BILL ANALYSIS ------------------------------------------------------------ |SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | SB 1317| |Office of Senate Floor Analyses | | |1020 N Street, Suite 524 | | |(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | | |327-4478 | | ------------------------------------------------------------ THIRD READING Bill No: SB 1317 Author: Leno (D) Amended: 5/6/10 Vote: 21 SENATE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE : 6-1, 4/20/10 AYES: Leno, Cedillo, Hancock, Huff, Steinberg, Wright NOES: Cogdill SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE : 8-1, 5/10/10 AYES: Kehoe, Cox, Alquist, Leno, Price, Wolk, Wyland, Yee NOES: Walters NO VOTE RECORDED: Corbett, Denham SUBJECT : Truancy SOURCE : San Francisco District Attorney DIGEST : This bill enacts a new misdemeanor for parents of K-8 children who are chronically truant, as specified; and authorizes courts to establish a deferred entry of judgment program to handle cases involving parents or guardians of elementary school pupils who are chronically truant, with specified features. ANALYSIS : Current law provides that "every person who commits any act or omits the performance of any duty, which act or omission causes or tends to cause or encourage any person under the age of 18 years to (become a dependent or delinquent ward of the juvenile court) or which act or CONTINUED SB 1317 Page 2 omission contributes thereto, or any person who, by any act or omission, or by threats, commands, or persuasion, induces or endeavors to induce any person under the age of 18 years or any ward or dependent child of the juvenile court to fail or refuse to conform to a lawful order of the juvenile court, or to do or to perform any act or to follow any course of conduct or to so live as would cause or manifestly tend to cause that person to become or to remain a person within the (jurisdiction of the dependency or delinquency court, as specified), is guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction thereof shall be punished by a fine not exceeding $2,500, or by imprisonment in the county jail for not more than one year, or by both fine and imprisonment in a county jail, or may be released on probation for a period not exceeding five years." (Penal Code 272.) Current law provides that for purposes of these provisions, "a parent or legal guardian to any person under the age of 18 years shall have the duty to exercise reasonable care, supervision, protection, and control over their minor child." (Id.) This bill would enact a new crime providing that a "parent or guardian of a pupil of six years of age or more who is in kindergarten or any of grades 1 to 8, inclusive, and who is subject to compulsory full-time education or compulsory continuation education, whose child is a chronic truant as defined in Section 48263.6 of the Education Code, and who has failed to reasonably supervise and encourage the pupil's school attendance, is guilty of a misdemeanor," punishable by a fine not exceeding $2,000, or by imprisonment in the county jail not exceeding one year, or by both that fine and imprisonment. Current law authorizes a diversion program for parents or guardians who are being prosecuted for contributing to the delinquency of a minor under Penal Code section 272, as specified. (Penal Code 1001.70 et seq.) This bill provides that a parent or guardian guilty of the new misdemeanor this bill would create would be eligible to participate in the deferred entry of judgment program created by this bill, as explained below. SB 1317 Page 3 This bill authorizes a superior court to establish a deferred entry of judgment program "to adjudicate cases involving parents or guardians of elementary school pupils who are chronic truants as defined in Section 48263.6 of the Education Code, " with the following components: 1.A dedicated court calendar. 2.Leadership by a judge of the superior court in that county. 3.Service referrals for parents or guardians, including, but not necessarily limited to, all of the following: A. Case management. B. Mental and physical health services. C. Parenting classes and support. D. Substance abuse treatment. E. Child care and housing. 4.A clear statement that, in lieu of trial, the court may grant deferred entry of judgment with respect to the current crime or crimes charged if the defendant pleads guilty to each charge and waives time for the pronouncement of judgment and that, upon the defendant's compliance with the terms and conditions set forth by the court and agreed to by the defendant upon the entry of his or her plea, and upon the motion of the prosecuting attorney, the court will dismiss the charge or charges against the defendant, as specified. 