Court Upholds 3-Strikes Term for Cookie Thief

An appeals court has upheld the 25-years-to-life prison sentence a homeless parolee received under California’s three-strikes law for stealing four cookies during a restaurant break-in.

In a case that became a rallying point for opponents of the sentencing law, Kevin Thomas Weber received the mandatory sentence for the burglary at a Santa Ana restaurant.

Weber’s lawyer argued on appeal that the 1995 sentence was cruel and unusual, but the 4th District Court of Appeal in Santa Ana called Weber a career criminal who deserved the maximum punishment.

Following reports of cases like Weber’s and a Redondo Beach pizza thief, the state Supreme Court gave judges the discretion to reject the maximum sentence if the crime or a defendant’s background does not support it.

The appeals court, in rejecting Weber’s plea June 12, noted that he went to extraordinary means to enter the restaurant by slipping through a roof vent, and probably would have stolen more than sweets if not for a blaring burglar alarm.

“A safecracker who cracks an empty safe is nonetheless a safecracker,” Justice David G. Sills wrote in an unanimous opinion.

Orange County Public Defender Carl Holmes, whose office represented Weber at trial, said he was disheartened to learn of the appellate court’s decision. Lawyers portrayed Weber as a nonviolent, homeless alcoholic in need of treatment, not a life behind bars.

“It shocks one’s conscience to think a man could spend the rest of his life in prison for stealing four cookies,” Holmes said Monday. “For some unapparent reason, the system still has no sense of compassion.”

At the time Weber was first sentenced, California judges had little choice but to impose the maximum punishment in three-strikes cases. In 1996, the state Supreme Court granted judges new discretion, but a judge declined to change Weber’s sentence, noting his past convictions for burglary, assault with a firearm and receiving stolen property.

A Los Angeles County judge, however, showed leniency in the case of a notorious pizza thief, slashing the 25 years to life he received for swiping a piece of pie in 1994 from a group of children at the Redondo Beach pier.

Weber’s appeals lawyer, Marilee Marshall, argued that Weber’s judge also should have used discretion to reduce the sentence. She said she plans to appeal to the state Supreme Court or possibly seek clemency through Gov. Gray Davis.

Though the Weber decision will have no binding effect on California courts, it could prove significant in the continuing battle over the law, which some view as draconian and others as a significant crime-fighting tool.

“The bottom line is that this is one of those cases that makes people rethink what we’re doing with the three-strikes law,” said Laurie Levenson, a law professor and legal analyst at Loyola Law School in Los Angeles. “On the other hand, . . . the courts are not saying that it’s cruel and unusual.”