🎙️ Voice is AI-generated. Inconsistencies may occur.
The California Supreme Court unanimously ruled on Monday that violent felons cannot be considered for early release even if their primary offense was considered to be a nonviolent one.
The court determined that corrections officials that have drafted regulations that "exclude from nonviolent offender early parole consideration any inmate who 'is currently serving a term of incarceration for a 'violent felony'" were correct in doing so.
The case that the court ruled on stemmed from an attempt to expand on an initiative approved by voters in 2016 that allowed for inmates to apply for early parole in an effort to reduce the prison population. Then-Governor Jerry Brown and other backers of the initiative said it was intended only for nonviolent offenders and sex offenders would also be excluded.
Under the court's ruling, incarcerated people with sentences that combine violent and nonviolent felonies are considered violent felons. Despite this, the justices also sided with the corrections department's claim that "the ballot materials reveal that the voters intended to exclude any inmate currently serving a term for a violent felony from early parole consideration, regardless of whether such an inmate has also been convicted of a nonviolent felony."
The case of 44-year-old Mohammad Mohammad was used as a basis for the court action. He pleaded no contest in 2012 to nine counts of second-degree robbery and six counts of receiving stolen property in a combination of both violent and non-violent offenses. The judge in the case ruled that one of the property crimes would be considered as the primary offense in the case, with the sentences for the other crimes running consecutively, and sentenced Mohammad to a total of 29 years.
As a result of his 29-year prison sentence and because his primary offense was considered nonviolent, Mohammad argued that Proposition 57 allowed him to apply for release after three years in prison, as the initiative allows many inmates to seek lesser sentences. An appeals court initially agreed with Mohammad's argument.
As a result of the ruling, Mohammad's attorney might file an appeal based on unresolved questions.
"They left open the possibility that Mr. Mohammad and other folks with mixed offenses might become eligible for early parole after they serve the violent felony portions of their terms,"said attorney Heather MacKay.
The broadest interpretation of the lower court's finding to the contrary would have required earlier release consideration for the vast majority of inmates, the department argued, since most are serving time for both violent and nonviolent felonies.
"Nobody thought this provision would apply to anyone with a violent conviction. And to take an extremely literal view of the (ballot) language and apply it in a way that nobody on either side thought it was going to be applied would be absurd," said Kent Scheidegger, legal director of the Criminal Justice Legal Foundation that filed a friend of the court brief opposing such a broad interpretation.
The Supreme Court's decision overturned one appeals court ruling that would have invalidated the corrections department's regulation that excluded inmates serving time for any violent crime, even it is not their primary offense.
The Supreme Court's ruling upheld four other appellate rulings that supported the department's regulation.
California's legal definition of violent crimes is narrow, applying to about two-dozen of the most serious crimes including murder, voluntary manslaughter, attempted murder, kidnapping, assaults, arson, robbery and extortion.
The justices' decision Monday contrasted with their previous decision that broadened parole consideration for sex offenders.
A year ago, they ruled that inmates who have been convicted of nonviolent sex crimes may be eligible for early parole consideration under the plain language of the same ballot measure.
"Here, by contrast, the ballot materials provide much stronger support for the Department's position," Chief Justice Tani Cantil-Sakauye explained in Monday's ruling.
The Associated Press contributed to this report.
