Robber Never Told to Report to Prison, Turns Life Around

[summer]

news.yahoo.com/armed-robber-never-told-report-prison-195146743.html




ST. LOUIS (AP) — After he was convicted of armed robbery in 2000, Cornealious Anderson was sentenced to 13 years behind bars and told to await instructions on when and where to report to prison. But those instructions never came.

So Anderson didn't report. He spent the next 13 years turning his life around — getting married, raising three kids, learning a trade. He made no effort to conceal his identity or whereabouts. Anderson paid taxes and traffic tickets, renewed his driver's license and registered his businesses.



Not until last year did the Missouri Department of Corrections discover the clerical error that kept him free. Now he's fighting for release, saying authorities missed their chance to incarcerate him.



In a single day last July, Anderson's life was turned upside-down.



"They sent a SWAT team to his house," Anderson's attorney, Patrick Megaro, said Wednesday. "He was getting his 3-year-old daughter breakfast, and these men with automatic weapons bang on his door."

Anderson, 37, was taken to Southeast Correctional Center in Charleston, Mo., to begin serving the sentence. A court appeal filed in February asks for him to be freed.



Anderson had just one arrest for marijuana possession on his record when he and a cousin robbed an assistant manager for a St. Charles Burger King restaurant on Aug. 15, 1999. The men, wearing masks, showed a gun (it turned out to be a BB gun) and demanded money that was about to be placed in a deposit box.



The worker gave up the bag of cash, and the masked men drove away. The worker turned in the car's license plate number.



Anderson was convicted and sentenced to 13 years in prison and waited for word on what to do next.

"His attorney said, 'Listen, they're going to get you some day, so just wait for the order,'" Megaro said. "As time goes by, the order never comes. What does a normal person believe? Maybe they forgot about it. It's only human nature to hope they just let it go. He really didn't know what to do.



"A year goes by, two years, five years, 10 years. He's thinking, 'I guess they don't care about me anymore,'" Megaro said.



So Anderson went about his life. Megaro said he was not a fugitive, was never on the run. In fact, just the opposite.

Megaro described Anderson as a model citizen — a married father who became a carpenter and started three businesses. He paid income and property taxes and kept a driver's license showing his true name and address. When he was pulled over for a couple of traffic violations, nothing showed up indicating he should be in prison.



That's why Anderson was shocked when the marshals arrived.



He now lives among the general population at Charleston. Megaro said Anderson is holding his own— barely.



"He's doing his best to keep his spirits up," Megaro said. "Each day that goes by, more hope is lost. It's a daily struggle for him."



Peter Joy, director of the Criminal Justice Clinic at the Washington University School of Law in St. Louis, said it isn't unusual in a country with such a high prison population for sentences to fall through the cracks. What is unusual, Joy said, is for it to go unnoticed for so long.





"The real tragedy here is that one aspect of prison is the idea of rehabilitation," Joy said. "Here we have somebody who has led a perfect life for 13 years. He did everything right. So he doesn't need rehabilitation."



What happens next isn't clear. Missouri Attorney General Chris Koster on Tuesday filed a court response that said the state is justified in making Anderson serve the sentence.



However, Koster wrote that Megaro could refile the case as an action against the director of the Department of Corrections, which could give Anderson credit for the time he was technically at large.



Megaro doubted that strategy would work. He said the law does not allow credit for time served when the convicted person was not behind bars.



"I don't think that's an option, unfortunately," Megaro said.



Instead, he's relying on case law. The last time anything like this happened in Missouri was 1912. In that case, the convicted man was set free, Megaro said.



Gov. Jay Nixon could also commute the sentence. A spokesman for Nixon declined to comment.

[carowen]

If the whole point of prison is to punish/rehabilitate so that the person doesn't commit a future crime, isn't the fact that this man has led a crime-free life evidence enough that he learned his lesson? I mean, really, it seems downright absurd to throw him in jail at this point and such a waste of taxpayer's dollars feeding/housing a man who has clearly turned into a typical, law-abiding citizen.

