Skip to main content

Level 3 sex offender offered reduced sentence, has until Aug. 8 to decide

By Howard B. Owens

Ronald A. Smith, a Level 3 sex offender facing three new felony charges, has been given a plea offer that would reduce his time in prison to five years.

Or he could take his case to trial, risk conviction, and a maximum sentence of 21 years in jail.

He has until Aug. 8 to decide.

Last month, Smith was convicted in a jury trial of failing to register his proper address as a sex offender.

He will be sentenced on Aug. 8 on that charge, with a possible sentence of up to three and a half years in prison.

If he pleads guilty to one count of sexual abuse in the first degree, he would receive a concurrent sentence of five years max.

The three sexual abuse counts carry a maximum possible sentence of seven years each, and the sentences could be imposed consecutively.

District Attorney Lawrence Friedman explained the plea offer in Genesee County Court this morning when Smith appeared so a trial date could be set on the sexual abuse charges.

Jury selection will begin Oct. 24 if Smith doesn't accept a plea deal on or before Aug. 8.

UPDATE: To clarify the sentencing options on the failure to register conviction. Smith can receive one of two possible indeterminate sentences, either one and a half to three years in state prison, or two to four years. So, on that charge he could likely serve from one and a half to two years, with credit for time already served. If he accepts the plea offer on just one count of sexual abuse, he would receive a determinate sentence of five years.  

Previously:

Elizabeth Downie

Why on EARTH would you give a LEVEL 3 sex offender a plea deal??? Especially when, after only being out of prison for four months, he is a repeat offender AND doesn't register??!! There should be a No-Tolerance policy/law here! Get these people off of our streets!

Jul 7, 2011, 1:24pm Permalink
Howard B. Owens

Why a plea deal? Have we already forgotten about Casey Anthony? Pretty much everybody in the world believes she's guilty, except for the 12 people in the jury box.

Juries are somewhat unpredictable.

That's one reason prosecutors offer plea deals.

No matter how solid the case, even the best prosecutor can still have a jury decide not to convict.

So if you believe the defendant is guilty, what's better? The bird in the hand with five years in prison or the defendant walking free? Sure, it feels good to say, "throw away the key," but if you don't offer a deal, that the defendant might actually accept, there's no guarantee you'll get a conviction.

And as others have noted, pleas also save taxpayers money.

Jul 7, 2011, 3:37pm Permalink
Howard B. Owens

Gary, in the first case, he had nothing to lose. The minimum he goes away for on the sex abuse charge is five years. The max he could do on the failure to register charge was just more than three years. So why not roll the dice on the registration charge? Even if he comes up snake eyes, he isn't really losing anything (assuming, of course, he's guilt of the sex abuse charge(s) and is looking at five to 21 years in prison).

Jul 7, 2011, 3:39pm Permalink
Gary Spencer

and what is the deal with concurrent sentences? He pleads guilty and receives NO MORE TIME than what he will receive now.....doesn't make a lick of since!!!

Jul 7, 2011, 4:30pm Permalink
Howard B. Owens

Saw a great line from somebody on Twitter yesterday: "Roger Clemens being put on trial for lying to politicians is like charging a woman with a crime who flashes her breasts in front of a stripper."

Jul 8, 2011, 6:46am Permalink

Authentically Local