CA: Lawsuit Challenges New Prop. 57 Regulations

A lawsuit has been filed challenging new regulations issued by the CA Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) that implement Proposition 57. The lawsuit was filed in Sacramento Superior Court on June 25.

“In its new regulations, CDCR repeated its original mistake of excluding everyone convicted of a sex offense from the benefits of Proposition 57,” stated ACSOL Executive Director Janice Bellucci. “As recognized by the Court in our first lawsuit, the agency lacks authority to change the public’s decision to provide the benefits of Proposition 57 to everyone convicted of a non-violent felony.”

The first lawsuit was filed in the same court on April 27, 2017. The Court ruled in favor of the plaintiffs on March 5, 2018, and granted plaintiffs’ request for a writ of mandate which required CDCR to modify its original regulations. CDCR subsequently filed a notice of appeal in that case on May 4, 2018.

“We will continue our efforts to protect the rights of individuals convicted of a sex offense who are currently incarcerated,” stated ACSOL President Chance Oberstein. “We cannot and will not allow CDCR to defeat the will of the people.”

Related posts

Notify of
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.  

Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

GLAD Janice is in our corner! SO’s would be so disadvantaged in society without her team. Society and Law Enforcement hate us. I just annually SO registered..and the officer taking my picture said I did NOT register last year. I debated her that I had, but could not recall the officer’s name whom I trusted my info with. Following a review of my file, she said there was NO record…but that she would update it today so I would not be in trouble. Moral: DO NOT TRUST POLICE, THEY DESPISE S.O.’S and prefer to initiate hardships.

Thank you, Janice and team! For always standing up for our citizens on the registry.

Does this mean CDCR can just keep playing this cat and mouse game for eternity?

Hi. Thanks for your valuable work.
Can you provide the case number for this latest suit? I have a loved one who of incarcerated and would like to be able to track and/or obtain a copy of what you submitted. Thanks again!

What does this mean for SO that are currently incarcerate? Are the credits granted under prop 57 still being granted?

There is an article, or more of an opinion piece, on this issue over at, a far right site.

Judge’s Ruling May Give Roughly 10,000 Sex Offenders Early Parole

Since CDCR announced on KTVU that they are not going to challenge the CA Court of Appeals ruling in In re Edwards wouldn’t that make our current suit moot? After all they’re admitting that under Prop. 57 all nonviolent offenders including 3rd strikers are entitled to the nonviolent parole process. And the court ruled they can’t exclude former see offenders will this finally get our loved ones out?