October 14, 1997
Families to Amend California's 3-Strikes ("FACTS") is a state-wide organization with the purpose of amending the 3-Strikes law so it applies only to violent and serious offenses. FACTS believes the application of the 3-Strikes law can be used in an unjust manner. In fact, FACTS believes the 3-Strikes law itself acknowledges that the 3-Strikes law can be applied in an unjust manner because of the discretion it allows to prosecutors.
Prosecutorial discretion is not enough to ensure that the 3-Strikes law will be used in only a just manner. Prosecutors are adversaries in the criminal justice system and are therefore naturally opposed to the rights of the offenders. Prosecutors are often evaluated, promoted and they run for political office based on how "tough" they are on crime. In most cases, the "tougher" they are on offenders, the better they are evaluated, promoted and the more elections they win. Thus, to believe that prosecutors will stand-up for justice rather than their own careers is to be naïve. Judges, however, are not adversaries but are supposed to be neutral participants and more concerned with whether due process and justice occur within the system. Therefore, to enhance the ability of justice to occur in the application of the 3-Strikes law, FACTS believes judges should also be allowed the discretion to disregard prior convictions if they believe a mandatory prison system is too cruel (as was held under the Romero decision).
[It should be noted that FACTS believes justice will occur even more frequently if the legislative process amends the 3-Strikes law so it is not applicable to non-violent and non-serious offenses. To believe that judges will always stand-up for justice rather than their own careers is also naïve.]
FACTS believes the public was not aware of how the 3-Strikes law could be applied in an unjust manner. The massive advertising of the 3-Strikes law as a deterrent to extremely violent crimes like murder, rape and child molestation overshadowed how the law could be applied to non-violent and non-serious offenders. Overlooked within the complexities of the law were the facts that: (1) non-violent crimes and minor offenses such as "possession of less then a gram of cocaine," "forgery," and "petty theft" can count as third strikes; (2) multiple counts during one act can count for multiple strikes; (3) it is being applied retroactively (meaning crimes committed back in the 1970s or earlier can count as strikes); and (4) crime committed by 16 and 17 year-olds can count as strikes.
The following pages are actual stories about prisoners who have been convicted under the 3-Strikes law. FACTS believes that these cases give evidence that not only can the 3-Strikes law be applied in an unjust manner, but it already is being applied in an unjust manner. Additional stories are continuously added to our web site at http://www.ags.uci.edu/~satij/FACTS.htm.
Please send questions or comments to factsla@sbcglobal.net.
Everything on this web site can be distributed to the general public, reprinted, or reposted without permission of Families to Amend California's 3-Strikes.
Date last modified: 10/15/97.