OFFICIALS LAMENT PASSAGE OF PROP. 36

Judges, Prosecutors Say They'll Have Less Latitude

Law enforcement officials spoke out against it, newspaper editorials
statewide voiced strong opposition to it, and even a television actor who
plays the role of the American president warned of its perceived dangers.

But not even actor Martin Sheen's pleas to reject Proposition 36 - the
measure that will send many nonviolent drug offenders to treatment rather
than prison - could dissuade the majority of California voters from
approving the legislation. A full 61 percent voted in favor of the measure
in the Nov. 7 election.

In San Luis Obispo County, 58 percent of the voters supported Proposition
36. Now judges and district attorneys both here and statewide are taking a
long look at the proposition and optimistically saying they will find ways
to make it work.

"In some ways I'm disappointed," said San Luis Obispo County Judge
Christopher Money, "but I'm pleased to see that there will be a lot more
funds available for treatment programs."

The proposition earmarks $120 million a year for five years for drug
treatment, counseling and vocational training for offenders. The funding
will allow for about $4,000 per patient for treatment. Currently costs for
incarceration are about $21,000 a year.

Supporters of the law, including San Luis Obispo criminal defense attorney
Ilan Funke-Bilu, say the legislation is an important step in rehabilitating
drug offenders.

"It simply rearranges the focus of our criminal justice system," Funke-Bilu
said. "It tells us that the people finally recognize that a good percentage
of criminals out there are really people who need treatment and help more
than they need incarceration, and in the long run it's cheaper for the
taxpayer to treat the people than throw them in the pokey and throw the key
away."

But the proposition's opponents question whether drug treatment will save
taxpayers the $150 million annually that it promises. For one thing,
critics note, there is no funding for drug testing in the measure. They
worry that the amount of money designated for drug programs will not be enough.

Judges and prosecutors also say that the proposition gives them less
latitude in charging and sentencing offenders. Under the current system, a
person who is caught with a small amount of an illicit drug - like
methamphetamine - can be charged with either a misdemeanor or a felony.

Those who are charged with a misdemeanor - generally first-time offenders -
are given lighter punishment. That could include requiring them to attend a
Narcotics Anonymous-type of meeting, which costs taxpayers little to nothing.

Under the new law, misdemeanor and felony offenders will be treated the
same in that both will be eligible for drug rehabilitation.

Money said the legislation takes away the court's ability to send drug
offenders to prison for a few days to "dry out" before they are dealt with
in the system.

"I think addiction is very, very difficult for people to overcome," he
said, "and when they limit the alternatives a judge has in requiring a
person who is addicted to overcome their addiction, it hurts."

He also is concerned about the fate of drug court in the county. In
September, nine people graduated from drug court, which was started two
years ago in San Luis Obispo. The program combines treatment, weekly
meetings with a judge, and regular visits from a probation officer.

Drug court succeeded because of the accountability - in the form of drug
testing and weekly meetings with the judge - that is built into the
program, supporters said. They worry that offenders will not choose to plea
and enter drug court, but instead will go to trial, be convicted and go
into rehabilitation.

"It's sad because drug court was succeeding," said Deputy District Attorney
Lee Cunningham. "It was the only thing that had hope. The drug addicts are
the ones that are going to be hurt. There is accountability with drug
court, but there's none with Proposition 36."

But with the prison population in California swelling despite a drop in
crime across the country, and one of every three prisoners in state
penitentiaries serving time for a drug-related crime, Proposition 36
supporters say that the voters were clearly voicing their opinion that
something needs to be done to help offenders.

"It's society looking at this saying we have to do something," said
criminal defense attorney Paul Phillips. "Is it the cure all? No. Is it a
step in the right direction? Maybe so. Those powers that be decided maybe
we need to do a little rehab here."