. People v. Scott, 58 Cal.4th 1415, 1418 (Cal. 2014); see also Mainez v. Gore, 2017 WL 6453595, at *1 (S.D. Cal. Dec. 18, 2017). In passing the Realignment Act, the legislature stated: “Criminal justice policies that rely on building and operating more prisons to address community safety concerns are not sustainable, and will not result in improved public safety.” Cal. Penal Code § 17.5(a)(3).
Proposition 57, otherwise known as the Criminal Justice Realignment Act of 2011, “significantly change[d] the punishment for some felony convictions” in California. People v. Scott, 58 Cal.4th 1415, 1418 (2014); see also Mainez v. Gore, 2017 WL 6453595, at *1 (S.D. Cal. Dec. 18, 2017). As relevant here, the Act shifted responsibility for housing and supervising certain felons from the state to the individual counties.
(See ECF No. 20 at 1-5; ECF No. 21 at 1-3.) Proposition 57, otherwise known as the Criminal Justice Realignment Act of 2011, "significantly change[d] the punishment for some felony convictions" in California. People v. Scott, 58 Cal. 4th 1415, 1418 (2014); see also Mainez v. Gore, 2017 WL 6453595, at *1 (S.D. Cal. Dec. 18, 2017). As relevant here, the Act shifted responsibility for housing and supervising certain felons from the state to the individual counties.