BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    

                           Senator Gloria Romero, Chair              S
                             2007-2008 Regular Session               B

          SB 425 (Margett)                                            
          As Amended April 16, 2007 
          Hearing date:  April 24, 2007
          Government Code; Health and Safety Code;
          Penal Code; Welfare and Institutions Code


          Source:  Attorney General's Office
                   Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department
                   California District Attorneys Association
                   Judicial Council

          Prior Legislation: SB 1422 (Margett) - Ch. 901, Stats. 2006
                       SB 1107 (SCoPS) - Ch. 279, Stats. 2005
                       SB 1796 (SCoPS) - Ch. 405, Stats. 2004
                       SB 851   (SCoPS) - Ch. 468, Stats. 2003
                       SB 1852 (SCoPS) - Ch. 545, Stats. 2002
                       SB 485   (SCoPS) - Ch. 473, Stats. 2001
                       SB 832   (SCoPS) - Ch. 853, Stats. 1999
                       SB 1880 (SCoPS) - Ch. 606, Stats. 1998

          Support: Unknown

          Opposition:None known

                                         KEY ISSUE



                                                           SB 425 (Margett)



          The purpose of this bill is to make technical and corrective  
          changes in various penal statutes.
          Correction of Constitutional Problems

           Existing case law  in Kolender v. Lawson (1983) 461 U.S. 352  
          found Penal Code Section 647 (e) to be unconstitutional.

           This bill  deletes that unconstitutional subdivision by  
          rearranging the other subdivisions.
           Corrections and Cross-References in Various Statutes

           Existing law  contains an incorrect cross-reference to a  
          non-existent Government Code Section 29950.3.  (Government  
          Code  29551 (d).)

           This bill  corrects that cross-reference by instead referring to  
          Government Code Section 29550.3.

           Existing law  contains an incorrect cross-reference to City of  
          Los Angeles security officers in Penal Code Section 830.7 (i)  
          regarding who can enforce waste disposal laws.  (Health and  
          Safety Code  117560.)

           This bill  corrects that cross-reference by instead correctly  
          referring to illegal dumping enforcement officers in Penal Code  
          Section 830.7 (j).

           Existing law  makes an incorrect cross-reference to the Federal  
          Code.  (Penal Code  530.5 (e).)

           This bill  changes that cross-reference to Section 1708 of 18 USC  
          to correctly cover the federal crime of mail theft.



                                                           SB 425 (Margett)

           Existing law  contains an incorrect cross-reference to paragraph 3  
          of subdivision (c) of Section 192.  (Penal Code  977 (a)(3).)

           This bill  corrects that cross-reference to subdivision (b) of  
          Section 191.5 because the crime of vehicular manslaughter while  
          intoxicated was renumbered.

          Grammatical and Related Errors

           Existing law  refers to the people's power to dismiss a case.   
          (Penal Code  1538.5 (j).)

           This bill  corrects that reference to state "either on the  
          court's own motion or the motion of the people" to conform with  
          case law.

           Existing law  refers to "residential."  (Welfare and Institutions  
          Code  6608.8 (e).)

           This bill  replaces "residential" with "residence" to make the  
          language grammatically accurate.

          Changes Made for Consistency, Coordination and Clarity of the  
          Existing law  provides in part that before a party may seek  
          court enforcement of any of the disclosures required by this  
          chapter, the party shall make an informal request of opposing  
          counsel for the desired materials and information.  If within  
          15 days the opposing counsel fails to provide the materials  
          and information requested the party may seek a court order.   
          (Penal Code  1054.5 (b).)

           This bill  changes the word "provide" to "disclose" to be  
          consistent with other discovery provisions.

          Existing law  lists enhancements included in "specific  
          enhancements" meaning an enhancement that relates to the  
          circumstances of a crime.  (Penal Code  1170.11.)



                                                           SB 425 (Margett)

           This bill  adds Health and Safety Code Section 11380.7 to that  

           Existing law  specifies which prosecutors can inspect a juvenile  
          case file.  (Welfare and Institutions Code  827.)

           This bill  adds the Attorney General to that list.

           Existing law  provides that records regarding the arrest and  
          conviction for less than an ounce of marijuana sha11 not be kept  
          beyond two years from the date of conviction and arrest. (Health  
          and Safety Code  11361.5.)

           This bill  provides that records must be destroyed within 2 years  
          where the only entries on the record refer to the possession of  
          marijuana charge.
          California currently faces an extraordinary and severe prison  
          and jail overcrowding crisis.  California's prison capacity is  
          nearly exhausted as prisons today are being operated with a  
          significant level of overcrowding.<1>  In addition, California's  
          jails likewise are significantly overcrowded.  Twenty California  
          counties are operating under jail population caps.  According to  
          the State Sheriffs' Association, "counties are currently  
          releasing 18,000 pre and post-sentenced inmates every month and  
          many counties are so overcrowded they do not accept misdemeanor  
          bookings in any form, . . . ."<2>  In January of this year the  
          Legislative Analyst's office summarized the trajectory of  
          California's inmate population over the last two decades:

              During the past 20 years, jail and prison  
              populations have increased significantly.  County  
          <1>  Analysis of the 2007-08 Budget Bill:  Judicial and Criminal  
          Justice, Legislative Analyst's Office (February 21, 2007).
          <2>  Memorandum from CSSA President Gary Penrod to Governor,  
          February 14, 2007.



