THREE-STRIKES LAW HAS NO EFFECT, STUDY FINDS

Crime: Report Compares Counties That Vigorously Enforce Law And Those That
Do Not. Supporters Dispute The Results.

Five years after it was hailed as a major deterrent to crime,
California's three-strikes sentencing law has had no measurable effect
on reducing violence, according to a study to be released today.

Crime has fallen at about the same rate in counties that aggressively
enforce the three-strikes law as in those that do not, the study
found. In addition, violent crime by felons ages 30 to 39 has actually
increased.

"The study shows that when both the age groups and the areas of the
state most affected by the law are analyzed, there is no effect on
crime," said the study's co-author, Mike Males, a doctoral candidate
in social ecology at UC Irvine. "The reason is that the law is simply
too broad."

The study by the Justice Policy Institute, a left-leaning research
organization based in San Francisco, found no correlation between
California's general drop in crime and the imposition of longer,
mandatory sentences for repeat felons. The findings are based on
information from the California Criminal Justice Statistics Center
and the data analysis unit of the state Department of
Corrections.

Examining the state's 12 largest counties, which account for
three-quarters of California's population and four-fifths of its
crime, researchers found radically different rates of sentencing
under three strikes. The law doubles the sentence of second-time
felons and mandates 25 years to life for those convicted of a third
felony.

Researchers found that counties most closely following the
three-strikes law, including Los Angeles and Sacramento, did not enjoy
the greatest decrease in crime.

"Data clearly shows that counties that vigorously and strictly enforce
the three-strikes law did not experience a decline in any crime
category relative to more lenient counties," said the study, which
will be published this fall in the Stanford Law and Policy Review.

"Even more remarkable, the sevenfold proportionally greater use of
three strikes in Sacramento and Los Angeles was not associated with a
bigger decline than in Alameda and San Francisco counties that barely
use the law," the study said. "In fact, San Francisco, the county
which uses three strikes most sparingly, witnessed a greater decline
in violent crime, homicides, and all index crime than most of the six
heaviest enforcing counties."

Without addressing a study they have not yet seen, prosecutors here
and statewide dispute the idea that the three-strikes law has not
reduced crime.

"We think three strikes is an effective prosecution tool and we have
used it extensively," said Victoria Pipkin, spokeswoman for the Los
Angeles County district attorney's office, the nation's largest.

Lawrence Brown, executive director of the California District
Attorneys Assn., called the sentencing law a tremendous success.

Although he had not seen the study, Brown said, a county-to-county
comparison is not a valid method of assessing the law's impact. The
three-strikes law, he said, "has done everything that the Legislature
and voters intended. We have put away the worst of the worst and have
made our communities safer as a result."

But the study challenges that assertion.

In addition to disputing a link between crime reduction and a county's
application of three strikes, the study found that the one age group
most affected by the law, felons ages 30 to 39, have committed more
crimes.

"In other words, the age group that is most likely to be sentenced
under three strikes witnessed increases in felony arrests and violent
crime," the study found.

"I was shocked by that," Males said. "Despite the most punitive
sentencing law in state history targeting a specific age group, those
over 30, the law registered no deterrent effect."

Dan Macallair of the Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice in San
Francisco and one of the study's co-authors, called the new law a
costly flop.

"If three strikes was successful, we would be able to show that with
the very population it was targeting," he said. "And instead, we have
the opposite effect."

The reason, the authors contend, is that the law does not limit itself
to criminals whose second or third offense is violent. The law applies
to any third felony offense.

Since the law took effect, the study said, less than 1% of the almost
40,000 second- and third-strike inmates have been convicted of murder.
About one fifth were found guilty of a violent offense, including robbery.

By contrast, the study said, 37% were convicted of property crimes,
such as theft, and 30% were found guilty of drug offenses, mostly
possession. "Basically we are getting a lot of nuisances, not
menaces," Males said.

"They are not the Richard Allen Harris [type]," he said, referring to
the ex felon whose slaying of Polly Klaas gave rise to the
three-strikes law.

"If the state is going to spend half a million to $1 million to lock
up somebody for 25 to life, we better make sure that he is the worst
of the worst. Because for [that amount] you can do a lot to treat a
drug addiction ... and return this person to society."

Analysis of Cases

A study by the Justice Policy Institute found that California's
three-strikes sentencing law has been applied mostly for nonviolent
crimes since its inception five years ago. Felons between 30 to 39
make up the largest age group given stiffer sentences.

Offense 2nd strike 3rd strike

Murder 175 137 Robbery
2,674 783 Felony assault
2,737 399 Rape/child sexual assault 973 291
Kidnapping 73 40 Manslaughter
116 21 Burglary
4,785 830 Theft/stolen property 6,178 392
Vehicle theft 1,576 146
Forgery/fraud/other property 576 65 Drug possession
7,091 425 Marijuana sales/other
556 23 Drug manufacture/sales/other 3,370 390
Weapons possession 2,395 250 Escape/DUI/other
1,412 120

Felons sentenced for

Age 2nd strike 3rd strike

Under 20 470 14

20-24 5,009 176

25-29 7,603 653

30-39 15,297 2,224

40-49 5,873 1,071

50+ 1,111 220

Total 35,363 4,368

Source: California Department of Corrections, through June 30, 1998