BILL ANALYSIS
AB 2715
Page 1
Date of Hearing: April 13, 2010
Counsel: Meghan Masera
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC SAFETY
Tom Ammiano, Chair
AB 2715 (Bass) - As Introduced: February 19, 2010
SUMMARY : Requires the Legislative Analyst to examine the
"Three Strikes" statutes and report its findings to the
Legislature no later than January 1, 2012. Specifically, this
bill :
1)Requires the Legislative Analyst to examine the Three Strikes
statutes and report its findings to the Legislature on the
fiscal costs, the state of public safety due to its
enforcement, any benefits or repercussions of those statutes,
and other specified findings.
2)Provides that the report must examine the extent to which
reductions in serious crime can be attributed to the mandatory
incarceration policies of the Three Strikes statutes, identify
the current and projected costs of the mandatory
incarceration, assess the costs to victims as a result of
being victimized, and analyze the manner in which Three
Strikes statutes are being implemented in various urban,
rural, and mixed urban-rural counties across California.
3)States that the Judicial Council, the Attorney General, and
the University of California, upon approval of the Board of
Regents, assist the Legislative Analyst in conducting the
study.
EXISTING LAW :
1)Provides that the Joint Legislative Budget Committee shall
ascertain facts and make recommendations to the Legislature
concerning the state budget, the revenues and expenditures of
California, the organization and functions of California, its
departments, subdivisions and agencies, and such other matters
as may be provided for in the Joint Rules of the Senate and
Assembly. (Government Code Section 9140.) The Committee is
responsible for the appointment of a legislative analyst and
AB 2715
Page 2
other clerical and technical employees as necessary.
(Government Code Section 9143.)
2)Declares legislative intent that in enacting the Three Strikes
statutes to ensure longer prison sentences and greater
punishment for those who commit a felony and have been
previously convicted of serious and/or violent felony
offenses. [Penal Code Sections 667(b) and 1170.12(a).]
3)States that if a defendant has been convicted of a felony and
it has been pled and proved that the defendant has one or more
prior felony convictions, the court should adhere to the
following [Penal Code Section 667(c)(1) to (8)]:
a) There shall not be an aggregate term limitation for
purposes of consecutive sentencing for any subsequent
felony conviction;
b) Probation for the current offense shall not be granted,
nor shall execution or imposition of the sentence be
suspended for any prior offense;
c) The length of time between the prior felony conviction
and the current felony conviction shall not affect the
imposition of sentence;
d) There shall not be a commitment to any other facility
other than the state prison;
e) The total amount of credits awarded shall not exceed
one-fifth of the total term of imprisonment imposed and
shall not accrue until the defendant is physically placed
in the state prison;
f) If there is a current conviction for more than one
felony count not committed on the same occasion, and not
arising from the same set of operative facts, the court
shall sentence the defendant consecutively on each count;
g) If there is a current conviction for more than one
serious or violent felony, the court shall impose the
sentence for each conviction consecutive to the sentence
for any other conviction for which the defendant may be
consecutively sentenced in the manner prescribed by law;
and,
AB 2715
Page 3
h) Any sentence imposed on a defendant who has a prior
felony conviction will be imposed consecutive to any other
sentence which the defendant is already serving.
4)Defines a prior conviction of a felony as [Penal Code Sections
667(d)(1) to (3) and 1170.12(b)(1) to (3)]:
a) Any offense defined by statute as a violent felony or
any offense defined by statute as a serious felony in
California. The determination of whether a prior
conviction is a prior felony conviction shall be made upon
the date of that prior conviction and is not affected by
the sentence imposed unless the sentence automatically,
upon the initial sentencing, converts the felony to a
misdemeanor;
b) A conviction in another jurisdiction for an offense
that, if committed in California, is punishable by
imprisonment in the state prison. A prior conviction of a
particular felony shall include a conviction in another
jurisdiction for an offense that includes all of the
elements of the particular felony as defined by statute;
c) A prior juvenile adjudication shall constitute a prior
felony conviction for purposes of sentence enhancement if:
i) The juvenile was 16 years of age or older at the
time he or she committed the prior offense;
ii) The prior offense is listed in statute as a felony;
iii) The juvenile was found to be a fit and proper
subject to be dealt with under the juvenile court law;
and,
iv) The juvenile was adjudged a ward of the juvenile
court.
