A 26-year-old man was charged with four cases of armed robbery and attempted armed robbery.
The prosecutor's office initially reached a plea deal with him of 27 months in prison, and then agreed to settle for 9 months of community service - but the court went even further and sentenced him to only 250 hours of community service.
The reason: the past restoration process.
Watch: Breaks into pubs and steals bottles of alcohol and cash // Archive photo: Police spokespersons
According to the revised indictment, the young man committed robberies at stores in Petah Tikva with a knife within one month.
During his confession, the parties stated that they had reached a plea agreement, according to which they would jointly appeal to sentence him to a prison sentence of 27 months, and at the same time he was referred to the review of the probation service.
From that time it became clear that he had undergone exemplary rehabilitation, and the probation service recommended that he settle for a punishment that includes a probation order and an order for public service hours.
The defense attorney, Adv. Avi Cohen, emphasized in his arguments for the sentence that during his military service his client became addicted to hard drugs - which are the background to the commission of the crimes. He also added that since the young man was detained for 11 months in the case - a probation order can suffice. "If, God forbid, he stumbles and commits a crime, The probation service will report and he will be sent back to prison," he claimed. The prosecution, for its part, claimed that the punishment for such a case without rehabilitation is up to 5.5 years in prison, but in the prosecution they were willing to settle for 9 months of community service due to the rehabilitation process that went through.
Judge Greenberg was satisfied with a supervision order for a year and a half, that if the conditions of supervision are violated, they can be confiscated and the accused sentenced to another punishment under which there may be a prolonged prison term, as well as 250 hours for the public benefit.
"I believe it would be right to allow the defendant to continue the rehabilitation process, which also includes an orderly workplace and a productive agenda. However, there is no reason to avoid imposing a time order for the public benefit that would have an educational message and set limits for the defendant," Judge Greenberg wrote in the sentencing.
Were we wrong?
We will fix it!
If you found an error in the article, we would appreciate it if you shared it with us