I sincerely hope he gets out soon.

[msmerymac]

Apr 17, 2014 11:59:36 GMT -5 carowen said:

If the whole point of prison is to punish/rehabilitate so that the person doesn't commit a future crime, isn't the fact that this man has led a crime-free life evidence enough that he learned his lesson? I mean, really, it seems downright absurd to throw him in jail at this point and such a waste of taxpayer's dollars feeding/housing a man who has clearly turned into a typical, law-abiding citizen.

I sincerely hope he gets out soon.

Not to mention, prison teaches you how to be a better criminal. 

This guy seems like a good guy who made some bad mistakes when he was younger. But what if throwing him in jail now trashes his businesses and business reputations? What if he can't get work when he gets out and he needs to bring money in for his family? What if someone he met in prison offers him an opportunity? I mean, not only did he rehabilitate on his own, but the punishment meant TO rehabilitate him could actually end up ruining his life.

[ringstrue]

Yeah I feel like the state had their chance to punish him and they didn't take it. What's the point of jailing him now? To waste money and ruin a business?

[Deleted]

Couldn't this be some sort of violation of his due process?

[ESF]

Apr 17, 2014 14:18:42 GMT -5 @septimus said:

Couldn't this be some sort of violation of his due process?

I'm wondering that too.  

The whole thing is absurd.  I get not wanting to set a precedent, but really that's sort of the whole reason the state shouldn't fight this.  If a violent criminal remained violent for 13 years, the state will want to be able to argue that he should have to serve the time he was sentenced to.   So they don't get some kind of judicial ruling, they ought to just pardon the guy and be done with it.

[ttt]

This is exactly the kind of situation that pardons were made for. Come on.

[kme]

I'm on the fence. Like carowen said, the sentence as to rehabilitate and punish. He was rehabilitation but the other part wasn't fulfilled. I don't think a pardon would work in this case since he did commit a crime and his sentence was grossly inhumane.

If "mistakes" led to people not serving, imagine how many people would try to pay-off or threaten someone who has access to make a "mistake"

Now I'm thinking he should be released under time served but I would want to know what he opinion is of those he affected committing the crime.

[sandsonik]

I'm going to play devils advocate here - because I do think some sort of leniency or mercy should be shown to him.

But everyone keeps saying "he's been crime free since then, so let him go."

No, you don't know that. No one could.

He's been arrest-free since then. I mean no one really thinks that the one time he was arrested for possession was the only time he ever possessed marijuana, do they? Lord knows, I possessed it enough times without ever being arrested for it. So why assume that since he was arrested for nothing in 13 years, that means he did nothing criminal in 13 years? Not a logical assumption.  Maybe he did, maybe he didn't.

But yeah....I think some mercy is in order, but they did pull a gun on people, scare the crap out of them and rob them, let's not forget. Why should this guy get a break because his orders to serve time never arrived? Presumably his cousin that committed the crime with him was ordered to serve a long time ago, and did. Is it fair to treat this guy differently because of a lucky bureaucratic break?

[Deleted]

Apr 17, 2014 15:51:24 GMT -5 ttt said:

This is exactly the kind of situation that pardons were made for. Come on.

I agree. I'm in Missouri, and I think I'll write a letter to Nixon.

[Deleted]

Apr 17, 2014 17:05:09 GMT -5 sandsonik said:

I'm going to play devils advocate here - because I do think some sort of leniency or mercy should be shown to him.

But everyone keeps saying "he's been crime free since then, so let him go."

No, you don't know that. No one could.

He's been arrest-free since then. I mean no one really thinks that the one time he was arrested for possession was the only time he ever possessed marijuana, do they? Lord knows, I possessed it enough times without ever being arrested for it. So why assume that since he was arrested for nothing in 13 years, that means he did nothing criminal in 13 years? Not a logical assumption.  Maybe he did, maybe he didn't.

