WOODLAND, Calif. — An arraignment held March 23, 2026, in Judge David W. Reed’s Yolo County courtroom highlighted the modern-day, arguably race-driven implications of California’s 1994 “three strikes” law.
The accused was present in custody, facing two new charges — a misdemeanor charge of possession of drug paraphernalia and a felony charge of possession of a controlled substance.
With possession of a controlled substance otherwise considered a misdemeanor in California, the accused’s two prior convictions constitute the third as a felony under the notorious “three strikes” law, revised into Proposition 36 in 2012.
Proposition 36 is an extension of what was originally coined the “three strikes” law in 1994, a law immediately assigning a 25-year-to-life sentence for individuals with two prior felony convictions, regardless of the severity of the third alleged offense.
The initial law was passed to “deal with violent repeat offenders,” as quoted by the United States Department of Justice. Proposition 36 claims to act as a reformative modification of this law, aiming to “reduce prison sentences served under the three strikes law by certain third strikers whose current offenses are nonserious, non-violent felonies,” according to the California Legislative Analyst’s Office (LAO).
Though the three-strikes law is meant to target violent and serious criminals, the accused in question is an elderly male, struggling to stand up out of his wheelchair to face the judge, whose two prior strikes occurred more than 40 years ago in the midst of a drug-focused era of mass incarceration and police surveillance of Black and brown individuals.
The court-appointed public defender requested the accused be granted an operational release, or release on his own recognizance.
An operational release is exactly what it sounds like, allowing for conditions to be placed upon the accused, including but not limited to GPS tracking by ankle monitor, routine chemical drug and alcohol testing, and required meetings with an appointed probation officer.
Nonetheless, the Yolo County Deputy District Attorney objected to the request on the grounds that the accused was, essentially, “a flight risk and a danger to society,” having failed to appear in court twice in the last three years.
Other comments by the DDA and court-appointed public defender remain limited, with zero mention by either party of the accused’s physical ailment, nor any form of potentially necessary substance abuse treatment for the accused, especially considering the alleged offense was not specified as “with intent to distribute.”
The racial disparities underlying the three-strikes law are summarized by the Prison Policy Initiative, reporting that “African Americans make up 6.5% of the population [in California], but they make up nearly 30% of the prison population, 36% of second strikers, and 45% of third strikers.”
Despite all else, the wheelchair-bound “flight risk and danger to society” remains in custody, demonstrating the modern-day implications of an outdated, racially driven law.
Follow the Vanguard on Social Media – X, Instagram and Facebook. Subscribe the Vanguard News letters. To make a tax-deductible donation, please visit davisvanguard.org/donate or give directly through ActBlue. Your support will ensure that the vital work of the Vanguard continues.
