What is split sentence probation?

Alabama Code § 15-18-8, the Alabama Split Sentence Act, allows Alabama criminal court judges to suspend portions of a criminal defendant’s sentence. Under a split sentence, the judge imposes a limited amount of jail time followed by a period of probation. The jail time that is not served can be imposed, and the defendant made to serve the remainder of his sentence if they violate the conditions of their probation.

For criminal sentences up to 15 years, the judge can order the defendant to serve a split sentence of up to 3 years of jail time followed by the remaining sentence being suspended while the defendant is on probation.

For criminal sentences over 15 years, but not over 20 years, the judge can order the defendant to serve a split sentence of not less than 3 years and not more than 5 years, followed by a period of probation.

The judge has absolute discretion to give or not give a split sentence so long as they abide by the limitations above. However, certain types of Alabama criminal convictions are not eligible for a split sentence. Under Alabama Code § 15-8-8(a) Class A and Class B felony child sex abuse cases are not eligible for a split sentence. Additionally, the sentencing judge retains jurisdiction to change the terms of the split sentence.

The period of probation that the defendant is to serve can be up to the length of the remaining sentence. Under Alabama law, the defendant must be given some term of probation following the period of incarceration. In addition, a defendant who receives a split sentence is not eligible to receive Correctional Incentive Time (“good time”).

Where there are sentence enhancements, the sentencing judge may suspend the additional time imposed by the sentencing enhancement.

Although not strictly defined in the Alabama Code, judges in Alabama have imposed what has become known as “reverse splits” or “reverse split sentences.” Under a reverse split sentence, the defendant is placed on probation for a limited amount of time, then is required to serve the remainder of the sentence. Because the sentencing judge retains jurisdiction over the split sentence, if the defendant abides by the terms and conditions of the probation, the sentencing judge can then suspend the remainder of the sentence. If the defendant fails to make it on probation, the remainder of the sentence is served.

Since AB109, the measure to realign California’s overcrowded prisons by sending more felons to county jails, split sentencing has become a more attractive option for negotiating plea bargains. While split sentencing has not quite caught on in Los Angeles County as it has in other counties, it may gain popularity as the jails become more and more crowded over the next year. Currently, the majority of split sentences apply to felony sentencing, but it can equally apply to misdemeanors, too.

Summary in 30 Words or Less: Split sentencing is an attractive way to creatively resolve certain felony offenses because the consequences of a post-release violation are less severe with split sentencing than with traditional probation.

Split sentencing is an arrangement where a defendant is ordered to a specified county jail term and then a period of post-release mandatory supervision by the probation department. It is not available for certain crimes excluded from AB109’s list of crimes punishable by county jail under Penal Code § 1170(h).

While post-release supervision under split sentencing may seem no different than the already existing probation, it differs in terms of the consequences for a violation of the terms of release. If one violates probation, even on the last day of probation, the probationer can face the entire jail term as punishment. With post-release supervision, if one violates the terms of release, the individual faces jail for the remainder of the total sentence.

Airport Superior Courthouse
It is understandable that many see split sentencing, also known as blended sentences, as yet another example of society becoming more lax in how it punishes criminals. Indeed, it is not an option in the more serious felonies still punishable only by state prison. It is, however, a viable option for those felonies where the prosecution is adamant about jail time exceeding one year, but with AB109, the individual is likely to commit more offenses unless he is afforded supervised release and assisted in his or efforts to reintegrate into society. In such cases, for example when mental health or drug addiction issues are present, both the prosecutorial interest in punishment is mixed with the defense interest in rehabilitation.Statewide, since October 1, 2011 when AB109 went into effect and excluding Los Angeles County, forty percent of the felonies punishable under Penal Code § 1170(h) were negotiated with split sentences. In Los Angeles County for the same period, the rate was five percent. It is unclear why Los Angeles County has been reluctant to embrace split sentencing. Split sentencing certainly seems to offer an option for dealing with people that probation did not work for in the past. At the same time, a long sentence in county jail usually helps no one much unless treatment is combined to help the individual re-enter society as a law-abiding citizen. Split sentencing can still address prosecutorial interests in making sure the individual receives no windfall. On wobblers, the sentence to county jail for the felony can exceed a year to make the individual ineligible for Penal Code 17(b) reclassification and expungement. Split sentencing does nevertheless raise many questions. Will a split sentence overburden the already heavily burdened probation department? What happens when the county jail gives an inmate an “early kick,” releasing him early? Does the post-release mandatory supervision time then count two-for-one or is it straight time? If so, how much of the time is two-for-one? Does such supervision need to be pursuant to a location tracking anklet or bracelet? The role of Penal Code § 654 in sentencing also overlays the split sentence duration calculus, especially if one of the crimes is excluded from county jail, i.e. a sex offense subject to Penal Code § 290. Nevertheless, split sentencing is a creative way to craft a plea bargain to avoid trial, the risks associated with trial and its expense. As county jails continue to fill up, this author believes split sentencing will find application in resolving more serious misdemeanors when the prosecution insists upon jail time.For more information about sentencing in general, click on the following articles:

For summaries of some of the cases we have handled, view our Select Case Results.

Contact Greg Hill & Associates

A Florida judge will often suspend a prison sentence in favor of a period of probation. In some cases, the judge will impose what is known as a “true split” sentence. Basically, this means that the judge imposes a specific prison sentence but suspends a part of it contingent on the defendant completing a similar term of probation.

For example, a court might impose a true split sentence of 6 years with 4 of those years suspended. The defendant would then need to serve 2 years in jail followed by 4 years of probation. If the defendant subsequently violated their probation, the judge could then “unsuspend” the remaining 4 years of the original sentence.

Critically, the judge is bound by the earlier true split sentence in the event of a probation violation. In other words, the judge cannot decide after a violation occurs to sentence the defendant to more prison time than was provided for by the original true split sentence. In effect, the true split sentence is a means of sentencing the defendant in advance for any probation violation that might occur.

Appeals Court Reverses 11-Year Sentence for Drug Offender Who Violated Probation

A recent decision from the Florida Fifth District Court of Appeal, Dalton v. State, provides a practical illustration of what we are talking about. In this case, the defendant pleaded guilty to two felony drug charges in 2016. The sentencing court imposed concurrent five-year prison terms. After completing a youthful offender program, the trial court modified the sentence and placed the defendant on probation. But the court advised that if the defendant violated probation, the court may “impose any sentence which it might have imposed before placing you on probation.”

About three years later, the defendant admitted to a probation violation, specifically possessing illegal drugs. The trial court then imposed a new sentence on the two original charges–5 years on the first and 11 years on the second, to run concurrently with credit for time already served. The defendant appealed, arguing the 11-year sentence violated the terms of the original sentencing, which was in fact a true split sentence of 5 years.

The Fifth District agreed. The appellate court noted the trial judge’s modification of the defendant’s sentence expressly stated that a probation violation would result in the same sentence that might have been imposed prior to probation. That is to say, the defendant’s original true split sentence. As such, the maximum penalty she faced for a probation violation was the original 5-year concurrent sentence.

Contact Orlando Criminal Defense Attorney Jose Baez Today

Drug charges often bring harsh sentences from judges. That is why it is crucial to work with an experienced Orlando drug crimes lawyer when you are the person on trial. Contact the Baez Law Firm today to schedule a consultation with a member of our criminal defense team today.

Source:

scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=18024688264531989115