Literature Review : Law On The Books '

The “three strikes and you’re out” law is in effect in different states around the country. In basic terms, the law requires that any offender that is convicted of three violent crimes must receive a sentence of 25 years to life in prison. The law is aimed at reducing crime by focusing on the small percentage of criminals that commit the majority of violent crimes and felonies. Many systems have been lenient with repeat

In conclusion, the three strikes law will surely always be a policy that will be scrutinized by those affected by it. In the state of Texas, perhaps the policy should be looked at and amended as it has been in place since the 1950’s. Society has changed drastically since the advent of the law in Texas; many will argue that it has changed for the worse and the policy in needed more now than when it was implemented. It is this writers opinion that the policy serves a greater purpose, but could also be amended and made better by the great men and women we have in place in our criminal justice system. This great state must always strive to become even greater, and part of that comes from looking at policies that have been in place for decades

Between 1993 and 1995, twenty four states enacted three strikes sentencing policy which calls for much harsher sentencing of repeat felony offender. Most sentences for these repeat offender called for a minimum punishment of a life sentence with possibility of release until twenty five years have been served (1 Marvell, Moody 89). These laws where created to target and punish what lawmakers believed to be the small percentage of criminals that where committing the majority of serious crimes such as murder, rape, kidnaping, aggravated robbery, aggravated assault, and sexual abuse.

In 1993, Washington was the first state to pass the three strikes laws; however, it later became known as the Persistent Offender Accountability Act. According to this act, courts are required to sentence “persistent offenders” to a term of life in prison

In March 1994, California voted to pass the Three Strikes Law with the majority of the vote, a bill that had been struck down multiple times by the state legislature (Naomi Harlin Goodno). This law would allow criminals with two prior felonies on their records to receive life in prison. These laws were proposed to keep serious repeat offenders off the streets, this was a result of the rising crime rate of the nineties. The law was presented to the electorate as a way to keep rapists, child molesters and killers of the streets, the most incorrigible of inmates; however, it has been proven that such laws unproportionally target minorities and persons with mental illnesses. African Americans are incarcerated at a rate thirteen times higher than

The Three Strikes Law has been a subject of much debate since its introduction as a regulation in 1993. The Three Strikes law was enacted in 1994 and is widely recognized as the harshest sentencing law in the United States. “The State of Texas was the first State to enact such a law in 1974.” (Laws.com) California passed its own law enacting a Three Strikes Law that mandates a sentence of 25 years to life for a third felony conviction. The reality of the Three Strikes Law will lead to a significant increase in the nation's

Between 1993 and 1995, 24 states and the federal government adopted some form of the three strikes law, which reduced judicial discretion practices and mandated severe incarceration periods to those who were convicted of three or more felonies (Peak, 2012). The rational of the three-strikes you are out law was an attempt to protect society and deter crime by targeting repeat offenders such as murders, rapists, and child molesters by locking them up for long periods of time. The law was built around a political push in the early nineties adopted around public perception that the prison system was lenient on criminals and society needed to get tough on crime. While the three-strike law was intended

The three strikes law implemented in the 1990s as deterrence for a crime. Even though the three strikes law created to remove those considered a threat to society, many agree that this law needs revamping. Studies show that the three strikes law has not detoured crime drastically, but has been successful in removing repeat offenders from endangering the public again. This law included crimes that were nonviolent or petty crimes counted as a third strike in California. The state of California has been one of the cities with the biggest incarceration rate since the three strikes law enacted.

