STUDY MINIMIZES `THREE-STRIKES' LAW
Berkeley Professor Finds No Impact On Crime

Sacramento- (AP) -- A new study of criminal sentences in three large
California cities concludes that the state's 5 1/2-year-old ``three
strikes, you're out'' law hasn't had any statistically significant
impact on the conduct of criminals.

Franklin Zimring, a University of California-Berkeley law professor,
said Monday his analysis of arrest records of 3,500 criminal
defendants in Los Angeles, San Diego and San Francisco before and
after California enacted the law in 1994 found no evidence it is a
deterrent to crime.

His report was immediately challenged by a spokesman for an author of
California's ``three strikes'' law, California Secretary of State Bill
Jones, a former state assemblyman.

``When you see the crime rate going down 38 percent since `three
strikes,' you can't say it doesn't work,'' Jones spokesman Alfie
Charles said. ``The entire crime-rate drop isn't attributable to
`three strikes,' but it is a major factor.''

The ``three strikes'' law -- doubling sentences for a second felony
conviction and imposing 25 years to life for a third conviction -- was
enacted in March 1994.

Rate Was Dropping

But the crime rate had been declining for 2 1/2 years before that
date, and it continued to drop after ``three strikes'' at roughly the
same rate, Zimring said.

More important, he said, the percentage of felony defendants facing
``three-strikes'' sentences, which Zimring contends is indicative of
the law's deterrent effect, declined from 13.9 percent during the 2
1/2 years before ``three strikes'' to 12.8 percent in the same length
of time after.

``The statistical effect of `three strikes' is negligible,'' Zimring
told a Capitol news conference Monday. ``The `three-strikes'
defendants are indistinguishable from the general run of felonies.''

``If California's crime decline were a `three-strikes' effect, we
would expect to see the drop in arrests concentrated among the target
groups,'' he said. ``Instead, the decline is spread evenly'' among
both three-strikes and first- and second-time offenders.

But Charles said Zimring's study ignored other relevant
data.

Parolee Data

``We have more parolees leaving California than coming to
California,'' Charles said. ``If you talk with parolees or inmates,
they know what it is, and they know how many strikes they have. It is
working.''

Zimring said there was ``no way to turn this data into a conclusive
argument for or against the impact of `three strikes.' ''

He said his statistical analysis also strongly suggests that
prosecutors are seeking the second-strike enhancement of double the
normal penalty but they are not seeking third-strike penalties in the
overwhelming majority of cases in which it might be applicable.

He said parole revocations of ex-convicts have also risen
substantially, an indication that prosecutors are using that option
instead of prosecuting for a third strike. ``It appears that only one
in 10 eligible for 25-to-life actually gets it,'' Zimring said.

He said that while at least 25 other states and the federal government
also have enacted three-strikes statutes, he doesn't plan a more
extensive study, since California has had nearly 90 percent of the
nation's three-strikes cases.