Sergio De La Pava - A Naked Singularity

THE DEFENDANT: Yes.

THE COURT: Yes? What other promise has been made to you?

THE DEFENDANT: No. No other promise but your honors why can’t I get a drug program?

THE COURT: The reason you can’t get a drug program is that you’re a predicate felon.

THE DEFENDANT: I’m not! What does that mean?

THE COURT: It means that you have been convicted of a prior felony within the past ten years.

THE DEFENDANT: It’s been eleven years!

THE COURT: Any time you’ve spent in jail the past eleven years doesn’t count towards the ten.

THE DEFENDANT: Oh yeah, right. He did say that.

THE COURT: As a predicate you are subject to a mandatory state prison sentence in this case.

THE DEFENDANT: But what about the D-Trap my attorney said I could get.

THE COURT: You’re referring to the DA’s office’s DTAP program. Counsel were any attempts made to get a DTAP disposition?

DEFENSE COUNSEL: Yes. He was evaluated and rejected.

THE COURT: There you have it Mr. Hurd. You were considered for DTAP, which would have allowed you to enter an inpatient drug treatment program and if you had successfully graduated from the program, your case would have been dismissed in the interests of justice, but you were rejected.

THE DEFENDANT: But why was I rejected?

THE COURT: People what was the reason for the rejection?

MR. ZORN: No community ties Your Honor.

THE DEFENDANT: But I am tied up to the community your honors. They called my mother and she told them I was tied.

THE COURT: Apparently they weren’t satisfied Mr. Hurd and unfortunately for you it is solely within their discretion whether or not to admit you into the program. That said, do you still wish to plead guilty?

THE DEFENDANT: I am pleading guilty your honors but I’m doing it because I think it would be a waste of money to have a trial over five dollars worth of crack. What I really need is a drug program because I want to turn my life around and the only reason I was doing what I was doing on the street was to support my habit. The habit has to be fed your honors as you know and I believe in working for my money. I could be out there robbing people but I’m not and I’ve always worked even though I am disabled. And not always at this your honors, I used to be a mail carrier back in the day but then I started using drugs and that was all I wanted to do. So I’m taking this plea to save the city of New York and the taxpayers money because I can’t believe that the DA, who I can see is a very tall man, would take to trial a case involving five dollars worth of crack, especially knowing how much a trial of that nature would cost. But I still think that I should get a chance to do a drug program because I’ve never been given that chance in any of my cases and the money that will be spent keeping me in jail could be spent addressing my real problem which is that I like, no need, to smoke crack every day and every chance I get, and if I have to point people to somebody who’s selling the stuff so I can get one dollar and eventually save up enough to buy a vial then smoke it immediately and start saving up for my next one then I’ll gladly do that, and I’ll do it even though I know it could land me in jail for years because the only thing that matters at that moment is getting my next vial and I am not a Homo-sapiens-sexual your honors but if I need money to buy crack I will suck….

THE COURT: That’s quite enough Mr. Hurd. I am not without sympathy for you and your plight, and believe it or not I agree with a lot of what you’ve said here. In fact I recently wrote an article for the New York Law Journal in which I addressed many of the same issues you’ve raised. One of the things I argue in this article, which will be on the front page of Thursday’s issue by the way, is that the Rockefeller drug laws, which in the early 70’s drastically increased the penalties for the conduct you engaged in, have flooded our prisons to the extent that there are eight times as many people incarcerated today than there were in 1970. Moreover, I argue that these laws, and the war on drugs in general, have eviscerated our inner cities which, because of congestion, poverty, and other factors, are ideally suited for the sort of low-level drug-dealing targeted. Consequently, by focusing on these cities this war has had a disproportionate impact on the indigent and the African-American community of which you are a member. I also argue that the overwhelming majority of people incarcerated from these poor neighborhoods are either addicts looking to support their habit or young minorities who are especially susceptible to the perceived attractions of the low-level drug trade and that those who truly profit from the sale of drugs exploit these individuals for their personal gain and yet are rarely held accountable. So yes I do personally feel that the money spent to incarcerate individuals such as yourself for several years would be better spent on treatment for individuals who are addicted to drugs. That said I am not empowered, in this case and under these circumstances, to make a unilateral decision to sentence you to mandatory drug treatment in lieu of a state prison sentence. As I’ve explained to you that decision rests solely with the District Attorney and they have not seen fit to consent to such a sentence. Consequently, your choice is between pleading guilty and receiving a sentence of three to six or proceeding to trial with all that entails. Knowing that, do you still wish to plead guilty?

THE DEFENDANT: Yes, but I still say that Mr. Zorro should have given me a drug program your honors.

THE COURT: First of all, Mr. Zorn is the assistant who is standing up on all the cases in this courtroom today. He is not the assistant assigned to your case and likely had nothing to do with the decision to reject you for DTAP. Second, I think we’ve more than adequately explained the reasons why that’s not going to happen and there’s no need to get started along those lines again. The plea is satisfactory to the court. Is it satisfactory to the People?

MR. ZORN: Yes.

THE COURT: Enter the plea.

THE CLERK: Mr. Hurd, in the presence of your attorney do you now withdraw your previously entered plea of not guilty and enter a plea of guilty to Criminal Sale of a Controlled Substance in the Fourth Degree in satisfaction of the indictment. Is that your plea? (The defendant conferred with his attorney)

THE DEFENDANT: Yes.

THE COURT: Four weeks for sentencing. How’s the 23rd?

THE DEFENDANT: That’s fine your honors.

THE COURT: I was actually speaking to your attorney Mr. Hurd. Any date is presumptively good for you. The 23rd counsel?

DEFENSE COUNSEL: That’s fine.

THE COURT: Defendant is remanded. The 23rd for sentencing.

THE CLERK: That being the final case of the morning session, Part 46 is adjourned until 2:15.

(Audible groan from the audience.)

“Fucking Casi,” from Dane who shook his head no while smiling from his seat in the first row. “You’ve got to control these guys better. A simple allocution shouldn’t take longer than it takes to read this rag (gesturing with dog-eared Daily News) from front to back then back to front again.”

“Guy said maybe five words to me the last six months,” I said. “Must be the impending state bid that’s got him all talkative.”

“Yeah, well, he should get an extra year for taking so much time that I have to come back here in the afternoon.”

“Let the guy have his fun. He rarely gets such a captive audience.”

“True enough,” conceded Dane. “What would you say if you were about to get three to six?”

“Nobody move or I’ll shoot.”

“Good old Preskill had no objection, she got to plug her article like some guest on Leno.”

“Made my guy’s day.”