BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 924
Page 1
Date of Hearing: April 23, 2013
Counsel: Gabriel Caswell
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC SAFETY
Tom Ammiano, Chair
AB 924 (Bigelow) - As Amended: March 21, 2013
SUMMARY : Imposes additional penalties for theft or excessive
takings of specified livestock. Specifically, this bill :
1)Specifies a fine of up to $5,000 for grand theft involving
livestock and earmarks those funds to the Bureau of Livestock
Identification for the purpose of investigating theft of
livestock.
2)Imposes a mandatory minimum of 30 days of incarceration as a
condition of probation for a second or subsequent offense of
grand theft of livestock. Provides a limited exception to this
requirement in unusual circumstances where the interests of
justice would best be served by granting probation or
suspending the imposition or execution of sentence without
requiring imprisonment in a county jail, in which case the
court shall specify on the record and shall enter on the
minutes the circumstances indicating that the interests of
justice would best be served by the disposition.
3)Lowers the threshold for imposition of additional consecutive
sentence enhancements for excessive takings as follows:
a) Lowers the threshold value of damage from $65,000 to
$15,000 for the imposition of an additional one year
consecutive sentence enhancement when a person takes,
damages, or destroys any specified livestock animal.
b) Lowers the threshold value of damage from $200,000 to
$50,000 for the imposition of an additional two year
consecutive sentence enhancement when a person takes,
damages, or destroys any specified livestock animal.
EXISTING LAW :
1)Defines "grand theft" as any theft where the money, labor, or
AB 924
Page 2
real or personal property taken or when the property is taken
from the person of another is of a value exceeding $950.
[Penal Code Sections 487(a) and 487(c).]
2)Provides that grand theft is committed when the money, labor,
or real or personal property taken is of a value in excess of
$950, except as specified. [Penal Code Section 487(a).]
3)Provides that notwithstanding the value of the property taken,
grand theft is committed in any of the following cases [Penal
Code Section 487(b)]:
a) When domestic fowls, avocados, or other farm crops are
taken of a value exceeding $250;
b) When fish or other aquacultural products are taken from
a commercial or research operation that is producing that
product of a value exceeding $250;
c) Where money, labor or property is taken by a servant or
employee from his or her principal and aggregates $950 or
more in any consecutive 12-month period;
d) When the property is taken from the person of another;
or,
e) When the property taken is, among other things, an
automobile, horse or firearm. Provides that if the grand
theft involves the theft of a firearm, it is punishable by
imprisonment in state prison for 16 months, 2 or 3 years.
(Penal Code Section 489.)
4)Provides for "excessive taking" which is the taking, damaging,
or destruction of property when any person takes, damages, or
destroys any property in the commission or attempted
commission of a felony, with the intent to cause that taking,
damage, or destruction, the court shall impose an additional
term as follows: (Penal Code Section 12022.6.)
a) If the loss exceeds sixty-five thousand dollars
($65,000), the court, in addition and consecutive to the
punishment prescribed for the felony or attempted felony of
which the defendant has been convicted, shall impose an
additional term of one year.
AB 924
Page 3
b) If the loss exceeds two hundred thousand dollars
($200,000), the court, in addition and consecutive to the
punishment prescribed for the felony or attempted felony of
which the defendant has been convicted, shall impose an
additional term of two years.
c) If the loss exceeds one million three hundred thousand
dollars ($1,300,000), the court, in addition and
consecutive to the punishment prescribed for the felony or
attempted felony of which the defendant has been convicted,
shall impose an additional term of three years.
d) If the loss exceeds three million two hundred thousand
dollars ($3,200,000), the court, in addition and
consecutive to the punishment prescribed for the felony or
attempted felony of which the defendant has been convicted,
shall impose an additional term of four years.
5)Specifies that in any accusatory pleading involving multiple
charges of taking, damage, or destruction, the additional
terms provided in this section may be imposed if the aggregate
losses to the victims from all felonies exceed the amounts
specified in this section and arise from a common scheme or
plan. The additional terms provided in this section shall not
be imposed unless the facts of the taking, damage, or
destruction in excess of the amounts provided in this section
are charged in the accusatory pleading and admitted or found
to be true by the trier of fact. [Penal Code Section
12022.6(b)-(c).]
FISCAL EFFECT : Unknown
COMMENTS :
1)Author's Statement : According to the author, "The financial
loss from animal theft can impact a family ranching operation
tremendously and can mean the difference in ending up in the
red or in the black on any given year. There has been a 60%
increase in the value of beef cattle over the last few years,
and as a result we have also seen an increase in theft. In
2012, the Bureau of Livestock Identification reported that
1,110 head of cattle were stolen a value of nearly $1 million.
AB 924 would give prosecutors the tools they need to
effectively administer the law and appropriately convict
persons found guilty of livestock theft. "
AB 924
Page 4
2)Background : According to the background provided by the
author, "Existing law, particularly with the effects of
realignment, is not adequate to properly deter livestock theft
and lacks specific provisions for prosecutors to use at their
discretion to enhance penalties. With the implementation of
Realignment, too many offenders including repeat offenders are
being convicted but receive no jail time at all. Instead,
almost all receive probation or nothing at all. The increasing
value of livestock has resulted in an exponential increase in
theft that has caused severe economic damage to the livelihood
of many ranchers throughout California. Livestock theft
negatively impacts a ranchers' bottom line and their ability
to care for their family and business."
3)Specifies of a $5,000 Fine for Grand Theft of Livestock and
Earmarks the Proceeds : This bill seeks to specify a criminal
fine of no more than $5,000 for grand theft of specified
livestock. This up to $5,000 fine is further earmarked to the
Bureau of Livestock Identification for the purpose of
investigating theft of livestock. The specification of this
fine takes funds from any default fine which would have been
imposed on offenders convicted of grand theft of livestock
from the general fund of the State of California.
