Abstract
Abstract “Three strikes laws,” which are based on habitual offender laws passed in the 1920s and 1930s, were adopted by many states and the federal government in the 1990s and mandate significant enhancements to the sentences of offenders with prior convictions who are then convicted of a new crime. Despite promises by proponents that the laws would reduce levels of serious crime, little empirical evidence exists that three strikes laws have had any measurable impact. In fact, some evidence indicates the laws actually worked in the opposite direction and increased some crimes, including murder.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
