Third-Strike Law Case Study

550 Words3 Pages
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. Any felony classified by the California law warrants a third strike.
According to (Coker and Wiesberg, 2012), only 3.1 % of the third-strike inmates were incarcerated for first-degree murder while 1.7% of the inmates were incarcerated for rape. A majority of the inmates incarcerated through the third strike were property or drug crimes. However, there have been cases where petty offenders such as pick picketers sentenced to a life imprisonment under the three-strike law. The fact that majority of the third-strike law sentences were petty offenders has raised public outcry prompting for a serious reconsideration of
…show more content…
However, under proposition, the individuals convicted for rape, gun crimes, sex offenses or murder will not be subject to reduced sentence. The aim of the proposition is to redefine non-violent crimes as misdemeanors. As a result, the proposition will not subject the individuals to mandatory sentence. Moreover, Proposition 47 allows those qualified to be resentenced as misdemeanants without any consideration of a further prison term either as a non-strike offender or a second strike (Coker & Weisberg,

More about Third-Strike Law Case Study

Open Document