STOP CDCR BID TO DENY 3 STRIKERS PROP 57 RIGHTS!

  • by: Judy collins
  • recipient: Mr. Timothy M. Lockwood, Associate Director CDCR, PO Box 883, Sacramento, CA 94283, California
Last November, California voters passed Prop 57 by an overwhelming margin. This is the third measure in five years aimed at reversing the harsh sentencing laws of the 1980s and 1990s that many feel went too far and resulted in severe overcrowding in our prisons. In 2012, voters passed Prop 36, which allowed 3 strikers to be "resentenced" as 2nd strikers, if their current offense was neither "serious" per PC 1192.7 nor "violent" per PC 667.5(c). Eligible inmates were able to petition the original sentencing court for relief and be granted early release upon completing twice the base term for the current "strike." Two years later, Prop 47 passed, which reclassified certain drug possession crimes as well as low level property crimes under $950 as misdemeanors. Many inmates were released early as a result, with their felonies expunged from their records. That broke down barriers that had made successful reentry into society difficult, with job and housing discrimination. CA voters have now made ALL inmates convicted of A NONVIOLENT FELONY eligible for early parole upon the completion of serving the "full term" for the "primary offense." Prop 57 was codified into the State Constitution as Article 32. The full term is defined as the longest term a court can impose for an offense without regard to any sentencing enhancements, consecutive or alternative sentences. The primary offense is defined as ANY offense, and represents that which resulted in the LONGEST sentence. These very specific terms and definitions are being misconstrued by some in the media as well as attorneys, with disinformation sometimes being disseminated to the masses. Any current "nonviolent" felony conviction qualifies an inmate for eligibility so long as sentenced to state prison. That offense need NOT be the same one as the inmate's PRIMARY OFFENSE, which can be ANY crime so long as the inmate has completed serving the BASE TERM for that offense. This means even a "violent" offense per PC 667.5(c) will qualify if the inmate has either completed serving the actual sentence or the "full term" if such offense is also the "primary offense." CDCR issued "proposed regulations" on 7/14/17, with a period of 45 days for public comment. Its stated intention is to "enhance" the "nonviolent second striker" early parole process implemented by the federal 3 Judge Panel in 2014. Although that was one of the measures ordered by the Panel, others specifically applied to elderly inmates, whether serving determinate or indeterminate (3 striker) sentences. All such inmates who were at least 60 years of age and had served 25 years or more became eligible for early parole. The Board was directed to factor in age and reduction in physical ability. Further, all elderly inmates already approved by the Board but awaiting a future parole date had their dates expedited. Measures were also implemented for minimum custody inmates and second strikers for credits. Mentally incapacitated inmates were included in early parole eligibility. Female inmates were directed to be relocated from state prisons to other locations. All of these changes were as minimally "intrusive" and "narrow" as possible to create a durable model for the future, to maintain capacity caps within the 137.5% threshold. CDCR is attempting to mislead the voters by implying that ONLY NONVIOLENT SECOND STRIKERS were part of the 2014 ruling. This is a convenient segue into CDCR's current stance that NO THIRD STRIKE INMATES ARE ELIGIBLE. In earlier press releases, CDCR was compliant with both the language and intent of the Act. Scott Kernan, CDCR Secretary and charged with the promulgation of regs that support the Act while also protecting public safety, has leaked to the press that he has "bowed to pressure" to exclude 3 strikers as well as registered sex offenders. Per Mr. Kernan, Governor Brown exerted pressure to remove the sex offenders, while the ADA/law enforcement sector pushed for ineligibility for all 3 strikers. Such attempts to subvert the voters' intent and deny whole classes of inmates their now constitutional rights will not prevail, either in the courts or in the court of public opinion. On 4/27/17, the Alliance for Constitutional Sex Offenses filed suit against CDCR/Scott Kernan in Sacramento Superior Court. The group is seeking an injunction as well as the voiding of all discriminatory language pertaining to registered sex offenders under PC 290. This group was also not excluded in the Panel's 2014 ruling; however, CDCR has intentionally subverted the Judges and is now attempting to thwart our Constitution in furtherance of its own agenda and that of the Governor, who has heard much public outcry. We the people demand that Scott Kernan/CDCR immediately revert to the substance and form contained within the Act. Sign the petition, spread the word, and be heard!
Sign Petition
Sign Petition
You have JavaScript disabled. Without it, our site might not function properly.

Privacy Policy

By signing, you accept Care2's Terms of Service.
You can unsub at any time here.

Having problems signing this? Let us know.