Andrew Luster, the great-grandson of cosmetics pioneer Max Factor, was released from a California state prison on October 11, 2026, after serving approximately 20 years behind bars for crimes involving the drugging and sexual assault of three women. His release has drawn strong criticism from local officials and renewed scrutiny of California’s sentencing laws.

Luster, 62, was originally sentenced to 124 years in prison after a 2003 jury convicted him of 86 felony counts. His sentence was later reduced to 50 years, and he became eligible to leave prison after qualifying for sentence credits under California law.

According to state corrections officials, his release followed the completion of the time required under his sentence, taking applicable credits into account. He is now on parole and is reported to be living in Glendora, east of Los Angeles.

Why Andrew Luster’s Release Has Sparked Outrage

The release has prompted an angry response from officials in Glendora, where Luster is reportedly residing. Mayor David Fredendall publicly criticized the decision, while California Assemblywoman Blanca Rubio called the outcome unacceptable and said she was working with local officials and law enforcement to understand his parole conditions.

Ventura County prosecutors had repeatedly opposed Luster’s release, citing the seriousness of his crimes and concerns about public safety. Their objections continued through earlier parole proceedings, even as changes to his sentence and California’s credit rules affected the amount of time he would serve.

The case has also raised questions about how California law classifies sexual offenses involving victims who have been drugged or rendered unconscious. Critics argue that the rules in effect when Luster was sentenced allowed him to qualify for credits that would not be available under later changes to the law.

How the Max Factor Heir Was Convicted

Prosecutors said Luster targeted women in the late 1990s, including at bars frequented by college students. They alleged that he used gamma-hydroxybutyrate, commonly known as GHB, to render victims unconscious before sexually assaulting them. Evidence presented at trial included recordings of assaults involving two of the women.

Luster fled to Mexico while his trial was underway in 2003 and was convicted in absentia. He was later captured in Puerto Vallarta by bounty hunter Duane “Dog” Chapman and returned to the United States to face the consequences of the case.

His initial 124-year sentence was subsequently challenged. In 2013, a court resentenced him to 50 years, leaving the convictions in place but changing the term that ultimately governed his incarceration.

How California’s Sentencing Rules Affected Andrew Luster

California’s Proposition 57, approved by voters in 2016, expanded opportunities for certain incarcerated people to earn credits and qualify for earlier parole consideration. The way state law classified particular offenses became central to the dispute surrounding Luster’s release.

The state later changed its classification of rape involving an intoxicated or unconscious victim, adding the offense to the list of violent felonies in 2025. However, the change did not apply retroactively to Luster’s existing sentence.

Ventura County District Attorney Erik Nasarenko said his office had fought to preserve the original sentence but acknowledged that the later legal change came too late to affect Luster’s case. State corrections officials maintained that his release followed the applicable sentence and credit rules.

Parole Supervision and Community Concerns

Luster remains subject to parole supervision and sex-offender registration requirements. His reported residence in Glendora has prompted local leaders to seek more information about the restrictions governing his release and the measures intended to protect residents.

The case continues to draw attention because of the gap between Luster’s original sentence and the time he ultimately spent incarcerated. It has also renewed calls from critics for closer examination of sentencing-credit policies in serious sexual assault cases.