Another advantage of the three strikes law is that it provides assistance to repair a defective justice system so convicted felons who choose to be repeat offenders will stay in prison. In today’s society, most crimes are committed by repeat offenders. (Kitchen, 2008). One possible reason this could be is that it is the way of life for most. The streets and committing crimes is all they know and have grown accustomed to. They commit crimes in hopes of never getting caught but they eventually they do. But even with this, they continue to commit crimes because that is what they know. Another possible reason could be that some repeat offenders commit crimes because they would rather be locked up behind bars then out in society. Some actually know that they are incapable of living civilized lives so they choose to commit crimes to be in a place where they are accepted for who they are. So because most crimes are committed by repeat offenders, this law was implemented as an instrument that the system can use to prevent such actions. It also helps with the reduction of liberal sentences, plea bargaining, and case backlogs. (Kitchen, 2009)

People who support the programs feel like it helps to reduce crime and arrest rates which will eventually help to deter criminals with the threat of increased incarceration. It has also been proven that three strikes laws reduce felony arrest rates. People in favor of three strikes laws it is an example of effective crime control, a preventive measure for career felons, adds additional peace of mind for citizens, and provides harsher punishments for habitual offenders. Those who are against the use of three strikes laws believe that it adds an additional cost to courts and prisons, causes an over population in prison cells, is an example of unfair law, and is a result of the decline in the number of law enforcement officer

When I think of the Three Strikes Law, and how it has been in place for more than 40 years, I understand the tradition it carries with it, the “why fix what is not broken” attitude (Sutton 1). However, what may not be completely broken still needs a major renovation, especially when it comes to non-person felonies, specifically drug related crimes. Drug related crimes, still a part of the Three Strikes Law in many states come with a multitude of issues, yet I believe offering some sort of treatment option will prevent excess costs that follow the Three Strikes Law, and perhaps even prevent further crimes from happening. In order to present the best case, I will discuss the effects of safety, and costs involved with the Three Strikes Law.

This reduction eventually helped to deter criminals with the threat of increased incarceration. It has also been proven that three-strikes laws reduce felony arrest rates. People in favor of three-strikes laws believe that it is an example of effective crime control, a preventive measure for career felons, adds additional peace of mind for citizens, and provides harsher punishments for habitual offenders. On the other hand, those who are against the use of three strikes laws suppose that it adds an additional cost to courts and prisons, causes an over-population in prison cells, is an example of an unfair law, and is a result of the decline in the number of law enforcement officer

My opinion of the 3 strikes law is that an unfair law because after 3 offenses or strikes a person can be incarcerated for 25 years. This law incarcerates people for non-violent offenses but also for violent crimes as well. A person’s last offense no matter how non-violent the crime at be sentenced to 25 years to life. The 3 strikes law should only apply to violent offenders because a person should no be sent to prison to serve 25-year sentence for a non-violent crime. I believe this law is effective in crime control because it causes the offender to be cautious of their actions, but it also causes fear to those who committed nonviolent crimes. “Crime rates may really be dropping because potential criminals now fear punishment and are being deterred from crime” (Siegel, Ch. 4-8a). Two-time offenders are more likely to steer clear from crime because of

Officially known as Habitual offender laws; “Three Strikes” laws have become common place in 29 states(Chern) within the United States and the Federal Court system; these laws have been designed to counter criminal recidivism by incapacitation through the prison system. The idea behind the laws were to maximize the criminal justice systems deterrent and selective incapacitation effect, under this deterrence theory individuals would be dissuaded from committing criminal activity by the threat of state imposed incarceration. Californians voted in the “three strikes” law (proposition 184) on March 7 1994 by a 72% vote with the intention of reducing crime by targeting serious repeat offenders with long term incarceration thereby

The three strikes law was implemented in the early 1990's for offender that are consider to be an extreme nuisance to the community as well as being called habitual offenders. These criminals are ones that have committed two felonies and are on their third. Now with that being said the third felony does not have to be a severe or heinous act. The third felony could be something as simple as grand larceny or forgery (The free dictionary, Three Strike Laws). The three strike laws were first adopted by Washington state and shortly there a California adopted the three strike law due to an emotional murder that was committed by a felon convicted twice before (total criminal defense). By 2003, more than half of the United States had adopted the three strike laws. Many States do have provisions under these laws called "habitual offender" provisions and these people are only affected by