Criminal Sentences & Juvenile Crime Proceedings | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Results | ||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||
 Results by county
| ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Source:California Secretary of State[1] | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Proposition 57 was aninitiatedCalifornia ballot proposition, approved on the November 8, 2016 ballot. The proposition allows parole consideration for nonviolent felons, changes policies on juvenile prosecution,[2] and authorizes sentence credits for rehabilitation, good behavior, and education.
Due to the approval of the proposition, theCalifornia Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation will begin to implement these new parole and sentencing provisions.[3] The passage and implementation of the proposition may allow the state to save tens of millions of dollars each year.
Proposition 57 allows theparole board to release nonviolent prisoners once they have served the fullsentence for their primary criminal offense.[4] Previously, prisoners were often required to serve extra time by a sentence enhancement, such as those for repeated offenders.[4] In addition, Proposition 57 requires the Department of Corrections to develop uniform parole credits, which reward prisoners' good behavior with reduced sentences.[4]
This proposition allows juvenile court judges to determine whether or not juveniles aged fourteen and older should be prosecuted and sentenced as an adult, repealingCalifornia Proposition 21, which was passed in March 2000. Proposition 21 gave prosecutors the sole authority to decide whether to try ayoung offender as a juvenile or adult.[5]
Proposition 57's proponents sought to restore juvenile court judges’ authority over juvenile offenders.[5] TheCalifornia Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation has been under federal court supervision since theSupreme Court of the United States found that California'sprison overcrowding constitutescruel and unusual punishment (Brown v. Plata, 2011).
Proponents of the measure spent $11.75 million. The top contribution was $4.14 million raised by Governor Brown.[4] Other proponents responsible for significant contributions included theCalifornia Democratic Party,Tom Steyer,Reed Hastings, and theOpen Philanthropy Project.[4] The measure was also supported by theeditorial boards of theLos Angeles Times,[6] theSan Francisco Chronicle,[7] andThe Sacramento Bee.[8]
Opponents of the proposition argued that it would release potentially dangerous criminals due to improper classification of crimes as non-violent including domestic violence and child molestation.[9]
Opponents of the proposition spent $641,326 fighting against the measure. Opponents that made high contributions included Los Angeles County police unions and a prosecutor lobbying group.[4]
Proposition 57 was approved by voters in the November General Election, with 64.46% voting in favor.[10]
