More handpicked essays just for you.
The three strikes law pros and cons
Three strikes legislation problems
Three strikes law impact on california
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: The three strikes law pros and cons
Ewing had been convicted of both burglary and robbery approximately seven years before the crime that gave rise to this appeal. When he stole the golf clubs, he was still on parole following his release from prison related to those two felony convictions. Following his conviction in this case, the trial judge declined to exercise discretion and convict Ewing of a misdemeanor only, as he was allowed but not required to do under California law. After determining that Ewing should be punished for a felony offense, the trial judge applied California’s “three strikes" law, where a criminal defendant must be sentenced indeterminate life sentence, which in this case was twenty-five years to life. Ewing claimed that the sentence was disproportionate
The Three Strikes Law states that a penalty enhancement should be handed down to anyone who had previously been convicted of one or more supposedly serious or violent felonies. Under the same laws, an offender who had previously been convicted of a violent or serious felony, regardless of how diminished it may be, face the risk of double-sentencing under the guidelines of the second strike. On the other hand, a third- strike sentencing guideline is applied when an offender with two or more previous crimes is convicted. Under this guideline, a minimum of twenty-five years to life is applied. However, for the third-strike sentence to be passed, the previous crimes committed must be either violent or serious.
In the year 2016, a proposition that allowed those who were convicted of non-violent crimes was placed on the ballot. It was to go in effect on July 1, 2017. This Proposition would create a gateway for nonviolent inmates, as stated by California Penal Code, to be considered for parole. Overall, Proposition 57, Parole for Non-violent Criminals and Juvenile Court Trial Requirements, should not have passed because criminals that committed serious “nonviolent” crimes would be released from prison.
The three strike law aimed to convict career offenders by giving them a harsher verdict when the offender has been convicted of their third offenses. The goal of this law was to control career offenders by making them think twice about committing crimes because of the harsh punishment they would face if they were caught committing the third crime. Ever since the law has been passed it has been in the center of many controversies. Many argue that the law is unfair to the offenders and that it has a negative effect on society.
This is the final draft of my HCP, where I had a completely new topic for my HCP. This draft is about the Three Strikes Law in New Mexico, where we had seen a lot of increase in crime rates after the Three Strikes Law was passed in 1994. This draft involves a lot of information about how the Three Strikes Law has caused an increase in crime rates every year and what kind of crimes has increased in New Mexico City. By the end of this draft, I was not completely satisfied with my final draft because I did not get a chance to review this draft as much I thought could have done it since they were some parts in the essay that were confusing to Professor Tae Sung even though I tried my best to make sure there is nothing confusing to him in my paper.
A review conducted by the National Institute of Justice concluded after comparing states with comparable laws in place to California’s Three Strikes Law that California was the only state that the implementation of the law would cause a significant increase in the prison
The maximum length is set by legislators and the judge imposes the length of the sentence up to the maximum. Mandatory sentences are set by legislators instead of judges. Mandatory sentences set a penalty for certain crimes that is the standard for all offenders convicted of that crime. I do not believe three-strike laws should be implemented across
Crime was so high and the crimes being done were so dangerous that in 1936 little less than 200 people were executed through the death penalty (“Historical Data.” Crime and Justice Atlas). These studies shocked the many that such a
He would steal to get the money for his drug habit. Mr. Anderson’s third strike was for purse snatching. Because of his two previous convictions, Mr. Anderson was sentenced under the Third Strike law to send a minimum of 25 years in prison. He served 12 years of that sentence (The Return,
(Banks, 2017). Three Strikes Law In California I. INTRODUCTION “California's Three Strikes sentencing law was originally enacted in 1994. The Legislature’s version of the law was created by amending
In 2009, California was ordered by a federal court to reduce their overcrowded prison population by 138 percent. The state had a massive incarceration rate during the “tough on crime” era (Alternative to Incarceration in California, 2015). In 1994, California had enacted a Three Strike Law. This law allows for offenders who have been convicted of a serious felony to be sentence to a prison term twice as long if they had a prior conviction. If they had two or more prior convictions then they would be mandated to a sentence of 25 years to life (California Courts,
In addition to greatly affecting the otherwise unlikely citizens of America, Tough on Crime policies have greatly affected minority groups in America; perhaps more so than of any other group of citizens. To begin, from the 1980 on through the year 1995, the incarceration rates among drug offenders increased by more than 1000 percent. Notably, by the year 1995 one out of every four inmates in any given correctional facility was a drug offender. In addition of that 1000 percent increase, drug offenders accounted for more than 80 percent of the total growth in the federal inmate population and 50 percent of the growth of the state prison population from 1985 to 1995 (Stith, web). In addition, once in the system, the probability of receiving harsher
In other words, mandatory sentencing for repeating offenders that have not learned their lesson and also so they stop committing crimes in the street since they are imprisoned. What the law basically states is that if you are a felon that has two felonies in their record and gets charged with a third felony, you must received the maximum sentence for the type of felony. With this law follows a lot of controversy. Some people believe that it is too harsh and can ruin a person's life. Others believe it is well deserved as you get 3 chances to better yourself.
Through the decades, crime and crime control have been analyzed in an attempt to find the causes of crime and decide how to combat them. The United States showed an increase in their prison population in the 1970s when the country turned towards a more punitive justice system. Referred to as just deserts theory of crime, the aim is to inflict as much pain on the offender through harsh prison sentences, in hopes to cause as much pain as the crime they committed. The worse the crime is, the worse the punishment the criminal will endure. The issue surrounding just deserts theory is the vast amount of offenders who return to prison after being released, also known as the recidivism rate.
In other words, if you commit a crime the second time, you serve double and if you commit the 3rd time, you get sentenced minimum 25 yrs. in jail, no matter what crime it is. This was a new law implemented after a man who was recently paroled. He had many criminal records such as drug possession and gun abuse. At the time of release, he was on influence and was a drug addict.