But yeah....I think some mercy is in order, but they did pull a gun on people, scare the crap out of them and rob them, let's not forget. Why should this guy get a break because his orders to serve time never arrived? Presumably his cousin that committed the crime with him was ordered to serve a long time ago, and did. Is it fair to treat this guy differently because of a lucky bureaucratic break?

I see your point, but had the state not erred, he'd still be a young man at 37 with his sentence already behind him. To begin the sentence now would mean a 50 year old ex-con re-entering society, with shitty career prospects, for a crime he committed nearly 3 decades prior. It doesn't sit well with me.

[ESF]

Apr 17, 2014 17:05:09 GMT -5 sandsonik said:

I'm going to play devils advocate here - because I do think some sort of leniency or mercy should be shown to him.

But everyone keeps saying "he's been crime free since then, so let him go."

No, you don't know that. No one could.

He's been arrest-free since then. I mean no one really thinks that the one time he was arrested for possession was the only time he ever possessed marijuana, do they? Lord knows, I possessed it enough times without ever being arrested for it. So why assume that since he was arrested for nothing in 13 years, that means he did nothing criminal in 13 years? Not a logical assumption.  Maybe he did, maybe he didn't.

But yeah....I think some mercy is in order, but they did pull a gun on people, scare the crap out of them and rob them, let's not forget. Why should this guy get a break because his orders to serve time never arrived? Presumably his cousin that committed the crime with him was ordered to serve a long time ago, and did. Is it fair to treat this guy differently because of a lucky bureaucratic break?

I think your points are good, and I can definitely see the other side on this one.  But who is it unfair to?  Is it unfair to people that serve their time that other guilty people get off because the statute of limitations has run or because the state fucked with evidence?   I'm not really bothered by the fact that other criminals were not so lucky, so I don't see it as being unfair to them that the state actually operated as it should.

Rather, my thinking is that letting this guy go is necessary to hold the state accountable.  The state shouldn't be able to engage in bureaucratic fuck ups, then round people up years and years and years after the fact without consequences.    I'd rather them own their mistake, take the heat, and make necessary changes.   

[ESF]

Apr 17, 2014 20:33:59 GMT -5 @vanessadoof said:

Apr 17, 2014 17:05:09 GMT -5 sandsonik said:

I'm going to play devils advocate here - because I do think some sort of leniency or mercy should be shown to him.

But everyone keeps saying "he's been crime free since then, so let him go."

No, you don't know that. No one could.

He's been arrest-free since then. I mean no one really thinks that the one time he was arrested for possession was the only time he ever possessed marijuana, do they? Lord knows, I possessed it enough times without ever being arrested for it. So why assume that since he was arrested for nothing in 13 years, that means he did nothing criminal in 13 years? Not a logical assumption.  Maybe he did, maybe he didn't.

But yeah....I think some mercy is in order, but they did pull a gun on people, scare the crap out of them and rob them, let's not forget. Why should this guy get a break because his orders to serve time never arrived? Presumably his cousin that committed the crime with him was ordered to serve a long time ago, and did. Is it fair to treat this guy differently because of a lucky bureaucratic break?

I see your point, but had the state not erred, he'd still be a young man at 37 with his sentence already behind him. To begin the sentence now would mean a 50 year old ex-con re-entering society, with shitty career prospects, for a crime he committed nearly 3 decades prior. It doesn't sit well with me.

Not to mention, the kids!  They are little kids!  Put him in jail now, and those kids lose a father and will probably have to go on public assistance.

If they won't pardon him, give him 100 hours of community service and be done with it.

[starlily]

Apr 17, 2014 20:45:51 GMT -5 ESF said:

Apr 17, 2014 20:33:59 GMT -5 @vanessadoof said:

I see your point, but had the state not erred, he'd still be a young man at 37 with his sentence already behind him. To begin the sentence now would mean a 50 year old ex-con re-entering society, with shitty career prospects, for a crime he committed nearly 3 decades prior. It doesn't sit well with me.

