Running Head: ANALYSIS OF AB109, PROPOSITION 47, AND PROPOSITION 57
Analysis of AB109, Proposition 47, and Proposition 57
Name
Institutional Affiliation
1
ANALYSIS OF AB109, PROPOSITION 47, AND PROPOSITION 57
2
Abstract
The approval of AB109, proposition 47 and 57 has heightened the debate on the efficiency of the
criminal justice in the state of California. The main intent of the implementation of these three
initiatives was to reduce the number of inmates and encourage personal rehabilitation. The effect
of AB109 is that county jails which were not designed to detain individuals serving long terms
are overcrowded and there is no room for the misdemeanors (Flynn, 2013). Immediately the
AB109 was signed about 10,000 inmates in California were eligible for resentencing which
further increased to approximately 1 million by January, 2015 (Petersilia & Snyder, 2013).
Proposition 57 classified crimes such as drive-by-shooting, human trafficking, rape of an
unconscious individual, and rape by intoxication as non-violent providing the release of about
30,000 criminals (Bhandal & Nevarez, 2016). Crimes that are not defined as “violent” are
automatically classified as “non-violent” (Bhandal & Nevarez, 2016). To reduce crime rates in
California, “non-violent” crimes should be reclassified as violent to avoid early release of
criminals. Theft laws should be reformed to restore accountability. DNA collection should be
expanded to include the perpetrators of theft and domestic violence. The constitutional rights of
the victims should be heard before the release of an offender. There is need to change these three
initiatives that have placed the criminal justice of California in debate.
ANALYSIS OF AB109, PROPOSITION 47, AND PROPOSITION 57
3
Analysis of AB109, Proposition 47, and Proposition 57
To address the rising population, California has undertaken reforms in criminal justice
including transferring prisoners from state prison to county jails. While state prisons detain
persons convicted of serious crimes and serving long sentences, county jails detain individuals
for a short period of up to one year or a few months awaiting trial. California voters approved the
Assembly Bill 109 (AB109), proposition 47 and proposition 57. The main goal of AB109 was
transfer individuals convicted of less serious crimes to the county jails. Before the approval of
proposition 47, crimes such as drug possession, rape, gun theft, checks forgery, and repeated
shoplifting were classified as felonies (Kail, 2016). Proposition 47 reclassified felony crimes to
misdemeanors to reduce the number of sentences due to theft and drug possession (Fischer,
2018). The objective of proposition 57 was to provide parole consideration and rehabilitation to
perpetrators. The proposition also classified some crimes such as rape of an unconscious person,
drive-by-shooting, and human trafficking as “non-violent (Bhandal & Nevarez, 2016).
Controversy on whether or not the three initiatives fulfill their main intent has made criminal
justice in California debatable.
Assembly Bill 109 (AB 109)
In October 2011, California voters passed the realignment bill, known as Assembly Bill
109 (AB109). The objective of the bill was to divert persons convicted of less serious or nonviolent crimes from state prison to county jails (Flynn, 2013). Realignment however does not
change what happens with serious crimes. Individuals convicted of violent crimes or sexual
crimes are still eligible for imprisonment in the state prison. It was set to transfer approximately
50,000 persons from state control to the county probation and sheriff’s department’s supervision
ANALYSIS OF AB109, PROPOSITION 47, AND PROPOSITION 57
4
(Flynn, 2013). Assembly Bill 109 advocates believe that individuals convicted of less serious
crimes could be rehabilitated through community based practices instead of state prisons. The
result of the bill is that county jails hold more inmates. AB 109 encourages counties to focus on
lowered re-offense and rehabilitation (Flynn, 2013). Despite their goals to reduce recidivism, the
bill does not require that counties provide funding and resources necessary for long lasting
changes to how imprisoned people reintegrate back to the streets. The realignment bill has made
various changes to the people of California and to the courts. The bill amended the definition of
felony crimes. Whereas felony crimes could be punished with state imprisonment, AB 109
dictates that the offense could be punished in county jails. The long-term effect is that some
culprits are not actually rehabilitated but rather take that as an opportunity to come back to the
society and commit more crimes. The intended benefit of the bill was violated.
