TERMS DIFFER IN JAIL RELEASES

Experts worry Sheriff Baca's policy of having certain prisoners serve
more time for the same crime may invite 'equal protection' challenges.

Under its policy of selectively releasing criminals to ease jail
overcrowding, the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department has
routinely forced women, prostitutes arrested in Compton and certain
gang members to serve more time than others convicted of identical crimes.

Prosecutors and legal experts fear the practice could be illegal and
prompt lawsuits challenging its constitutionality.

"It could not be more upside down and backward," Los Angeles County
Dist. Atty. Steve Cooley said.

The county lacks the resources to hold all the people being sent to
jail, but at the same time Sheriff Lee Baca is under federal court
order to avoid overcrowding in the nation's largest jail system.

Therefore, Baca says, he has no choice but to direct jailers to free
dozens of inmates every day under a set of rules that governs which
inmates get out early -- many after serving less than 10% of their
sentences -- and which stay behind bars.

Under the policy, inmates arrested in certain crime-plagued regions
are incarcerated 10 times longer than those arrested for the same
crimes in other parts of the county, according to interviews and the
department's two-page "Release Criteria."

For example, people convicted of prostitution in areas served by the
sheriff's Compton and Century stations are required to serve 100% of
their sentences, while those convicted of prostitution in the rest of
the county serve 10%.

That's because the department is cracking down on prostitution in
those regions, and officials believe the program would be less
effective if inmates were released early, said sheriff's Chief Marc
Klugman, who oversees the jails.

The department has also made exceptions for members of a Hawaiian
Gardens gang implicated in the June 2005 slaying of Deputy Jerry Ortiz.

Department policy now calls for those associated with the gang to
serve full sentences for any crime for which they are convicted.

The arbitrary nature of those decisions worries Cooley and others,
who say the policy could violate the "equal protection" clause of the
Constitution, which requires similarly situated people to be treated
equally by the government.

Long Beach City Prosecutor Tom Reeves said he was concerned for other
reasons. Forcing Compton prostitutes to serve their entire sentences
could push them over the border into Long Beach, where prostitutes
convicted by Reeves' office serve just 10% of their sentences.

"I guess it must be a much more serious crime in Compton than it is
in Long Beach," Reeves said. "That upsets me a great deal because we
have quality-of-life issues, just as Compton does."

There are also gender-equity issues.

Over the years, the Sheriff's Department has maintained different
release policies for men and women, even for those convicted of the
same crimes.

Male and female inmates are housed in separate jail sections, and
sheriff's officials said their release policies are based on the
amount of space available and fluctuations in arrests.

Two years ago, women convicted of all but the most serious crimes
were released immediately, serving none of their sentences. But in
the last year, the department required women convicted of assault to
serve 25% of their sentences while men served just 10%.

Klugman said he changed the policy earlier this month. Men and women
now are eligible for release after serving 10% of their time.

"You could probably go through this entire early release policy and
nitpick it and find all kinds of inequities. But remember: No one has
a right to early release," Klugman said.

The Sheriff's Department has released inmates early from its jails
for decades to deal with overcrowding issues. Faced with steep cuts
to its budget, the sheriff started closing jail facilities in 2002
and dramatically increased the practice of early release.

A staff of civilian clerks decides who is released by reviewing
inmate files and the release criteria drafted by department executives.

In the last four years, the department has freed more than 150,000
inmates three or more days early. According to an investigation by
The Times, nearly 16,000 of those were charged with committing new
crimes during the time they would otherwise have been in custody,
including 518 robberies, 215 sex crimes and 16 murders.

Last Tuesday, the Sheriff's Department announced that it would begin
looking into inmates' criminal records before deciding whether they
should be released early. Those with past convictions for violent or
serious crimes would be held for their entire sentences, Klugman said.

That announcement underscored the difficult task the Sheriff's
Department has in striking a balance between meeting a federal court
order that prohibits the agency from overcrowding the jails and its
duty to protect the public.

Cooley said he wants the department and county leaders to find a way
to hold all inmates for their entire sentences. In the meantime, the
prosecutor said, he's concerned about how the department is deciding
who will be released. The decision about how much time inmates serve
should be made by judges who have reviewed all relevant factors, not
civilian clerks, Cooley said.

A policy that calls for women to spend 150% more time in jail than
men convicted of the same type of crime appears to be
"unconstitutional on its face," Cooley said.

Applying sentences differently based on where the crimes were
committed could also pose problems, he said.

Prompted by questions from The Times, Cooley last week assigned
attorneys to investigate whether the sheriff's early release policy
is violating some inmates' constitutional rights. Although the review
is just underway, Cooley said he was troubled to learn that the
department is making its decisions based on geography, gender and
other factors -- instead of following judges' intentions.

"We need to spend more time with the Sheriff's Department and explain
these concepts to them," Cooley said.

Steve Whitmore, a spokesman for Baca, said the sheriff would welcome
suggestions from Cooley's staff. He said the department previously
had been unable to get prosecutors to help devise an early release protocol.

"The sheriff welcomes his participation and looks forward to it,"
Whitmore said. "We believe the district attorney's office can be helpful."

Eugene Volokh, a professor of constitutional law at UCLA, said he
believes the department has the right to prioritize enforcement
efforts and can legally hold some inmates longer than others for the
same crimes.

But he questioned the past policy of holding women longer than men.

"Having separate sentences based on whether you're a man or woman, I
would say, would be presumptively unconstitutional," Volokh said. "At
the very least it poses serious constitutional questions."

Duke University's Erwin Chemerinsky said, "Imagine if the Legislature
said women who commit assault will serve 2 1/2 times more than the
men who committed the same crime. No one would stand for that."

He suggested that the Board of Supervisors or Legislature might be
better suited to establish guidelines for early release.

David Bennett, a Utah-based jail consultant who has advised counties
on dealing with overcrowded facilities for more than 25 years, said
the county needs to form a plan that makes sense. Leaving everything
in the hands of the sheriff is unfair and ineffective, he said.

"L.A. County has to rethink its whole criminal justice plan because
this doesn't work," Bennett said. The sheriff "should not have to put
on a judicial robe and release people early. He's had to do this
because the rest of the system is broken. It needs the involvement
and leadership of the entire criminal justice system."

Times staff writer Jack Leonard contributed to this report.