91813 CRAZYTHUNDER, FRANKLIN J

DATE: 09/15/2015

PAGE: 2

THE ORIGINAL APPROVED MINUTES ARE ON FILE IN THE COMMISSION OFFICE

S T A T E O F I D A H O COMMISSION OF PARDONS AND PAROLE 91813 CRAZYTHUNDER, FRANKLIN J REG PAROLE HRG DATE: 09/15/2015 COMMISSIONERS: MATTHEWS, MIKE H DRESSEN, JANIE MOORE, R. DAVID JONES, SANDY Executive DirectorINSTITUTION: ISCC CASE SENT NUMBER OFFENSE TYPE MAX MIN ---------------- ------------ ---- ------------ ------------1) CR10-3863 ASSLT AGGR CC 15 YR 6 YR Parole Elig Date: 1) 03/21/2016 Full Term Date: 1) 03/20/2025 Prior Hearing(s) or Reviews: Hearing Date Hearing Type Hearing Decision Action Date ------------ --------------- -------------------- ----------- 1) 09/01/2010 PRIM REV AMEND SCHEDULE HEARING 2) 04/01/2010 PRIMARY REVIEW SCHEDULE HEARING There are two visitors present in support of this subject.

There was one victim present and two investigating officers in support of the victim.The Commission has letters of support. Ms. Barbara Ehardt, friend, said she is here on behalf of her mother. Subject spent many hours and days at their house. Her mother has subjects children. The children come to see him here and they need him home. Her mother will provide a place for him to live and it is an alcohol and drug free environment. Her expectations include that he better himself. She said he has a job if he is released. He also needs to work on his education. She said she feels she is putting her reputation on the line as she is a city council member.The Commission asked subject why he is incarcerated. Subject said he was in a bad spot and not thinking straight. He said when he did commit his crime he made an irrational decision. He didnt have the tools to pull himself out of the place he was in or to get him out of that downward spiral. He feels remorse and sorry for putting his victim through what he did. He knows what it is to be in fear for his life.

The Commission noted he has still not said what he did. Subject said he did not fire at a police officer. He said he fired the shots in the air. The Commission asked how he thought that was going to help. Subject said it was not his intention to kill anyone. He was evading arrest. Subject said his childrens mother would have been responsible for the eluding, as she was the driver. He was on felony probation at that time. Subject said he was absconding his probation and was using drugs. Subject said he did not tell her to go, but, he did say that when he was interviewed he said that he lied so she would not get charged.

The Commission asked where the bullets went. Subject said he thinks one hit a tree and one hit a car. He said the way the car he was in was swerving around, he isnt sure. The Commission noted the bullets could have hit anyone or anything. Subject said he picked up the gun but he doesnt know why he had it. He has a possession of a weapon by a minor in his history. The Commission noted the subject had commented regarding the shooting that he had said it was better than a drug high. Subject said he wasnt thinking and it was merely a response to the adrenaline. He recalls stating that he had no intention of shooting the officer. He does not remember saying that if he had wanted to shoot the officer, he would have. During the eluding, the Commission noted that was also putting people at risk. Subject said they were in a residential neighborhood. Subject is 25 years old now. He had just turned 20 when this offense happened. The Commission noted the many charges in subjects past. The Commission noted he could have charges here today for murder or homicide. The Commission noted this all started from drinking underage. Subject said right now, he isnt living in an active gang tier. He is staying out of it right now and is trying to better himself. He is in close custody and he is in a tier that is mixed. There are other gang members housed there but he is programming and he is trying to look past all that. Subject is close custody because a few years ago he was involved in a fight that resulted in him being close custody for 5 years. There were several DORs prior to this Aggravated Battery and there has been an additional STG write-up and his last DOR for Tattooing and Piercing. Subject said there have been no behavior issues since his interview with the Hearing Officer. Subject understood that his LSI score was high partly because he is in close custody. Subject in in Pathway 7, and his plan, if paroled, is to reside with his grandmother in Idaho Falls. The Commission asked what he would do if he cannot go back to Idaho Falls. He said his grandmother is willing to help him and he has other places he can go. The Commission noted they have read the letters that have been sent and they appear to be good people, but the victim also has a right to live without fear. It is noted that it is a possibility he cannot go to Idaho Falls.Subject said he was close to completing his GED but he was moved out of segregation and he missed a test and was transferred over to ISCC. He signed up for the classes and he has to do all the tests again. The Commission noted the guidelines are not favorable for subject right now. Add that to the LSI and it does not look good for subject. The crime information will not change, but the DORs, and the programming, and the LSI can all come down.

Subject said he has messed up and he knows that. He has taken accountability for the offense. In the end he did take accountability and he doesnt give staff problems. He understands that from the Commissions point of view, it doesnt look that way with his DORs. He said he takes accountability when he is wrong. He has been staying out of trouble. With the classes he is trying to get into, they can help him learn to think properly and to find solutions to make the right decisions. He wants to better himself and get an education.The Commission noted they have to consider public safety in their decisions. He was on felony probation when he committed this offense. After arriving in prison, he received 7 DORs. That says much about a person more than the person sitting before the Commission today. Today subject said he stuck the weapon out of the window and fired shots in the air. From where the bullets were removed, it indicates he was aiming the weapon at the officer. That is not indicative of taking accountability.The Commission noted he said he was in a bad place when this occurred. The Commission asked if that gave him the right to endanger the officers lives? Even if he were using methamphetamines, it does not justify endangering peoples lives. The Commission understands about his past and he did have a rough go but he also had some opportunities. This still happened.

Lieutenant Steven Poulter, victim, 23 year veteran of Idaho Falls Police Department provided testimony. This offense occurred in the daytime hours around homes and apartments. The distance of the shooting was approximately 15 feet. A convicted felon had armed himself with a .357 magnum. This was the third time this officer has been almost killed by a bullet. Subject fired six times. The officer ducked down and waited to die. This was a pre-meditated attack to kill a police officer. Subject was given 5 years mandatory for possessing a weapon. The sentence for shooting a police officer is one year. This officer was involved in the offenders first arrest as a juvenile in which the offender had a firearm and then again in the second at which time he fired the weapon. He will offend again if released.The Commission elects to deny parole and schedule the next hearing in 9/2020.The reasons for denial include:Your continued incarceration will serve to protect the public from possible future violence or criminal activity.

Circumstances of crime indicate ongoing propensity toward violence.

You committed your offense while on probation, parole, home confinement, or in prison.

Length of record would indicate a substantial risk of continuing to engage in serious criminal behavior.

You have failed to successfully maintain a continued period of good behavior.

Dawn Howell, Parole Commission Officer, explained the decision.