Court gives California 2 years to lower prison population

[alp227]

Source: San Francisco Chronicle

A federal court gave California two more years Monday to reduce the population of its overcrowded prisons, yielding to pressure from state officials who said they could meet an impending deadline only by shipping thousands of inmates to other states.

The three-judge court had initially set a June 2013 deadline for the state to lower the inmate population to 37.5 percent above its designed capacity in order to reduce overcrowding that had undermined prison health care.

The court extended the deadline several times. The latest deadline was Feb. 24, but on Monday, the court said it was reluctantly granting Gov. Jerry Brown's request for another two years. The main reason, the court said, was a warning from state officials that they would respond to an order for immediate compliance by transferring more inmates to prisons in other states, joining 8,900 California prisoners already locked up out of state.

That would result in "thousands of prisoners being incarcerated hundreds or thousands of miles from the support of their families" and would consume "hundreds of millions of dollars that could be spent on long-lasting prison reform," the court said.

Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/crime/article/Court-gives-California-2-years-to-lower-prison-5221828.php

[Ash_F]

1. Time to legalize marijuana. Other States have led the way.

Let these non-violent offenders, who have harmed noone, out.

[bemildred]

2. Time to legalize it retroactively, get those people out of jail. nt

[WhiteTara]

10. Yep. It's beyond time all across the nation.

Let's leave some room for *co and the banksters!

[NobodyHere]

4. Do you know how many prisoners are doing time for non-violent offenses?

All I could find after a quick search was this:

At year-end 2012, 88% of inmates had a current or prior violent or serious felony conviction, and 16% were registered sex offenders. A large percentage of inmates have long-term sentences: 25% are serving a "second strike” sentence, and 19% are lifers with the possibility of parole. Smaller proportions are serving a "third strike” sentence (7%) or are serving life sentences without the possibility of parole (4%).

http://www.ppic.org/main/publication_show.asp?i=702

It doesn't show exactly what I'm looking for but it's a start, and the question has always intrigued me.

The reason why I bring this up is because I wonder what to do if you release all the non-violent offenders and there is STILL overpopulation.

[former9thward]

7. No one is in prison for simple pot possession.

So that is not going to reduce the population.

[Ash_F]

16. Dealing? /nt

[former9thward]

18. There are probably people in prison for dealing.

Especially if they were caught with huge amounts. i don't have any number or percentage. But no one is there for simple possession.

[duhneece]

19. But many, MANY are in prison for violation of probation by smoking pot

Rarely is there a count of folks locked in prison cages for dirty UA's (urinalysis) but many are back in prison because they smoked pot. I don't know how to get that count. I'd like to know by state, by county, for the whole US...anyone? I just know that by anecdote.

[former9thward]

24. You may be right.

I have no idea how to get those numbers or if anyone even keeps them.

[Mz Pip]

28. I'm pretty sure that's true.

Simple possession is pretty much ignored at least around here. Cops have bigger issues to deal with. I'm not saying it never happens but it's the exception not the rule.

Freeing non violent pot offenders won't solve the problem of crowding in CA prisons.

[Le Taz Hot]

3. It's the Three Strikes law that is crowding our prisons.

We tried to get rid of it via the initiative process but we failed to overturn it.

[KamaAina]

11. Given this situation, one would hope the legislature would do that.

But apparently there are enough law'n'order repukes to block any attempt to do that.

[Le Taz Hot]

12. I think there are enough gutless Dems

afraid of being seen as "soft on crime" as well. I think the only way we overturn this is through the initiative process.

[Xithras]

14. The California legislature can't overturn Three Strikes.

It was passed by Proposition 184. The California constitution prevents the legislature from overturning articles of law passed by the voters through the initiative process. While they do have the ability to modify its enforcement a little (they can't conflict with it, but can redefine any gray areas), actually reversing it or scaling it back will require another vote by the people.

California's proposition process was specifically designed so that it couldn't be contravened by the states leadership. Their hands are tied.

[L0oniX]

5. Release all the pot possesion prisoners immediatly.

[former9thward]

8. They are long gone.

No one is in prison for simple pot possession.

[Xithras]

15. There are no pot possession prisoners in California.

There are growers and dealers in prison, but California eliminated prison time for possession over a decade ago. It was reduced to a misdemeanor without jailtime quite some time back, and then Der Gropenfurher passed a modification reducing it even further to an infraction (you can get a ticket, but no jail time and it doesn't show up on your record).

Even with harder drugs, California has diversion programs that keeps junkies out of the prison system. We don't have people in our state prisons simply for using or possessing drugs.

[Ash_F]

17. What if you don't or can't pay the fine? /nt

[Xithras]

20. Then it's treated like a traffic ticket.

If you can't afford to pay the fine, every county in the state has payment plans or community service alternatives available to those who genuinely can't afford to pay.

If you can afford it and simply choose not to. Well, then you get to deal with the judge and it's treated like any other unpaid fine.

[Ash_F]

21. Ok so jail. /nt

[NobodyHere]

23. County jail doesn't equal state prison

nt

[Xithras]

25. Sure. If you want to make a political statement out of it. But then it's your choice.

Nobody goes to jail over unpaid tickets in California if they genuinely can't afford to pay. The only way you are going to jail is if you choose to willfully defy the courts and refuse to pay even though you are capable.

And at that point, it isn't about pot any longer.

[Ash_F]

26. "Genuinely can't afford to pay"

I think some folks might differ on what that means on a case by case basis. The bottom line is people go to jail for unpaid citations. Almost exclusively the very poor. I have been in court to plead down fines, it is not easy. Best case is you get on a work release program which still takes time away from paying work.

And my question was not answered anyway. How many is it? When the State is being ORDERED to reduce its prison population due to human rights violations, it is time to ask these questions. These violations are a more severe crime than any pot ticket.

[Xithras]

27. Which is why they are considered on a case by case basis.

First off, it's very rare to see jailtime over an unpaid ticket. Most of the time when you hear about people being arrested over unpaid tickets, they're REALLY being arrested because they skipped the court dates as well and a bench warrant was issued for them. Not due to their failure to pay, but because they have ignored a court summons.

In California, if you get a ticket and can't afford to pay, you go to court and explain the situation to the judge. The judge is going to ask WHY you can't afford it, how much money you make, etc., but in the end will either reduce the amount to something you CAN pay, set up a payment plan so you can pay it a bit at a time, or divert you into an alternative program to work it off. Every single county in the state has programs and options for people in this situation.

In that regard, pot possession is really no different than any other infraction. California handles pot possession under the same set of rules that we use for jaywalking tickets or littering citations. Under California law, you cannot be arrested or imprisoned over an infraction. If you fail to respond to a court summons, however, you can be arrested for THAT. If a judge issues an order directing you to pay, and you refuse, then you can be arrested for defying a court order. But you cannot be arrested over the infraction itself.

And, as has already been mentioned, these are handled at the county level. There are precisely ZERO people in state prison because they refused (or were unable) to pay a pot possession fine. Or a jaywalking fine. Or any other fine related to an infraction. This order is entirely about state prisons, and has little to do with city and county jails.

[jwirr]

6. They can also release their elderly prisoners and those with terminal illnesses.

[olddad56]

9. two more years and the prison and county jails will be more crowded not less.

The only way the state can reduce the number is to keep kicking back inmates to the counties.

[Blue_Tires]

13. In another state, some would almost take that to mean:

"Fast-track all the death row inmates!!"

[mackerel]

22. we hey gang affiliation charge

here. It adds another 5 years to the sentence