Three strikes
Mar. 5th, 2003 06:30 pmNews item:
Except, of course, when it comes to election laws.
{hal slaps his hand to his mouth}
Did I say that out loud? Oh, so sorry...
"A divided U.S. Supreme Court upheld on Wednesday California's "three-strikes" law which gives up to life in prison for repeat offenders even if their last crime was minor theft like stealing golf clubs.
By a 5-4 vote, the high court ruled the law does not violate the constitutional ban on "cruel and unusual" punishment.
In one case, the high court said it was constitutional for Gary Ewing to be sentenced to 25 years to life even though his last crime was stealing three golf clubs worth about $1,200.
In the other case, the justices by a 5-4 vote said a U.S. appeals court was wrong in overturning the sentence of two consecutive terms of 25 years to life for Leandro Andrade, who stole nine videotapes worth $153.
Ewing and Andrade had been convicted of a number of prior felonies. They argued the law unconstitutionally resulted in an unduly harsh sentence "grossly disproportionate" to the crime.
Justice Sandra Day O'Connor wrote in the majority opinion that in the Ewing case the three-strikes laws caused a dramatic change in criminal sentencing in the mid-1990s throughout the nation.
State legislatures "made a deliberate policy choice that individuals who have repeatedly engaged in serious or violent criminal behavior and whose conduct has not been deterred by more conventional approaches to punishment must be isolated from society ... to protect public safety," she said.
O'Connor said the Supreme Court has a long-standing tradition of deferring to state legislatures on such policy choices."
Except, of course, when it comes to election laws.
{hal slaps his hand to his mouth}
Did I say that out loud? Oh, so sorry...