Move towards clearing records of cannabis crimes is no small feat

Of those serving time in California purely for marijuana offenses, 25% appear to be African-Americans, who represent only 6% of the population. In this backdrop, Los Angeles District Attorney Jackie Lacey has not only accepted Code for America's offer to enable the clearing of criminal records for tens of thousands of citizens with records of cannabis crimes back to 1961, she has brought these matters into court and obtained an order that is totally consistent with the special responsibilities of a prosecutor. See ABA Rule 3.8(h).

We applaud the initiative in harnessing the power of technology (generously gifted by Code for America) to winnow out tens of thousands of overlooked cases or formerly unreachable cases and to seek the destruction of such records in the tens of thousands. A hearty "it's about time" is truly in order.

The most striking thing is most beneficiaries of this action would never have been able to find access to such relief on their own. The societal costs of the status quo was an incredibly high one (no pun intended) in allowing tens of thousands to languish in the stigma and deleterious effects of drug arrests and convictions long ago suffered for generally normalized conduct. Juxtaposed against the tremendous benefits realized since Judge Sam Ohta's recent order sweeping these records clear, the cost of such action is virtually nil.

In showing a willingness to harness the power of computer science and facilitate ameliorative justice on a mass scale, Lacey has balanced the need to remedy with the cost of bringing such matters on a case by case basis. That is not only in the interests of justice, but judicial economy as well. Given the institutional resistance this sort of action typically encounters, the district attorney's move towards justice here is no small feat.

Records of conviction for the crime of marijuana possession seem to haunt people for decades or more. State law has long required such records to be purged no later than two years after the date of conviction. Penal Code Section 11361.5 has mandated this since 1976. The Legislative intent of Section 11361.5 is to ensure that once the cannabis offender paid his or her fine and having done the time, if any, will not suffer any ongoing penalties or stigma. The gestalt being that unless these records were permanently destroyed, there would likely be mis-used or create interference with the person's rehabilitation, education, employment, licensing and business or professional advancement. Younger v. Superior Court, 21 Cal. 3d 102, 107 (1978).

Section 11361.5 seems to have been systematically disobeyed. It is not the least bit uncommon to see decades-old simple possession convictions arise in probation reports and on DOJ "rap" sheets as well. The contrary intent of the Legislature in passing Section 11361.5 is clear.

This action by the Los Angeles district attorney should serve as a clarion call to others around the state to follow suit. No one should have to suffer any stigma whatsoever, much less a permanent mark of shame, for having once or more violated a dis-used and now abolished law that was designed and applied with racial animus in mind. The statistics in Los Angeles alone prove these records are relics of a bygone era, not only of racial but also of class stigmatization. The time to destroy, obliterate and erase these records throughout the state of California has long passed.

Any district attorney in this state who does not take advantage of Code for America's offer (free to all 58 counties) in order to achieve such an objective with minimal effort, is part of the problem rather than the solution. 