Is the “Three Strikes andYou’re Out” law cruel andunusual punishment?Grady KerrCriminal Law IIT&Th 8:00am5/23/02Research PaperThe purpose of my research paper is to analize how the “Three Strikes Law”helps to support our Constitution or violates it. I will discuss where the law camefrom and why we have it. I will also write about the positive and negative aspectsof the law as a whole.
I hope to be able to analize the spirit of the law versus theletter of the law as it relates to this subject. “In 1994 California voters approved a ballot initiative known as “ThreeStrikes and You’re Out. ” Basically what it means is that people who are convictedof three felonies may end up facing life in prison. ” There are some limitationsthough on how this law is executed.
Not any felony constitutes a strike. For thefirst and second strikes only serious and violent felonies can count as a strike. Alsosome juvinille crimes can count. For the third strike any felony can be the finalblow. While for the first two strikes it takes crimes like rape, kiddnapping, androbbery; the third strike can be a crime as simple as carring brass knuckles.
This law “was enacted in 1994 after Polly Klaas was kidnapped from aslumber party in her home and murderedby Richard Allen Davis, who had two priorkidnapping convictions. The jury recommended that Davis be sentenced to death,and the judge imposed that sentence. ” “On March 7, 1994, Governor Wilsonsigned into law AB 971 (Ch 12/94, Jones) referred to as the Three Strikes andYou’re Out criminal sentencing measure. In November, the voters reaffirmed themeasure by overwhelmingly approving Proposition 184, an initiative that isessentially identical to Chapter 12.
The measure is the most significant change tothe state criminal justice system in more than a generation. ” Govenor Wilsonpassed this law as part of his goal to crack down on repeat offenders anddangerous felons. The case of Richard Allen Davis was the prime example of howthe law could be effective. He was a person who was an already twice convicted ofkidnapping. After a third conviction it was blatently obvious that Davis could notbe rehabilitated and deserved the death sentence for his crimes.
This law has a very good intent and it’s purpose it to prosecute dangerousfelons. When a criminal finds himself repeatedly behind bars it should send amessage to the legal system that he is a threat to societey. 1. www.
silicon-valley. com/3strikes. htmlCopyright 1995-1998, Jerome P. Mullins, Attorney at Law, emailprotected, all rights reserved.www.silicon-valley.com
