California Gov. Gavin Newsom is facing criticism from current and former prosecutors after announcing plans to consider clemency for hundreds of inmates sentenced to death.
Newsom directed the California Board of Parole Hearings to conduct individualized investigations into whether the sentences of approximately 500 death-row prisoners should be commuted to life without parole.
The Democratic governor’s action does not immediately commute the sentences, and each inmate must undergo an individual review before Newsom decides whether to grant clemency.
However, prosecutors and victims’ advocates argue the initiative could ultimately eliminate nearly every remaining death sentence in California.
“The governor’s recent announcement that he intends to commute the death sentences of hundreds of California’s most heinous murderers is an appalling abuse of executive power and a slap in the face to victims, their families, and every Californian who believes in justice,” Riverside County District Attorney Michael Hestrin said.
Hestrin said California juries imposed the sentences after considering evidence and aggravating circumstances in individual cases.
“Those verdicts were not political,” Hestrin said. “They were the product of due process, careful deliberation, and the rule of law.”
Newsom has opposed capital punishment throughout his governorship.
He imposed a moratorium on executions in 2019 and ordered the closure of the execution chamber at San Quentin State Prison.
California has not executed an inmate since 2006.
Newsom subsequently began dismantling the state’s traditional death-row system by transferring condemned prisoners from San Quentin to other prisons.
His latest action potentially goes considerably further by converting death sentences into life imprisonment without the possibility of parole.
Newsom defended the initiative by arguing that capital punishment has been applied unfairly and has failed to improve public safety.
“California’s death penalty is broken beyond repair,” Newsom said while announcing the review.
The governor said the process would examine each case individually and would not result in automatic commutations.
Los Angeles County Deputy District Attorney John McKinney nevertheless criticized the move as disregarding decisions made by juries and judges.
“This isn’t about justice,” McKinney told Fox News Digital. “This is about one man imposing his personal ideology on an entire state.”
McKinney argued that victims’ relatives endured lengthy trials, appeals and decades of litigation with the understanding that death sentences would remain in effect.
Former Los Angeles County prosecutor Eric Siddall also questioned Newsom’s decision.
“Victims deserve a voice in this process,” Siddall said, arguing that families should be consulted before any sentence is changed.
California has the largest death-row population in the United States.
The condemned population includes prisoners convicted of some of the state’s most notorious murders, including serial killers, child murderers and perpetrators convicted of killing multiple victims.
Among them is Richard Allen Davis, convicted of kidnapping and murdering 12-year-old Polly Klaas in 1993.
Davis’ crime helped fuel support for California’s “three strikes” sentencing law and became one of the state’s most prominent capital cases.
Another condemned prisoner is Cary Stayner, who was convicted of murdering four women near Yosemite National Park in 1999.
Newsom cannot unilaterally commute every death sentence.
Under California’s Constitution, clemency for an inmate with two or more felony convictions requires approval from a majority of the California Supreme Court.
The governor has nevertheless steadily used his executive authority to move California away from capital punishment.
California voters rejected attempts to abolish the death penalty in both 2012 and 2016.
In 2016, voters instead approved Proposition 66, which was intended to accelerate the appeals process in capital cases.
Newsom said when announcing his 2019 moratorium that he could not participate in executions he considered immoral and ineffective, despite the fact that juries and courts came to their decisions based on evidence.
His administration now argues the latest clemency review is consistent with that longstanding position.
Prosecutors opposing the initiative say the debate is also about whether a governor should effectively override sentences imposed by juries under laws approved by California voters.
This article may contain commentary which reflects the author’s opinion.
