Researchers Find Three Strikes Law Had Minimal Effects on Crime

At its May, 2000 meeting in Sacramento, the California Association For Criminal Justice Research heard reports of ongoing study of the impact of California's Three Strikes Law, enacted in 1994.

Adam Beyer, a researcher for the State Judicial Council observed that when the 3-strikes law was being debated in the legislature, analysts were pondering two possibilities: a) that felony charges would plummet, as criminals who were rotating between jail and the streets were carted off to prison for terms of 25 years to life, or b) that courts would be jammed with defendants demanding jury trials, unwilling to plead guilty to minor felonies because of the draconian consequences.

Actual experience shows that neither scenario emerged, at least not in the state as a whole. Crime levels had already begun to decline in 1993, the year prior to enactment of 3-strikes, and the downward trend continued. However, the number of people arrested and prosecuted as felons remained constant, suggesting that arrests and prosecutions are unrelated to the level of criminality in a community, but more related to the number of police officers on the street. Furthermore, the number of reported crimes fell most sharply in those counties like San Francisco and Alameda, where prosecutors used restraint in alleging 3-strikes priors, asking for the maximun sentences only in cases where the current offense was serious or violent.

A small number of courts did experience clogged calendars due to three-strikes cases, but the overall increase in jury trials tended to be temporary, and it was in the 15% to 30% range. It appears that most prosecutors and public defenders adapted to the situation by plea-bargaining more of the non-3-strikes cases, and after a few months, when the new sentencing math had become established, trial rates returned to normal. Even the impact on terms of second strikers, whose sentences were doubled by the law, tended to be moderated by plea bargains that moved cases from higher to lower sentence ranges.

Bolt Hall professors Zimring, Hawkins, and Kamin examined 2400 felony arrest records in three counties for the year prior to 3-strikes' effective date, and for the following two years. The proportion of repeat offenders was not visibly altered by enactment of the law. This suggests that neither the threat of a longer sentence, nor the ability to hold repeat offenders in prison has led to any decline in crime. Because most arrests of people elegible for3-strike enhancements are actually disposed of through plea bargains, the effects of the law appear to be felt in less than 5% of cases.

Peter Greenwood, of RAND Corporation said the main effect of the law has been to shift power from judges to prosecutors, who now swing a much bigger hammer in plea negotiations. It appears that burglary cases have been affected most, and that indeed, the number of burglaries may have fallen about 5% more rapidly than would have been the case if 3-strikes had not been enacted. Research could not show the law had any effect on violent crimes such as the Poly Klass kidnapping that was so instrumental in placing the issue before the voters in 1974.

60 MINUTES--SUNDAY, 5-6-00

TV's 60 Minutes interviewed Stephen Bell, facing a 25-life sentence for taking a bicycle in a garage burglary, then talked with Mike Reynolds, who said "If you'r not prepared to lock up criminals, you'r not prepared to stop crime." Gray Davis said, "If all you'r doing is crime, you deserve to be serving time." The Placer County jurors in Stephen Bell's bicycle burglary case didn't think "the elevator ran to the top floor," and two refused to find valid prior felonies that would send him away for 25 years to life. Judge O'Flaherty considers the law a classic sacred cow that politicians don't dare touch. Franklin Zimring said he thinks the law violates the first principle of proportionality. Several Folsom Prison inmates claimed they were 3d strikers for shoplifting Levi's, theft of two small batteries, and posession of drugs. It was pointed out that San Francisco's prosecutors normally refuse to charge the priors when the third strike is a non-serious offense.

The following letter was delivered to the Policy Committee chair on March 30, 2000:
*****************************

FRIENDS COMMITTEE ON LEGISLATION OF CALIFORNIA
926 J Street, Sacramento, CA 95825 (916)443-3734

March 30, 2000

Carl Washington, Chair
Assembly Public Safety Committee
State Capitol, Sacramento, CA

Re: Assembly Bill 2447 (Wright) Support

Dear Assembly Member Washington:

The Friends Committee on Legislation supports Assembly Bill 2447, which would reduce the chances that offenders who are not a threat to public safety will occupy expensive state prison space. The existing 3-strikes law was represented as an effort to put potential murderers, rapists and hard-core violent criminals in prison for a long time. Unfortunately, as written the law includes many individuals who have committed nuisance offenses, and who are unlikely to be violent. It is time to revisit the operation of this law, and to restore reasonable discretion to prosecutors and judges.

We think it is doubtful that mandatory sentences have a favorable effect on public safety. It has often been pointed out that by the time most of the sentences apply under the 3-strikes and other sentence enhancement laws, the offender is about to age out of the most active stages of criminal activity. This may be why states with less mandatory sentences have had better reductions in crime rates than California. We understand that in the practical application of mandatory sentences, the most serious and sophisticated offenders often serve dramatically shorter sentences than their crime partners.

We urge you to support AB 2447.

Yours very truly,

STEVE BIRDLEBOUGH

cc: Assembly Member Wright

THE FCL IS A QUAKER-SPONSORED LEGISLATIVE ACTION GROUP

***************************

The following material was distributed to lobby day participants for use in conferences with legislators on April 11, 2000

**********************

THREE STRIKES REFORM

AB 2447 (Wright) Support

Assembly Bill 2447 amends the 3 Strikes law, to provide that, if a person has two prior strikes, the "Third Strike" enhancement shall apply only if the defendant's current conviction is for a serious or violent felony or offense.

Under the existing 3-strikes law:
- If a person has one previous violent or serious felony conviction (such as theft of a bicycle from a garage), he/she is sentenced to twice the term prescribed by law for each new felony.
- If a person has two prior violent or serious convictions, he/she is sentenced to a term of 25 years to life in prison for each new felony conviction, whether or not they are violent or serious offenses, and each new offense must be served consecutively.

The problems:
The 3-Strikes law greatly exceeds its original objective to put potential murderers, rapists and hard-core violent criminals in prison for a long time. It also imprisons many individuals who have committed only minor offenses, such as the possession of a small quantity of drugs, or petty theft with a prior. These people are unlikely to be violent in the future.
Not only does the taxpayer end up paying to hold small time offenders in custody for excessive periods, their children are deprived of contact and parental guidance, and often become public charges. The stress of living apart is also destructive to spouses and marriages.

There are great discrepancies across the state in the way the 3-strikes law is enforced. In some counties, priors are not usually charged if they are more than ten years old, or if the current offense is not serious or violent. These different practices reflect local interpretations of justice and the interests of public safety.

AB 2447 addresses these problems by requireing the "Third Strike" to be a "Violent" offense as defined in subdivision (c) of section 667.5 or a "Serious" offense as defined in subdivision (c) of Section 1192.7 of the California State Penal Code. A similar bill was introduced by Senator Tom Hayden last year (SB79). This Bill requires a 2/3 vote of the members of each house.

For further information contact: Families to Amend California Three Strikes
4460 Dorer Pkwy, Sacramento, CA 95823 (916) 391-7765

**************************

For letters sent on this issue in the prior legislative session, go to 3-STRIKES ARCHIVE

For more information on these and other bills, contact the FCL office:

Friends Committee on Legislation
717 K St., Suite 500-B,
Sacramento, CA 95814-3406
(916) 443-3734

Click Here to Donate to the FCL