Court Opinion

ID: 9715598
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 06:09:54.014229+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:23:36.271028
License: Public Domain

McCown, J.,
dissenting as to sentence.
This is another case in which it might well be said that the punishment does not fit the crime, although it may well fit the defendant! Eighteen months in the penitentiary for fleeing to avoid arrest for driving while under the influence of alcoholic liquor is in sharp contrast with the 30 days in jail which the defendant received on the conviction for the original offense itself. There is no showing as to any other traffic charges filed or the penalties received as a result of the facts involved in this case. The record reveals that the defendant had been previously convicted for a traffic offense of a different kind which was also a felony for *634which this court later directed, probation. Neither the probation violation nor the penalty for it are directly involved here. The defendant’s record does not justify any leniency as to him but the nature of the crime raises issues as to the extent of punishment apparently authorized.
The attention of the Legislature ought to be drawn to the provisions of section 60-430.07, R. R. S. 1943, the statute involved here. That statute was presumably intended as an additional weapon in the enforcement of motor vehicle traffic laws. It applies to flight in a motor vehicle to avoid arrest for violating “any law of this state.” It seems obvious that the evil aimed at by the Legislature would be better dealt with in more specific terms than the broad generality of “any law of this state.” It seems equally apparent that the penalties provided have no specified relationship to the nature or seriousness of the violation which initiated the flight. It should not be assumed that the Legislature specifically intended to authorize or approve a punishment of 3 years imprisonment in the penitentiary for the crime of fleeing in a motor vehicle in an effort to avoid arrest for a traffic violation. The facts suggest the advisability of legislative review.