Three-strikes laws are the most obvious and controversial use of selective incapacitation. In 2004, approximately 26 states and the U.S. federal court system had three-strikes laws. In most cases, three felonious convictions result in a mandatory life sentence with no possibility of parole. In the case of Lockyer v. Andrade, this was Andrade’s third strike in the state of California. Andrade was sentenced to 50 years with no possibility of parole. In your initial post, discuss the following:
Is this sentence disproportionate to the offense? Why or why not?
What evidence-based strategy or criminological theories would you use to address three-strikes laws and their application? (Review the Module Two resources on evidence-based strategies.)
Do you feel that three-strikes laws are cruel and unusual punishment? Does this affect negative public perception of the criminal justice system?
