After eight years winding its way through the court system, the case of a Hoonah man convicted of sexually abusing his pre-teen foster daughter returns to the original trial judge for possible sentencing.
A three-judge sentencing panel met in Juneau on Monday to consider the case of Thomas Jack, 42. But they declined to take it up, and they sent it back for another sentencing hearing.
Ketchikan Superior Court Judge Trevor Stephens said the case was incorrectly referred to them. Kenai Superior Court Judge Anna Moran and Fairbanks Superior Court Judge Michael McConahy were also part of the panel.
Jack was arrested and charged in 2009 for sexually abusing an 11-year-old girl placed in his and his wife’s care.
Jack stood trial twice. According to a synopsis of the case compiled by Alaska Court of Appeals in 2014, the first jury could not reach a verdict. But a second jury found Jack guilty on three counts of first degree sexual abuse of a minor and three counts of second degree sexual abuse of a minor.
In 2010, Jack was sentenced to the lowest presumptive sentence allowed by statute: 50 years and 3 days in prison with 10 years suspended, or 40 years and 3 days to serve.
In 2014, the Alaska Supreme Court ordered that Jack be resentenced to merge some charges for sentencing purposes. But justices also said the trial judge, Superior Court Judge Philip Pallenberg, didn’t make a mistake when he did not send the case onto a special three-judge sentencing panel.
The panel could’ve cut the potential sentence by as much as half after considering non-statutory mitigating factors, such as an extraordinary potential for rehabilitation, or if the defendant proves that a presumptive sentence would result in manifest injustice.
In the run up to a potential sentencing hearing in January 2017, former Juneau Rep. Cathy Muñoz was criticized for writing a letter to Judge Pallenberg, asking for a lighter sentence than what was initially proposed.
Then, Pallenberg granted Jack’s request for a sentencing before the three-judge panel while using the non-statutory mitigating factor.
On Monday, Judge Stephens said they reviewed legislation and previous case law, and didn’t agree with Pallenberg’s reasoning. As a consequence, they did not have the authority to consider the case. It was returned to Pallenberg for sentencing, but he can still refer the case back to the three-judge panel again, based on other reasons.
