Citing ‘3 Strikes,’ Lawyers to Shun Plea Bargains

The day after “three strikes” became law, lawyers advised adult and juvenile defendants to go to trial, raising the prospect that courts will quickly become jammed.

In Alameda County, Dist. Atty. John Meehan said he will not enforce one key provision of the tough new criminal sentencing law. Meehan said he will not count crimes committed by juveniles as “strikes” because he thinks the provision is unconstitutional.

Although the full impact of the law targeting repeat felons will not be felt for years, the earliest ripples of change were being felt Tuesday as many judges, prosecutors and defense lawyers studied the law for the first time. Prosecutors and criminal defense lawyers set up task forces and met with judges in an effort to sort out how they would handle what they assume will be an onslaught of trials and heavy sentences.

“I have been studying it all day,” Stanislaus County Dist. Atty. Donald Stahl said. By day’s end, he had concluded that “it’s the toughest thing I’ve seen in 28 years. This is farther reaching certainly than the death penalty.”

The new law says criminals who have committed two prior violent or serious felonies--there are 29 of them, ranging from murder to residential burglary--and commit any felony on a third offense will face a minimum sentence of 25 years to life. The law also doubles sentences for second convictions on serious or violent felonies.

The first defendants to face life sentences under “three strikes” are almost certainly in jail by now, but their identities may not be known until later in the week. After making an arrest, police must obtain rap sheets detailing a suspect’s previous crimes, process the case and send it to prosecutors, all of which takes a day or two.

Los Angeles County public defenders began telling adult defendants that there was little reason to accept plea bargains now if it means that in later life they could be subject to additional time in prison if convicted of a new felony. Better to test prosecutors’ evidence by taking more cases to trial, the lawyers said.

“I’m certain that there are people who have opted against accepting plea bargains,” said Jabe Kahnke, a deputy public defender in Long Beach. “It’s certainly something we discussed this morning before (the staff members) went to court.”

In San Francisco, Public Defender Jeff Brown said: “People are really putting on the brakes in terms of pleas. People are being hauled aside and given time to reflect on this. The ramifications are a hell of a lot more serious today than it was (Monday).”

Brown said he is directing his deputies “to ask for a jury trial” in juvenile proceedings, rather than a less formal proceeding before a judge--”and we’re going to challenge any prior (conviction) based on a juvenile adjudication if the conviction was not secured by a jury trial.”

Los Angeles public defenders also were considering making such requests.

“If it’s going to count as a conviction, it has to be contested,” said Los Angeles County Deputy Public Defender Nina Law, who handles juvenile cases in Long Beach.

The juvenile court system is far less formal and is designed to rehabilitate rather than punish. Juvenile convictions are known as “adjudications” and are made without juries and without many of the rules of evidence in adult court.

Ventura County Dist. Atty. Michael D. Bradbury had testified in Sacramento against the new law. But he predicted Tuesday that the criminal justice system would adjust.

“The doomsday prophets have always said the system will grind to a halt and devastate us financially,” Bradbury said. “But the system is flexible. It adapts well, and it will be able to process any additional trials.”

When the law was moving through the Legislature, many county prosecutors echoed Bradbury’s position, saying that some of its provisions may be unconstitutional. The California District Attorneys Assn. lobbied against it and tried to persuade Wilson not to sign it.

But in an electorate weary and angry over crime, the concept of imprisoning repeat felons for life has gathered huge support. Legislators in Sacramento cast aside concerns about the measure’s cost, questions about constitutionality and ambiguity of some of its provisions, and approved the bill by Assemblymen Bill Jones (R-Fresno) and Jim Costa (D-Fresno) without amendment.

As it went into effect this week, most prosecutors said they intended to fully carry out the new law.

Meehan, who objected to the provision regarding juvenile offenders, is a veteran of 34 years as a prosecutor and is stepping down this year. He is a past president of the district attorneys association and often has taken stands that run counter to strict law and order prosecutors.

“I personally think there is a cloud over the juvenile cases (clause),” Meehan said.

Other prosecutors interviewed Tuesday say they will attempt to count juvenile crimes as strikes. But Meehan said, “Good luck trying to prove them.” He noted that records of juvenile proceedings are sealed unless defendants are tried as adults, and most juvenile cases are disposed of in informal hearings.

In the state attorney general’s office, a task force of experts on sentencing and criminal law embarked on a full analysis of the new law, formulating the state’s position on key questions, and how to defend expected legal attacks.

“I knew there were going to be some big, big problems,” said George Williamson, chief assistant to Atty. Gen. Dan Lungren and a major proponent of the “three strikes” law. “We were aware that there were some drafting concerns which were significant. We were also advised by line prosecutors that they perceived some problems.”

Williamson said he is anticipating charges by defense lawyers that all three crimes must be committed after Monday, the day the law went into effect. But he predicted that the state would prevail on its position: A felon could have been convicted of two serious or violent felonies before Monday, be convicted of a third felony after Monday, and be subject to a sentence of 25 years to life.

There will be other challenges, including objections to the provision that serious or violent felonies committed by a juvenile age 16 or 17 can be counted as strikes, Williamson said.

On Tuesday, Kern County Dist. Atty. Ed Jagels was among county prosecutors who set up a committee of deputies to study its implications. His prosecutors quickly found a potential problem not previously considered.

Kern County has three state prisons. A prisoner who commits virtually any transgression, from assault on another inmate to possession of drugs or drug paraphernalia or a weapon, can be charged with a felony. That felony would count as a third strike for those with two strikes behind them.

“There have to be hundreds of these. Anything you do in the prison is a felony,” Jagels said.

What will the repercussions be?

“I am not certain yet,” Jagels said.

There is, however, one thing of which Jagels is sure. The cost must be born by the state of California. Under state law, costs incurred by local law enforcement to handle state prison-related crime must be paid for by the state.

Contributing to this story were Times staff writer Dean Murphy in Los Angeles and Times correspondent Jeff McDonald in Ventura.