This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.
Subscribe to the Daily Journal for access to Daily Appellate Reports, Verdicts, Judicial Profiles and more...

Criminal,
9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals

Nov. 17, 2001

Behind Bars

On Nov. 2, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, for the first time, invalidated a sentence under California's three-strikes law as cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the Eighth Amendment. Andrade v. Attorney General of the State of California , 2001 U.S.App.LEXIS 23720 (9th Cir. Nov. 2, 2001). The court ruled that it was "grossly excessive" to sentence a man to 50 years to life in prison for stealing $153 worth of videotapes.

Erwin Chemerinsky

Dean and Jesse H. Choper Distinguished Professor of Law, UC Berkeley School of Law

Erwin's most recent book is "Worse Than Nothing: The Dangerous Fallacy of Originalism." He is also the author of "Closing the Courthouse," (Yale University Press 2017).

        By Erwin Chemerinsky
        
        On Nov. 2, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, for the first time, invalidated a sentence under California's three-strikes law as cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the Eighth Amendment. Andrade v. Attorney General of the State of California, 2001 U.S.App.LEXIS 23720 (9th Cir. No...

To continue reading, please subscribe.

Already a subscriber?

Or access this article for $45
(Purchase provides 7-day access to this article. Printing, posting or downloading is not allowed.)