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