|
In response to
"And...California passed Prop 57, which increases parole chances for "non-violent" felons....which can include rapists..."
by
IrishStephen
|
Looking at this issue, if it's not defined in the state constitution, it would be up to the courts to define what a non-violent crime is.
Posted by
Roger More (aka Rogermore)
Nov 9 '16, 04:53
|
and it's based on the crime - not the criminal or the specific criminal act.
I'd find it hard to swallow that the court would consider (for example) rape as a non-violent crime.
The other thing I'd add is that the legislature could always pass a bill that says something along the lines of "for the purposes of the constitution, the following offences under the criminal code are defined as violent: ..."
I'm not saying it was a well thought out / drafted prop - just that nothing is settled yet.
|