ACSOL’s Conference Calls

Conference Call Recordings Online
Dial-in number: 1-712-770-8055, Conference Code: 983459

Monthly Meetings | Recordings (7/10 Recording Uploaded)
Emotional Support Group Meetings

Click here to sign up now for ACSOL’s Online EPIC Conference: Empowered People Inspiring Change Sept 17-18
Download a PDF of the schedule


CA: New CDCR Regulations Deny Prop. 57 Benefits to Registrants

[ACSOL 5/4/18]

The California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) has issued new regulations that continue to deny the benefits of Proposition 57 to registrants. The new regulations are dated May 1, but were not publicly available until today.

“The new CDCR regulations are inconsistent with a court order issued earlier this year,” stated ACSOL Executive Director Janice Bellucci. “The court in that case clearly ruled that CDCR cannot exclude all registrants from the benefits of Proposition 57.”

In its newly issued regulations, CDCR specifically prohibits “inmates convicted of a sexual offense that currently require, or will require, registration as a sex offender” from the benefits of Prop. 57 including early consideration for parole. CDCR states that public safety is the reason for this prohibition, however the court’s order stated that CDCR’s prior regulations, which included the same prohibition, are “not necessary to public safety”.

The court order also determined earlier this year that CDCR’s regulations did not reflect the voters’ directive when they passed Prop. 57 because the proposition did not exclude registrants from its benefits. Further, the court stated that CDCR based its exclusion of registrants based “on recidivism rates” instead of upon the language of the ballot proposition.

“Because CDCR has chosen to defy a court’s order as well as the Constitution, a new lawsuit is necessary in order to protect the rights of registrants and their families,” stated Bellucci.

CA Proposition 57 – Order – Final – March 2018

CA Proposition 57 – Regulations – May 2018

We welcome a lively discussion with all view points - keeping in mind...  
    1. Your submission will be reviewed by one of our volunteer moderators. Moderating decisions may be subjective.
    2. Please keep the tone of your comment civil and courteous. This is a public forum.
    3. Swear words should be starred out such as f*k and s*t
    4. Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
    5. Please refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
    6. Please take personal conversations off this forum.
    7. We will not publish any comments advocating for violent or any illegal action.
    8. We cannot connect participants privately - feel free to leave your contact info here. You may want to create a new / free, readily available email address.
    9. Please refrain from copying and pasting repetitive and lengthy amounts of text.
    10. Please do not post in all Caps.
    11. If you wish to link to a serious and relevant media article, legitimate advocacy group or other pertinent web site / document, please provide the full link. No abbreviated / obfuscated links.
    12. We suggest to compose lengthy comments in a desktop text editor and copy and paste them into the comment form
    13. We will not publish any posts containing any names not mentioned in the original article.
    14. Please choose a short user name that does not contain links to other web sites or identify real people
    15. Please do not solicit funds
    16. If you use any abbreviation such as Failure To Register (FTR), or any others, the first time you use it please expand it for new people to better understand.
    17. All commenters are required to provide a real email address where we can contact them.  It will not be displayed on the site.
    18. Please send any input regarding moderation or other website issues via email to moderator [at] all4consolaws [dot] org
ACSOL, including but not limited to its board members and agents, does not provide legal advice on this website.  In addition, ACSOL warns that those who provide comments on this website may or may not be legal professionals on whose advice one can reasonably rely.  
Notify of
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Let’s get em J!! Looks to me like CDCR beleives they can do what they want when they want. I don’t mind showing them different. Looks like the only problem with recidivism in this case is with the CDCR!!

CDCR: “Your honor, we apologize. Apparently, there was a misunderstanding – on your part. It is, indeed, recidivism rates that concern us. With those individuals convicted of other sorts of crimes, there is a good chance of them coming back into our prisons and, thereby, bringing us more government dollars to finance their stays and line our CDCR pockets. But with these registrants, their recidivism rates are much too low. We can’t count on them coming back into the system. So when they initially come into the system, we need to make certain that we keep them as long as possible in order reap every possible government dollar. It’s as simple as that, your Honor.”


This just further proves that CDCR will do *anything* to prop its lies. CDCR is perhaps the most corrupt of government institutions.


Yes, Janice, please take them back to court and make them obey the laws of this state.

Thanks for your hard work

I hope Janet can rake in the CASH from this evil fake organization CDCR needs to be done away with overbloted 85% FAKE JOBS (PAROLE)!!! Yes you PAROLE IN SAN DIEGO !!!! All part of the evil machine ! To bad im not paying a RED Cent of my 12k restitution ! NO MONEY FROM ME !!!!

I can attest to the corruption in CDCR. In this case, I certainly hope that Janice is able to sue and recover tons of $$$ for her legal services. CDCR gets away with so much, it would be unbelievable to most. They *do* plant evidence (as I’ve seen it with my bare eyes); they do manufacture “statistics;” they are in cahoots with private industry that profit off the prison industrial system; and they are in conflict-of-interest in so many instances. CDCR never gets called out on the TONS of illegal and unconstitutional sh*t that they do.

Again, CDCR is absolutely corrupt. Most people would not believe (or choose to ignore) the blatant corruption that CDCR gets immunity from. Yuck.

Thank you Janice.

I was at a grocery store yesterday and the people with the petitions were in front convincing everyone that came by to sign them to get this made into law.

Concerning court ruling for my son, who is in for non-violent 2nd strike for burglary: the CDCR refuses to consider him for the Prop 57 early parole, due to having to register for a 290 offence. This missdeminer is over 20 years old (647.5 PC). My son needs help on what to do, because the CDCR has classified him as a violent offender. Is there any way someone from your office could contact him? If you would send me an e-mail at my address, I will send you his
contact information. Thank you.

Would love your thoughts, please comment.x