4)Mandatory Minimum Sentence for Probation : This bill imposes a
mandatory period of incarceration of 30-days in the county
jail if a court imposes probation upon a person convicted of a
second or subsequent offense of grand theft of livestock. By
making the imposition of the 30-day sentence mandatory the
bill will exacerbate already overcrowded county jails and
removes aspects of the decision from the sentencing court.
Judges are often in a better position to make these decisions
other than the Legislature because they are experienced in the
handling of criminal matter, and they have the most firm grasp
of the facts and circumstances of any particular case. This
bill limits this discretion with a requirement of unusual
circumstances where the interests of justice would best be
served by granting probation or suspending the imposition or
execution of sentence without requiring imprisonment in a
county jail. It further requires that the judge specify on
the record and enter on the minutes the circumstances
indicating that the interests of justice would best be served
by the disposition.
AB 924
Page 5
5)Increases to the Threshold for Excessive Takings were Recently
Increased in 2007 : This bill lowers the threshold for
excessive taking, damaging, or destruction of property when
that property is livestock. The default threshold for the
imposition of an additional sentence of one year imprisonment
is $65,000. The default threshold of an imposition of an
additional two years imprisonment is $200,000.
This bill would lower those thresholds to extremely low levels
for the excessive taking, damaging, or destruction of
livestock. For an imposition of an additional, consecutive
year of imprisonment the perpetrator need only damage or take
$15,000 in property. For imposition of an additional two
years consecutive imprisonment, the perpetrator need only
damage or take $50,000 in property.
As a matter of perspective, the State of California recently
increased the threshold values to trigger imposition of these
penalties for all other types of property. Prior to 2007 the
taking or damage had to be $50,000 for a one year enhancement
and $100,000 for a two year enhancement.
This bill takes the levels for livestock drastically below the
levels prior to the increase in the threshold in 2007.
6)Potential for Jail Overcrowding : According to a recent report
by the Public Policy Institute of California titled Capacity
Challenges in California's Jails, "California's county jails
are facing increasing adult daily populations (ADP). Many
counties are facing capacity constraints on their population.
Prior to realignment, 17 counties were operating under court
orders limiting the number of inmates in their jails. In
all, 13 counties including some of the biggest (Los Angeles,
Orange, San Diego, and Sacramento) had average daily
populations that were larger than the number of beds their
jails were rated for. This bill drastically lowers the
threshold for taking offenses involving livestock and imposes
a mandatory minimum sentence for grand theft of livestock with
a prior, thereby exacerbating the jail overcrowding problem in
California."
7)Argument in Support : According to the California Cattlemen's
Association "Simply put, AB 924 provides new and appropriate
penalty enhancements for prosecutors to use at their
discretion to ensure that the proper punishment can be
AB 924
Page 6
provided for repeat offenders and those convicted of felony
grand theft of livestock that have caused irreparable economic
damage to livelihoods of our state's family farmers and
ranchers.
"The financial loss from animal theft can impact a family
farming or ranching operation tremendously and can mean the
difference of ending up in the red or black on any given year.
The increasing value of livestock has unfortunately led to an
exponential increase in the rates and severity of livestock
theft. In some recent cases, an entire semitrailer load of
cattle were stolen equating to a nearly $40,000 loss to the
rancher. In many of these cases, those convicted of livestock
grand theft receive little to no punishment even if they have
already been convicted of livestock theft in the past.
"AB 924 respects the ongoing efforts of the state to address
prison overcrowding by providing the flexibility for local
district attorneys, in coordination with their constituents
and the need of their local jurisdictions, to apply the new
penalty enhancements as deemed appropriate. For those who have
been convicted of felony grand theft of livestock more than
once, AB 924 only denies probation for a period of 30 days or
less. While this may seem insignificant, it sends a strong
message to prior offenders that a new conviction will result
in some jail time.
"AB 924 also creates a new $5,000 fine that can be imposed on
a convicted offender for the specific purpose of assisting
coordination efforts between the California Department of Food
and Agriculture's Bureau of Livestock Identification and local
law enforcement to identify potential suspects."
8)Argument in Opposition : According to the California Attorneys
for Criminal Justice , "California Attorneys for Criminal
Justice (CACJ), a statewide association of criminal defense
attorneys, opposes Assembly Bill 924 (Bigelow). This
legislation seeks to deter livestock theft by creating methods
to punish repeat offenders and those found guilty of high
value theft.
"Existing law establishes that theft of certain livestock is
punishable by imprisonment in county jail not to exceed one
year pursuant to 1170(h). This bill would create an additional
fine of $5,000 and continues the option of charging a felony
AB 924
Page 7
or misdemeanor for the theft of livestock. For the second or
subsequent convictions, the bill would require 30 days in
county jail as a condition of granting probation.
"Furthermore, the bill lowers the threshold for eligibility of
an enhancement from a loss of $65,000 to a $15,000 loss for an
additional year of incarceration. For an additional two years
of incarceration, the limit has been lowered even further,
from $200,000 to $50,000. This bill unnecessarily sends people
back to county jail where our state's goal is to reduce the
number of persons unnecessarily sent to jail."
9)Prior Legislation : AB 1705 (Niello), Chapter 420, Statutes of
2007, increased the threshold for takings offenses.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION :
Support
Agricultural Council of California
California Cattlemen's Association
California Chamber of Commerce
California Farm Bureau Federation
California Grain and Seed Association
California Poultry Federation
Pacific Egg and Poultry Association
Western United Dairyman
Opposition
California Attorneys for Criminal Justice
Analysis Prepared by : Gabriel Caswell / PUB. S. / (916)
319-3744