The Negative Impact of California's Three Strikes Law Essay

There is also a large disparity between races when it comes to sentencing convicts to Death Row. Looking just at the federal death penalty data released by the Department of Justice between 1995 and 2000, 682 defendants were charged with death-eligible crimes. Out of those 682 defendants, the defendant was black 48% of the cases, Hispanic in 29% of the cases, and white in only 20% of the cases (Coker, 2003).

The diversity issue focused on in this paper will be racial disparity in sentencing. This paper will also focus on some of the reasons why racial disparity exists within sentencing. One of the research methods used in this paper will be case studies. In society today there are a diversity of citizens, of offenders, and leaders within in the court system. However, race still plays a big role in the Criminal Justice system especially during the sentencing portion. Although racial dynamics may have changed over time, race still exerts an undeniable presence in sentencing process. This ranges from disparate traffic stops due to racial profiling to imposition of the death penalty based on the race of

For my final project I chose to focus on Race and sentencing. The United States is about 5% of the world’s population but when it comes to world prisoners the Unites States is about 25%. In the United States African Americans are incarcerated 5 times more than whites in state prisons throughout the country and also 10 times more than whites in 5 states. In this paper I am going to research and study specific articles and studies that document the rate of incarceration for African Americans and Whites. This is not only a problem state by state sentencing but it is also problem for federal sentencing as well. Not only am I going to look at race and sentencing but I am going to also

Racial inequality is growing. Our criminal laws, while facially neutral, are enforced in a manner that is massively and pervasively biased. My research will examine the U.S. criminal justice policies and how it has the most adverse effect on minorities. According to the Justice Department’s Bureau of Justice Statistics, out of a total population of 1,976,019 incarcerated in adult facilities, 1,239,946 or 63 percent are

Since the policy was enacted in the early 1990s, three strikes laws have been one of the most controversial issues facing the American criminal justice system. In general, advocates believe that locking up criminals will protect society. Critics believe that three-strike policy can only be effective with offenders that are on their last strikes (Worrall, 2008). However, other critics explain how three-strike laws don’t significantly reduce crime because most criminals mature out of the criminal lifestyle (Worrall, 2004).

The existence of racial disparity and structural inequality within the criminal justice system renders the concept of true justice for all unobtainable. The statistics of convictions and prison sentences by race definitely support the concept that discrimination is a problem in the justice system as well as the insignificantly number of minority judges and lawyers. There are a multitude of circumstances that influence these statistics according to the “Central Eight” criminogenic risk factors. The need for programs and methods to effectively deter those at risk individuals has never been greater and the lack of such programs is costing society in countless ways.

One more pro on the affirmative side is that is helps out the justice system. Let’s admit it, our justice system is not perfect and will probably never be perfect. Like everything else it has its flaws.” The Three Strikes Law is a way to provide fix for the flaws of our justice system

This over-representation raised the question of the effect of the U.S. sentencing guideline. Thus, researcher used date from U.S. Sentencing Commission in the year 1990 to observe whether African Americans were more likely to convict under the mandatory minimum sentence than the White population (Free, 1997). The percentage showed that there were 28.2% of all federal defendants in the African American population and 38.5% were convicted under mandatory minimum sentences. As for Whites, they found 46.9 % of all federal defendants and 34.8% were convicted under mandatory minimum sentences (Free, 1997). Also, African American was found to be sentenced on or above the indicated mandatory minimum sentences than either Whites or Hispanics. About 67.7% of all Black federal defendants, which was more than two thirds of them received sentences that were at or above the mandatory minimum. Comparing the Black defendants, “54% of Whites and 57.1% of Hispanic federal defendant convicted under the mandatory minimum sentence received these sentences” (Free, 1997, p. 275). Over the study, the independent variable was the implementation of mandatory minimum sentencing guidelines and the dependent variable was the racial disparity in the African American population under the mandatory minimum

Laws like three strikes, mandatory minimum sentencing, powder and crack cocaine disparities, and others, must be eradicated. The prisons are overfilled with non-violent, victimless offenders living environments that are overcrowded, in poor condition, and exploitive of prisoners’ lack of basic rights. This is neither conducive to the betterment of prisoners, nor the improvement of their life trajectories once they leave. Additionally, most drug laws produce racially disparate outcomes, furthering stereotypes and the inherent criminalization of men of color. In the long run, America must move toward alternative sentencing programs for low-level and non-violent offenders that issue penalties that are actually proportionate with real public safety

According to President Bill Clinton, “We have a chance to pass the toughest, the smartest crime bill in the history of the United States,” and this was the California residents ' belief at the time the Three Strikes and you’re out law took effect in 1994.The purpose of the Three Strikes Law is to punish habitual offenders upon receiving their third conviction of any felony. Initially, if an individual receives a serious or violent felony conviction, this is a first strike; subsequently, the second serious or violent felony charge is a second strike and the individual will serve double the time originally assessed for the first felony. Finally, upon the third felony conviction an individual receives a minimum sentence of twenty five to life in prison. Even though twenty-three states, including the federal government, several politicians such as, Senator Bob Dole, and President Bill Clinton supported the passage of the Three Strikes Law. Undoubtedly, the Three Strikes bandwagon happened during a time in society when fear of crime was at its peak; as a result, law enforcement and other government officials went to the extreme in promising citizens to end habitual crime. Therefore, if the Three Strikes Law is to be a fair and impartial punishment for all criminals’ committing serious and violent crimes; then the crime committed must fit the consequences. Thus, is it fair to condemn a man who has two previous serious felonies for stealing a one dollar item on his third offense,

The purpose of the Three Strikes Law is to reduce serious or violent crime rates and provide a means to practice racial disparity in sentencing. The law is also intended to give longer sentences to offenders who are convicted three times. Usually, the first and second convictions result in punishment, but of a more routine appeal. Justice James A. Ardaiz, the Fifth Appellate District of California explained,

Incarceration rates are a definite proof that racial discrimination occurs. “Incarceration rates in the United States have risen sharply since 1980”, stated Filip Spagnoli, “the racial distribution of inmates in the U.S. is highly negative for black Americans. Whereas they only make up 12% of the total U.S. population, they represent more than 40% of inmates”

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

Consider the following statistics in reference to the disparities among the different groups of defendants when it comes to minimum sentencing in the United States. According to the 2010 Commission’s Sourcebook of Federal Sentencing Statistics: over three-quarters (77.4%) of convictions of an offense carrying a mandatory minimum penalty were for drug trafficking offenses; Hispanic offenders accounted for the largest group (38%) of offenders convicted of an offense carrying a mandatory minimum penalty, followed by Black/African American offenders at 31.5%, White/Caucasian offenders at 27.4%, and other race offenders at 2.7%. More than 90% (90.3%) of offenders convicted of an offense carrying a mandatory minimum penalty were men; and Black/African American offenders received relief from a mandatory minimum penalty least often (34.9%), compared to White/Caucasian offenders (46.5%), Hispanic/Latino offenders (55.7%), and other race offenders(58.9%).

Minorities are being sentence to jail for harsher punishment more than whites in the United States. In this disparity of the justice system, young white males between the ages of 18-29 were 38% less likely to be sentences to prison than black men of the same age group (Kansal, 2005). According to Kansal (2005) “ Young uneducated or unemployed African American and Hispanic males are more likely to serve longer sentences and, have a