Not to mention, the kids!  They are little kids!  Put him in jail now, and those kids lose a father and will probably have to go on public assistance.

If they won't pardon him, give him 100 hours of community service and be done with it.

We were talking about this at work today. It's not often that DAs, judges, and public defenders all agree 100% on something, but we all agreed this is some bullshit.

I believe that there are applicable legal principles that he will ultimately prevail on, but the court really should have allowed him to remain out of custody until this mess gets sorted out.

[Deleted]

What would "Dr" Megan Heimer JD errr.. law school graduate who is neither a doctor nor a lawyer do?

[phunluvin82]

Apr 17, 2014 20:43:13 GMT -5 ESF said:

Apr 17, 2014 17:05:09 GMT -5 sandsonik said:

I'm going to play devils advocate here - because I do think some sort of leniency or mercy should be shown to him.

But everyone keeps saying "he's been crime free since then, so let him go."

No, you don't know that. No one could.

He's been arrest-free since then. I mean no one really thinks that the one time he was arrested for possession was the only time he ever possessed marijuana, do they? Lord knows, I possessed it enough times without ever being arrested for it. So why assume that since he was arrested for nothing in 13 years, that means he did nothing criminal in 13 years? Not a logical assumption.  Maybe he did, maybe he didn't.

But yeah....I think some mercy is in order, but they did pull a gun on people, scare the crap out of them and rob them, let's not forget. Why should this guy get a break because his orders to serve time never arrived? Presumably his cousin that committed the crime with him was ordered to serve a long time ago, and did. Is it fair to treat this guy differently because of a lucky bureaucratic break?

I think your points are good, and I can definitely see the other side on this one.  But who is it unfair to?  Is it unfair to people that serve their time that other guilty people get off because the statute of limitations has run or because the state fucked with evidence?   I'm not really bothered by the fact that other criminals were not so lucky, so I don't see it as being unfair to them that the state actually operated as it should.

Rather, my thinking is that letting this guy go is necessary to hold the state accountable.  The state shouldn't be able to engage in bureaucratic fuck ups, then round people up years and years and years after the fact without consequences.    I'd rather them own their mistake, take the heat, and make necessary changes.   

This is where I'm at.  They're the ones who fucked up, so they're gonna have to take this one on the chin.  I'm not overly concerned with the 'fairness' issue.  Some people catch lucky breaks sometimes and that's just life.  

The state should be thanking their lucky stars right now that this guy turned into a productive citizen (by all known accounts) and wasn't out robbing or killing anyone while their bureaucratic error went unnoticed.  

[phunluvin82]

Ugh, and I sort of glossed over the timeline while reading, but I just realized he's been in jail now for almost a year already?! 

[miniroller]

Apr 17, 2014 23:48:51 GMT -5 phunluvin82 said:

Ugh, and I sort of glossed over the timeline while reading, but I just realized he's been in jail now for almost a year already?! 

This makes me incredibly sad; I hope the article/ story release might possibly play a role in speeding things up here.
In regard to the devil's advocates (& please realize I know this is a utopian dream not likely to happen), I could really see ordering several hours (150?) of community service, which would be much more productive than a prison sentence served. He could speak to juvenile offenders about their future & be a living example of how it IS possible to turn things around! Sigh. I know that's not how our system works, but I can dream...

[IIOY]

Apr 18, 2014 1:37:48 GMT -5 @mx said:

Related to this, why do I keep reading stories like this one where someone who doesn't seem likely to run away merits a SWAT team in front of his young kids? Do we just have a glut of SWAT teams that need to justify their existence?

As a matter of fact, yes.  I have read multiple articles now about police departments that have beefed up their resources by adding military-style equipment and training thanks to assets seized (improperly or otherwise) during raids.  As you can imagine, boys with toys develop itchy trigger fingers, so SWAT-style teams are frequently dispatched to perform tasks that could be performed by the average police officer.

ETA: Here is a recent article from The Economist on this issue.