BILL ANALYSIS ------------------------------------------------------------ |SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | AB 1925| |Office of Senate Floor Analyses | | |1020 N Street, Suite 524 | | |(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | | |327-4478 | | ------------------------------------------------------------ THIRD READING Bill No: AB 1925 Author: Salas (D) Amended: 8/2/10 in Senate Vote: 21 SENATE VETERANS AFFAIRS COMMITTEE : 4-0, 6/22/10 AYES: Denham, Correa, Negrete McLeod, Cedillo NO VOTE RECORDED: Wyland, Vacancy, Vacancy SENATE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE : 7-0, 6/29/10 AYES: Leno, Cogdill, Cedillo, Hancock, Huff, Steinberg, Wright ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 76-0, 6/2/10 - See last page for vote SUBJECT : Veterans courts SOURCE : Vietnam Veterans of America, California State Council DIGEST : This bill authorizes superior courts to develop and implement veterans courts for eligible veterans of the United States (U.S.) military with the objective of, among other things, creation of a dedicated calendar or a locally developed collaborative court-supervised veterans mental health program or system that leads to the placement of as many mentally ill offenders who are veterans of the U.S. military, including those with post-traumatic stress disorder, traumatic brain injury, military sexual trauma, substance abuse, or any mental health problem stemming from CONTINUED AB 1925 Page 2 military service, in community treatment as is feasible and consistent with public safety. ANALYSIS : Existing law states that in the case of any person convicted of a criminal offense who would otherwise be sentenced to county jail or state prison and who alleges that he or she committed the offense as a result of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), substance abuse, or psychological problems stemming from service in a combat theater in the United States military, the court shall, prior to sentencing, hold a hearing to determine whether the defendant was a member of the military forces of the United States (U.S.) who served in combat and shall assess whether the defendant suffers from PTSD, substance abuse, or psychological problems as a result of that service. Existing law allows a defendant convicted of a criminal offense who committed the offense as a result of PTSD, substance abuse, or psychological problems stemming from service in a combat theater in the United States military, and if the defendant is otherwise eligible for probation and the court places the defendant on probation, the court may order the defendant into a local, state, federal, or private nonprofit treatment program for a period not to exceed that which the defendant would have served in state prison or county jail, provided the defendant agrees to participate in the program and the court determines that an appropriate treatment program exists. Existing law provides for diversion from criminal prosecution through a deferred entry of judgment (DEJ) and sentence when an open case is before any court for specified violations of drug possession, paraphernalia possession, being in the presence of drug use, misdemeanor transportation of marijuana, or harvesting of marijuana for personal use and it appears to the prosecuting attorney that, all of the following apply to the defendant: 1. The defendant has no conviction for any offense involving controlled substances prior to the alleged commission of the charged offense. 2. The offense charged did not involve a crime of violence or threatened violence. CONTINUED AB 1925 Page 3 3. There is no evidence of a violation relating to narcotics or restricted dangerous drugs other than a violation of the sections listed in this subdivision. 4. The defendant's record does not indicate that probation or parole has ever been revoked without thereafter being completed. 5. The defendant's record does not indicate that he or she has successfully completed or been terminated from diversion or DEJ pursuant to this chapter within five years prior to the alleged commission of the charged offense. 6. The defendant has no prior felony conviction within five years prior to the alleged commission of the charged offense. Existing law effectuates July 1, 2001, except as specified, a person convicted of a non-violent drug possession offense shall receive probation with completion of a drug treatment program as a condition of probation. Existing law provides that certain defendants and parolees are ineligible for the Substance Abuse Treatment Crime Prevention Act of 2000 (SACPA), enacted by Proposition 36. These ineligible persons include persons who possessed drugs other than for personal use; committed other offenses along with a drug possession offense; used a firearm while in possession or under the influence of heroin, cocaine or PCP; previously convicted of a serious felony and have not been free of custody or commission of felonies or