![Sample our Law journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5942/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Law.jpg"})
In 1994 California enacted legislation commonly known as “Three Strikes.” According to the conventional wisdom concerning the effect of “get tough” sentencing enhancements, the most draconian provisions are undermined by prosecutors, judges, and defense attorneys, who resist the changes in the “normal” way of doing business. The research reported here uses data derived from interviews and surveys of courtroom members, and finds that Three Strikes has significantly disrupted the efficiency of the workgroup and has made the prediction of case outcomes difficult.
Data were collected for this research as part of a larger project undertaken by the Administrative Office of the Courts, California Judicial Council, to assess the impact of the “three strikes” law on the superior courts of the state. The treatment of the data and conclusions reached in this paper are solely those of the authors.
Data were collected for this research as part of a larger project undertaken by the Administrative Office of the Courts, California Judicial Council, to assess the impact of the “three strikes” law on the superior courts of the state. The treatment of the data and conclusions reached in this paper are solely those of the authors.
Notes
Data were collected for this research as part of a larger project undertaken by the Administrative Office of the Courts, California Judicial Council, to assess the impact of the “three strikes” law on the superior courts of the state. The treatment of the data and conclusions reached in this paper are solely those of the authors.