What evidence-based strategy or criminological theories would you use to address three-strikes laws
Three-strikes laws are the most obvious and controversial use of selective incapacitation. In 2004, approximately 26 states and the U.S. federal court system had three-strikes laws. In most cases, three felonious convictions result in a mandatory life sentence with no possibility of parole. In the case of Lockyer v. Andrade, this was Andrade’s third strike in the state of California. Andrade was sentenced to 50 years with no possibility of parole. In your initial post, discuss the following:
Is this sentence disproportionate to the offense? Why or why not?
What evidence-based strategy or criminological theories would you use to address three-strikes laws and their application? (Review the Module Two resources on evidence-based strategies.)
Do you feel that three-strikes laws are cruel and unusual punishment? Does this affect negative public perception of the criminal justice system?
…………………………….Answer preview…………….
Three strike law in California is a law which has a significance in the increase of the prison sentence especially it has its effects for the people who are convicted of felony, and they have been convicted before for two or more crimes of violence or serious felonies. This law limits the ability of such offenders to receive a punishment rather than a life sentence. Looking at case of Lockyer V. Andrade, the sentence was disproportionate because Andrade has been involved in petty theft crimes, for instance, he had stolen video tapes worth of $150 from two stores and then the three strike law was applied where he was charged with two counts of felony and as a result he was convicted with a continuous 25 years term in prison…………………………..
APA
277 words
