Dos cosas ocurren si pasa la lei.
(1) Encarcelados por crímenes nonviolentos - definido por el codigo penal - serán ahora serán elegibles para ganar créditos por buen comportamiento, logros educativos y rehabilitación, que pueden usarse para acortar su condena. El sistema de crédito ya existe, y la ley estatal ya limita cuánto se puede acortar una sentencia. La Proposición 57 requeriría que los reclusos cumplan su condena primaria completa - osea su condena principal de prisión, excluyendo cualquier condena a parte.
(2) Si un fiscal del condado decide que un menor debe ser juzgado en un tribunal para adultos, entonces un juez debe confirmarlo en un juicio separado. (En este momento, los fiscales del condado pueden enviar a un menor a un tribunal para adultos sin la aprobación de un juez).
Como puedes imaginar, los medios se enfocan en el (1) de esta proposición.
On one side, there's a US Supreme Court
mandate to California to reduce its prison population.
[..] California has already reduced its prison population by 50,000 since 2009 but is still over capacity by 50,000.
[11] This proposition would create a yet-to-be-defined system where inmates could
earn their way out of prison. Some say their release might be inevitable,
[6] so why not incentivize rehabilitiation?
Here's something vague: Because this new credit structure has yet to be written, Prop 57 might end up applying to
more than just non-violent offenders.
And you might assume that this will shorten inmates' terms. Not necessarily. Non-violent inmates would now have to serve their primary term in full, but this might actually
increase some prisoners' terms, if they've already been approved to serve 1/2 or 1/3 of their total sentence. But, it has not been worked out how these conflicts will be resolved.
More vagaries:
non-violent is not clearly defined. Rape of an unconscious person, taking hostages, and setting off a bomb with intent to injure are
not considered violent crimes, according to the
Penal Code 667.5(c). (In judicial parlance, there are three non's: non-violent, non-serious, and non-sexual.) There is no clear demarcation of what a non-violent crime is. In practice, criminals who've committed these more heinous acts are excluded from the credit system now, but it doesn't specify whether that would extend with Prop 64.
[4]Inherent in all this is the hotly debated question
"Is rehabilitation more effective than punishment?"