COMMUNITY VOICES: THREE STRIKES LAW PUT INTO PROPER PERSPECTIVE

A recent Community Voices article attacked California's Three Strikes
law as unfair. In it, the author mentioned several specific reasons
why he thinks the law is unfair. Unfortunately, though, every point he
used to support his opinion was factually incorrect. I am writing to
correct the author's misunderstandings.

First, the author wrote: "With two strikes, a misdemeanor
offense is turned by the court into a felony...." Not
true. Fact: The Three Strikes law does not (and cannot)
turn any misdemeanor into a felony.

Second, the author wrote (for prior offenses to be
strikes) "it doesn't matter ... if they were violent or
non-violent." Not true. Fact: Only crimes specifically
identified by the Legislature as serious or violent crimes
may count as strikes.

Strikes are limited to stuff like murder, rape and kidnapping. To put
this in perspective, crimes such as assault with a firearm, battery
with serious bodily injury and possession of cocaine for sale are not
strikes.

Third, the author wrote, "Most of these three strikers are
poor so they are assigned a public defender who go(es)
through the motions of a jury trial." Fact: Some of the
best (and hardest working) trial attorneys in town work
for the office of the public defender.

Fourth, the author wrote, "the final blow" is that a jury is not
informed the defendant will receive 25 years to
{??? - SNIP - ???}
juries about a defendant's criminal history is to protect the
defendant!

The danger is that if a jury knows about a person's past especially
something like two (or more) past violent felonies the jury might
want the defendant out of the community (in jail) even if there is
reasonable doubt that he committed the present crime.

Additional fact: No one knows what a defendant's sentence will be
until long after his trial is completed. If we told a jury during
trial "the defendant, if convicted, will receive 25 years to life," we
would be misinforming the jury.

No one knows what the sentence will be until the judge considers all
available information regarding the defendant and decides accordingly.
If, for example, a defendant has two past violent felonies from 30
years ago, but has led a law-abiding life since, a judge would likely
dismiss one or both of the strike priors.

The author then wrote, "The three strikes law hasn't stopped, or even
slowed crime." His proof is that he watches the news and "it appears
crime is increasing." In contrast, the Department of Justice Crime
statistics for 1998 show that statewide, every class of violent crime
is down 20 percent or more over 1997. I don't know whether three
strikes is the only reason, but clearly things are getting better.

William L. Woodruff is deputy district attorney for Kern County.
Community Voices is a reader commentary on an issue of high community
interest and importance. Because of the nature of their content,

Community Voices articles are allowed to exceed the 250-word
letter-to-the-editor limit.