Advertise Here

Deliver your message to thousands of readers every day.

Our readers are influential opinion makers - politicians, journalists and activists.

Learn more about ads.

Our latest headlines

Want more? Dive into the archives.

About Us

David Greenwald, Editor. (Contact David.)
CFC Education Foundation, Publisher. (Contact us.)

Got a news tip? Want to write a guest column?
Contact David here.

About California Progress Report.

Founded by Frank D. Russo (Publisher and Editor, 2006-08).

Books

California Sentencing Reform Bill to be Voted on Today by State Assembly

By Frank D. Russo

California Assembly Speaker pro Tempore Sally Lieber advises that legislation authored by her creating an independent California Sentencing Commission charged with devising criminal sentencing guidelines will be debated and put to a vote today on the floor of the Assembly. Lieber's bill, AB 160, is similar to SB 110 by Senator Gloria Romero poised to be voted on by the Senate this week.

Lieber sees this bill in the context of the massive prison construction bill passed in April. Referencing that bill, she said in a statement released late last night: "We have a historic opportunity in the wake of the passage of AB 900 to reform thirty years of piecemeal modifications to California’s sentencing laws. The Commission concept has been used successfully in other states to address this issue. This bill would create a truly independent commission that is carefully balanced and chaired by the Chief Justice of the California Supreme Court."

Under the provisions of AB 160, authority to appoint members of the Commission will be distributed among the Governor and both houses of the Legislature. The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court will serve as the permanent Chair of the Commission. Four members will be ex officio: the Attorney General, the Secretary of the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, the Director of the Department of Finance, and the State Public Defender.

Similar commissions in other states have been successful in balancing sentencing policy and prison resources. In recent months, the Governor has repeatedly indicated his support for such a commission. Although it’s anticipated that a commission would help in balancing prison resources, Lieber reiterated that sentencing guidelines and prison overcrowding must be dealt with as separate subjects.

“Developing appropriate sentences for criminal acts must be considered independent of dealing with the issue of prison overcrowding,” explained Lieber.

AB 160 would create the Commission and empower it to devise sentencing guidelines generally. The Commission would not review “Three Strikes” sentencing, or any other sentencing law created by voter initiative. The Commission would also analyze legislation that would modify sentencing and provide data and recommendations to the Legislature.

The Commission would issue a first report and recommendations in 2008. Under the Commission’s charter, the new sentencing guidelines will be adopted automatically unless the Legislature acts to alter or reject them.

For further information on why California needs a prison commission, you may want to read an article by Kara Dansky, a Stanford Law Professor and noted expert on sentencing laws and commissions, which appeared in January in the California Progress Report and another article about Senator Romero's bill and the California reports on sentencing that have been issued in recent years.

Posted on June 06, 2007

Comments

AB 160 would be a mistake. A commission with Legislators and Law Enforcement as its Commission members would only continue the disfunctional rational of our justice system. Yet another useless commission. Power must be removed from Legislators that continually look for ways to advance their careers. SB 110 is the only bill that will work.

Posted by: Morris1 at June 6, 2007 07:32 AM

SB 110 is the only bill that includes members of the Legislature on the commission; AB 160 does not. SB 110 is also more heavily weighted with members of law enforcement. Both SB 110 and AB 160 would create truly independent commissions--sentencing guidelines devised by the commission would take effect unless the Legislature provides otherwise.

Posted by: cj at June 6, 2007 10:11 AM

cj- I stand corrected. You are right. Although similar there are more legislators serving on SB 110. It seemed to me that SB 110 had more power to act. AB 160 is more advisory. I also did not like the fact that AB 160 would not look at voter empowered initiatives that have in large part caused this crisis. Voters have made some huge mistakes in the past. What is your take? There seems to be good in both bills, could they merge them somehow?

Posted by: Morris1 at June 6, 2007 02:33 PM

You can check the status, research, and influence the outcomes of AB160 and SB110 at Capitol Connection: California.

http://www.capconcal.com

Posted by: Roger Cohen at June 19, 2007 06:39 PM

Get Email Updates

Want the California Progress Report by email? Once a week, we'll send you the latest and greatest headlines.

Stat tracker