Several top Central Valley prosecutors have a new tool to help bring habitual thieves and drug users to justice. Proposition 36 passed overwhelmingly by state voters last year at 68%. In Fresno County alone, 75% of voters approved.

Early numbers show a slow but steady implementation.

The law gave prosecutors more tools to file felony theft charges for suspects with two prior theft-related convictions, even if the items stolen were less than the previous $950 threshold. It also mandates stricter punishment for felony drug possession for those with prior convictions, but it does allow mandatory treatment.

In a survey by the California Judicial Council, Smittcamp filed 16 Prop 36 theft cases and six drug cases through mid-February. The law took effect Dec. 18.

Data crunched by the San Francisco Chronicle shows Fresno ranking low among other counties. But Fresno County District Attorney Lisa Smittcamp has filed considerably more cases since then. The updated totals are 114 theft filings and 22 drug cases.

“It was a little bit of a slow roll with the education process and establishing new protocols. But, yeah, it’s definitely going in the right direction,” Smittcamp, one of Prop 36’s most ardent supporters, said.

Smittcamp said the transition has not been “as expeditious as I would have hoped,” but law enforcement is on the same page.

She expects the numbers to increase over the next year.

“We’re seeing shopkeepers and corporations who have retail stores that are reinvigorated now that there’s actually some teeth in the law. And I think we’re going to see an increase in reporting,” Smittcamp said.

A Theory on Low Drug Filings

Even with the new numbers, Fresno County would rank 35th — based on cases per 100,000 residents.

Smittcamp has a theory — Fresno County maintained its drug court even when Proposition 47 took effect in 2014. That proposition lowered certain criminal thresholds, leading the Prop 36 movement to reverse some effects. Many counties, she said, stopped prosecuting misdemeanor drug cases and offering treatment options.

“We had a lot of people that would go through the system and get their cases dismissed that didn’t result in conviction, because they abided by the drug court,” Smittcamp said.

Tulare County: ‘A Resounding Success’

Tulare County ranks at the top among the Central Valley counties in early Prop 36 implementation, and ranks highly statewide — sixth for theft filings, and 17th for drug filings.

District Attorney Tim Ward helped craft Prop 36 and is a former president of the California District Attorneys Association.

“It is showing to be a resounding success, not only just on the numbers, but talking to business owners and then also … looking at the individual results,” Ward said.

“We’re ahead of Fresno, which I find interesting,” Ward said.

Ward said the drug filings are effective, helping people into treatment. In updated numbers he provided, of the 69 drug filings, 30 pleaded guilty and 13 of those sought help.

“Those are 13 people that I say to you would not have been receiving rehabilitation for their drug addiction had Prop 36 not been passed. Based on that alone, it’s a success,” Ward said.

“The intent behind 36 when we wrote it was to have accountability, but compassionate treatment for drug addicted people that were basically dying on our sidewalks,” Ward said.

His office filed 72 theft cases through March 21, achieving 25 guilty pleas, with nine of those referred to drug treatment.

District Attorneys Working with Law Enforcement

Initially, Merced County listed no filings for drug cases, even though District Attorney Nicole Silveira supported Prop 36. Updated numbers show four filings through April 19.

“Our system didn’t show that law enforcement had referred any cases,” Silveira said.

“I do plan to address that with our law enforcement partners and kind of see, are we missing something here?” Silveira said.

Silveira praised area law enforcement and has provided Prop 36 training.

Merced initially ranked 18th for theft filings, with 5.0 per 100,000 residents. Silveira said they have added 10 more filings, now at 24, since the reporting period.

Madera County DA Sally Moreno experienced similar issues. Madera County filed 28 drug cases, ranking 10th statewide, and two theft cases, ranking 35th (through mid-February).

In updated raw numbers provided Tuesday, Madera County filed 39 drug and six theft cases.

“If they’ve been an officer for less than eight years, they’re not used to reading rap sheets, because in the last eight years these priors haven’t mattered. So we’re in the process of teaching them,” Moreno said.

“Otherwise, they go out to citation, just like another misdemeanor crime, and then it doesn’t come to us for some time,” Moreno said. “If we have to wait until they’re cited out and then it gets to our office, now it’s very hard for us to find these people.”

Prop 36 helped Moreno’s office to focus on filing drug crimes, which she called a “nothing crime” for a long time.

“I think every office wasn’t terribly concerned about convictions. So oftentimes as part of a plea agreement, if we got you for the vandalism or theft for ripping copper wire out of a well, we would dismiss the (drug charges), which means no conviction,” Moreno said.

Now, filing drug charges “matter again,” she said.

Regarding the low theft filing numbers, Moreno said simply, “Madera doesn’t have a ton of retail.”

Most of Madera County shoppers head to north Fresno.

“We don’t have a Lululemon. We don’t even have a Target in Madera. Retail theft was never a huge problem for us,” Moreno said.

Smittcamp said it can be a difficult process for law enforcement in the field to connect with dispatchers checking on prior convictions.

“It’s not only as a system change for everybody in the DA’s office, the court, the police departments, and the sheriff, but it’s also just a re-education of the officers and the deputies on the street,” Smittcamp said.

Ward, Tulare County’s DA, said they will review every case referred to them to see if they are eligible for Prop 36 filings.

“I find it disappointing that law enforcement doesn’t avail themselves of the aspect of the law that we wrote in, that an individual is not automatically released, which is exactly what the community was in an uproar about,” he said.