5)If a defendant has one prior felony conviction that has been
pled and proved, the determinate term or minimum term for an
indeterminate term shall be twice the term otherwise provided
as punishment for the current felony conviction. [Penal Code
Sections 667(e)(1) and 1170.12(c)(1).]
AB 2715
Page 4
6)If a defendant has two or more prior felony convictions that
have been pled and proved, the term for the current felony
conviction shall be an indeterminate term of life imprisonment
with a minimum term of the indeterminate sentence calculated
as the greater of [Penal Code Sections 667(e)(2) and
1170.12(c)(2)]:
a) Three times the term otherwise provided as punishment
for each current felony conviction subsequent to the two or
more prior felony convictions;
b) Imprisonment in the state prison for 25 years; or,
c) The term determined by the court pursuant to determinate
sentencing statutes, including any enhancement applicable.
FISCAL EFFECT : Unknown
COMMENTS :
1)Author's Statement : According to the author, "As we know, the
mandatory minimum sentence for a third strike in California is
25 years. More than 4,000 individuals have been sentenced to
a third strike in California for a non violent offense. The
number of crimes reported for the first six months of 2009
declined in every offense category when compared to the same
period in 2008. Preliminary crime statistics show that
violent crimes reported for the first six months of 2009
decreased 6.2 percent from the same period in 2008.
"While these numbers are encouraging, it is important to examine
if this reduction in crime and other factors can be attributed
to enforcement of '3 Strikes.' In March of 2009, the
initiative reached its 15th year anniversary and it has been a
half a decade since the Legislative Analyst's Office (LAO)
completed a study on this issue. Given the changing dynamics
coupled with the limited resources within California,
reevaluating this statute to examine the impacts today on
public safety is very relevant.
"AB 2715 requires the LAO to examine the '3 Strikes' statutes
and report to the Legislature its findings on the fiscal
costs, state of public safety relevant to enforcement, and any
benefits and/or repercussions.
AB 2715
Page 5
"I have brought forth this measure to ensure that important
decisions affecting individuals, communities, sentences, and
resources are made with current and thoughtful data as an
underpinning and are not based on old, outdated anecdotes and
stereotypes."
2)Background : According to the Legislative Analyst's Report, "A
Primer: Three Strikes" (October 2005), "In 1994, California
legislators and voters approved a major change in the state's
criminal sentencing law, (commonly known as Three Strikes and
You're Out). The law was enacted as Chapter 12, Statutes of
1994 (AB 971, Jones) by the Legislature and by the electorate
in Proposition 184. As its name suggests, the law requires,
among other things, a minimum sentence of 25 years to life for
three-time repeat offenders with multiple prior serious or
violent felony convictions. The Legislature and voters passed
the Three Strikes law after several high profile murders
committed by ex-felons raised concern that violent offenders
were being released from prison only to commit new, often
serious and violent, crimes in the community." [Legislative
Analyst's Office, A Primer: Three Strikes (Oct. 2005) p. 3.]
"The Three Strikes law imposed longer prison sentences for
certain repeat offenders, as well as instituted other changes.
Most significantly, it required that a person who is
convicted of a felony and who has been previously convicted of
one or more violent or serious felonies receive a sentence
enhancement. The major changes made by the Three Strikes law
are as follows (Id. at pp. 5-7):
a) "Second Strike Offense. If a person has one previous
serious or violent felony conviction, the sentence for any
new felony conviction (not just a serious or violent
felony) is twice the term otherwise required under law for
the new conviction. Offenders sentenced by the courts
under this provision are often referred to as 'second
strikers.'
b) "Third Strike Offense. If a person has two or more
previous serious or violent felony convictions, the
sentence for any new felony conviction (not just a serious
or violent felony) is life imprisonment with the minimum
term being 25 years. Offenders convicted under this
provision are frequently referred to as 'third strikers.'
