originally published at: http://www.pressdemocrat.com/article/20100122/ARTICLES/100129758/0/LIFESTYLE
Thousands of inmates to get early release
By GLENDA ANDERSON
and JULIE JOHNSON’THE PRESS DEMOCRAT
Published: Friday, January 22, 2010 at 8:12 p.m.
Thousands of non-violent California prison and jail inmates become eligible Monday to have their sentences reduced substantially by getting greater credit for time served time.
Generally, qualifying inmates will half their sentences, and in some cases less, instead of the current two-thirds.
But wholesale inmate releases are not likely, in part because of confusion about how the new state law should be applied.
Mendocino County is taking an aggressive approach, announcing that on Monday it will release nearly 10 percent of its jail population — 23 inmates.
But Sonoma County has elected not to apply credits retroactively. Thus, none of the 800 inmates that qualify will get immediate release.
And in Santa Clara County, jail officials have decided that the new standards will not apply to anyone who currently is serving time.
Statewide, an estimated 5,000 non-violent inmates are expected to eventually be granted new credits for time served.
“The law is less than clear,” said Nick Warner, legislative director for the California State Sheriffs’ Association.
“We absolutely oppose it,” Warner said. “It puts sentenced inmates back on the street earlier than they should be.”
“Statistics tell you 70 percent of all incarcerated inmates will re-offend. That’s why we’re doing everything we can to keep offenders locked up,” he said.
The association also opposes the early release of an additional 40,000 inmates under an early release proposal that is being challenged in court.
The Mendocino County inmates to be freed Monday are being released under a section that increases the amount of time non-violent inmates can earn for time served with good behavior. They’ll be able to cut their time in half under the new law where formerly they could reduce it by one third.
Inmates who have ever been convicted of a violent crime or sex offense are not eligible, said Mendocino County Sheriff Tom Allman.
The new law, part of Senate Bill x3-18, also provides for additional credit for inmates who complete rehabilitative programs, work, and undergo employment training. It also reduces oversight of non-violent parolees.
Allman said he’s applying the law retroactively in order to ensure inmates’ Constitutional right to equal protection under the law.
Inmates in Sonoma County will get one day’s credit for each day served starting Monday. Credit for time they’ve served prior to Monday will be calculated with the previous standards: two days of credit for every six days served.
This “bifurcated formula” may create complications for jail staff, officials said, but a team from the sheriff’s, probation, district attorney’s and public defender’s offices decided that’s what legislators intended.
“It’s our interpretation. We think we’re accurate,” said Assistant District Attorney Diana Gomez.
Halving sentences for nonviolent inmates could save the state about $42 million, according to a report released by Senate President pro Tempore Darrel Steinberg, D-Sacramento, released when the legislation was passed in September.
But critics such as Sonoma County Assistant Sheriff Linda Suvoy said those savings may turn into higher costs for local law enforcement agencies because they expect county jail populations to increase as a result.
“The concern of sheriffs is that it’s going to push what’s going on at the state level to local levels … at a time when there are dwindling resources,” Suvoy said.
Jail populations in Sonoma County have decreased about eight percent — to about 1,000 inmates — over the past two years due in part to new jail alternatives programs, Suvoy said.
“Fortunately we’re ahead of the game,” Suvoy said. “Had we not done that, we wouldn’t have room.”
Marin County officials will also will give fifty-percent time-served credit starting Monday to those inmates who qualify, said Jail Commander Lt. Tricia Seyler.
“We’ve all been waiting for a legal opinion from the Attorney General’s office and as far as I know we haven’t,” Seyler said. “We didn’t want to wait any longer.”