BILL ANALYSIS
AB 1969
Page 1
Date of Hearing: March 25, 2008
Chief Counsel: Gregory Pagan
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC SAFETY
Jose Solorio, Chair
AB 1969 (Plescia) - As Introduced: February 14, 2008
SUMMARY : Increases the penalty to three, four, or five years
in the state prison for any person who, with the intent to cause
injury or death, personally causes the death of a horse or dog
being used by, or under the supervision of, a peace officer.
EXISTING LAW :
1)Provides that any person who maliciously strikes, beats,
kicks, stabs, shoots, or throws, hurls, or projects any rock
or object at a any horse being used by a peace officer, or any
dog being supervised by a peace officer in the performance of
his or her duties is a public offense and if injury is
inflicted, the offense is punishable by imprisonment in the
county jail for a term not to exceed one year. If the injury
inflicted is serious injury, the offense is punishable by
imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding one year; by a
fine not to exceed $2,000; or by imprisonment in the state
prison for 16 months, two, or three years. (Penal Code
Section 600(a).)
2)Provides that any person who willfully and maliciously
interferes with, or obstructs, any horse or dog being used by
a peace officer or any dog being supervised by a peace officer
in the performance of his or her duties by frightening,
teasing, agitating, harassing, or hindering the horse or dog
shall be punished by imprisonment in a county jail not
exceeding one year; by a fine not exceeding $1,000; or by
both. (Penal Code Section 600(b).)
3)Provides that any person who, with the intent to inflict
serious injury or death, personally causes the death,
destruction, or serious physical injury of a horse or dog
being used by, or under the direction of, a peace officer
shall, upon conviction, be punished by an additional and
consecutive one year in the state prison. (Penal Code Section
AB 1969
Page 2
600(c).)
4)Defines "serious injury" to include bone fracture, loss or
impairment of function of any bodily member, wounds requiring
extensive suturing, or serious crippling. (Penal Code Section
600(c).)
5)Provides that when battery is committed against any person,
including a peace officer and serious bodily injury is
inflicted on the person, the battery is punishable by
imprisonment in the state prison for two, three, or four years
or by imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding one year.
(Penal Code Section 243(d).)
FISCAL EFFECT : Unknown
COMMENTS :
1)Author's Statement : According to the author, "AB 1969 will
stiffen current punishment for the deliberate harm to working
animals specifically dogs and horses that are under the
supervision of law enforcement. In this day and age, these
animals are there in the direct line of harm. They are in just
as much danger as regular police officers. We need to ensure
the over all safety and respect to these animals, and under
current law the penalty to harming, harassing and even killing
these animals is completely too lenient."
2)Sentence Increase : Under existing law, any person who
willfully and maliciously strikes, beats, kicks, cuts stabs,
or throws any rock or other object likely to produce injury on
any horse or dog being used, or supervised, by a peace officer
that results in serious injury is guilty of a public offense
punishable by 16 months, 2 or 3 years in the state prison.
(Penal Code Section 600(a).) Any person who, in violation of
the above section and with the intent to inflict injury or
death, personally causes death or serious bodily injury shall,
upon conviction, be punished by an additional and consecutive
one year in the state prison. (Penal Code 600(c).)
Therefore, under existing law, a person convicted of causing
the death of a police animal can be sentenced to 28 months, 3
or 4 years in the state prison.
This bill increases the existing one-year additional
enhancement, under the above circumstances, if the person
AB 1969
Page 3
causes the death of the horse or dog to three, four, or five
years in the state prison. However, the author has indicated
that it is not his intent to create a sentence enhancement,
but rather to increase the base punishment for the substantive
offense of inflicting serious bodily injury on a police animal
that results in the death of the animal. This bill should be
amended to reflect that intent. Given the existing penalty,
with the one year enhancement of 28 months, 3 or 4 years in
the state prison for assault on a peace officer animal
resulting in the death of the animal, is it necessary to
increase the penalty? Is there any reason to believe that the
existing penalty is inadequate? Is there any evidence that
these types of offenses are not being severely punished?
