1994 Oregon Ballot Measure 11

Prior to 1989, Oregon judges would decide whether a convicted felon should be put on probation or sent to prison, and for those sent to prison, set a maximum sentence (known as an "indeterminate sentence.") Based on a subsequent decision by the Parole Board, which used an assessment of good behavior, rehabilitative efforts, and criminal case, the average offender would serve a fraction of the sentence handed down by the judge. The Oregon Legislative Assembly established felony sentencing guidelines in 1989, in an attempt to achieve the following four goals: • Proportional punishment, imposing the most severe sentences on the most serious offenders • Truth in sentencing, so the judge's sentence would more closely reflect actual prison time • Sentence uniformity, to reduce disparities among judges • Maintenance of correctional capacity consistent with sentencing policy, so the criminal justice system would be able to deliver proposed penalties. Parole release for most offenders was abolished by the establishment of these guidelines. The Board of Parole and Post-Prison Supervision continues to have release authority over those prison inmates sentenced for crimes committed prior to November 1, 1989, those sentenced by the courts as dangerous offenders, and for murderers and aggravated murderers who are eligible for parole, regardless of the date of their crimes. Other prisoners began serving at least 80% of their sentences. Measure 11, passed in 1994, affected only specific crimes, which were covered by the sentencing guidelines from 1989 to 1994. Various exceptions exist to the guidelines, and to Measure 11 restrictions on sentencing. == Impact on youth ==

In February 2018, Oregon Council on Civil Rights, in collaboration with the Oregon Justice Resource Center, released a report on the impact of Measure 11 on Oregon's young people and whether the law is out-of-step with legal and scientific developments of recent years. According to the report, Measure 11 mandates that juveniles hold the same culpability as adults, despite brain science declaring otherwise. The US Supreme Court has ruled several times in regards to the sentencing of minors: • Roper v. Simmons, which ruled that juveniles cannot be sentenced to death. • Graham v. Florida, which ruled that juvenile life without parole is unconstitutional for non-homicide juvenile offenders. • Miller v. Alabama, which ruled that mandatory juvenile life without parole is unconstitutional for all crimes. • Montgomery v. Louisiana, which confirms that the miller ruling now be applied retroactively. • Key conceptual takeaways from the supreme court decisions: • Youth have a unique capacity for reform. • Youth are fundamentally different from, and less culpable than, adults • All youth should have a reasonable opportunity to demonstrate their ability to change. • Lengthy sentences that fail to take into consideration the mitigating qualities of youth are in violation of their Eighth Amendment rights. • Youth should have access to a “meaningful opportunity for release. Some key statistics: • Today, Oregon incarcerates young people at a higher rate than almost every other state in the country, including Texas and Louisiana. In fact, Oregon has the second highest rate of youth transfers to adult court in the nation, with young people - especially youth of color - subjected to lifelong consequences as a result. • In 2012, Oregon convicted black youth of Measure 11 offenses at 17 times the rate of their white counterparts. • Black youth account for 15.5% of Measure 11 indictments but only 1.8% of the general population in Oregon (resulting in an overrepresentation of around 8.6 times.) • The average relative rate of disparity (measure by the relative rate index or RRI2 ) between black and white youth for the five most common Measure 11 crimes is 15.26. The overall RRI for all crimes covered in this study was 13.6. • Oregon taxpayers bear a significant burden for youth incarceration. Measure 11 offenders require close custody, the most expensive form of state confinement, which can result in costs of as much as $263 per day and $95,995 per year, per juvenile. == Impact on women ==

In October 2018, the annual Women in Prison Conference held by the Oregon Justice Resource Center Women's Justice Project focused primarily on the effects of mandatory minimum sentences imposed by Measure 11 on female defendants. The conference highlights similar concerns and statistics echoed by Measure 11's original opponents in concerns to youth, Coffee Creek Correctional Facility reported 2015 that 46% of their intakes that year experienced domestic violence; 76% were unemployed; over half had children; and 38% had not finished high school. == Political impact ==

The passage of Measure 11 was a central issue of Governor John Kitzhaber's first term, and remains a matter of controversy in Oregon politics. Supporters credit Measure 11 for reducing crime rates.[12] Opponents argue Measure 11 pressures innocent defendants into plea bargains for lesser (non-Measure 11) crimes, due to fear of mandatory sentences.[13] == See also ==