5.A clear statement that failure to comply with any condition under the program may result in the prosecuting attorney or the court making a motion for entry of judgment, whereupon the court will render a finding of guilty to the charge or charges pled, enter judgment, and schedule a sentencing hearing as otherwise provided in this code. 6.An explanation of criminal record retention and disposition resulting from participation in the deferred entry of judgment program and the defendant's rights relative to answering questions about his or her arrest SB 1317 Page 4 and deferred entry of judgment following successful completion of the program. This bill requires that funding for the deferred entry of judgment program come solely from nonstate services. This bill becomes operative only if SB 1148 of the 2009-10 Regular Session is enacted, adds Section 48263.6 to the Education Code, and becomes operative on or before January 1, 2011. Related Legislation This bill is contingent upon the passage of Senator Alquist's bill, SB 1148, which as amended April 6, 2010, would provide the following definition of chronic truancy: Any pupil subject to compulsory full-time education or to compulsory continuation education who is absent from school without valid excuse for 10 percent or more of the schooldays in one school year, from the date of enrollment to the current date, is deemed a chronic truant, provided that the appropriate school district officer or employee has complied with Sections 48260, 48260.5, 48261, 48262, 48263, and 48291. (emphasis added.) FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes Local: Yes SUPPORT : (Verified 5/12/10) San Francisco District Attorney (source) California District Attorneys Association California State PTA California Teachers Association California Probation, Parole, and Correctional Association Chief Probation Officers of California ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : According to the author's office: When it comes to breaking the cycle of crime, we can either pay attention to the signs of trouble now, or SB 1317 Page 5 we can pay the price later. We pay that price in more ways than one. Elementary school children who fail to attend school today become tomorrow's high school dropouts. Dropouts are those most likely to end up in the streets as either victims or perpetrators of crime. ? Combating elementary school truancy is a smart approach to crime prevention. The statistics speak volumes. Habitual truants become high school truants, and it is estimated that as many as 75 percent of all truant high school students will eventually drop out of school. Statewide, three-fourths of prison inmates are high school dropouts. In San Francisco, over 94 percent of all homicide victims under the age of 25 are high school dropouts. ? ? In 2007, the National Center for Children in Poverty issued a study finding that children who miss 10 percent or more of the days in a given school year are the most likely to suffer lower academic performance in subsequent school years. ? ? Numerous studies demonstrate a strong correlation between teenage truancy and juvenile delinquency. The California Department of Education identified truancy as the most powerful predictor of juvenile delinquent behavior. The Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention reported that truancy correlates with substance abuse, gang involvement, and other criminal activity. A report by Fight Crime: Invest in Kids concluded that increasing graduation rates by 10 percentage points would decrease rates of violent crime by 20 percent, and prevent 500 murders and more than 20,000 aggravated assaults each year in California. ? County prosecutors have relied on Penal Code Section 272, "contributing to the delinquency of a minor" to seek stronger sanctions against parents of repeatedly truant children. Although Section 272 does not specifically address truancy, courts have found parents guilty of this misdemeanor if their failure to get their child in school results in delinquent SB 1317 Page 6 juvenile behavior. Under this statute, parents can be fined up to $2,500 or placed in jail for 6 months. Unfortunately, however, neither the Education Code nor the Penal Code effectively addresses the most serious problem that needs the most immediate attention: chronic elementary school truancy. The Education Code does not distinguish between levels of truancy, leaving the potential for parents of children who have missed 5 days to be considered as liable as parents of children who have missed 50 days for failing to ensure access to education. The most severe consequence that a parent can receive under the Education Code is an infraction conviction and a fine. (Education Code Section 48293) Second, the Penal Code's silence on the issue of truancy leaves prosecutors and courts with the unhelpful option of focusing on whether the child is delinquent as a result of missing school, rather than focusing on the parents' failure to provide a basic need. Parents who allow their young children to have chronic levels of truancy are neglecting their child's needs, regardless of whether that child demonstrates delinquent behavior. Failing to educate a child is an issue of neglect, just like failing to feed or clothe them. Finally, when prosecutors do invoke "contributing to the delinquency of a minor" to bring misdemeanor charges against parents of severely truant children, criminal courts have widely varying responses to these charges. Some courts take a punitive approach that may levy a fine or jail time on the parent but may not result in the return of the child to school, while others may not take these charges seriously, given the gravity of other criminal offenses being addressed, and may throw out the cases with no changed circumstances for the child. ? RJG:nl 5/12/10 Senate Floor Analyses SB 1317 Page 7 SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE **** END ****