Justices Affirm Governor’s Power to Block Killers’ Parole : Legal system: State Supreme Court lets stand a ruling pertaining to crimes committed before 1988. Attorney for inmate whose release was quashed says he will take case to federal court.

The California Supreme Court on Thursday rejected a constitutional challenge to the governor’s sweeping power to block the parole of murderers serving life sentences.

The justices let stand an appeals court ruling that a 1988 law allowing the governor to overrule parole decisions by the Board of Prisons could be used against prisoners who committed murders before the law was passed.

The action will have broad effect. More than 5,000 inmates, nearly all convicted murderers, are serving life sentences with parole eligibility for crimes occurring before the law’s passage. In the 1990-91 fiscal year, the board reviewed the cases of 1,241 life prisoners, deciding that 63 (or 5.1%) were ready for parole.

Last year, Gov. Pete Wilson invoked the 1988 law for the first time to review 10 parole decisions by the board. He reversed six grants of parole, modified three and affirmed one.

Michael Satris of Bolinas, a lawyer for an inmate denied parole by Wilson, said the case will be taken to federal court.

“The irony is we’ve gotten to the point where the board rarely grants parole,” Satris said. “Now, the governor can come in and wipe even that out. It’s going to be virtually impossible for a lifer to get out because of the politics involved.”

State Deputy Atty. Gen. Paul D. Gifford said he was not surprised that the high court let stand what he viewed as a thorough and correctly decided opinion by the Court of Appeal.

The law, a constitutional amendment known as Proposition 89 on the fall, 1988, ballot, was approved by voters after a furor over the parole of William Archie Fain, a murderer-rapist from Stanislaus County. Then-Gov. George Deukmejian tried to block the parole but an appeals court ruled that he lacked the power.

In May, 1991, Wilson overruled the parole of Johnny Arafiles, 40, of Stockton. Arafiles had served 14 years of an indeterminate life term for the 1977 first-degree murder of Eddie Leroy Anderson, who had testified in another case against Arafiles’ brother.

Wilson concluded that Arafiles should be denied parole in view of his unprovoked attack on a witness, his refusal to accept responsibility and his record of crime and drug abuse.

Lawyers for Arafiles filed suit, contending that application of the 1988 amendment to prisoners whose crimes were committed before its passage violated state and federal constitutional prohibitions against ex post facto laws. These prohibitions against applying laws retroactively are designed to give fair notice of the penalties for crimes and to bar laws that increase punishment after an offense has been committed.

Last May, a state Court of Appeal in Sacramento ruled 3 to 0 against Arafiles’ claims. The panel, in an opinion by Appellate Justice Robert K. Puglia, concluded that the governor’s action merely added a level of executive review to the parole process and did not alter Arafiles’ sentence.

The appeal court noted that the law was not necessarily a disadvantage for prisoners because the governor can reverse a board refusal to grant parole.

Had the court upheld Arafiles, it would have prevented the governor from using the law to overrule parole for an inmate convicted of first-degree murder until at least 2005--the earliest date anyone who committed a crime after passage of the law would be eligible for parole.

Since Wilson rejected Arafiles’ parole, the board has held another hearing for Arafiles but denied parole, Satris said.