California Proposition 8, Changes to Criminal Proceedings Initiative (June 1982)
| California Proposition 8 | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
| Election date |
|
| Topic Civil and criminal trials |
|
| Status |
|
| Type Combined initiated constitutional amendment and state statute |
|
California Proposition 8 was on the ballot as a combined initiated constitutional amendment and state statute in California on June 8, 1982. It was approved.
A “yes” vote supported requiring restitution, establishing a right to safe schools, allowing certain evidence to be admitted, giving the courts discretion about when to establish bail, allowing the increase of prison terms, prohibiting the use of the diminished capacity and insanity defenses, and allowing victim statements during parole hearings. |
A “no” vote opposed requiring restitution, establishing a right to safe schools, allowing certain evidence to be admitted, giving the courts discretion about when to establish bail, allowing the increase of prison terms, prohibiting the use of the diminished capacity and insanity defenses, and allowing victim statements during parole hearings. |
Election results
|
California Proposition 8 |
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Result | Votes | Percentage | ||
|
|
2,826,081 | 56.42% | ||
| No | 2,182,710 | 43.58% | ||
Text of measure
Ballot title
The ballot title for Proposition 8 was as follows:
| “ | Criminal Justice | ” |
Ballot summary
The ballot summary for this measure was:
| “ | CRIMINAL JUSTICE. INITIATIVE STATUTES AND CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT. Amends Constitution and enacts several statutes concerning procedural treatment, sentencing, release, and other matters for accused and convicted persons. Includes provisions regarding restitution to victims from persons convicted of crimes, right to safe schools, exclusion of relevant evidence, bail, use of prior felony convictions for impeachment purposes or sentence enhancement, abolishing defense of diminished capacity, use of evidence regarding mental disorder, proof of insanity, notification and appearance of victims at sentencing and parole hearings, restricting plea bargaining, Youth Authority commitments, and other matters. Summary of Legislative Analyst's estimate of net state and local government fiscal impact: As the fiscal effect would depend on many factors that cannot be predicted, the net fiscal effect of this measure cannot be determined with any degree of certainty. However, approval of the measure would result in major state and local costs. The measure could: increase local administration costs; increase state administrative costs; increase claims against the state and local governments relating to enforcement of the right to safe schools; increase school security costs to provide safe schools; increase the cost of operating county jails by increasing the jail populations; increase court costs; and increase the cost of operating the state's prison system by increasing the prison population (estimated to be about $47 million increased annual prison operating costs and $280 million prison construction costs based on various assumptions). | ” |
Full Text
The full text of this measure is available here.
Path to the ballot
In California, the number of signatures required for a combined initiated constitutional amendment and state statute is equal to 8 percent of the votes cast at the preceding gubernatorial election. For initiated amendments filed in 1982, at least 553,790 valid signatures were required.
See also
External links
Footnotes
 |
State of California Sacramento (capital) |
|---|---|
| Elections |
What's on my ballot? | Elections in 2024 | How to vote | How to run for office | Ballot measures |
| Government |
Who represents me? | U.S. President | U.S. Congress | Federal courts | State executives | State legislature | State and local courts | Counties | Cities | School districts | Public policy |
