"California lawmakers passed the "Three

Strikes" Law in March 1994, following the high-

profile kidnapping and murder of 12-year-old

Polly Klaas. Her abductor was a violent offender

out on parole, living in the Klaas family's community.

Outraged by this awful crime and

eager for the legislature to get tougher on crime,

California voters overwhelmingly approved

Proposition 184. This law was designed to

deter offenders from committing new crimes

by requiring longer prison terms for criminals

who had been convicted of felonies in the past.

By the late 1990s, about 40 states had some

form of recidivist statute, a law designed spe-

cifically to punish serious repeat offenders.

Under California's Three Strikes Law, a

"strike" is a conviction for a serious or violent

felony. When a defendant has one strike, con-

viction for the second strike results in doubling

the usual sentence for that crime. If a defen-

dant is convicted of a third felony, the law

requires that he or she receive a sentence of at

least 25 years to life, with no possibility of

parole before 25 years.

While strikes one and two must be for

serious or violent felonies, any felony conviction

will qualify as the third strike, whether or not

the felony was serious or violent. In addition,

certain offenses (called "wobblers") can be

prosecuted as either misdemeanors or felonies,

at the discretion of the prosecutor or the

judge. Finally, the Three Strikes Law is retroac-

tive and is not limited to crimes committed in

California. Therefore, convictions from before

the law was passed (1994) or in other states

can count as strikes.

In November 1995, Leandro Andrade

attempted to steal five G-rated videotapes

but was arrested upon leaving the store. Two

weeks later, Andrade was arrested outside

another store for attempting to steal more

videotapes. The total value of all the tapes

was approximately $150. Andrade, a longtime

heroin addict, had a 15-year criminal history

with five felonies and two misdemeanors on

his record. None of the previous convictions

were for violent offenses. Prosecutors deter-

mined that he already had two strikes under

the California law when the prosecution for

the most recent thefts commenced. Under

California law, petty theft with a prior convic-

tion is one of the so-called wobblers, misde-

meanors that can be prosecuted as felonies.

Andrade, then 37, was convicted and sen-

tenced to 25 years to life for each of the two

petty theft counts (strikes three and four).

According to the Three Strikes Law, those sen-

tences must be served consecutively, not con-

currently, so Andrade will not become

eligible for parole for 50 years.

A federal appeals court found his sentence

"grossly disproportionate" to the crime and

a violation of the Eighth Amendment's prohi-

bition against cruel and unusual punishment.

Prosecutors for the state of California appealed

to the U.S. Supreme Court."

Problem 15.1: The Three Strikes Law (Open the Chapter 15 PDF Page 175)

a. Why did California pass the Three Strikes Law? Why do you think these laws have become so popular in the United States? Answer:

b. What are the most convincing arguments for upholding Andrade's sentence?

c. What are the most convincing arguments for reversing the sentence?

d. How should the Court decide the Andrade case? What arguments might the dissenting justices make?

e. As a matter of public policy, do you support or oppose laws like the Three Strikes Law?