BILL ANALYSIS Ó
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | AB 986|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: AB 986
Author: Bradford (D)
Amended: 9/6/13 in Senate
Vote: 21
SENATE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE : 6-0, 6/18/13
AYES: Hancock, Block, De León, Knight, Liu, Steinberg
NO VOTE RECORDED: Anderson
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 74-0, 5/23/13 (Consent) - See last page for
vote
SUBJECT : Postrelease community supervision: flash
incarceration: city jails
SOURCE : California Police Chiefs Association
DIGEST : This bill revises the definition of flash
incarceration, which currently is defined to include a period of
detention in a county jail, to include city jails.
Senate Floor Amendments of 9/6/13 add language to avoid
chaptering out SB 76 (Senate Budget and Fiscal Review Committee,
Chapter 32, Statutes of 2013).
ANALYSIS :
Existing law:
1. Generally authorizes the use of a penalty known as "flash
CONTINUED
AB 986
Page
2
incarceration" for felons who have been released from prison,
are subject to supervision by state parole or county
probation, and are believed to have violated a condition of
their supervision.
2. Specifically authorizes county agencies responsible for
supervising persons subject to postrelease community
supervision to:
. . . determine and order appropriate responses to alleged
violations, which can include, but shall not be limited
to, immediate, structured, and intermediate sanctions up
to and including referral to a reentry court . . . , or
flash incarceration in a county jail. Periods of flash
incarceration are encouraged as one method of punishment
for violations of an offender's condition of postrelease
supervision.
(c) "Flash incarceration" is a period of detention in
county jail due to a violation of an offender's conditions
of postrelease supervision. The length of the detention
period can range between one and 10 consecutive days.
Flash incarceration is a tool that may be used by each
county agency responsible for postrelease supervision.
Shorter, but if necessary more frequent, periods of
detention for violations of an offender's postrelease
supervision conditions shall appropriately punish an
offender while preventing the disruption in a work or home
establishment that typically arises from longer term
revocations.
3. Authorizes this use of flash incarceration on parolees, who
are supervised by state parole.
This bill:
1. Revises the definition of "flash incarceration" to include a
period of detention in a city jail.
2. Makes additional non-substantive changes, as specified.
3. Adds language to avoid chaptering out SB 76 (Senate Budget
and Fiscal Review Committee, Chapter 32, Statutes of 2013).
CONTINUED
AB 986
Page
3
Comments
The author states:
"Flash incarceration" is an effective tool for local law
enforcement to temporarily detain an offender who violates
the conditions of his/her postrelease supervision. Periods
of flash incarceration are encouraged as one method of
punishment for violations of an offender's condition of
postrelease supervision. The length of the detention period
can range between one and 10 consecutive days, depending on
what is deemed appropriate by the responsible county agency.
Flash incarceration is, of course, subject to bed
availability in the county jail.
After the Legislature passed AB 109, the Criminal Justice
Realignment Act of 2011, the population in county jails
dramatically increased. As a result, county agencies haven't
been able to flash incarcerate individuals in violation of
the conditions of their postrelease supervision simply
because there aren't enough beds.
This bill would allow city jails to be used for flash
incarceration in cases where an offender violates conditions
of his/her postrelease supervision.
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: No Local:
No
SUPPORT : (Verified 9/9/13)
California Police Chiefs Association (source)
League of California Cities
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 74-0, 5/23/13
AYES: Achadjian, Alejo, Allen, Ammiano, Atkins, Bigelow, Bloom,
Blumenfield, Bocanegra, Bonilla, Bonta, Bradford, Brown,
Buchanan, Ian Calderon, Campos, Chau, Chávez, Chesbro, Conway,
Cooley, Dahle, Daly, Dickinson, Donnelly, Eggman, Fong, Fox,
Frazier, Beth Gaines, Garcia, Gatto, Gomez, Gordon, Gorell,
Gray, Hagman, Hall, Harkey, Roger Hernández, Jones-Sawyer,
Levine, Linder, Logue, Lowenthal, Maienschein, Mansoor,
Medina, Melendez, Mitchell, Morrell, Mullin, Muratsuchi,
Nazarian, Nestande, Olsen, Pan, Patterson, Perea, V. Manuel
CONTINUED
AB 986
Page
4
Pérez, Quirk, Quirk-Silva, Rendon, Salas, Skinner, Stone,
Ting, Wagner, Weber, Wieckowski, Wilk, Williams, Yamada, John
A. Pérez
NO VOTE RECORDED: Grove, Holden, Jones, Waldron, Vacancy,
Vacancy
JG:k 9/9/13 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****
CONTINUED