dangerous misdemeanors within five years (parolees may not have ever been convicted of a serious felony); participated in two prior Proposition 36 treatment programs; and refused treatment. Existing law allows a superior court, with the concurrence of the prosecuting attorney of the county, may create a "Back on Track" deferred entry of judgment reentry program aimed at preventing recidivism among first-time nonviolent felony drug offenders. No defendant who has been convicted of a violation of a sex offense shall be eligible for the CONTINUED AB 1925 Page 4 program established in this chapter. When creating this program, the prosecuting attorney, together with the presiding judge and a representative of the criminal defense bar selected by the presiding judge of the superior court may agree to establish a "Back on Track" deferred entry of judgment program pursuant to the provisions, as specified. The agreement shall specify which low-level nonviolent felony drug offenses under the Health and Safety Code will be eligible for the program and a process for selecting participants. The program shall have the following characteristics: 1. A dedicated calendar. 2. Leadership by a superior court judicial officer who is assigned by the presiding judge. 3. Clearly defined eligibility criteria to enter the program and clearly defined criteria for completion of the program. 4. Legal incentives for defendants to successfully complete the program, including dismissal or reduction of criminal charges upon successful completion of the program. 5. Close supervision to hold participants accountable to program compliance, including the use of graduated sanctions and frequent, ongoing appearances before the court regarding participants' program progress and compliance with all program terms and conditions. The court may use available legal mechanisms, including return to custody if necessary, for failure to comply with the supervised plan. 6. Appropriate transitional programming for participants, based on available resources from county and community service providers and other agencies. The transitional programming may include, but is not limited to, any of the following: 7. Vocational training, readiness, and placement. 8. Educational training, including assistance with CONTINUED AB 1925 Page 5 acquiring a GED or high school diploma and assistance with admission to college. 9. Substance abuse treatment. 10.Assistance with obtaining identification cards and driver's licenses. 11.Parenting skills training and assistance in becoming compliant with child support obligations. 12.The program may develop a local, public-private partnership between law enforcement, government agencies, private employers, and community-based organizations for the purpose of creating meaningful employment opportunities for participants and to take advantage of incentives for hiring program participants. This bill: 1. Authorizes superior courts to develop and implement veterans courts for eligible veterans of the United States (U.S.) military with the objective of, among other things, creation of a dedicated calendar or a locally developed collaborative court-supervised veterans mental health program or system that leads to the placement of as many mentally ill offenders who are veterans of the U.S. military, including those with post-traumatic stress disorder, traumatic brain injury, military sexual trauma, substance abuse, or any mental health problem stemming from military service, in community treatment as is feasible and consistent with public safety. 2. Provides that county participation is voluntary. 3. Declares the intents of the Legislature that, where there are statutory requirements for certain education or counseling programs to be included in the terms of probation, the components of those counseling terms is required to be incorporated into the treatment programs that are designed to treat the underlying psychological disorders rather than requiring them in lieu of the CONTINUED AB 1925 Page 6 psychological treatments. Background UCSF and San Francisco VA Medical Center Study on Veterans and PTSD . An article appearing in Science Daily (online) on March 13, 2007, discussed a study conducted by the University of California-San Francisco and the San Francisco Veterans Affairs Medical Center finding that approximately one-third of veterans returning from Iraq received one or more mental health or psychosocial diagnoses. The study appeared in the Journal of the American Medical Association and Archives Journals. Another study reported in the New England Journal of Medicine in 2004 stated that the rate of post-traumatic stress syndrome (PTSD) among Iraq and Afghanistan veterans increased in a linear manner with increased exposure to combat. (Hoge, Combat Duty in Iraq and Afghanistan, Mental Health Problems, and Barriers to Care (2004) 351 N. Engl. J. Med. 13-22.) Studies also indicate that PTSD may drive or exacerbate drug and alcohol abuse