Learn this story in English
Californians charged with sure drug and retail theft crimes may already be dealing with harsher penalties beneath an initiative voters accepted this 12 months, together with associated payments that Gov. Gavin Newsom signed into legislation.
This November voters overwhelmingly accepted Proposition 36which amends and provides key adjustments to California legislation.
That features prosecutors with the ability to cost folks convicted for a 3rd time of assorted drug crimes with a so-called critical crime with obligatory remedywhich might ship them to substance abuse or psychological well being remedy as an alternative of as much as three years in jail or jail.
Below the brand new legislation, courts are additionally required to warn folks convicted of promoting or offering sure medicine, comparable to fentanyl, that they may face homicide prices for subsequently distributing unlawful medicine that kill somebody.
And petit larceny and shoplifting offenses may also have extra critical penalties, together with the potential of as much as three years in jail or jail if an individual has already been convicted twice for sure larceny offenses.
A number of district attorneys and police departments introduced arrests this month that deliberate to file prices beneath the brand new legislation, together with in counties from San Francisco, Solano y Shasta.
The measure partially reversed a special initiative voters accepted a decade in the past, which lowered penalties for sure misdemeanor drug offenses and petty thefts from felonies to misdemeanors. The initiative, Proposition 47, aimed to develop new public security methods and scale back incarceration after the state’s jail inhabitants skyrocketed attributable to tough-on-crime insurance policies courting again to the Eighties.
However prosecutors, legislation enforcement and large retailers who spoke out in favor of Proposition 36 mentioned these sentencing reforms went too far and created a revolving door for folks to repeatedly commit crimes with out accountability.
“It is a clear mandate from the public that we must take a new approach to public safety issues, specifically hard drugs, retail theft and fentanyl,” mentioned Yolo County District Legal professional Jeff Reisig.
Opponents of the measure warned that it’s going to worsen homelessness, drug use and crime by chopping funding for remedy applications and growing court docket and jail prices by lots of of tens of millions of {dollars}.
Behavioral well being consultants from throughout the state have expressed concern in regards to the effectiveness of a criminal offense with obligatory remedygiven that the majority California counties lack the assets needed to supply the “mass treatment” that proponents of the measure have promised.
“I think (the proponents) have also been given a mandate to adopt problem-solving measures and supportive services for people who are struggling,” mentioned Cristine Soto DeBerry, government director of the California Prosecutors Alliance, a company nonprofit that opposed Proposition 36.
“I do not suppose the mandate was to place extra folks in jail. It wasn’t what folks thought they have been voting for. “I hope that the people with the discretion to enforce this law will think very carefully about the communities they serve and what they were asking for at this time,” he mentioned.
Gov. Gavin Newsom tried to maintain Proposition 36 off the autumn poll and for a time thought-about placing an anti-crime measure earlier than voters. As a substitute, signed a package deal of 10 payments in August that may facilitate the processing of auto and retail thefts. These legal guidelines will go into impact on January 1.
Though Governor Newsom didn’t make investments cash within the struggle towards Proposition 36, he referred to the initiative as an “unfunded mandate” that may deliver California again into the Battle on Medication. The truth is, the measure didn’t embody new sources of financing. However supporters like Reisig expressed optimism that there are already funding alternatives within the invoice, pointing to the $6.4 billion in Psychological well being hyperlink accepted by voters in March.
“I hope legislators and the governor accept the mandate and work collaboratively to ensure we are successful in fulfilling the promise of Proposition 36,” Reisig mentioned.
This text was initially printed in English by CalMatters.
