'Three strikes' law: Is it too-cruel punishment?

Besides court appeals, civil libertarians say a new dialogue between California citizens and lawmakers should ensue, and that the state should clarify its intentions with new laws or sentencing guidelines.

"A lot of people have been totally surprised with the number of stories coming out that the law is a lot broader than just punishing serious violence," says Mary Broderick, executive director of California Attorneys for Criminal Justice.

The law was passed after the high-profile murder of Polly Klaas, a Petaluma, Calif., girl who was abducted and murdered by a convicted child molester. Amid public concerns about rising crime, former Gov. Pete Wilson (R) made the law's passage a centerpiece of his reelection agenda.

But not long after citizens overwhelmingly approved the initiative, stories began surfacing of criminals being sentenced for 25 to 50 years and longer for third offenses that were not violent. Jury members, after returning guilty verdicts for minor crimes, found out the defendants in their cases had been given harsh sentences.

"We thought we were giving this guy about two years for burglary, until the [district attorney] told us later that because of 'three strikes' the judge's hands were tied," says a Santa Monica juror of a 1997 burglary case. "They gave him 25 years; we were all horrified," says the juror, who asked not to be identified.

In addition, police began complaining about defendants who wound up dead, after resisting arrest rather than going back to jail for good.

The volume of three-strikes cases also clogged court dockets and drove up the costs of jailing repeat offenders in already overcrowded prisons.

Other observers say that cracking down on criminals, whether or not their third crimes were petty, was indeed the original intent of the law.

They expect that higher courts will support their position. One is current California secretary of state and gubernatorial candidate Bill Jones, who authored the three-strikes law. He is pressing the state attorney general to "initiate a rapid and aggressive appeal."

"If this decision is not overturned, we risk returning to the revolving-door prison system that caused California's crime rate to go through the roof," Mr. Jones told the Los Angeles Times.

Still others hold a middle position, saying each of the state's 58 county district attorneys has the discretion to decide how to charge criminals.

"Cases like Andrade's are the exception, not the rule," says Tom Orloff, president of the California District Attorney's Association. "The fact of the matter is that most DAs have used better discretion in avoiding situations like this. Overall, crime has dropped in California, and three strikes is the reason why."

Page: 1 | 2