COURT LIMITS `THREE STRIKES' JUDICIAL POWER

State ruling: Judges' discretion in exempting repeat criminals is curtailed.

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) -- The state Supreme Court put limits Monday on judges'
power to exempt repeat criminals from sentences of up to life in prison
under the ``three strikes, you're out'' law.

The unanimous ruling appears to narrow the court's June 1996 decision that
let judges refuse to impose ``three strikes'' sentences they considered too
harsh, based on the facts of the case. Monday's ruling said a defendant
whose past and present conduct showed him or her to be within ``the spirit
of the three-strikes law'' must be given a full sentence, with no reduction.

Using that standard, the court said a Los Angeles-area man who was arrested
for driving under the influence of drugs -- and who had a long criminal
record but no violent felony convictions in 13 years -- faced a mandatory
``three strikes'' sentence if convicted.

Adopted in 1994

The law, approved by the Legislature and the voters in 1994, increases the
sentences of criminals who have previously committed serious or violent
felonies, or ``strikes.''

Monday's case involved a prosecution appeal of the nine-year sentence of
Reginald Eugene Williams, charged in 1995 with driving under the influence
of PCP in Norwalk. The charge can be treated as either a misdemeanor or a
felony.

Williams, 32, had three previous convictions for driving while intoxicated,
in 1991 and 1992, and also had been sentenced to jail or prison 10 times
since 1981 for various crimes and parole violations, including convictions
for rape and attempted robbery -- both ``strikes'' -- in 1982. He had been
sentenced to jail earlier in 1995 on a misdemeanor conviction for spousal
battery.

One strike disregarded

Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Philip Hickok said he would treat the DUI
charge as a felony because of Williams' record. But Hickok said he might
disregard one of Williams' ``strikes'' because they dated from 1982 and
because Williams had not committed any violent crimes since then --
apparently ignoring the recent spousal battery conviction, the court said.

Williams then changed his plea to guilty and was sentenced to nine years --
six for a second strike, double the normal term, and three for his previous
prison terms. His sentence for a third strike would have been 28 years to
life.

A state appellate court ruled that Hickok had abused his authority in
disregarding the previous conviction. The state's high court agreed.

A judge can reduce a ``three strikes'' sentence only if, in light of the
defendant's current and past crimes ``and the particulars of his
background, character and prospects, the defendant may be deemed outside
the spirit'' of the three-strikes law, the court said.