3)Prison Overcrowding and a Court-Ordered Population Cap : As
noted above, this bill increases the penalty to three, four,
or five years in the state prison for any person who, with the
intent to cause injury or death, personally causes the death
of a horse or dog being used by, or under the supervision of,
a peace officer. Concerns for overcrowding arise because of
the increase in the prison term when the offense is already
punishable by a substantial prison term. As California's
prison crisis worsens, close attention should be paid to
legislation that increases prison overcrowding. The
California Policy Research Center (CPRC) recently issued a
report on the status of California's prisons. The report
stated, "California has the largest prison population of any
state in the nation, with more than 171,000 inmates in 33
adult prisons, and the state's annual correctional spending,
including jails and probation, amounts to $8.92 billion.
Despite the high cost of corrections, fewer California
prisoners participate in relevant treatment programs than
comparable states, and its inmate-to-officer ratio is
considerably higher. While the nation's prisons average one
correctional officer to every 4.5 inmates, the average
California officer is responsible for 6.5 inmates. Although
officer salaries are higher than average, their ranks are
spread dangerously thin and there is a severe vacancy rate."
(Petersilia, "Understanding California Corrections",
California Policy Research Center, (May 2006).) California's
prison population will likely exceed 180,000 by 2010.
According to the Little Hoover Commission, "Lawsuits filed in
three federal courts alleging that the current level of
overcrowding constitutes cruel and unusual punishment ask that
AB 1969
Page 4
the courts appoint a panel of federal judges to manage
California's prison population. United States District Judge
Lawrence Karlton, the first judge to hear the motion, gave the
State until June 2007 to show progress in solving the
overpopulation crisis. Judge Karlton clearly would prefer not
to manage California's prison population. At a December 2006
hearing, Judge Karlton told lawyers representing the
Schwarzenegger administration that he is not inclined 'to
spend forever running the state prison system.' However, he
also warned the attorneys, 'You tell your client June 4 may be
the end of the line. It may really be the end of the line.'
"Despite the rhetoric, 30 years of 'tough on crime' politics has
not made the state safer. Quite the opposite: today
thousands of hardened, violent criminals are released without
regard to the danger they present to an unsuspecting public.
Years of political posturing have taken a good idea -
determinate sentencing - and warped it beyond recognition with
a series of laws passed with no thought to their cumulative
impact. And these laws stripped away incentives for offenders
to change or improve themselves while incarcerated.
"Inmates, who are willing to improve their education, learn a
job skill or kick a drug habit find that programs are few and
far between, a result of budget choices and overcrowding.
Consequently, offenders are released into California
communities with the criminal tendencies and addictions that
first led to their incarceration. They are ill-prepared to do
more than commit new crimes and create new victims." (Little
Hoover Commission Report, "Solving California's Corrections
Crisis: Time is Running Out", pg. 1, 2 (2007).)
In light of the escalating overcrowding situation in
California's state prison system, should the Legislature
increase the state prison term for persons convicted of
causing the death of a dog or horse being used by a peace
officer?
4)Argument in Support : The California State Sheriffs'
Association states, "Law enforcement dogs and horses serve a
number of operational functions including enforcing public
order, search and rescue, bomb detection, and narcotics.
These animals are instrumental in law enforcement efforts.
Accordingly, a great deal of funding and officer time is
afforded to these animals for training, maintenance, and care,
AB 1969
Page 5
not to mention the personal connection that is formed between
the law enforcement unit and the animal."
5)Argument in Opposition : The California Public Defenders
Association believes, "This bill seeks to increase the felony
triad for crimes against police dogs and horses from the
present 16 months, 2 years and 3 years to a higher triad of 3
years, 4 years and 5 years.
"It is difficult to understand why an increase of penalty for
this crime is sought, when it is so unlikely that the
legislation will reduce criminality or have a deterrent
effect. The prison system is already overcrowded and this
proposed legislation would exacerbate overcrowding."
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION :
Support
California Correctional Peace Officers' Association
California Correctional Supervisors Organization
California State Sheriffs' Association
San Bernardino County Sheriff's Department
Opposition
California Public Defenders Association
Analysis Prepared by : Gregory Pagan / PUB. S. / (916)
319-3744