Democrats Offer Rival 3-Strikes Bill

State Senate President Pro Tem Bill Lockyer, offering a Democratic response to the GOP’s three-strikes sentencing bill, called Thursday for eliminating petty theft and check forgery as three-strikes crimes.

Those who commit violent and serious crimes would still be subject to severe three-strikes criminal penalties, including life in prison.

Many of the more infamous sentences for three-time felons, however, have involved petty thefts--shoplifting of beer, aspirin or other items of little value--that resulted in lengthy prisons terms.

“We’re trying to fix three strikes. We’re trying to make it constitutional. We’re trying to make it affordable,” Lockyer said Thursday.

Lockyer accused his Republican rival, Senate Republican Leader Rob Hurtt, of trying to turn the three-strikes debate into a political issue. But he predicted that voters would side with Democrats.

“[Hurtt’s] political judgments are consistently wrong,” Lockyer said. “Voters respect acts of conscience.”

Hurtt immediately blasted Lockyer’s proposal, calling it a “cheap attempt to provide political cover” for Lockyer and other Democrats.

The fight comes in the wake of a June 20 state Supreme Court ruling that permits judges to grant leniency in three-strikes cases by overlooking a felon’s prior crimes.

Hurtt was the first to introduce a response, pushing legislation that would sharply limit judges’ discretion in three-strikes cases. His measure was approved the Republican-controlled Assembly but stalled this week in a Senate committee.

Lockyer’s proposal, which is still being refined, would leave intact much of the high court ruling by permitting judges to retain discretion over three-strikes sentences in most instances. Among its provisions, Lockyer’s measure would require that :

* Prosecutors seek three-strikes sentences if the current crime is violent, or one of the past crimes involves a sexual assault on a child.

* Judges impose lengthy three-strikes sentences if the current crime is violent or the felon’s history includes a record of sex crimes against children.

* Judges impose lengthy sentences if the current felony occurred within six years of a criminal’s release from prison for a violent crime, or if the current crime came within three years of the felon’s release from prison for a serious crime.

The most dramatic change offered by Lockyer is the elimination of petty theft from consideration for three-strikes cases.

Petty theft itself is a misdemeanor. However, someone who commits petty theft and has a prior petty theft conviction faces a felony, making them subject to a lengthy three-strikes sentence if they also have a record of serious or violent crimes.

In the two years since the three-strikes law went into effect, 148 people have been sent to prison for 25 years to life after having been convicted of petty theft. That represents 9% of all such sentences.

Another 2,150 have been sentenced to prison on second-strike cases in which their current crime was petty theft, or 12.6% of all second-strike terms.

Lockyer’s proposal to eliminate check forgery would have a less dramatic impact. No more than 289 people are serving second-strike and third-strike sentences for writing bad checks.

The current three-strikes law calls for minimum sentences of 25 years to life for those who commit “any felony” after having been convicted of two prior serious or violent crimes. Serious and violent crimes range from burglary and arson to rape and murder.

The law also calls for a doubling of sentences for people who commit any felony after having been convicted in the past of one serious or violent crime.

Lockyer’s measure is expected to go to a vote in the Senate in August when the Legislature returns from its summer recess. While it probably will clear the Democratic-controlled Senate, the measure has little chance of passage in the Republican-controlled Assembly, suggesting that the session will end in a stalemate over three strikes.