A group of Stanford lawyers is working to put a referendum on the 2012 California ballot that would ask the state’s voters to reform the notoriously harsh “Three Strikes Law” which has put offenders in prison for life for crimes such as petty larceny. In 1994 California voters, reeling under the murder of 12-year-old Polly Klaas who was abducted from her bedroom and strangled by a convicted felon, voted to pass the “Three Strikes Law.” The law was meant to protect society from violent, repeat offenders. Instead, many non-violent offenders have gotten caught in the law’s wide net.
With financial backing from David W. Mills, former investment banker, and current Stanford law professor, the group (which includes Stanford’s Three Strikes Clinic) has hired Averell Smith to help turn around the public’s opinion of the law. The coalition hopes that, unlike 2004,when a similar referendum failed by three percent of the votes, 2012 will bring about the desired reform.
According to an article posted in mercurynews.com, offenders have received life sentences for “stealing a pair of socks, attempting to break into a soup kitchen to get something to eat and for forging a $146 check…” The website also reported that in 2004, almost half of those imprisoned under the “Three Strikes Law” did not commit a violent or serious offense.
To the surprise of some, support for reformation of the law has come from prominent individuals with right-leaning political agendas. Los Angeles County Attorney Steve Cooley, is joined by former Reagan era attorney general Ed Meese and Grover Norquist in calling for the law to be changed.
The particulars of the referendum are still being written, but the draft includes changing the law so that the “third strike” would only apply to those who commit a serious or violent crime. The campaign to reform the law is expected to begin during late summer through mid-fall. In order to get on the ballot, 504,760 signatures supporting the measure are needed.
In light of the recent Supreme Court decision ordering California to release tens of thousands of prisoners (see Reentry Central article Supreme Court Orders California to Reduce Prison Population by up to 37,000 5/31/11) the campaign has already received publicity concerning the harshness of the law. The Court blames the overcrowding of California’s prisons, in part, on the life sentences that are mandated under the current “Three Strikes Law.” Another factor California voters might wish to consider is the annual $200 million price tag taxpayers will pay for the next 25 years to keep non-violent “three-strikers’ locked up. Marc Levin, who is also a policy advisor for the reform coalition told the Mercury News “It’s better to have the sentence fit the crime. When you have these one-size-fits-all laws, it really inhibits you from prioritizing your prison space.”
There are many California residents who are convinced that the “Three Strikes Law” improves public safety, and in some cases, as with violent career-criminals it does. Convincing these voters that the law must be amended to exclude non-violent or petty offenders from receiving the same punishment as murderers is the job the Stanford University reform coalition is undertaking with gusto.
Source: mercurynews.com
|
|
|
|
