Proposed Initiative to Toughen Death Penalty Law Revived

The Senate Judiciary Committee on Wednesday breathed new life into a proposal to give California voters the chance to toughen the state’s death penalty law.

The committee approved, 7 to 2, a bill to place an initiative on next June’s ballot. The initiative would roll back recent court decisions that critics say have made the death penalty more difficult to impose.

The bill by Assemblyman Gary A. Condit (D-Ceres) was sent to the Appropriations Committee. A similar proposal by Condit was rejected by a single vote in the Assembly Ways and Means Committee in June.

Condit arranged to revive the proposal in the Senate.

“This is the toughest bill (on the death penalty) submitted to the Legislature,” contended John Lovell, a lobbyist representing Los Angeles County Dist. Atty. Ira Reiner, a chief sponsor of the measure.

“It overrules several bad decisions of the California Supreme Court,” Lovell said after the committee vote.

Among other things, the bill would:

- Lengthen minimum sentences for first-degree murder to 35 years in prison.

- Allow 16- and 17-year-olds convicted of murder to be sentenced to prison for life without the possibility of parole.

- Prohibit a trial court judge from throwing out a jury finding that special circumstances, under which the death penalty can be imposed, were present in a murder case.

- Allow an uncorroborated confession of a murder defendant to be used to make the defendant eligible for the death penalty.

The measure was criticized by civil libertarians, public defenders and other defense lawyers. Larry Briskin, lobbyist for the California Public Defenders Assn., said existing law, with a minimum 25-year sentence for first-degree murder, has been on the books only since 1977, which is not enough time to gauge whether it is effective.

If approved by the Senate and the Assembly and signed by Gov. George Deukmejian, a longtime death penalty supporter, the measure would be placed on the June, 1986, ballot.

The proposal is regarded, in part, as a Democratic response to rising public sentiment against the courts and for the death penalty. It comes as Chief Justice Rose Elizabeth Bird and two other justices appointed by former Democratic Gov. Edmund G. Brown Jr. face tough confirmation fights in November, 1986.

Sen. President Pro Tem David A. Roberti (D-Los Angeles), a death penalty foe, explained that he supported the Condit measure during the hearing because the public voted in 1978 for a death penalty initiative, but the court rulings have limited its application.

“When the people cast a vote in an initiative, rather clearly, that’s a whole different issue. . . . And we have a duty to implement the public will,” Roberti said.

Voting against the bill in the Judiciary Committee were Sens. Milton Marks (R-San Francisco) and Diane Watson (D-Los Angeles).