BILL ANALYSIS Ó SENATE COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC SAFETY Senator Loni Hancock, Chair A 2011-2012 Regular Session B 2 2 0 AB 220 (Solorio) As Amended June 29, 2011 Hearing date: July 5, 2011 Welfare and Institutions Code AA:dl JUVENILE JUSTICE: INTERSTATE COMPACT HISTORY Source: Author Prior Legislation: AB 1053 (Solorio) - Ch. 268, Stats. 2009 Support: Unknown Opposition:None known Assembly Floor Vote: N/A KEY ISSUE SHOULD THE SUNSET FOR THE INTERSTATE COMPACT FOR JUVENILES BE EXTENDED FROM JANUARY 1, 2012 TO JANUARY 1, 2014? PURPOSE The purpose of this bill is to extend the January 1, 2012 sunset (More) AB 220 (Solorio) Page 2 on the Interstate Compact for Juveniles two years, to January 1, 2014. Current law sets for the Interstate Compact for Juveniles, which generally provides for specified matters concerning juvenile offenders, especially with respect to overseeing, supervising, and coordinating the interstate movement of juveniles subject to the terms of this compact, as specified. (Welfare and Institutions Code § 1400 et seq.) Current law sunsets these provisions on January 1, 2012, as specified. This bill would extend this sunset to January 1, 2014. RECEIVERSHIP/OVERCROWDING CRISIS AGGRAVATION For the last several years, severe overcrowding in California's prisons has been the focus of evolving and expensive litigation. As these cases have progressed, prison conditions have continued to be assailed, and the scrutiny of the federal courts over California's prisons has intensified. On June 30, 2005, in a class action lawsuit filed four years earlier, the United States District Court for the Northern District of California established a Receivership to take control of the delivery of medical services to all California state prisoners confined by the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation ("CDCR"). In December of 2006, plaintiffs in two federal lawsuits against CDCR sought a court-ordered limit on the prison population pursuant to the federal Prison Litigation Reform Act. On January 12, 2010, a three-judge federal panel issued an order requiring California to reduce its inmate population to 137.5 percent of design capacity -- a reduction at that time of roughly 40,000 inmates -- within two years. The court stayed implementation of its ruling pending the state's appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court. (More) AB 220 (Solorio) Page 3 On May 23, 2011, the United States Supreme Court upheld the decision of the three-judge panel in its entirety, giving California two years from the date of its ruling to reduce its prison population to 137.5 percent of design capacity, subject to the right of the state to seek modifications in appropriate circumstances. In response to the unresolved prison capacity crisis, in early 2007 the Senate Committee on Public Safety began holding legislative proposals which could further exacerbate prison overcrowding through new or expanded felony prosecutions. This bill does not to aggravate the prison overcrowding crisis described above. (More) COMMENTS 1. Background; What This Bill Would Do In a report dated January 2011, the Corrections Standards Authority issued a report on California's membership in the Interstate Compact for Juveniles. The report stated in part: The Interstate Compact for Juveniles (ICJ) is a multi-state agreement governing the supervision of delinquent juveniles in jurisdictions other than their home states and procedures for the return to their home states of juveniles who have run away, absconded and/or escaped from juvenile homes or treatment facilities in other than their home states. Enabled by the Federal Crime Control Act, 4 U.S.C. Section 112 (1965), this compact is authorized and encouraged for cooperative efforts and mutual assistance in the prevention of crime. . . . . . . Based on these and other considerations, the Executive Steering Committee reached three overarching conclusions: California should join the ICJ and establish the required State Council as soon as possible. The State Council - or the ESC if the change of state administrations appears likely to result in a significant delay in appointing members to the State Council - should begin immediately to evaluate major issues and review existing ICJ rules to determine whether it is in California's best interests to remain in the ICJ permanently after the January 1, 2012 sunset of (More) AB 220 (Solorio) Page 5 Chapter 268. It is imperative that all court officers - judges, prosecutors and defense attorneys - and probation and parole personnel who are or may be involved in the interstate movement of California juveniles be provided ongoing training in the provisions of the ICJ. This bill would extend the sunset on the ICJ for two years. ***************