Man Will NOT Get Life For Stealing VCR - Was Possible

[matcom]

<snip>

A federal appeals court carved a small but important exception to the state's rigorous three-strikes law Monday, ruling that a 25-years-to-life sentence for stealing a $199 VCR amounted to unconstitutional "cruel and unusual punishment."

In a 2-1 decision, the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals based in San Francisco called the case "exceedingly rare," saying the defendant, Isaac Ramirez, had been given a sentence that was "grossly disproportionate to the crimes committed, in violation of the 8th Amendment" to the U.S. Constitution.

Last year, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld California's three-strikes law. That 5-4 decision held that sentencing thieves and petty criminals to life in prison for a third offense did not violate the 8th Amendment in most cases, but held out the possibility that some cases might be exceptions.

Monday's decision is the first to say that a specific case is one of those exceptions, said USC law professor Erwin Chemerinsky, who argued the case at the Supreme Court last year.

http://www.latimes.com/news/custom/showcase/la-me-strikes20apr20.story

[GOPisEvil]

1. Wow...every once in a while this court gets something correct.

A broken clock is right twice a day, though.

[w4rma]

3. Note, one judge thought that this wasn't in violation of the BoR. (nt)

[GOPisEvil]

5. Yeah, but the Reagan appointee agreed it was.

The BushI appointee didn't.

[Renew Deal]

4. They got it wrong.

You can't bend the law for these criminals. I don't care if he stole baseball cards. If it's his third conviction, put him away. Life might be cruel, but the 25 years isn't.

[GOPisEvil]

6. I didn't say not to punish him.

I think the 3 strikes law are reactionary and fail to render adequate justice. I think the 3 strikes laws should be amended to cases where the 3 crimes escalate or when there are violent crimes.

[Renew Deal]

2. They should have thrown away the key.

He knew it was his last chance and he blew it. Screw him.

[Champ]

7. The three strike rule should apply to violent criminals

I seriously doubt then when it was passed it was intended to put away non-violent criminals like him. The law was passed because of a kidnapping and murder of a little girl(i believe). It was intended to put away violent criminals for life after 3 crimes so they won't be free and do something like this. A $199 VCR player? Give me a break. It is cruel and unusual punishment which is against the constitution and I'm glad they overturned the ruling. There are worse criminals out on the street and many people who live in my city have been arrested countless times for theft.

[Nomad559]

8. kidnapping and murder of a little girl(i believe).

Incorrect, she was not kidnapped, she was shot when she tried to fight the guy that grabbed her purse, and she was the 18 year old daughter of Mike Reynolds.