In 2012, District Attorney Gascón endorsed Prop 36 to revise California’s unfair, disproportionate, and counterproductive “three strikes” sentencing law.
Proposition 36 is drafted by some of the most prominent leaders and advocates in the legal profession, including Stanford Law professors, NAACP Legal Defense Fund lawyers, and some of the toughest and most respected law enforcement officers. In November 2012, California voters passed Prop. 36, which eliminates unnecessary, harsh, and ineffective life sentences for minor nonviolent crimes.
Reduces Overcrowding Safely and Creates More Room in Prison for Dangerous Felons
- As of 2014, over 1,600 prisoners have been released from custody under Prop. 36
- The recidivism rate of prisoners released under Prop. 36 is 1.3 percent.
Removes Unfair and Disproportionate Life Sentences
- A life sentence cannot be imposed for nonviolent, non-serious crimes, unless a special situation exists
- These situations are limited and only include:
- the new felony conviction is for a serious or violent crime
- the new conviction is for certain sex or drug offenses or involves a firearm,
- or an offender’s prior strikes are for rape, murder, or child molestation
- Non-violent “three strikes” inmates can petition for a shorter sentence, pending a determination by the court that the inmate is no longer a risk to society
- Offenders who commit repeat low-level offenses are still sentenced to twice the ordinary sentence, but not to life.
Prop. 36 is a Money-Saver
- According to the most recent Stanford Law Study of 2014, “Proposition 36 has already saved California over $30 million dollars in prison costs and has freed up valuable prison space for more dangerous criminals."
- According to the same study, Proposition 36 is projected to save taxpayers over $750 million over the next 10 years.