THE CASE AGAINST CALIFORNIA'S 3 STRIKES LAW

Steal A Bottle Of Shampoo, Go To Prison For Life

SHANE REAMS' mother was practicing ``tough love'' when she encouraged
neighbors to press charges. Shane had been stealing from the neighbors'
garages. Those burglary convictions ended up serving as the basis for a
three-strike sentence that sent her son away for 25 years to life. His
third strike: aiding and abetting a $20 drug sale to an undercover officer.

Ronnie Villa, a grandfather of four, is doing 25 to life. His crime:
stealing five bottles of Head and Shoulders shampoo. His prior strikes
occurred 12 years earlier.

William Anderson was convicted of a robbery 27 years ago. He is serving 25
to life for possession of a forged drivers license.

Welcome to the macabre world of California's Three Strikes Law, where 25 to
life for the theft of a disposable camera is not an aberration. The
Department of Corrections projects that by 2002, 1 out of every 4
California prisoners will be a ``second or third striker.''

CDC statistics show that as of March 31, there were 4,076 prisoners serving
third-strike sentences, but fewer than half were imprisoned for convictions
for ``crimes against persons.'' According to the Legislative Analyst's
Office, almost half of the ``third strike'' offenses were nonviolent or
nonserious felonies, and the most common ``second strikes'' were drug
possession, petty theft and burglary.

When Californians voted for three strikes, they were bombarded with images
of Richard Allen Davis, not Reams. But prosecutors use the law viciously,
frequently against petty, nonviolent offenders like Reams.

Robert Loomis' third strike was the theft of a $37 calculator. His prior
strikes were residential burglaries committed between 1986 and 1989.

Michael Morgan is serving 25 to life for stealing $25. His last strike,
burglarizing a garage, occurred a decade ago.

While in court on an unrelated matter, I encountered an older black man,
facing his third strike. His priors were from Louisiana in the late 1960s,
neither a time, nor a place, known for its fair treatment of African
Americans. He said he wanted to die.

These vignettes illustrate the major problems with three strikes: No
offense is too old to count. Even juvenile convictions count.

It does not matter that the conviction was from another state, or even
another country. Perhaps most significantly, the third strike can be any
felony; it does not need to be a ``violent'' or ``serious'' one. Thus,
offenses such as petty theft can bring a life sentence.

While many states have three strikes, only California's is so
uncompromising. Moreover, it is not working. According to the Justice
Policy Institute, between 1994 and 1995, violent crime in states without
three strikes fell three times faster than in states with such laws. RAND,
a respected policy analysis institution, found that a graduation incentive
program is five times more effective at reducing crime than three strikes.

There are several steps that Governor- Elect Gray Davis should take to
remedy the most egregious aspects of the law. The most obvious: Require
that the third strike be a ``violent'' or ``serious'' felony. This would
eliminate life sentences for theft and marijuana. Secondly, the law should
be amended so that convictions older than 10 years don't count.

Third, the law should not permit one offense to count as more than one
strike. This would mean that the robbery of a store with two workers
present would be one strike, not two.

Since 1984, California has built 20 prisons and only one new university.
Despite the building boom, the Legislative Analyst's Office projects that
California will exhaust all available prison space by 2000. Davis faces a
possible $2 billion deficit in the state budget, with little likelihood of
funds for more prison construction. Davis should amend three strikes
because it is brutal and ineffective.

(c)1998 San Francisco Chronicle

Checked-by: Pat Dolan