Some of these might be the reason the bill failed to pass:

⚠️Overcrowded Prisons: Requiring people convicted of being an accessory to murder to serve at least 85% of their sentence might add to the overcrowding problem in prisons. This would increase costs for the state, as more people would stay in prison longer.

⚠️Limited Flexibility for Judges: Judges might have less room to consider individual circumstances. For example, if someone played a small role in a crime, they would still face a long sentence without the chance for early parole, even if their involvement was less significant.

⚠️Impact on Rehabilitation: Keeping people in prison for longer without parole could reduce their motivation to rehabilitate and improve their lives. Parole often acts as an incentive for good behavior and personal growth.

⚠️Fairness Concerns: Some people might argue that the law doesn’t account for different levels of involvement in a crime. Treating all accessories to murder the same could seem unfair, especially if some were less involved than others.

This bill was sponsored by Michael Bergstrom [R] and Mark Lepak [R] on 3/4/24. Due to lack of support, missed deadlines, committee action, leadership decisions or veto, this bill failed to pass and will not be signed into law.

➡️Is this something that you think Oklahomans need? How would it have benefited the county you live in?

*********************************************
Hi, I'm Judy! I love talking about the area I live in and what affects us. Follow me if you'd like more stories like this.