The prior record enabled his theft to be upgraded to a felony under the California penal code. I thought this was very odd and unusual, shouldn't three strike law be stricter on serious and violent offender rather than petty theft crimes? In other case, Gary Ewing was sentenced for the admittedly more serious theft of $1,197 worth of golf clubs from a pro shop. Because he had four previous convictions for serious or violent felonies, he was sentence upon conviction in the golf club theft to life imprisonment (Post Gazette). This case make more sense than the first case I had mention because Gary Ewing had committed some serious offense so it's ok to put him away but for Mr. Andrade to be put away for life because of petty theft, I think the three strike law kind of went out of hand with that case.
Violent felonies within the meaning of the California three strike law are murder or voluntary manslaughter, mayhem, rape and sodomy by force, duress, menace, or fear of immediate and unlawful bodily injury on the victim or another person (California Criminal Law). Any of these offenses can also be a serious offenses can be considered as a strike once committed. You can also get a strike for any robbery in an inhabited dwelling house, floating home, trailer coach, and building with a deadly or dangerous weapon. Juvenile (as a strike) within the meaning of welfare and institution code are: Murder, arson of an inhabited building, robbery with a deadly weapon, rape with force or violent or threat of great bodily harm, sodomy by force. Juvenile will be punishing the same as adult if they were to committed anyone of these offenses. Age is not an issue when it comes to the three strikes law. Everyone shall be punished the same if they"re committed three time serious offense.
Since three strikes law had made sentences longer on people that mean that more people will stay in jail longer, which will make prison overcrowded.
