U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government, Department of Justice.

NCJRS Virtual Library

The Virtual Library houses over 235,000 criminal justice resources, including all known OJP works.
Click here to search the NCJRS Virtual Library

Punishment and Democracy: Three Strikes and You're Out in California

NCJ Number
193368
Author(s)
Franklin E. Zimring; Gordon Hawkins; Sam Kamin
Date Published
2001
Length
255 pages
Annotation
This report examined the origins, the impacts, and the implications of California’s Three Strikes You’re Out law with crucial lessons learned about democracy and criminal justice in America.
Abstract
California’s Three Strikes You’re Out law was passed in 1994 and represented America’s get tough crime legislation. The law was designed to target repeat offenders using mandatory prison sentences. Prior to the passing of the new law, California’s prison system was larger than any other. This book studied the origin and impact of this new legislation with evidence presented on how overrated the new law was as a crime prevention measure. The book is divided into four sections: (1) the origin of the California law and the degree of its impact as a crime prevention or reform measure as compared to other legislative criminal law reform; (2) an evaluation on the effects of the law on punishment policy and on crime rates; (3) an exploration on the broader impacts of the law in the 1990's, such as the interactions with prior law, creating complications, and inconsistencies in the punishment of felons; and (4) an in-depth discussion on the broad implications of the Three Strikes law for American criminal justice, such as what is the proper role for citizens’ preferences in structuring the governance of punishment in a democratic system? Limitations identified with respect to this book include: (1) the lack of history provided on earlier habitual offender laws; (2) the lack of data and perspective available only after the statute has been part of California law and practice for decades; and (3) the lack of any ethnographic study of the law at street level. References