Originally enacted in 1994 to impose increasingly severe penalties on repeat felony offenders, California’s three-strikes law is one of the state’s most consequential sentencing laws. However, it has also led to decades of controversy over lengthy prison sentences, fairness and the effectiveness of mandatory sentencing enhancements for people who commit crimes.

Though California voters approved significant reforms in 2012, the three-strikes law continues to have life-changing implications for defendants with prior convictions. If you stand accused of felony charges, you should know how previous offenses may affect your sentence and what legal defenses are available to you.

How Does California’s Three-Strikes Law Work?

The consequences generally depend on the number of qualifying prior convictions and the nature of the new offense. Some circumstances can trigger third-strike life sentencing even when the new felony is not serious or violent. Because the penalties can be so harsh, accurately identifying and evaluating prior convictions is a cornerstone of most criminal defense strategies.

• First strike: A conviction for a qualifying serious or violent felony can count as a strike and affect sentencing if you are convicted of another felony in the future.
• Second strike: If you have one qualifying prior strike and commit another felony, it will generally double the prison sentence for that offense.
• Third strike: If you have two or more qualifying prior strikes and are convicted of another serious or violent felony, you may receive a sentence of 25 years to life, subject to statutory requirements and exceptions.

Controversies Surrounding the Three-Strikes Law

Proponents of this law argue that enhanced sentences protect public safety by keeping repeat offenders incarcerated. They also believe the prospect of a substantially longer prison term can discourage people from committing additional crimes. On the other hand, critics have raised concerns about proportionality, prison overcrowding and the financial and social costs of lengthy imprisonment.

Under the original version of California’s three-strikes law, some defendants received life sentences after committing relatively minor third felonies because they had qualifying convictions on their record. The resulting sentences sometimes appeared disproportionate to the latest offense, prompting questions about whether the law accomplished its intended purpose. These concerns eventually led California voters to reconsider how the three-strikes law should apply.

How Proposition 36 Changed the Law

In November 2012, California voters approved Proposition 36, also known as the Three-Strikes Reform Act. These reforms intended to make sentencing more proportional while preserving enhanced penalties for defendants. Though the law is less sweeping than it initially was, it still gives prosecutors substantial leverage in cases involving defendants with qualifying prior convictions.

One of the most significant changes was that a third felony conviction generally must be serious or violent to trigger the traditional third-strike life sentence. However, exceptions remain for certain offenses and prior convictions. Proposition 36 also established a process through which some people already serving life sentences under the previous law could petition for resentencing.

What Is a Romero Motion to Dismiss Prior Strike Conviction?

If you commit a felony that qualifies as a strike and you already have two strikes on your record, California law allows judges to dismiss prior allegations. A Romero motion is a legal tool California criminal defense attorneys can use to help their clients avoid harsh penalties. When executed successfully, it can lead to a lighter sentence.

When evaluating whether to dismiss a strike, a judge may consider the nature of the current offense, your previous convictions and relevant aspects of your background, character and prospects. However, obtaining this relief is not automatic. A persuasive motion requires careful legal analysis and a compelling explanation of why your case falls outside the intended scope of the three-strikes sentencing structure.

The Value of Experienced Legal Representation

Even if you have previous felony convictions, you retain your constitutional right to seek representation from an attorney. Sal Ciulla has decades of experience handling serious criminal cases and has successfully defended many clients facing life sentences due to prior strikes on their records, leading to dismissal in over 95% of those cases. He understands the complexities of serious felony cases and the importance of developing a defense strategy that accounts for the immediate allegations and long-term consequences of a conviction.

He’ll carefully review your criminal history, determine whether previous convictions legally qualify as strikes, challenge the prosecution’s evidence and identify opportunities to seek reduced charges or sentencing relief. Contact the Law Firm of Salvatore Ciulla to schedule a confidential consultation.