Los Angeles Superior Court Judge James Chalfant made it clear in granting a preliminary injunction against District Attorney George Gascon's controversial directives on "three strikes law" and "special circumstances" - they are not legal.
“It's a victory for us this opinion by the court,” said Michele Hanisee, president of the Los Angeles Association of Deputy District Attorneys (LAADDA), which filed a lawsuit against Gascon. “The judge uses the word unlawful multiple times.”
As previously reported, the LAADDA challenged Gascon and the LA County District Attorney’s Office in state court, alleging Gascon’s new directives conflicted with state law.
Among Gascon’s reforms that the LAADDA challenged in their lawsuit was the three strikes law and a provision ordering prosecutors to dismiss special circumstances that have been found or admitted as true by a court or jury.
As a result of Chalfant's ruling, three strikes prior will continue to be filed in new cases and will not be dismissed in pending cases.
“It allows our members to comply with the law and it also allows them to obey their duty of candor to the court and not misrepresent case law to the court,” Hanisee told the Southern California Record. “The court sided with us that these directives are illegal.”
“Dismissing special circumstances changes the maximum sentence from death or life without parole to 25 years to life in prison. Most of the time, we don't seek death.”
The three-strikes law curtails a repeat offender’s ability to receive anything but a life sentence.
“Gascon has to immediately remove the prohibition against filing strikes, nor can he require deputies to dismiss strikes that are already filed nor can he require them to read the statement in special directive 28.1 to the trial court without also allowing the deputy district attorney to inform the judge that the motion is contrary to existing case law and to inform the court of existing case law that contradicts that,” Hanisee said.
Although Gascon vowed to appeal Chalfant’s decision, he also issued new directives that comply with the preliminary injunction while the issue is being litigated, according to media reports.
Hanisee said the association is not opposed to Gascon’s reforms but rather the "undemocratic" process in which he brought them about.
“Laws are passed either by our legislators who are elected by the voters or directly by the voters through the initiative process, such as the strikes law which was enacted through the initiative process by voters in a statewide election,” she said. “It's a violation of the second separation of powers doctrine for an elected official to decide which laws to follow and not to follow. It is the job of our legislature and our citizens to decide what the laws will be.”