Supreme Court chief justice draws fire for minimum-mandatories letter
Utah Supreme Court Chief Justice Michael Zimmerman is drawing fire for a letter supporting the controversial law to wipe out the minimum-mandatory sentences for certain sex offenses.In a letter to Senate President Lane Beattie, Zimmerman said the Utah Judicial Council strongly supports eliminating the minimum-mandatory sentences, which mostly are used against child molesters.
Zimmerman spoke for the council without informing the full 13-member judicial group of his actions.
The letter was distributed to all senators during Wednesday's special legislative session by House Speaker Mel Brown during debate. As requested by Gov. Mike Leavitt, the legislators voted to delay for one year the implementation of the law eliminating the minimum-mandatory sentences.
The law had been enacted without debate on March 1 during the final two hours of the regular 1995 Legislature at the behest of Beattie.
Sen. David Buhler, R-Salt Lake City, criticized Zimmerman for the letter.
"It's a fine line, but I think he crossed it," said Buhler, Senate leader of the unsuccessful effort to repeal the new law. "This was out of bounds. It's a very political sort of letter."
Another supporter of the repeal effort, former U.S. Attorney Brent Ward, said, "Given the great credence that's normally attached to an official statement by the chief justice . . . (the letter) crosses over the line that separates the two branches of government and violates the separation of powers."
Zimmerman said the letter was appropriate because it dealt with the issue of sentences and discretion of judges.
University of Utah law professor and constitutional expert John Flynn concurred. "Don't mis-char-ac-ter-ize it as a violation of separation of powers," Flynn said. "If Justice Zimmerman was trying to enact legislation, that would be a violation."
Zimmerman's action was "very appropriate" and "politically realistic," Flynn said. "The branches of government ought to be able to talk to each other."
"Speaking on behalf of the Utah Judicial Council, I want to express our firm support for the governor's and legislative leadership's proposal" to abolish minimum-mandatory sentences, Zim-mer-man's letter said.
The council, the policymaking group for the state's judges, has not taken a vote on the debate over postponement or repeal of the bill. The council also has never taken a formal stand on minimum-mandatory sentences.
Third District Judge David Young, a council member, said he was unaware Zimmerman had spoken for the group. Young said he believed the bill normally would not be an issue the council would address.
"The reason is that's basically a legislative determination," he said.
Under council policy, Zim-mer-man can speak for the group if he has the agreement of the head of the legislative liaison committee, a post now held by Justice Christine Durham. Zim-mer-man said he discussed the letter with Durham and Court of Appeals Judge Pamela Greenwood, the state's acting court administrator.
"I feel comfortable with the wording of the letter," Greenwood said. "The rationale is to keep the issue on the table and the council generally supports that."
Also, judges are generally opposed to minimum-mandatory sentences, Greenwood said, echoing a point Zimmerman made in his letter.
"Sentencing discretion needs to be restored to the Board of Pardons and to the judiciary, so that sex offenders can be dealt with on an individualized basis," Zimmerman wrote.