IV

103D CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. RES. 391

Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that the State of

California should enact legislation to make the State’s indeterminate

sentencing system applicable to all serious violent crimes, while continuing to provide and maintain any current minimum sentences for such

crimes.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

MARCH 17, 1994

Mr. DREIER (for himself, Mr. LEWIS of California, Mr. HUFFINGTON, Mr.

PACKARD, Mr. GALLEGLY, Mr. HERGER, Mr. MCKEON, Mr. CALVERT,

Mr. HORN, Mr. ROYCE, Mr. DORNAN, and Mr. KIM) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

RESOLUTION

Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that

the State of California should enact legislation to make

the State’s indeterminate sentencing system applicable

to all serious violent crimes, while continuing to provide

and maintain any current minimum sentences for such

crimes.

Whereas the State of California’s Determinate Sentencing

Act was enacted in 1976;

Whereas the Determinate Sentencing Act forces the release

of the vast majority of California State felons on an arbitrary schedule, resulting in the required freeing of tens
2

•HRES 391 IH

of thousands of violent criminals despite their demonstrated danger to society;

Whereas recent examples of the State of California’s failed

determinate sentencing system for violent criminals include—

(1) the release of the serial criminal known as the

College Terrace Rapist, who served only 1⁄2 of his sentence for committing as many as 100 rapes, in addition

to assaults and burglaries;

(2) the release, despite the censure of the Governor

of the State of California and the protests of the California Department of Justice and the California Department of Prisons, of the serial criminal known as the Pillowcase Rapist, who has been arrested and released from

prison at least 4 times for committing over 70 rapes and

kidnappings;

(3) the release of a man previously imprisoned twice

for kidnapping women, who was rearrested for kidnapping and brutally murdering 12-year-old Polly Klaas of

Petaluma, California; and

(4) the release of a man, previously convicted of 8

armed robberies, who was paroled and rearrested for cocaine and weapon possession, and who was tried after

his release for killing a Sacramento grandfather during

a daylight downtown street robbery;

Whereas the Governor of the State of California has stated

publicly that State law precludes him from barring the
3

•HRES 391 IH

release of sexual and other serious violent offenders sentenced under the Determinate Sentencing Act;

Whereas the Governor of the State of California has called

for mandatory life sentences for sexual predators;

Whereas, according to reports by the California Department

of Justice—

(1) the average time served in California State prisons is only 41 percent of the average time that offenders

are sentenced to serve in such prisons;

(2) 58 percent of the criminals released from California State prisons commit another crime within 2

years of their release; and

(3) approximately 39 percent of the violent criminals arrested in California are already involved in a component of the criminal justice system;

Whereas, according to studies conducted by the United States

Department of Justice, the typical street criminal commits more than a dozen serious crimes a year, excluding

drug crimes;

Whereas the result of the State of California’s determinate

sentencing is that 90 percent of the 115,000 criminals

currently incarcerated in California State prisons will be

required to be released on a fixed date, regardless of the

danger the prisoners pose to society, their prison behavior, their propensity for recidivism, or the lack of a positive parole evaluation or an approved plan for living a

productive crime-free life;

Whereas the offenders released under the State of California’s arbitrary determinate sentencing deadlines will in-
4

•HRES 391 IH

clude more than 38,000 prisoners who have committed

dangerous violent crimes, including rape, child abuse,

kidnapping, assault with a deadly weapon, manslaughter,

and armed robbery;

Whereas the State of California has an existing, relatively effective, and constitutional indeterminate sentencing system for imprisoning especially heinous and violent criminals;

Whereas the California criminal justice system can easily

shift serious violent crimes from the determinate sentencing system to the indeterminate sentencing system, so

that the most violent and dangerous criminals, who are

judged most likely to commit additional violent crimes,

can be kept off the streets and imprisoned until a longterm supervised release program is instituted for the

prisoner and the felon demonstrates a reduced propensity

towards recidivism; and

Whereas the Governor of the State of California has stated

his support for requiring all criminals who have committed certain serious violent crimes to be imprisoned under

the State’s indeterminate sentencing laws, which link a

criminal’s release date to the severity of the offense and

the prospects for a crime-free life upon release: Now,

therefore, be it

1 Resolved, That it is the sense of the House of Rep2 resentatives that, to maximize public safety, the State of

3 California should enact legislation to require that all

4 criminals convicted in California State courts of serious

5 violent crimes be imprisoned under the State’s indetermi6 nate sentencing system, which links a convicted criminal’s
5

•HRES 391 IH

1 release date to the severity of the offense and the pros2 pects for a crime-free life after release.

Æ