by veterans. (Stress & Substance Abuse: A Special Report, National Institute on Drug Abuse (Sept. 12, 2005).) Mental health and substance abuse problems are linked to future incarceration in veterans. In a Bureau of Justice study, 35 percent to 45 percent of incarcerated veterans reported symptoms of mental health disorders in the previous 12 months, including mania, psychotic disorders, and major depressive episodes. (Noonan & Mumola, U.S. Dep't of Justice, Veterans in State and Federal Prison, 2004 (2007), p. 6.) Three-quarters of veterans in state prisons reported past drug use and one-quarter reported being on drugs at the time of the offense for which they were incarcerated. (Id. at p. 5.) Veterans are also more likely than non-veterans to report past intravenous drug use. (Ibid; See also Badkhen, Shelters Take Many Vets of Iraq, Afghan Wars, Boston Globe (Aug. 7, 2007).) It appears that veterans are disproportionately represented in the prison population. Veterans make up 10% of state prisoners. (Noonan & Mumola, supra, at p. 1.) By 2004, veterans of the current conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan CONTINUED AB 1925 Page 7 already comprised 4% of the veterans in state and federal prisons. (Ibid.) Studies have concluded approximately two-thirds of mentally ill prisoners receive no treatment. (James & Glaze, U.S. Dep't of Just., Bureau of Just. Stats., Mental Health Problems of Prison and Jail Inmates (Sept. 2006) pp. 1, 9.) Providing meaningful mental health treatment has been shown to significantly reduce recidivism rates, with studies showing decreases of over 20 percent. (Wash. State Inst. For Pub. Policy, Evidence-Based Policy Options to Reduce Future Prison Construction, Criminal Justice Costs, and Crime Rates (2006).) FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: No Local: No SUPPORT : (Verified 8/4/10) Vietnam Veterans of America, California State Council (source) American Legion, Department of California AMVETS Post 40 of Sonoma County AMVETS, Department of California California Association of County Veterans Service Officers California Attorneys for Criminal Justice California Psychiatric Association California Psychological Association California Public Defenders Association California State Commanders Veterans Council National Alliance on Mental Illness California Public Counsel Law Center of Los Angeles Swords to Plowshares Veterans of Foreign Wars, Department of California Veterans Village of San Diego OPPOSITION : (Verified 8/4/10) Crime Victims United of California ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : The author's office states, "Veterans with combat-related mental illness in the criminal justice system often face unique challenges which traditional courts are often ill-equipped to address. AB CONTINUED AB 1925 Page 8 1925 modifies the California Penal Code to better address the particular needs of veterans by providing a template for the creation of new veterans' courts throughout the state. AB 1925 sets the stage for the formalization of relationships between judges, district attorneys, public defenders, veterans' service agencies, residential treatment organizations, and others. AB 1925 standardizes the structure of veterans' courts and establishes a clear process for the formation of new courts, while maintaining local control over the establishment of these courts." ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION : The Department of Finance opposes this bill and writes the following, "Finance is opposed to this measure because by creating a reimbursable state-mandated local program, it would result in General Fund costs that are not included in the Administration's current fiscal plan. Additionally, it would create a General Fund cost pressure for the courts and create the expectation that these courts would be created. During this time of limited resources and already decreased capabilities to meet mandated workload,, Finance does not believe imposing this workload and expectation of a new program at this time is appropriate." ASSEMBLY FLOOR : AYES: Adams, Ammiano, Anderson, Arambula, Bass, Beall, Bill Berryhill, Blakeslee, Block, Blumenfield, Bradford, Brownley, Buchanan, Caballero, Charles Calderon, Carter, Chesbro, Conway, Cook, Coto, Davis, De La Torre, De Leon, DeVore, Emmerson, Eng, Evans, Feuer, Fletcher, Fong, Fuentes, Fuller, Furutani, Gaines, Galgiani, Garrick, Gilmore, Hagman, Hall, Harkey, Hayashi, Hernandez, Hill, Huber, Huffman, Jeffries, Jones, Knight, Logue, Bonnie Lowenthal, Ma, Mendoza, Miller, Monning, Nava, Nestande, Niello, Nielsen, Norby, V. Manuel Perez, Portantino, Ruskin, Salas, Saldana, Silva, Skinner, Smyth, Solorio, Swanson, Torlakson, Torres, Torrico, Tran, Villines, Yamada, John A. Perez NO VOTE RECORDED: Tom Berryhill, Lieu, Audra Strickland, Vacancy CTW:TSM:do 8/4/10 Senate Floor Analyses CONTINUED AB 1925 Page 9 SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE **** END **** CONTINUED