qwerty
11-02-2004, 06:50 PM
Editorial: Ignore attack on Prop. 66
Amend '3 strikes' to target violent crime
Published 2:15 am PST Monday, November 1, 2004
In the waning days of the 2004 campaign, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger is resorting to the worst kind of late attack ads.
In a desperate bid to defeat Proposition 66, which would amend California's "three strikes and you're out" law, he has taken to the airwaves with claims that Superior Court Judge Raymond Cadei in July called "patently false" and "mathematically impossible." In his ads, Schwarzenegger says that under Proposition 66 "26,000 dangerous criminals will be released from prison." Not true.
Not one person would be automatically released from prison.
Proposition 66 simply allows 4,300 third-strikers who were put away for 25-years-to-life on a nonviolent felony to ask for a limited, one-time resentencing hearing to see if the time fits the crime. They are eligible for possible resentencing, not for release. The only prisoners who could be released are those who have served their full sentence.
Say, for example, a prisoner already served a full sentence for two robberies committed 20 years ago, but was convicted two years ago of check forgery. That prisoner could request a hearing to see whether he should serve a three-strikes life sentence or a sentence for check forgery with two priors. He would still have to serve out the full sentence for the crimes for which he was convicted.
Proposition 66 would affect the following kinds of third-strikers convicted of nonviolent felonies: 357 prisoners serving three-strikes life sentences for petty theft; 235 serving life sentences for vehicle theft; 70 serving life sentences for forgery; and 678 serving life sentences for possessing small amounts of drugs.
Those who are serving three-strikes life sentences for violent crimes - such as murder, robbery, assault with a deadly weapon, kidnapping - would not be eligible for a resentencing hearing.
To reach the false, mathematically impossible 26,000 number, Schwarzenegger is including in his tally second-strikers serving doubled sentences. The language of Proposition 66, however, is clear that only those currently charged with a nonviolent felony that resulted in a 25-to-life three-strikes sentence are eligible for a resentencing hearing.
California's three-strikes law should target habitual violent criminals. Proposition 66 would do just that.
Voters should ignore misleading last-minute, misleading attacks and vote Yes on Proposition 66.
http://www.sacbee.com/content/opinion/story/11286451p-12201628c.html
Amend '3 strikes' to target violent crime
Published 2:15 am PST Monday, November 1, 2004
In the waning days of the 2004 campaign, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger is resorting to the worst kind of late attack ads.
In a desperate bid to defeat Proposition 66, which would amend California's "three strikes and you're out" law, he has taken to the airwaves with claims that Superior Court Judge Raymond Cadei in July called "patently false" and "mathematically impossible." In his ads, Schwarzenegger says that under Proposition 66 "26,000 dangerous criminals will be released from prison." Not true.
Not one person would be automatically released from prison.
Proposition 66 simply allows 4,300 third-strikers who were put away for 25-years-to-life on a nonviolent felony to ask for a limited, one-time resentencing hearing to see if the time fits the crime. They are eligible for possible resentencing, not for release. The only prisoners who could be released are those who have served their full sentence.
Say, for example, a prisoner already served a full sentence for two robberies committed 20 years ago, but was convicted two years ago of check forgery. That prisoner could request a hearing to see whether he should serve a three-strikes life sentence or a sentence for check forgery with two priors. He would still have to serve out the full sentence for the crimes for which he was convicted.
Proposition 66 would affect the following kinds of third-strikers convicted of nonviolent felonies: 357 prisoners serving three-strikes life sentences for petty theft; 235 serving life sentences for vehicle theft; 70 serving life sentences for forgery; and 678 serving life sentences for possessing small amounts of drugs.
Those who are serving three-strikes life sentences for violent crimes - such as murder, robbery, assault with a deadly weapon, kidnapping - would not be eligible for a resentencing hearing.
To reach the false, mathematically impossible 26,000 number, Schwarzenegger is including in his tally second-strikers serving doubled sentences. The language of Proposition 66, however, is clear that only those currently charged with a nonviolent felony that resulted in a 25-to-life three-strikes sentence are eligible for a resentencing hearing.
California's three-strikes law should target habitual violent criminals. Proposition 66 would do just that.
Voters should ignore misleading last-minute, misleading attacks and vote Yes on Proposition 66.
http://www.sacbee.com/content/opinion/story/11286451p-12201628c.html