Help us improve in just 2 minutes—share your thoughts in our reader survey.
California Proposition 184, Three Strikes Sentencing Initiative (1994)
| California Proposition 184 | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Election date November 8, 1994 | |
| Topic Civil and criminal trials | |
Status Approved | |
| Type State statute | Origin Citizens |
California Proposition 184 was on the ballot as an initiated state statute in California on November 8, 1994. It was approved.
A "yes" vote supported creating a three-strikes sentencing model to increase prison sentences for repeat offenders. |
A "no" vote opposed creating a three-strikes sentencing model to increase prison sentences for repeat offenders. |
'.
Aftermath
Changes to Proposition 184
As voters approved Proposition 184, all proposed changes to the law needed to be put on the ballot for voter consideration. Initiatives were featured on the ballot to amend Proposition 184 in 2000, 2004, and 2012.
In 2000, Proposition 36 was certified for the ballot. The initiative was designed to require probation and drug treatment for persons convicted of being under the influence of controlled substances and similar parole violations, rather than be subject to the provisions of Proposition 184. Voters approved Proposition 36, with 60.86 percent in favor.
In 2004, voters rejected Proposition 66, which would have removed non-serious and non-violent felonies from counting as Strike 3 of Proposition 184. Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger (R) opposed Proposition 66.
In 2012, voters approved Proposition 36, which amended Proposition 184 to exclude non-serious and non-violent felonies, except those involving firearms, sex offenses, or drug offenses, from counting as Strike 3. The initiative authorized judges to resentence people sentenced to life imprisonment under Proposition 184 for third offenses that were non-serious and non-violent.
Election results
|
California Proposition 184 |
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Result | Votes | Percentage | ||
|
|
5,906,268 | 71.85% | ||
| No | 2,314,548 | 28.15% | ||
Text of measure
Ballot title
The ballot title for Proposition 184 was as follows:
| “ | Increased sentences. Repeat offenders. Initiative statute. | ” |
Ballot summary
The ballot summary for this measure was:
| “ |
• Increases sentences for defendants convicted of any felony who have prior convictions for violent or serious felonies such as rape, robbery or burglary. • Convicted felons with one such prior conviction would receive twice the normal sentence for the new offense. Convicted felons with two or more such prior convictions would receive a life sentence with a minimum term three times the normal sentence or 25 years, whichever is greater. • Includes as prior convictions certain felonies committed by juveniles 16 years of age, or older. • Reduces sentence reduction credit which may be earned by these convicted felons. | ” |
Full Text
The full text of this measure is available here.
Measure design
The measure was designed to increase prison sentences for repeat offenders. The three-strikes sentencing model was enacted as follows:[1]
- Strike 1: persons with no prior violent or serious felony conviction who commit a violent or serious felony receive a sentence for that felony as prescribe by state law.
- Strike 2: persons with one prior violent or serious felony conviction who again commit any type of felony receive a sentence twice the term state law otherwise required.
- Strike 3: persons with two prior violent or serious felony convictions who again commit any type of felony receive a life sentence, with a minimum imprisonment of 25 years.
The measure also counted serious or violent felony convictions received as minors, who were at least 16 years old, as previous convictions in the three-strikes sentencing model. Proposition 184 decreased the number of credits that persons who were imprisoned under the initiative for Strike 2 or Strike 3 could receive to reduce their time in prison.[1]
Background
Mike and Kimber Reynolds
Mike Reynolds, a photographer and the ballot initiative's proponent, proposed Proposition 184 following the murder of his 18-year-old daughter Kimber Reynolds in 1992. Kimber was leaving a restaurant when two individuals, Douglas Walker and Joe Davis, attempted to steal her purse. Davis shot and killed Kimber. Davis was wanted for multiple robberies and assaults and had served time in jail for gun and drug charges and time in state prison for auto theft. Police, attempting to locate Davis, shot and killed him after he fired on police. Walker was convicted of robbery and accessory to murder and was sentenced to nine years in prison.[2] Reynolds noted that both Walker and Davis were repeat offenders.[3]
Path to the ballot
In California, the number of signatures required for an indirect initiated state statute is equal to 5 percent of the votes cast in the preceding gubernatorial election. To get an initiative certified for the ballot in 1994, proponents were required to collect 384,973 valid signatures.[4] Supporters of Proposition 184 reported filing more than 800,000 unverified signatures.[5]
According to the Legislative Analyst's Office (LAO), Proposition 184 was identical to a bill that the California State Legislature passed and Gov. Pete Wilson (R) signed in March 1994.[1] Proponents of Proposition 184 began collecting signatures before the legislature passed the bill.[6] Mike Reynolds, the initiative's proponent, filed signatures for Proposition 184 despite the legislature's actions and governor's signature. In California, he noted, the legislature is not permitted to amend a voter-approved initiative without the consent of voters. Within Proposition 184, Reynolds said, "[Legislators] are in a position to unravel everything that's been done here."[5] As voters did approve Proposition 184 on November 8, 1994, changes to the law require the approval of voters at the ballot box.
See also
External links
Footnotes
- ↑ 1.0 1.1 1.2 UC-Hastings, "Voter Information Guide for November 1994 Election," accessed December 21, 2017
- ↑ Los Angeles Times, "A Father's Crusade Born From Pain," December 9, 2013
- ↑ NPR, "Two Torn Families Show Flip Side Of 3 Strikes Law," October 28, 2009
- ↑ Los Angeles Times, "No Lack of Initiative: Recession Brings New Class of Worker to Signature-Gathering Trade," April 13, 1992
- ↑ 5.0 5.1 Los Angeles Times, "'3 Strikes' Law Goes Into Effect," March 8, 1994
- ↑ New York Times, "The Supreme Court; Excerpts From Supreme Court Rulings on California's 'Three-Strikes' Law," March 6, 2003
 |
State of California Sacramento (capital) |
|---|---|
| Elections |
What's on my ballot? | Elections in 2025 | How to vote | How to run for office | Ballot measures |
| Government |
Who represents me? | U.S. President | U.S. Congress | Federal courts | State executives | State legislature | State and local courts | Counties | Cities | School districts | Public policy |
