As resident of that neck of the woods (actually just moved to a place over the county line from Contra Costa), this seems reasonable. Not the idea of publicly saying you’re not going to prosecute ANYONE for a big list of crimes, thats complete BS, and asking for a crimewave.
But if you ARE going to draw a line and say “Anything worse than this gets prosecuted”, putting firearms offences on the “will prosecute” side of that line seem eminently sensible.
Presumably though the title-line the OP is incorrect, and its pretty hard to mug someone without committing a felony.
Assault, theft, and burglary are no longer accepted as crimes to be prosecuted, griffin. That seems like mugging to me. Long as you used your fists, it’s legal!
I think that’s a bit of sloppy reporting. He says, misdemeanors such as. . . and then lists two ambiguous categories (there are some kinds of misdemeanor assault and theft and some felonious kinds) and one felony (Burglary is a felony). And mugging isn’t a simple assault or theft (which are misdemeanors).
As a resident of Contra Costa County, this is kind of disturbing. I agree with the other posters that think it might be part of some kind of bluff. In any case, though, it’s just asking for problems.
That being said, not all misdemeanors are off limits.
I’m pretty sure at that point it would cross the line from theft to “demanding with menaces” or some such felony, irregardless of whether a firearm is used or not.
Additionally it has to be a pretty minor assault/battery offense to get away just a misdemeanor. “beating the heck” out of someone would clearly cross the line into a serious felony conviction.
The article itself is unbelievable. I cannot believe they would pull something like this, and STRONGLY suspect there reason they are announcing it publicly in this way (and in the process putting all the counties residents at risk) is nothing to do with keeping the public informed, and everything to do with jockeying for position politically.
That said the spin the OP is putting on it is also pretty unbelievable (and blatantly factually incorrect). Putting gun crimes on the “will prosecute” misdemeanor list rather than the “won’t prosecute” misdemeanor list seems eminently sensible to me.
There are several misdemeanors in California that involve firearms that should fall below assaults and petty theft. Most commonly it would be possession without a permit, but could even include brandishing.
As someone who drives through Contra Costa county every day I’d rather someone was prosecuted for brandishing a firearm than petty theft.
Of course I’d rather BOTH things were prosecuted (and even if they’re not I’d rather the criminals didn’t know precisely what they could and could not get prosecuted for).
Wow. And as a long-term resident of Contra Costa who’s graduating law school next year, I was hoping to look into a job with the CCC DA. Guess that’s right out!
I can understand not prosecuting minor non-violent drug crimes, but putting things like theft and assault on the board seems to be a mistake. I know California is hurting for money though, so maybe this is a ploy of some sort.
This article had an actual PDF scan of the letter which was sent out to the police, listing which crimes will no longer be prosecuted. Most of the crimes are listed by statutory number, so I did a quick look over and translated it into english:
-11550: use of a controlled substance
647(f): public intoxication
14601: driving with a suspended license
20002: duty to pull over and give/leave information when in a car accident causing only property damage
23103: reckless driving
594: vandalism
484: theft
487: grand theft
503: embezzlement
459: burglary
470: forgery
plus the ones listed by name (misdemeanor drug crimes, simple assault and battery, trespassing, loitering)
Some of the above CAN be felonies, I’m not sure where the line in each case is though. Someone with more familiarity with the California code is more than welcome to help out.