There was a time – and not that long ago – when Paul DeMuniz entered a courtroom, people stood up. Those days are gone.
Now that DeMuniz is no longer chief justice of the Oregon State Supreme Court, he doesn’t command the respect he used to. Perhaps that’s appropriate.
For the past two years, he has done his part to disrespect the rule of law.
DeMuniz retired from the state Supreme Court in January and began teaching at Willamette University. And, as was recently revealed by Willamette Week, DeMuniz also became a registered lobbyist for the insurance industry.
Last month DeMuniz testified against proposed legislation that would require insurance companies to make faster settlements on environmental claims. He didn’t tell legislators he was speaking on behalf of the Property Casualty Insurers Association of America, which opposes the bill.
After the Willamette Week story appeared, DeMuniz apologized to lawmakers “for not making abundantly clear the capacity in which I appeared in my recent legislative testimony … .”
He promised that in future testimony or contacts with legislators he would “make it clear on whose behalf I am appearing.”
DeMuniz sullied himself even before he became a registered lobbyist for the insurance industry. During his last two years on the bench, he also served as chairman of the Commission on Public Safety, where he functioned as a lobbyist for Gov. John Kitzhaber.
DeMuniz liked to say that he and the commission were “tasked” by Kitzhaber to lower Oregon’s prison costs. But DeMuniz did more than fulfill a duty.
He carried great buckets of water for the governor from the very first meeting of the commission.
Standing next to Kitzhaber at a press conference held midway through the meeting, DeMuniz declared: “We know now what can keep us safe. … We can make us safe by being smart on funds.”
The commission hadn’t even completed its first meeting, and already DeMuniz had decided what was needed – spend less on public safety, while using words to reassure citizens that they will be safe.
His haughty demeanor was on display from that first meeting. He made it clear that he had no use for voter-mandated Measure 11, which requires minimum sentences for certain violent crimes.
DeMuniz seemed perplexed when some of the commissioners wondered aloud about whether they could make the case to the public if they tried to overturn portions of Measure 11.
“Why does public perception make any difference to what we are trying to do here…” DeMuniz said at the first meeting. “What science says these sentences are the minimum required for justice and for the victim?”
Two years later, his commission delivered its recommendations. Among them: Remove second-degree robbery and assault and first-degree sex abuse from Measure 11; reduce penalties for driving while suspended; reduce penalties for repeat property offenders; increase earned time by 10 percent so eligible inmates could reduce 30 percent of their prison sentences.
Those recommendations were rolled into House Bill 3194, still working its way through the legislative process. DeMuniz attended the Feb. 13th meeting of the Joint House and Senate Committee on Public Safety for a work session on the bill.
By then he was no longer chief justice of the state Supreme Court. He sat at the witness table in front of the committee like anyone else invited to testify, and he looked up at the state senators and representatives seated on the dais. He now seemed so … small.
HB 3194’s evolution hasn’t been smooth, even though the 10-member Joint House and Senate committee includes two senators and two representatives from DeMuniz’s old commission. It would take a two-thirds vote of the legislature to overturn portions of Measure 11, and there isn’t a super-majority of legislators who share DeMuniz’s ease in ignoring the will of the voters.
Since DeMuniz’s appearance before the committee in February, the Measure 11 recommendations have been dropped.
In its latest amended version, HB 3194 would still hand some offenders a break on sentencing by not including certain prior convictions in their criminal history.
Last week, Lane County District Attorney Alex Gardner appeared before the committee and urged them not to do this.
“That notion that a person’s prior conduct ought to shape the punishment is common-sensical to what the community expects,” he said.
As currently amended, HB 3194 would consider prior convictions based on the date the conviction was entered into the court record.
“It doesn’t make sense to depreciate the criminal history because of the time it (the conviction) was entered,” Gardner said.
He already has a problem with criminal defendants blowing off their court appearances. This amendment would make it worse.
“It would add an incentive, a reward, to those who just skip court,” Gardner said.
Although Lane County recently passed a public safety levy, it will be a while until that money is flowing and his county can hire more jail staff.
“We are still going to be completely dysfunctional for property offenders. … We won’t be able to get those people to sentencing. … These guys we get back in our community are going to be a danger for us that we can’t manage.”
Gardner sounded frustrated, almost pleading with the committee.
“I want the sentencing judge to have a hammer big enough to protect the community. … This has been the standard for more than 20 years for Lane County. If it goes away tomorrow, holy cow, I’m not a chicken little kind of guy … .”
The most unrepentant, recidivist property criminals don’t want to be reformed, he said.
“They hang out in Lane County and victimize people.”
Now that DeMuniz is no longer chief justice, he might have a better chance of meeting one of Oregon’s unrepentant recidivists – he no longer has a state police trooper to act as his driver.
Why should a state Supreme Court chief justice have personal access to a state police officer when so many communities have had to cut law enforcement? It isn’t as if judges are at greater risk of becoming crime victims.
If they were, DeMuniz’s tenure as chairman of the Commission on Public Safety might have produced a different result.
– Pamela Fitzsimmons
Related:
No Comments