A timely study of California's Three-Strikes Law, just published by the Salvatori Center for the Study of Individual Freedom in the Modern World, demonstrates that discretion on the part of both prosecutors and judges is effectively preventing the imposition of overly-harsh sentences for less serious second- and third-strike offenses, according to the monograph's author.
Tough for Whom? by Jennifer Walsh, a research associate at CMC's Salvatori Center and an assistant professor at California State University, Los Angeles, focuses on the use of discretion in filing charges and determining sentencing for third-strike offenders. Walsh will discuss her research at the Marian Miner Cook Athenaeum at 12:15 p.m. on Tuesday, Oct. 12.
Published at a time when opponents of the Three-Strikes Law are backing Proposition 66, the 50-plus-page monograph includes Walsh's findings after surveying prosecutors in each of the state's 58 counties. Among the statistics: 45 percent of felons considered eligible for a third-strike prosecution are not being prosecuted or sentenced as Three-Strikes cases. "There are two levels of review: the prosecutor and the judge, and at each level, they have the authority to reduce a prior strike," explains Joseph Bessette, associate director of the Salvatori Center. "It's what Jennifer has called the escape clause' in the law, and it mitigates the severity of sentencing that might be considered unfair."
Key factors being considered by prosecutors in deciding whether to eliminate a "strike," Walsh found, were the seriousness of the most recent offense, history of violence, and the amount of time that elapsed between the latest offense and prior crimes. She also analyzed data from the state Department of Corrections to rebut the common misperception that most third-strike sentences have been handed down to people convicted of a minor third offense.
Other findings presented in Tough for Whom?:
*Two-thirds of those now serving a third-strike conviction were prosecuted for a violent crime, burglary, or illegal possession of a weapon.
*Most convicts who were in prison for minor third-strike offenses had committed serious crimes for their first and second strikes, and were considered a danger to society by prosecutors and judges handling their cases.
*About 5 percent of the state's prison populationabout 7,500 inmatesis composed of third-strike offenders. ("The L.A. Times recently gave the impression that 42,000 inmates in California are third-strikers," Bessette explained, "but that's a misimpression created by the law's opponents. Most of those people are two-time offenders, not three-strikers.")
Bessette says Proposition 66 is a measure that stands to amend current law so that only serious or violent felonies may be considered for third-strike prosecutions, and it would reduce the number of offenses that would qualify as strike offenses. "It would significantly amend the Three-Strikes Law, despite the fact that this study shows that it is working largely as intended," Bessette says.
Walsh will travel to Sacramento for a press conference on her report, to increase voter awareness. She also will testify before the state Senate Committee on Criminal Justice. "We've sent out the report to hundreds of people in the criminal justice community in California," Bessette says.
For additional information on Tough for Whom's findings, visit: http://salvatori.claremontmckenna.edu/publications/