Pennsylvania Homeless Man Spared Felony Charge for 43-Cent Misunderstanding
However, the cruel policy that threatened him with years in jail remains in place.

In September, Pennsylvania prosecutors charged a homeless man with theft over a 43-cent misunderstanding, which due to the state's three-strikes law could have subjected him to years in prison. Last month, the theft charge was dropped, thereby preventing the worst possible outcome, although that does not mean everything necessarily worked out as it should have.
As Reason reported at the time, Joseph Sobolewski grabbed a Mountain Dew at a convenience store that was advertising them as two for $3. He placed $2 on the counter and walked out, unaware that the individual price was $2.29, or $2.43 with tax. The clerk called the police over the infraction. The police then tracked Sobolewski down and arrested him for theft, which because of Pennsylvania's three-strikes law was automatically escalated to felony theft, due to his two previous theft convictions from a decade earlier. Held on $50,000 bond, Sobolewski faced up to seven years in prison.
According to The Patriot-News, however, prosecutors dropped the theft charge and reduced another charge for driving with a suspended license from a misdemeanor to the equivalent of a traffic ticket. As a result, Sobolewski would be spared from the possibility of a yearslong prison sentence over an obvious misunderstanding, which he described as "great news."
While this is indeed great news, it does not mean that the system worked as it should have.
First, upon being arrested, Sobolewski spent a week in jail under a bond amount completely incommensurate with either the alleged offense or his purported danger to society. It was only after a public defender stepped in and convinced a different judge to change it to "unsecured," which meant that he could leave without having to post any money upfront, that he was able to go free.
According to a GoFundMe arranged by another Pennsylvanian on his behalf, Sobolewski and his wife are both homeless, and he works odd jobs to try and support them. Even if he did have gainful employment, however, it is entirely possible that a week in jail would have led to his termination.
In addition, Sobolewski still owes court fees, and his bail amount is still set at $50,000—if at any point the district attorney's office decides that Sobolewski has violated the terms of his bail, it can simply call him back to prison. While this is unlikely based on the recent media attention, it still hangs over Sobolewski's head.
In fact, as The Patriot-News noted, prosecutors dropped the charges earlier in October after the story had gone "viral, with dozens of other publications across the country and into Canada writing about it." People are arrested every day in the more than half of U.S. states that currently have three-strikes laws on the books, and it should not take national media attention to spare them from cruelly disproportionate sentences.
Ultimately, that is exactly what three-strikes laws are: Cruel and disproportionate sentences enshrined into statute. The idea that the punishment should fit the crime is completely upended by mandatory sentencing requirements that treat lesser offenses more harshly based not upon the circumstances of the crime being charged, but upon previous offenses for which the offender has already been punished. Even in cases where a judge would prefer not to impose a harsh sentence, such laws often give them no choice. It is welcome news that Sobolewski will not face a felony charge in this case, but unfortunately, the policy that initially threatened him with one remains in place.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
In September, Pennsylvania prosecutors charged a homeless man with theft over a 43-cent misunderstanding,
Ok... here we go...
I made over $700 per day using my mobile in part time. I recently got my 5th paycheck of $19632 and all i was doing is to copy and paste work online. this home work makes me able to generate more cash daily easily. simple to do work and regular income from this are just superb. Here what i am doing.
Try now……………… Visit Here
Seriously I don’t know why more people haven’t tried this, I work two shifts, 2 hours in the day and 2 in the evening…FhL And i get surly a check of $12600 what’s awesome is I m working from home so I get more time with my kids.
Try it, you won’t regret it........CASHAPP1
What's missing from that sentence is "felony". A felony charge over 43 cents is utterly ridiculous.
As Reason reported at the time, Joseph Sobolewski grabbed a Mountain Dew at a convenience store that was advertising them as two for $3. He placed $2 on the counter and walked out, unaware that the individual price was $2.29, or $2.43 with tax. The clerk called the police over the infraction.
The clerk's name is Karen.
I made over $700 per day using my mobile in part time. I recently got my 5th paycheck of $19632 and all i was doing is to copy and paste work online. this home work makes me able to generate more cash daily easily.NGd simple to do work and regular income from this are just superb. Here what i am doing.
Try now............... VISIT HERE
I wonder if that might be that the people that live in this shitty town are the very cohort who have no understanding of what the actual risk of covid is?
About 76 million people suffered anxiety because of the pandemic
That darn pandemic! WHY DID IT HAVE TO HAPPEN!
The only anxiety I have is government induced.
3 strikes against 3 strikes. So many BS third 4th degree felonies needed in too much prison time for our privatized for profit system. Ask any DA
He's homeless guy without a license driving. Any bets on whether or not he's making that car insurance payment?
It wasn't a "misunderstanding"; it's been explicitly documented that this asshole regularly commits petty thefts. As was clear from a close reading of the article linked to in Reason's original report, but of course ignored by our Reason writer here.
This result isn't "great news", this is a declaration by the state that it won't stop a habitual criminal from victimizing people, as long as his crimes individually don't amount to much.
That, of course, is exactly the injustice to the victims that "three strikes" laws are intended to fix, by taking people who demonstrably will not refrain from crime and putting them somewhere where they cannot victimize the innocent.
Well said. Also, Reason does a disservice to journalistic integrity by failing to report that the store clerk had a different story to tell. She said that she did inform the man that he needed to pay more money.
Of course, just based on two quotes from each side, we can't know for sure which person is telling the truth. Though, a store security camera would be nice to see, and may indicate which party is telling the truth.
It drives me crazy that Reason publishes this kind of lefty feely stuff and ignores fact and intent. We have three strike laws because we do not want people who insist on repeatedly breaking the law walking the street. While punishment should fit the crime, the real crime once you've committed enough crimes is that you refuse to quit committing crimes.
Sadly, Reason is just playing the same game as most of today's "journalists".
1) Determine what the narrative of the publication is.
2) Announce that you are "reporting" some outrage or other that comports with the party narrative.
3) Scan the national news for a story that happens to fit (it's a BIG country and it's a sure bet that you'll find something)
4) Reiterate the story so that it clearly illustrates the narrative. If the original source happens to be actual reporting (if the source is your own publication, an expedient often found in Reason, then the problem may take care of itself) and there are nuanced or even conflicting parts of the story, simply ignore them; after all, you are presenting a synopsis of the story. 5) Sit back and enjoy the feeling of a job well done (well, a job done, anyway).
At least Reason is an admitted opinion publication. Sadly, a lot more of the media that likes to play journalists do the same.
According to one of the links in the article, the 'Three Strikes' law in New York predates baseball by something like 65 years. That's impressive.
Good news for this loser.
I can buy the argument that the theft was a misunderstanding (although, I do believe even that is giving him too much credit: who the heck just tosses money on the counter these days? At the very least, you'd think he would want the change back and everyone even slightly aware of inventory control systems would be aware of what an a-hole move that is).
But are we really going to gloss over driving with a suspended license? Was that related to the DUI he had also received (but apparently doesn't count as a strike?).
If DAs are so afraid of 3 strikes they won't prosecute clear cases, I guess those areas need to think of a system without such a big step function: the sentence multiplier. For each strike, the sentence you would have gotten is multiplied by that much. Driving with a suspended license off a DUI normally puts you in jail for a month? Congrats, now it is 3. Get out, then commit a crime with a 1 year sentence? Now they get to hang out for 4 years. And so on.