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 continu-
ing 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 fol-
lowing 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 arbi-
trary schedule, resulting in the required freeing of tens
•HRES 391 IH
of thousands of violent criminals despite their dem-
onstrated danger to society;
Whereas recent examples of the State of California’s failed
determinate sentencing system for violent criminals in-
clude—
(1) the release of the serial criminal known as the
College Terrace Rapist, who served only 1⁄2 of his sen-
tence 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 Califor-
nia Department of Justice and the California Depart-
ment of Prisons, of the serial criminal known as the Pil-
lowcase 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 kidnap-
ping 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 co-
caine 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
•HRES 391 IH
release of sexual and other serious violent offenders sen-
tenced 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 pris-
ons 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 Cali-
fornia State prisons commit another crime within 2
years of their release; and
(3) approximately 39 percent of the violent crimi-
nals arrested in California are already involved in a com-
ponent of the criminal justice system;
Whereas, according to studies conducted by the United States
Department of Justice, the typical street criminal com-
mits 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 behav-
ior, their propensity for recidivism, or the lack of a posi-
tive parole evaluation or an approved plan for living a
productive crime-free life;
Whereas the offenders released under the State of Califor-
nia’s arbitrary determinate sentencing deadlines will in-
•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 ef-
fective, and constitutional indeterminate sentencing sys-
tem for imprisoning especially heinous and violent crimi-
nals;
Whereas the California criminal justice system can easily
shift serious violent crimes from the determinate sentenc-
ing 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 long-
term 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 commit-
ted 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
Resolved, That it is the sense of the House of Rep-
resentatives that, to maximize public safety, the State of
California should enact legislation to require that all
criminals convicted in California State courts of serious
violent crimes be imprisoned under the State’s indetermi-
nate sentencing system, which links a convicted criminal’s
•HRES 391 IH
release date to the severity of the offense and the pros-
pects for a crime-free life after release.
Æ