AB 2715
Page 6
c) "Consecutive Sentencing. The statute requires
consecutive, rather than concurrent, sentencing for
multiple offenses committed by strikers.
d) "Unlimited Aggregate Term. There is no limit to the
number of felonies that can be included in the consecutive
sentence.
e) "Time Since Prior Conviction Not Considered. The length
of time between the prior and new felony conviction does
not affect the imposition of the new sentence, so serious
and violent felony offenses committed many years before a
new offense can be counted as prior strikes.
f) "Probation, Suspension, or Diversion Prohibited.
Probation may not be granted for the new felony, nor may
imposition of the sentence be suspended for any prior
offense. The defendant must be committed to state prison
and is not eligible for diversion.
g) "Prosecutorial Discretion. Prosecutors can move to
dismiss, or 'strike,' prior felonies from consideration
during sentencing in the 'furtherance of justice.'
h) "Limited 'Good Time' Credits. Strikers cannot reduce
the time they spend in prison by more than one-fifth
(rather than the standard of one-half) by earning credits
from work or education activities.
"As a result of these provisions, the Three Strikes law
significantly increases the length of time some repeat
offenders spend in state prison." (Id. at p. 7.)
3)Impact on California's Criminal Justice System : In the last
25 years, California's state prison population has increased
from 25,000 inmates in 1980 to 172,000 in 2008. Among others,
one factor blamed for this sharp increase is the passage of
the Three Strikes Law in 1994. [Rappaport, Sentencing Reform
in California (2009) 7 Hastings Race and Poverty L.J. 285.]
Currently, California's prison population is at an all-time high
with more than 173,000 inmates housed in facilities equipped
to hold one-half that. Due to the passage of determinate
sentencing laws and the Three Strikes Law, the Little Hoover
Commission has reported that the growth in California's prison
AB 2715
Page 7
population unfolded in two distinct phases. "Until the 1980s,
California's inmate population grew at a relatively slow pace,
its prison population growing by an average of 500 inmates a
year. But from 1980 to 2006, the inmate population surged
more than 600 percent, adding an average 5,500 inmates a
year." [Little Hoover Commission, Solving California's
Corrections Crisis: Time is Running Out (Jan. 2007) p. 17.]
From 1980 to 1997, California built 21 prisons and added more
than 120,000 inmates. One additional prison opened in June
2005, adding nearly 3,000 beds, which is not enough. "As of
November 30, 2006, California's 33-prison system was operating
at 200 percent of the design capacity. Approximately 19,000
offenders are double- and triple-bunked in dorms, hallways and
classrooms. Overcrowding threatens the safety of prison staff
and inmates and obstructs the efficient delivery of services
needed to prepare inmates for parole and prevent recidivism."
[Little Hoover Commission, Solving California's Corrections
Crisis: Time is Running Out (Jan. 2007) p. 19.]
The Little Hoover Commission concluded that "while the initial
surge in inmate growth in the 1980s was likely due to an
increase in drug-related crimes, changes in sentencing laws
over the past two decades, as well as changes in incarceration
and parole policies fueled further growth. Those policy
changes established punishment as the primary goal of
incarceration and fundamentally changed the nature of parole."
[Little Hoover Commission, Solving California's Corrections
Crisis: Time is Running Out (Jan. 2007) p. 20.]
Based on these findings, the Little Hoover Commission
recommended that the Governor and the Legislature begin a
comprehensive review of California's sentencing system. The
last Legislative Analyst's Office Report on the effect of the
Three Strikes Law was completed in 2005. The report mandated
by this bill would assist the Legislature in implementing the
Little Hoover Commission's recommendation by providing
up-to-date information about how the Three Strikes Law's
sentencing scheme has affected California's criminal justice
system.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION :
Support
AB 2715
Page 8
None
Opposition
None
Analysis Prepared by : Meghan Masera / PUB. S. / (916)
319-3744