Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
One application of a three-strikes law was the Leonardo Andrade case in California in 2009. In this case, Leandro Andrade attempted to rob $153 in videotapes from two San Bernardino K-Mart stores. He was charged under California's three-strikes law because of his criminal history concerning drugs and other burglaries.
Lockyer v. Andrade, 538 U.S. 63 (2003), [1] decided the same day as Ewing v. California (a case with a similar subject matter), [2] held that there would be no relief by means of a petition for a writ of habeas corpus from a sentence imposed under California's three strikes law as a violation of the Eighth Amendment's prohibition of cruel and unusual punishments.
California leaders began changing laws like three strikes after a panel of federal judges in 2009 ordered the state to reduce prison overcrowding, a decision the U.S. Supreme Court affirmed in 2011.
Proposition 36, also titled A Change in the "Three Strikes Law" Initiative, was a California ballot measure that was passed in November 2012 to modify California's Three Strikes Law (passed in 1994). The latter law punishes habitual offenders by establishing sentence escalation for crimes that were classified as "strikes", and requires a ...
At sentencing on the golf club theft, the judge classified the 1993 burglaries and robbery as "two strikes" and imposed the 25-to-life sentence under California's three strikes law. [9] Ewing appealed his conviction to the California Court of Appeal, which rejected his challenge that the 25-year sentence was grossly disproportional to the crime ...
The anti-crime law also added a provision to expand the scope of federal crimes and penalties, as it introduced approximately 60 new crimes, indicating that these crimes require the death penalty, including terrorist murders, drug-trafficking, and drive-by shootings, in addition to the three-strikes law. [12]
The People of the State of California v. Superior Court (Romero), 13 CAL. 4TH 497, 917 P.2D 628 (Cal. 1996), was a landmark case in the state of California that gave California Superior Court judges the ability to dismiss a criminal defendant's "strike prior" pursuant to the California Three-strikes law, thereby avoiding a 25-to-life minimum sentence.
Strike 3 Holdings says it's the creator of 'artistic' and 'inspiring' pornography. Some judges call it a copyright troll that makes millions by threatening to out those who download its films.