Advertisement
Advertisement

Most eligible inmates got 3 Strike sentence cuts

Share

Three years after voters approved a change in the state’s Three Strikes sentencing law that held out hope some inmates could reduce their life sentences, 94 percent of eligible inmates have been given shorter sentences by San Diego Superior Court judges.

That comes out to 201 inmates who successfully petitioned judges to reduce their terms of at least 25 years to life in prison, according to statistics provided by the court. The court said some 170 petitions had been denied, but that number includes both inmates who were denied because they were not eligible for a reduction under the terms of the law as well as those who were turned down because, although eligible, a judge determined they should not be released.

The court does not break out how many were denied because they were ineligible and how many were denied on the merits. But the Public Defender’s office, which has represented the majority of inmates, said that only 13 of the total eligible inmates have been denied a sentence reduction.

Advertisement

The number of inmates getting reduced sentences in the county is close to statewide figures compiled by Three Strikes Project at Stanford Law School, which tracks the court cases statewide under Proposition 36, the sentence reduction law which was passed by voters in November 2012.

Across the state, judges have granted reduced sentences at a rate of 93 percent, said Michael Romano, the director of the law school project. A study conducted by the project also showed that the recidivism rate for those who have been released from prison is 6.4 percent — a rate Romano said was lower than opponents of the measure had warned would occur when it was on the ballot in 2012.

Proposition 36 changed the state’s Three Strikes sentencing law that was approved by voters in 1994, when tough-on-crime measures were popular and usually adopted by voters. The law initially called for a 25-years-to-life sentence for people with two prior violent or serious felony convictions who were convicted of a third felony offense.

Though the law was modified in subsequent years — judges were given the authority to discard prior “strikes”, which was not in the original measure — the most far-reaching change was the 2012 proposal. It allowed inmates to ask for a re-sentencing if their third strike was for a nonviolent, or non-serious crime, such as drug possession.

Judges could grant the request if they determined doing so did not pose an unreasonable risk to public safety. Not all inmates with a life sentence under the law were eligible. Inmates with previous convictions for rape, murder or child molestation were presumed to be ineligible.

The law created an opening for an estimated 3,000 inmates serving a life sentence for third strike convictions for a nonviolent crime to file petitions with the courts. Among them was Barry Adams of San Diego, convicted in May 1994 of stealing a pair of sneakers and set of car speakers from an unlocked car.

His story is detailed in court records at the downtown Superior Court. San Diego police caught Adams walking down the street, wearing the pilfered shoes and carrying the speakers.

Adams, now 54 years old, had prior convictions for residential burglary in 1986 and 1980. The shoe-speaker theft convictions automatically cast him into state prison for 25 years to life.

After passage of the law, Adams asked for and got a sentence reduction to eight years in April 2013, court records show. By then he had served 19 years in state prison, and was released.

In all, some 2,157 inmates have been released from state prisons since the law’s passage, according to Bill Sessa, a spokesman for the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation. An additional 585 were denied release, he said.

Those who are being released appear to be staying out of prison. Sessa said of the 2,157 who got a sentence reduction and, in most cases, were released right away, only 166 have been returned to state custody.

Romano, of the Three Strikes Project, said judges granting a high rate of reductions shows both that the measure targeted the right population of inmates and that attitudes toward mass incarceration have changed.

“I think what you’re seeing is courts and the public have realized, with some reflection, that giving someone 25 years to life for some of these nonviolent crimes wasn’t protecting public safety,” he said.

During the campaign, proponents said the state could save more than $100 million in prison costs over time. No accounting of how much has been saved has been made, however.

The savings were projected to come both from releasing current inmates, and from a second change to the law — one that now says a life sentence can be imposed only when a the new conviction is for a violent or serious felony.

That change reduced the pool of potential third strikers in the future. It also eliminated people like Tommy Singleton, sentenced to 25 to life after he dropped two rocks of cocaine and a glass smoking pipe on the sidewalk outside a drug house in front of San Diego police.

Singleton got a life sentence in April 1996. Without his two prior convictions for robbery in 1980 and 1986, he would have been sentenced to a maximum of six years in prison, according to court records. In 2013, after 19 years, he was granted a reduction under Proposition 36 and released.

There are eight cases awaiting decisions still in San Diego Superior Court, said Deputy Public Defender Abbey Noel.

“The vast majority of our clients were people sentenced in mid to late 1990s, just after the law was passed,” she said.

She said a collaborative effort among the defense bar, the District Attorney and the court to identify inmates who were eligible and move them through the system helped move the cases along.

greg.moran@sduniontribune.com

Advertisement