BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 1118
Page 1
Date of Hearing: May 1, 2013
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Mike Gatto, Chair
AB 1118 (Hagman) - As Amended: April 10, 2013
Policy Committee: Public
SafetyVote: 7-0
Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program:
No Reimbursable:
SUMMARY
This bill requires the Judicial Council, on or before January 1,
2015, to prepare, adopt and annually revise a statewide bail
schedule for all bailable felony, misdemeanor, and infraction
offenses except Vehicle Code infractions, and requires the
superior courts, in annually adopting countywide bail schedules,
to consider the statewide bail schedule. Specifically, this
bill:
1)Requires the Judicial Council to appoint a representative
group of judges to develop and approve the statewide bail
schedule in consultation with specified parties, pursuant to
guidelines similar to those used by superior courts for
countywide bail schedules.
2)Provides that, effective January 1, 2015, courts adopting
countywide bail and penalty schedules shall consider the
statewide bail schedule prepared and adopted by the Judicial
Council.
3)States that after adopting a countywide bail schedule, a court
shall, as soon as practicable, mail a copy of the adopted bail
schedule to the Judicial Council with a report that states how
that bail schedule differs from the statewide bail schedule.
FISCAL EFFECT
1)One-time costs in the range of $150,000 to the Judicial
Council to establish a statewide bail schedule. This assumes
the equivalent of one personnel year plus travel and per diem.
AB 1118
Page 2
2)Ongoing costs to maintain and update the bail schedule,
assuming 20% of the initial development costs, would be about
$25,000.
3)Ongoing costs to local trial courts for a comparative analysis
of the statewide bail schedule and the local schedule, would
likely be in the range of $120,000, assuming a workload
average of 40 hours per county.
COMMENTS
1)Rationale . According to the author, "To ensure the reduction
in jail overcrowding and the migration of criminals amongst
them, we must create predictability in the state's bail
schedules."
According to the background materials provided by the author,
"Under existing law, counties are charged with creating an
annual bail schedule that applies to their respective
district. With each county creating their schedule, bail for a
specific crime in one county could vary significantly in a
different county.
"This disparity creates unequal protection under the law. For
instance, the felony of grand theft bail schedules could range
from $5,000 in Placer County to $50,000 in San Bernardino
County.
"As has been seen in Southern California, often when one
county raises the bail amounts the counties near them feel
pressure to follow suit. Once bail amounts become too high
for the accused to pay, they stay in jail until their court
date. This causes overcrowded conditions which necessitates
their release without any assurance they will appear for their
court date."
2)Opposition . According to the California District Attorneys
Association, "Prosecutors agree with current law that permits
superior court judges in each county to set their own bail
schedule. This statute recognizes that bail amounts and
decisions, like other aspects of our criminal justice system
such as policing policies, charging decisions, and sentencing
determinations, can vary based on community characteristics
AB 1118
Page 3
and standards. Requiring consideration of a statewide bail
schedule could discourage courts from setting bail terms based
on appropriate local factors.
"Additionally, because the ways in which law enforcement
protects public safety and guarantees defendant appearance
(key notions underlying bail) are not the same in every
jurisdiction, the virtue of a statewide uniform criminal bail
schedule is illusory."
1)Proposed author's amendments delete the provisions of the bill
that require courts adopting countywide bail and penalty
schedules to consider the statewide bail schedule prepared and
adopted by the Judicial Council and to provide a copy of the
adopted bail schedule to the Judicial Council with a report
that states how that bail schedule differs from the statewide
bail schedule. Proposed amendments would also delete reference
to the State Bail Agents Association and the California Bail
Agents Association as pertaining to entities the Judicial
Counsel must consult with in devising a statewide bail
schedule.
Analysis Prepared by : Geoff Long / APPR. / (916) 319-2081