Stafford will apparently have to serve at least 30 years of 40-year sentence

Barring any changes on appeal, Derrick Stafford will apparently have to serve at least 30 years of his 40-year sentence for the death of 6-year-old Jeremy Mardis.

There has been some confusion as to how long Stafford must be imprisoned before he would be eligible for release. Ultimately, its up the Louisiana Parole Board and the Department of Corrections, who have discretionary powers. Each prisoner’s case is handled differently by the board.

In handing down the sentence on March 31, 12th Judicial District Judge Billy Bennett sentenced Stafford to the maximum of 40 years for the manslaughter of Jeremy Mardis. He also sentenced Stafford to the mandatory 15 years for the attempted manslaughter of Jeremy’s father, Christopher Few, who was seriously wounded in the shooting incident of Nov. 3, 2015. The two sentences will be served concurrently. If somehow the manslaughter 40-year conviction was reversed but the attempted murder sentence was not, Stafford would still have his 15 year sentence.

In handing down the sentence on March 31, Bennett wrote that "20 years of this sentence to be served without parole, probation or suspension of sentence.... due to the discharge of a firearm during the commission of a violent felony". That does not mean Stafford is be free in 20 years, but more likely he will be able to start the parole process which will take many additional years.

In addition state law calls for at least 10 years of a non probational period because the victim was under 10 years of age.

Bennett also pointed out that because the offense was a violent crime, it would not be subject to the normal “good behavior” release.

RECENT CHANGE
The law is already complicated enough for non-lawyers to comprehend, but a new curve was recently added to the mix.
Statute (RS 15.571.3 A 1) states that a prisoner convicted of a first time crime of violence shall earn diminution of sentence at the rate of 3 days for every 17 days in actual custody.
Gov. John Bel Edwards signed a prison reform law in June 2016 that reduced the former “85 percent rule” for violent offenders to 75 percent. That went into effect Jan. 1, but is not retroactive for anyone currently serving time for a violent crime at the time the law became effective.

There is at least 20 years for discussion before a final answer is due. The apparent best answer to the question, based solely on a simple reading of the law, is that Stafford must serve 75 percent of his 40-year sentence before he is eligible for parole. That requirement is regardless of whether the sentence was imposed with or without benefit of parole. The final number of years Stafford serves will be determined over time by the Department of Correction or the parole board.

The other answers floated, from “best for defendant” to “worst for defendant” are:

* Stafford would be “eligible” for parole after serving the first 20 years of his sentence imposed “without benefit of parole, etc.” Parole would not be automatic even if he applied to the Parole Board.

* Applying the 75 percent rule for good behavior to the entire 40 years would mean Stafford would have earned enough years off his sentence to walk out the doors after 30 years without going before the Parole Board.

* Applying the “good behavior” rule only to the second half of the sentence -- assuming Stafford could not earn good behavior credit in the first 20 because of the wording of the sentence prohibiting “diminution of sentence” -- he would not have enough time earned until 35 years. He would have been eligible for parole, but not guaranteed approval, for five years at that time.

* Then there’s the theory that Stafford should fall under the “85 percent” rule in place on Nov. 3, 2015, when the crime occurred. That would mean he would not be eligible for parole consideration until he has served 34 years. If the “good behavior” credit does not kick in until after the first 20, he would not be released until he had served 37 of his 40 years.

One local attorney noted that Stafford’s sentence could change under future “prison reform” legislation, which these days is usually designed to reduce the number of inmates the state has to house, feed and provide medical care.

“The problem comes when they make those reforms’ retroactive to inmates already in prison,” the attorney said. “That’s when sentences are shortened.”

Stafford’s attorneys told the Journal they will file appeals of the court’s verdict and sentence. If successful, all discussion on the years Stafford will serve will be moot.