Intended Benefits of Proposition 47, and Proposition 57
Proposition 47 and 57 had various intended benefits to the courts and the people of
California. Under proposition 47, certain offenses including drug possession and theft were
reclassified to misdemeanors (Fischer, 2018). The theft charges included shoplifting, forgery,
receiving stolen items and fraud. The proposition also provided that defendants currently serving
sentences in state prisons for felonies that would have been classified as misdemeanors would
also have the right to file a petition for resentencing. The proposition also extended to culprits
who have already completed their sentences; it allowed them to apply for a reclassification of
their convictions to misdemeanors for future purposes. Immediately the law was signed about
10,000 inmates in California were eligible for resentencing which further increased to
approximately 1 million by January, 2015 (Petersilia & Snyder, 2013). The main goal of the
proposition was to reduce the number of inmates in state prisons. Notably, the number decreased
ANALYSIS OF AB109, PROPOSITION 47, AND PROPOSITION 57
5
significantly that various sheriff’s departments in California closed some of their jails. Orange
County for example closed a section of their jail (Petersilia & Snyder, 2013). Proposition 57 on
the other hand provides inmates with incentives such as credit-earning prospects, in-prison
activities and programs to ensure that they are solely responsible of their rehabilitation (Bhandal,
& Nevarez, 2016). The proposition also provides parole consideration for individuals who
demonstrate harmlessness once released back to the society. The changes made in proposition
57 were intended to improve inmate behavior and provide a safer environment for inmates and
staff (Bhandal, & Nevarez, 2016). Additionally, the changes provided the inmates with skills to
be more productive once they complete their sentences. Proposition 57 also aimed at reducing
the number of inmates by providing parole consideration. Despite making significant changes,
the propositions also brought about unintended consequences.
Unintended Consequences of AB109, Proposition 47, and Proposition 57
The effects of the AB109, proposition 47 and proposition 57 raise question on whether
there were other hidden agendas of their implementation other than the stated ones. The
enactment of AB109 transferred almost 45,000 criminals from the state prison to the county jails
(Flynn, 2013). It is worth noting that county jails are designed to detain criminals for a short term
for less-serious offenses. The approval of the realignment bill, however, transferred criminals
who would have otherwise been in the state prison serving long sentences. Consequently, county
jails are filled with criminals who are serving long sentences. Under AB109, individuals who
commit crimes such as domestic violence, rape, elder abuse, terrorist threats, attempted murder
or burglary are qualified for early release. Besides, AB 109 disregards prior histories of crime
when considering an individual for early release. The result is that thousands of criminals are
released back into the society. Proposition 47, also known as The Safe Neighborhoods and
ANALYSIS OF AB109, PROPOSITION 47, AND PROPOSITION 57
6
Schools Act reclassified serious crimes to misdemeanors. Before the approval of proposition 47,
crimes such as drug possession, rape, gun theft, checks forgery, and repeated shoplifting were
classified as felonies (Kail, 2016). Now, they are classified as misdemeanors which are minor
violations punishable by up to one year imprisonment or citation issuance. Criminals can now
steal as much as they want as long as they ensure that the value of the stolen item $950 or less
(Kail, 2016). Reclassification of cocaine, heroin, opiates and methamphetamine possession as
misdemeanor has made it impossible to compel drug addicts to start rehabilitation programs
(Woods, 2016). There is no room for misdemeanor offenders since all jails are filled under
AB109 (Woods, 2016). Proposition 57 has brought adverse impacts to the people of California.
The proposition classified crimes such as drive-by-shooting, human trafficking, rape of an
unconscious individual, and rape by intoxication as non-violent providing the release of about
30,000 criminals (Bhandal & Nevarez, 2016). Crimes that are not defined as “violent” are
automatically classified as “non-violent”. The approval of AB109, proposition 47, and
proposition 57 has only made it difficult to enhance public safety. The laws are not working as
intended and the voters’ expectations on these laws are rarely met.
Christian Teachings on AB109, Proposition 47, and Proposition 57
Christian teaching about law borrows heavily from the Bible which encourages love for
one another, forgiveness and second chances, and obedient to earthly authorities. 1 John 4:7–8
teaches Christians that they should love each other because God is Love and whoever loves is of
God. The Catholic Church, California favors proposition 57. San Bernardino diocese has a
ministry that focuses of restoring justice by reaching out to crime victims, criminals and the
family members (Brian, 2016). Andrews, the diocese spokesman said that proposition 57 fits into
what they are doing. He added that providing all individuals with an opportunity to redeem
ANALYSIS OF AB109, PROPOSITION 47, AND PROPOSITION 57
7
themselves from past transgressions is fundamental to Christian faith and that proposition 57
provides a greater redemption and rehabilitation avenue for perpetrators (Brian, 2016). Second
Peter 3:9 says that the Lord does not count slowness in his promises but he is patient with us and
wishes that none would perish but all should repent. Mike Ramos, the attorney general in that
diocese said that he believes in rehabilitation and suggested that prison systems should actually
implement rehabilitation programs to ensure a safe transition into the society (Brian, 2016).
Christians, however, do not support the reclassification of felonies to “nonviolent” crimes. Chris,
Southern California Police Officer said that proposition 57 is the worst legislation, which would
release many predators to the streets (Christian Podcast, 2016). According to Christians,
everyone deserves a second chance to repent and become a better person.
