Monday, March 3, 2025

California toughens penalties for theft… and more changes are coming

Penalties for theft
Those convicted of theft or certain drug-related offenses and retail theft could already be facing harsher penalties under an initiative voters approved this year, Proposition 36, which amends and adds key changes to California law.

By Cayla Mihalovich. CalMatters via Bay City News.

Listen to this note:

 

Californians charged with certain drug and retail theft offenses could already be facing tougher penalties under an initiative voters approved this year, along with related bills signed into law by Gov. Gavin Newsom.

In November, voters overwhelmingly approved Proposition 36, which amends and adds key changes to California law.  

That includes allowing prosecutors to charge people convicted for a third time of various drug offenses with a so-called mandatory treatment felony, which would send them to substance abuse or mental health treatment instead of up to three years in jail or prison.

Under the new law, courts are also required to warn people convicted of selling or providing certain drugs, such as fentanyl, that they could face murder charges for later distributing illegal drugs that kill someone.

And petty theft and shoplifting offenses can also carry more serious consequences, including the possibility of up to three years in jail or prison if a person has already been convicted twice for certain theft offenses.

Several district attorneys and police departments announced this month arrests they planned to file under the new law, including in San Francisco, Solano and Shasta counties.

The measure partially reversed a different initiative that voters approved a decade ago, which reduced penalties for certain minor drug offenses and petty theft from felonies to misdemeanors. The initiative, Proposition 47, was aimed at developing new public safety strategies and reducing incarceration after the state’s prison population skyrocketed due to tough-on-crime policies dating back to the 1980s.

But prosecutors, law enforcement and major retailers who spoke in favor of Prop. 36 said those sentencing reforms went too far and created a revolving door for people to repeatedly commit crimes without being held accountable.

“It is a clear mandate from the public that we must take a new approach to public safety issues, specifically hard drugs, retail theft and fentanyl,” said Yolo County District Attorney Jeff Reisig.

Opponents of the measure warned it would worsen homelessness, drug abuse and crime by cutting funding for treatment programs and increasing court and prison costs by hundreds of millions of dollars.

Behavioral health experts across the state have expressed concern about the efficacy of a crime requiring mandatory treatment, given that most California counties lack the resources to provide the “mass treatment” promised by proponents of the measure.

“I think (the proponents) have also been given a mandate to put in place problem-solving measures and support services for people who are struggling,” said Cristine Soto DeBerry, executive director of the California Prosecutors Alliance, a nonprofit that opposed Proposition 36.

“I don’t think the mandate was to put more people in prison. That’s not what people thought they were voting for. I hope that the people with the discretion to enforce this law think very carefully about the communities they serve and what they were asking for at this time,” she said.

Gov. Gavin Newsom tried to keep Proposition 36 off the fall ballot and briefly considered putting an anti-crime measure before voters. Instead, he signed a package of 10 bills in August that will make it easier to prosecute vehicle and retail thefts. Those laws take effect Jan. 1.

Although Gov. Newsom did not spend money fighting Prop. 36, he referred to the initiative as an “unfunded mandate” that will take California back to the War on Drugs. In fact, the measure included no new funding sources. But supporters like Reisig expressed optimism that funding opportunities already exist in the law, pointing to a $6.4 billion mental health bond that voters approved in March.

“I hope legislators and the governor will embrace the mandate and work collaboratively to ensure we are successful in fulfilling the promise of Proposition 36,” Reisig said.

 

You may be interested in: “It has been an honor to be your mayor”: Joaquin Jimenez, at Half Moon Bay transition ceremony

Peninsula 360 Press
Peninsula 360 Presshttps://peninsula360press.com
Study of cross-cultural digital communication

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Stay connected

951FansLike
4,750FollowersFollow
607FollowersFollow
241SubscribersSubscribe

Latest articles

es_MX