Help us improve in just 2 minutes—share your thoughts in our reader survey.
California Proposition 195, Permit Death Penalty or Life Sentence for Certain First-Degree Murders Measure (March 1996)
California Proposition 195 | |
---|---|
![]() | |
Election date March 26, 1996 | |
Topic Law enforcement | |
Status![]() | |
Type State statute | Origin State legislature |
California Proposition 195 was on the ballot as a legislatively referred state statute in California on March 26, 1996. It was approved.
A "yes" vote supported adding murder during or resulting from a carjacking or murder of a juror to the list of special circumstances for first-degree murder punishable by the death penalty. |
A "no" vote opposed adding murder during or resulting from a carjacking or murder of a juror to the list of special circumstances for first-degree murder punishable by the death penalty. |
Election results
California Proposition 195 |
||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Result | Votes | Percentage | ||
4,847,966 | 85.82% | |||
No | 800,857 | 14.18% |
Measure design
Proposition 195 added three types of first-degree murder to the state's list of special circumstances that are punishable by the death penalty or by life imprisonment with no parole. The three types of first-degree murder added to the special circumstances list are:
- First-degree murder committed during a carjacking.
- First-degree murder committed during a carjacking-kidnap.
- First-degree murder of a juror in retaliation for performing his or her official actions or to prevent the juror from carrying out his or her official duties.
Proposition 196, on the same March 1996 ballot, also passed, and added an additional type of first-degree murder to the list of special circumstances.[1]
Text of measure
Ballot title
The ballot title for Proposition 195 was as follows:
“ | Punishment. Special circumstances. Carjacking. Murder of juror. Legislative initiative amendment. | ” |
Ballot summary
The ballot summary for this measure was:
“ |
| ” |
Full Text
The full text of this measure is available here.
Fiscal impact
The California Legislative Analyst's Office provided the following estimate of net state and local government fiscal impact for Proposition 195:[1]
“ | Probably minor additional state costs.[2] | ” |
Support
Supporters
- Senator Steve Peace[1]
- Assemblyman Peter Frusetta[1]
- Michael Bradbury, District Attorney of Ventura County[1]
Official arguments
The official arguments in support of Proposition 195 can be found here.
Opposition
Opponents
- Senator Milton Marks[1]
- Right Reverand Jerry A. Lamb[1]
- Mike Farrell, president of M, J & E Productions, Inc.[1]
Official arguments
The official arguments in opposition to Proposition 195 can be found here.
Path to the ballot
Proposition 195 was voted onto the ballot by the California State Legislature via Senate Bill 32 (Statutes of 1995, Chapter 477).
Votes in legislature to refer to ballot | ||
---|---|---|
Chamber | Ayes | Noes |
Assembly | 59 | 7 |
Senate | 28 | 2 |
See also
External links
Footnotes