At a recent meeting of the state’s Criminal Code Evaluation Commis-sion, one of the members described a Class D felony as the kind of crime most people have committed but just hadn’t been caught for it.
It was an eyebrow-raising moment, considering he included in his “most people” category the members of the commission — people who represent the state’s prosecutors, public defenders, judges, probation officers, prison officials, and the General Assembly.
In a flight of imagination, I scanned the panel of members sitting there and began wondering about their secret criminal history.
In Indiana, a Class D felony is the lowest level of serious crime; it can land you in prison for six months to three years. Here some examples of Class D felony crimes: burglary, battery, cheating at gambling, cruelty to animals, cultivating marijuana, domestic battery, fraud, impersonating a public servant, moving a body from the scene of a death, obstruction of justice, perjury, possession of a sawed-off shotgun, prostitution, and public indecency.
The list goes on and on, but here’s just a few more: criminal deviate conduct, dispensing of material harmful to minors, disposing of a dead animal, driving while intoxicated, exploiting an endangered adult, failure to warn of a communicable disease, illegal possession of a vehicle identification number, invasion of privacy, stalking, strangulation, prescription fraud, and tampering with an odometer.
There are some drug possession crimes on the list, too, including possession of more than 30 grams of marijuana, about 1 ounce.
My flight of imagination didn’t last long. The commission member’s statement was meant to emphasize a point (I think) about proportionate punishment, rather than to implicate his colleagues.
The commission was created in 2009 to take a deep look at the state’s criminal code — which lays out the standards for crime and punishment in Indiana — and figure out what needs to be kept and what can be tossed. Since it was last revised in 1977, the General Assembly has been adding to it and altering it — often, as legislators themselves say, without considering the escalating costs of locking up more offenders or making sure there were like penalties for like crimes.