OPPapers.com

Politics

Penalty for Bias-Motivated Crimes
On June 11, 1993, the United State Supreme Court upheld
Wisconsin's penalty enhancement law, which imposes harsher sentences on criminals who "intentionally select the person against whom the crime...is committed..because of the race, religion, color,
disability, sexual orientation, national origin or ancestry of that
person." Chief Justice Rehnquist delivered the opinion of the
unanimous Court. This paper argues against the decision, and will
attempt to prove the unconstitutionality of such penalty enhancement
laws.
On the evening of October 7, 1989, Mitchell and a group of
young black men attacked and severely beat a lone white boy. The
group had just finished watching the film "Mississippi Burning", in
which a young black boy was, while praying, beaten by a white man.
After the film, the group moved outside and Mitchell asked if they
felt "hyped up to move on some white people". When the white boy
approached Mitchell said, "You all want to fuck somebody up? There
goes a white boy, Go get him." The boy was left unconscious, and
remained in a coma for four days. Mitchell was convicted of aggravated
battery, which carries a two year maximum sentence. The Wisconsin
jury, however, found that because Mitchell selected his victim based
on race, the penalty enhancement law allowed Mitchell to be sentenced
to up to seven years. The jury sentenced Mitchell to four years, twice
the maximum for the crime he committed without the penalty enhancement
law.

The U.S. Supreme Court¹s ruling was faulty, and defied a
number of precedents. The Wisconsin law is unconstitutional, and is
essentially unenforceable. This paper primarily focuses on the
constitutional arguments against Chief Justice Rehnquist¹s decision
and the statute itself, but will also consider the practical
implications of the Wisconsin law, as well as a similar law passed
under the new federal crime bill...