BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 1384
Page 1
Date of Hearing: May 4, 2011
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Felipe Fuentes, Chair
AB 1384 (Bradford) - As Amended: March 21, 2011
Policy Committee: Public
SafetyVote: 4-2
Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program:
No Reimbursable:
SUMMARY
This bill authorizes the court, in the interest of justice, to
expunge the record for a misdemeanor conviction - after one year
- of a person who has not received probation. (This relief is
similar to that provided to specified misdemeanants and felons
who have received probation under current law, as well as to
misdemeanants who have not received probation and withdraw their
plea or have their plea set aside.)
FISCAL EFFECT
Minor absorbable trial court costs by extending judicial
discretion for expungement to misdemeanants who have not been
given a probation term.
COMMENTS
1)Rationale. The author and proponents note that while current
law provides expungement relief for specified misdemeanants
and felons who have received probation, there is no parallel
provision for misdemeanants who have not received probation.
According to the author, "In today's climate, job seekers, who
were suddenly laid off after years of working, find they are
unable to find a new job because of a conviction that occurred
many years ago. Some of those job seekers are unable to get
low level misdemeanor convictions expunged from their records
due to this inconsistency in the California expungement
process.
"This bill can increase employment opportunities for people
AB 1384
Page 2
with past convictions and decrease the state's recidivism
rate, which is the highest in the nation (70%). Reducing
recidivism will enhance public safety and decrease the amount
of money that the state spends on incarceration."
2)Support . According to the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights
of the San Francisco Bay Area, "Currently there is an
inconsistency in the two dismissal statutes . . . . Penal
Code section 1203.4, which applies to cases where probation is
sentenced, empowers judges to exercise their discretion to
dismiss a conviction 'in the interests of justice.' Penal
Code section 1203.4a, which applies to misdemeanor and
infraction cases where no probation is sentenced, does not
contain a parallel 'interests of justice' provision. The
differing treatment of misdemeanors under the two statutes is
unwarranted, and prevents courts from granting dismissals in
appropriate cases. AB 1384 will amend Penal Code section
1203.4a to give judges discretion to expunge misdemeanor
convictions in appropriate cases, regardless of whether or not
the sentence included probation. The impact of AB 1384 is
significant because it equalizes the way misdemeanors are
treated for purposes of California expungement remedies."
3)Opposition . According to the California District Attorneys
Association, "The proponents argue that current law is
inconsistent and unfair given the disparate treatment of
misdemeanants who are granted probation and those who are not.
While the statutes are different, we would argue that it is
not inappropriate to recognize the difference between those
granted probation and those who are not.
"Additionally, criminal history can be an important factor in
employment decisions, especially when they involve persons who
will be working in sensitive positions (e.g. with and around
children, handling financial or personal information, etc.).
We are not convinced of the need to open the door to
expungement to a class of offenders who were not granted
probation and were otherwise unable to comply with the
existing conditions that precede expungement."
4)Prior Legislation . AB 2068 (Hill), 2010 Legislative Session,
was similar to this bill and was vetoed.
Analysis Prepared by : Geoff Long / APPR. / (916) 319-2081
AB 1384
Page 3