                                                           SB 425 (Margett)

              jail populations have increased by about 66  
              percent over that period, an amount that has been  
              limited by court-ordered population caps.  The  
              prison population has grown even more dramatically  
              during that period, tripling since the  

          The level of overcrowding, and the impact of the population  
          crisis on the day-to-day prison operations, is staggering:

              As of December 31, 2006, the California Department  
              of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) was  
              estimated to have 173,100 inmates in the state  
              prison system, based on CDCR's fall 2006  
              population projections.  However, . . . the  
              department only operates or contracts for a total  
              of 156,500 permanent bed capacity (not including  
              out-of-state beds, . . . ), resulting in a  
              shortfall of about 16,600 prison beds relative to  
              the inmate population.  The most significant bed  
              shortfalls are for Level I, II, and IV inmates, as  
              well as at reception centers.  As a result of the  
              bed deficits, CDCR houses about 10 percent of the  
              inmate population in temporary beds, such as in  
              dayrooms and gyms.  In addition, many inmates are  
              housed in facilities designed for different  
              security levels.  For example, there are currently  
              about 6,000 high security (Level IV) inmates  
              housed in beds designed for Level III inmates.

              . . .  (S)ignificant overcrowding has both  
              operational and fiscal consequences.  Overcrowding  
              and the use of temporary beds create security  
              concerns, particularly for medium- and  
              high-security inmates.  Gyms and dayrooms are not  
              designed to provide security coverage as well as  
              in permanent housing units, and overcrowding can  
              contribute to inmate unrest, disturbances, and  

          <3>  California's Criminal Justice System:  A Primer.   
          Legislative Analyst's Office (January 2007).



                                                           SB 425 (Margett)

              assaults.  This can result in additional state  
              costs for medical treatment, workers'  
              compensation, and staff overtime.  In addition,  
              overcrowding can limit the ability of prisons to  
              provide rehabilitative, health care, and other  
              types of programs because prisons were not  
              designed with sufficient space to provide these  
              services to the increased population.  The  
              difficulty in providing inmate programs and  
              services is exacerbated by the use of program  
              space to house inmates.  Also, to the extent that  
              inmate unrest is caused by overcrowding,  
              rehabilitation programs and other services can be  
              disrupted by the resulting lockdowns.<4>

          As a result of numerous lawsuits, the state has entered into  
          several consent decrees agreeing to improve conditions in the  
          state's prisons.  As these cases have continued over the past  
          several years, prison conditions nonetheless have failed to  
          improve and, over the last year, the scrutiny of the federal  
          courts over California's prisons has intensified.


          <4>  Analysis 2007-08 Budget Bill, supra, fn. 1.

          In February of 2006, the federal court appointed a receiver to  
          take over the direct management and operation of the prison  
          medical health care delivery system from the state.   Motions  
          filed in December of 2006 are now pending before three federal  
          court judges in which plaintiffs are seeking a court-ordered  
          limit on the prison population pursuant to the federal Prison  
          Litigation Reform Act.  Medical, mental health and dental care  
          programs at CDCR each are "currently under varying levels of  
          federal court supervision based on court rulings that the state  
          has failed to provide inmates with adequate care as required  
          under the Eighth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.  The courts  
          found key deficiencies in the state's correctional programs,  
          including:  (1) an inadequate number of staff to deliver health  
          care services, (2) an inadequate amount of clinical space within  
          prisons, (3) failures to follow nationally recognized health  
          care guidelines for treating inmate-patients, and (4) poor  
          coordination between health care staff and custody staff."<5>

           This bill  will not aggravate the prison and jail overcrowding  
          crisis outlined above.


          1.  Purpose of This Bill
          This is the annual omnibus bill.  In the past it has been  
          introduced by all Members of the Committee on Public Safety but  
          this bill and the one from last year were introduced by Senator  
          Margett.  This bill is similar to the ones introduced as  
          Committee bills in the past in that it was introduced with the  
          following understanding:

           Its provisions make only technical or minor changes to the  
           There is no opposition by any Member of the Legislature or  
            recognized group to the proposal.
          This procedure has allowed for introduction of fewer minor bills  

          <5>  Primer, supra, fn. 4.



                                                           SB 425 (Margett)

          and has saved the Legislature time and expense.  The following  
          bills had the same intent as this bill:

                 SB 1422 (Margett) - Ch. 901, Stats. 2006
                 SB 1107 (Senate Committee on Public Safety) - Ch. 279,  
               Statutes 2005
                 SB 1796 (Senate Committee on Public Safety) - Ch. 405,  
               Stats. 2004
                 SB 851 (Senate Committee on Public Safety) - Ch. 468,  
               Stats. 2003
                 SB 1852 (Senate Committee on Public Safety) - Ch. 545,  
               Stats. 2002
                 SB 485 (Senate Committee on Public Safety) - Ch. 473,  
               Stats. 2001
                 SB 832 (Senate Committee on Public Safety) - Ch. 853,  
               Stats. 1999
                 SB 1880 (Senate Committee on Public Safety) - Ch. 606,  
               Stats. 1998

          2.  Repeal of Penal Code Section 647 (e)  

          The Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department pointed out that  
          Kolender v. Lawson (1983) 461 U.S. 352 found unconstitutional  
          Penal Code Section 647 (e) relating to loitering.  This bill  
          deletes that subdivision and replaces it with the current  
          subdivision (j) so that the remaining charging subdivisions are  
          not changed.

          3.  Changes to Courts Destruction of Records  

          Judicial Council noted the difficulty the court has in meeting  
          the requirement that records pertaining to arrest or conviction  
          for possession of less than an ounce of marijuana (Health and  
          Safety Code  11357 (b), (c), (d) and (e)) when those same  
          records also contain other charges that must be kept for longer  
          than that. This bill would clarify the requirement of  
          destruction of records to provide that the records must not be  
          kept beyond 2 years where the only entries on the record are  
          these marijuana offenses.


                                                           SB 425 (Margett)

          4.  Other Changes  

          As noticed in the purpose section of this analysis, the other  
          changes in this bill are technical or grammatical.