COURT BACKS HELP, NOT JAIL FOR DRUGS

Mandate For Treatment Given Maximum Effect

The first appellate court to consider California's voter-approved overhaul
of drug sentencing ruled yesterday that people sentenced after July 1 for
possessing drugs are entitled to treatment instead of jail.

In a decision that affects hundreds or even thousands of defendants
statewide, a three-judge Court of Appeal panel in Los Angeles said
Proposition 36 applied to everyone waiting to be sentenced when it took
effect in July, no matter when they committed their crimes.

Proposition 36, passed by 61 percent of the voters last November, requires
probation and mandatory treatment for drug possession. Those who repeatedly
fail to complete a treatment program or refuse to take part can be
sentenced to jail or prison.

The initiative delayed the change until July 1 to give counties time to
establish drug programs, and it specified that the law covered defendants
convicted after that date. Citing the measure's purpose of rehabilitating
as many defendants as possible, the court said a "conviction" is complete
only when the judge pronounces final judgment and imposes sentence.

Prosecutors and judges in many counties have taken a narrower view of
Proposition 36, applying it only to cases in which the jury verdict or
guilty plea was given after July 1, said Lawrence Brown, executive director
of the California District Attorneys Association. He said some defendants
sentenced to jail in those counties could petition for release under
yesterday's ruling.

San Francisco District Attorney Terence Hallinan, the only district
attorney in the state to endorse Proposition 36, already followed the
practice decreed by the court, said Liz Aguilar-Tarchi, chief of narcotics
prosecution in Hallinan's office.

"The outcome is to respect the will of the voters so the addicted person
gets treatment instead of punishment," said Alex Ricciardulli, the deputy
Los Angeles public defender who argued the case.

In an unusual alignment, the prosecutor's office agreed, although it
presented opposing arguments to the court.

"It's consistent with what the voters intended, trying to help these
people, not put them in jail," said George M. Palmer, head deputy in the
Los Angeles district attorney's office.

The case involved Janet DeLong, who was convicted in May of possessing
cocaine. She was sentenced July 12 to five months in jail by a judge who
ruled she was not covered by Proposition 36, but the appellate court
ordered her released a week later while it reviewed the issue.