Modifications
Certain modifications are necessary to ensure that the AB109, Proposition 47, and
Proposition 57 initiatives work as intended. The state of California should focus on sustaining
public safety by enhancing efficiency in the re-entry system (Flynn, 2013). The state should
develop strategies to reduce re-offense by assisting the imprisoned and the formerly imprisoned
persons in successful transition to the society. The state should also ensure collaboration with
law enforcement agencies to promote accountability through rehabilitation. Besides, states
should expand on certain services to target marginalized, mentally-ill, and substance-dependent
populations. The system should expand supportive mental health, housing and/or substance and
promote personal management. To reduce crime rates in California, “non-violent” crimes should
be reclassified as violent to avoid early release of criminals. Theft laws should be reformed to
restore accountability. DNA collection should be expanded to include the perpetrators of theft
ANALYSIS OF AB109, PROPOSITION 47, AND PROPOSITION 57
8
and domestic violence. The constitutional rights of the victims should be heard before the release
of an offender.
Conclusion
California has undertaken reforms in criminal justice including transferring prisoners
from state prison to county jails. California voters approved the Assembly Bill 109 (AB109),
proposition 47 and proposition 57. The objective of the Assembly Bill 109 (AB109) was to
divert persons convicted of less serious or non-violent crimes from state prison to county jails.
The unintended effect of AB 109 is that county jails are filled with criminals who are serving
long sentences and more criminals are released to the society (Flynn, 2013). Under proposition
47,crimes such as drug possession, rape, gun theft, checks forgery, and repeated shoplifting are
classified as misdemeanors which are minor violations punishable by up to one year
imprisonment or citation issuance (Fischer, 2018, Kail, 2016)). Criminals can now steal as much
as they want as long as they ensure that the value of the stolen item $950 or less (Fischer, 2018).
Such reclassification has made it impossible to encourage rehabilitation among drug addicts.
There is no room for misdemeanor offenders since all jails are filled under AB109. Proposition
57 classified crimes such as drive-by-shooting, human trafficking, rape of an unconscious
individual, and rape by intoxication as non-violent providing the release of about 30,000
criminals (Bhandal & Nevarez, 2016). Crimes that are not defined as “violent” are automatically
classified as “non-violent”. The Catholic Church, California favors proposition 57 because fits
into what they are doing; restoring justice through rehabilitation (Bhandal & Nevarez, 2016).
Providing all individuals with an opportunity to redeem themselves from past transgressions is
fundamental to Christian faith and that proposition 57 provides a greater redemption and
rehabilitation avenue for perpetrators (Brian, 2016). From a commoner’s perspective, the
ANALYSIS OF AB109, PROPOSITION 47, AND PROPOSITION 57
9
approval of AB109, proposition 47, and proposition 57 has only made it difficult to enhance
public safety. The laws are not working as intended and the voters’ expectations on these laws
are rarely met. There is need to change these three initiatives that have placed the criminal justice
of California in debate.
ANALYSIS OF AB109, PROPOSITION 47, AND PROPOSITION 57
10
References
Bhandal, N., & Nevarez, T. (2016). Proposition 57: Criminal sentence. Parole. Juvenile criminal
proceedings and sentencing.“. The public safety and rehabilitation act of 2016.
Brian, R. (2016). Prop. 57: Rewarding good prison behavior or increasing public danger?
Retrieved from https://www.pe.com/2016/11/03/prop-57-rewarding-good-prisonbehavior-or-increasing-public-danger/ on 21, February, 2020.
Christian Podcast (2016). The Big Picture 75: The Truth Hidden In California Prop. 57 – A
Christian Cop’s Perspective. Retrieved from
https://www.patheos.com/blogs/e2medianetwork/2016/11/the-big-picture-75-the-truthhidden-in-california-prop-57/ on 21, February, 2020.
Fischer, B. J. (2018). Proposition 47 and Crime: A Difference in Differences Analysis of
Incarceration Rates and Crime using border counties.
Flynn, K. N. (2013). Putting teeth into AB 109: why California's historic Public Safety
Realignment Act should require reentry programming. Golden Gate UL Rev., 43, 525.
Kail, S. (2016). The Unintended Consequences of California Proposition 47: Reducing Law
Enforcement's Ability to Solve Serious, Violent Crimes. Pepp. L. Rev., 44, 1039.
Krisberg, B., & Taylor-Nicholson, E. (2011). Realignment: A bold new era in California
corrections. The Chief Justice Earl Warren Institute on Law and Social Policy. University
of California, Berkeley Law School. Retrieved August, 1, 2014.
Petersilia, J., & Snyder, J. (2013). Looking past the hype: 10 questions everyone should ask
about California's prison Realignment. California Journal of Politics and Policy, 5(2),
266-306.
ANALYSIS OF AB109, PROPOSITION 47, AND PROPOSITION 57
11
Woods, C. L. (2016). Proposition 47: The unintended consequence. U. La Verne L. Rev., 38, 83.