Montgomery County sentinel. [volume] (Rockville, Md.) 1855-1974, 1959-12-03
Drunk Sentences

IF OUR prosecuting authorities and courts were interested
in demonstrating lack of awareness of the full gravity
OF the drunk driving problem they couldn't have done
better job of it than in recent weeks.
Perhaps the recent findings of a special committee of
the American Medical Association should be made required
reading for our judges and prosecutors For in that sur
vey the committee found that in so per cent of the fatal
automobile accidents in this country last year. alcohol was
factor.
In the light of this finding it is little difficult to
understand how recent drunk driving case-probaby the
worst such case to appear in Montgomery County
yearscoud have been handled routely has BEEN
The defendant, 31-year-old carpenter was in Peo-
pies Court charged with two drunk driving offenses He
had been convicted in the lower court of third offense
ana an appeal for that pending The two recent
oenses which occurred within two weeks of each other
We're committed while the defendant bond after
being arrested for the other onse There had been three
earlier convictions bringing to six the defendants total
number of drunk driving violations in Maryland in 10
years. In addition, he up string of about 16 other
assorted traffic violations the principal being driving
without permit.
Despite the defendants long record Judge Samuel
Gordon OF the lower court, sentenced him to only 13
months in Jail although under the law he could have sem
fenced him to about five years.
The earlier appeal and an appeal from Judge Cordon's
sentence were in Circuit Court Monday and this is the
way they were handled by States Attorney Leonard T.
Hardy and Judge Thomas M Anderson of the three
drunk driving cases were dropped he not prosecuted
for them ao the State declined to prosecute charges of
driving on suspended permit driving without headlights
and driving on revoked permit The defendant accord
ngy was tried and sentenced for only one drunk driving
oense and one charge of driving revoked permit To
both charges ne pleaded guilty he had in the lower
court In what appeared to be routine handling of this
extreme case the judge sentenced the defendant to one
year In jail on the drunk driving charge and on the driving
on revoked permit charge he gave him generally sus-
pended sentence" That he got nothing for the
lesser ofense- time in Jail fine And of course
is TO be remembered that many persons sent to jail are
paroed after serving only third of their time as re-
ward Tor good behavior. This means that this particular
oeendan could emerge in four months with his sate-one
OF the worst ever seen by local oficalswped clean Yet
when the Maryland General Assembly enacted sitter law
IN an effort to cope with the growing drunk driving prob
e specified that defendants should be given not less
tnan SIX months nor more than two years for second
or subsequent drunk driving conviction This means that
as Tar as the General Assembly was concerned drunk
driver with second offense should 60 to Jail for at least
SIX months and for each subsequent oense he should be
gwen another six months-at least. BY implication the
legislators would have favored the maximum two-vear
sentence rather than the bare minimum for drunk drivers
VINO have record as long as your arm
AS far as the local courts and prosecutors are CON-
cened however drunk driving still seems to be an offense
nat warrants only light sentences for an offender who has
repeatedly demonstrated total ncapacity to exercise re-
sponsony behind the Wheel We submit that this is not
quite the right way to about coping with this extremely
serious problem.