BILL ANALYSIS Ó
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | AB 1618|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
CONSENT
Bill No: AB 1618
Author: Chesbro (D)
Amended: 3/11/14 in Assembly
Vote: 21
SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE : 7-0, 6/10/14
AYES: Jackson, Anderson, Corbett, Lara, Leno, Monning, Vidak
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 68-0, 3/28/14 (Consent) - See last page for
vote
SUBJECT : Juveniles: case file inspection
SOURCE : Judicial Council
DIGEST : This bill clarifies that the authorization for those
persons specified to inspect the case file of a dependent child
or ward of the juvenile court includes persons serving in a
similar capacity for an Indian tribe, reservation, or tribal
court when the case file involves a child who is a member of, or
is eligible for membership in, that tribe.
ANALYSIS :
Existing law:
1.Provides, under the federal Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA),
that tribes are entitled to notice of child welfare
proceedings involving children who are either identified as
members or eligible for membership in the tribe.
CONTINUED
AB 1618
Page
2
2.Provides that tribes have presumptive jurisdiction over child
welfare matters involving children who are either identified
as members or eligible for membership in the tribe and allows
tribes to seek transfer of state court child welfare matters
involving these children to tribal court. If the case remains
in state court, existing law allows tribes to intervene and
participate in those cases.
3.Provides that juvenile case files are confidential, but
authorizes specified persons and entities to access those
files.
4.Provides for any non-specified person who seeks to access the
juvenile court file to submit a petition with the court.
Existing law requires the petition to be served on all known
interested parties 10 days prior to filing the petition.
5.Prohibits any party authorized to inspect a dependency court
case file from disseminating the file or its contents unless
otherwise permitted.
This bill authorizes the following officials, or those serving
in a similar capacity, of an Indian tribe, reservation, or
tribal court, to inspect juvenile case files when the case
involves a child who is a member of, or is eligible for
membership in, that tribe:
1.Court personnel;
2.The attorneys for the parties, judges, referees, other hearing
officers, probation officers, and law enforcement officers who
are actively participating in criminal or juvenile proceedings
involving the child;
3.The county counsel, city attorney, or any other attorney
representing the petitioning agency in a dependency action;
4.Members of the child protective agencies, as defined;
5.Members of children's multidisciplinary teams, persons, or
agencies providing treatment or supervision of the child;
6.Judge, commissioner, or other hearing officer assigned to a
CONTINUED
AB 1618
Page
3
family law case with issues concerning custody or visitation,
or both, involving the child, and other specified family court
officials;
7.A court-appointed investigator who is actively participating
in a guardianship case involving the child; and
8.Local child support agency.
Background
Juvenile case files are confidential and may be accessed only by
specified classes of people and entities. Traditionally, only
the parties to a juvenile dependency hearing, which includes the
attorneys and parents, could access the case file without a
court order. This group of people has been expanded numerous
times over the years to include city attorneys or prosecutors,
judges, referees, hearing officers, law enforcement officers
actively participating in juvenile proceedings involving the
minor, the superintendent of the school where the minor is
enrolled, members of Child Protective Services, children's
multidisciplinary teams, and persons or agencies providing
treatment or supervision of the minor. These persons and groups
need not petition the court or make a showing of good cause
because they are presumptively allowed access. Additionally,
the courts are permitted to authorize inspection by any other
person designated by court order. However, under existing law,
tribes and tribal officials are not presumptively granted this
access, and thus must request access through the court when an
Indian child is involved in a juvenile case. California has a
unique history when it comes to Native American legal and
political policy. California is home to over 100 federally
recognized tribes, and has more Indians living here than any
other state. The cultural benefits associated with preventing
the breakup of Indian families and tribes are well-documented,
and have been a driving force behind both state and federal
legislation. In 1978 Congress passed the ICWA. It was intended
as a federal mandate to those involved in the child custody
system to work collaboratively with tribes to prevent the
breakup of Indian families and tribes and to redress past wrongs
of the child custody system. However, many agencies still fail
to comply with procedural requirements such as notifying the
tribes and the Bureau of Indian Affairs when a tribal youth is
involved in a juvenile proceeding, causing much frustration to
CONTINUED
AB 1618
Page
4
both the courts and the tribes. (Administrative Office of the
Courts, Bench Handbook: The Indian Child Welfare Act, revised
2013.)
Prior Legislation :
SB 927 (Runner of 2011) would have authorized an attorney for a
sibling of the minor to inspect and copy the dependency case
file upon showing good cause and the facts supporting why
inspection is necessary to the on-going representation of the
child. This bill died in the Senate Judiciary Committee.
AB 2228 (Garcia, Chapter 574, Statutes of 2004) among other
things, facilitated the sharing of information between the
family law and probate law courts in guardianship proceedings,
and the sharing of information between the family law and
probate law courts and juvenile court in the latter court's
proceedings in order to assist the court in determining the best
interest of the child.
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: No Local:
No
SUPPORT : (Verified 6/11/14)
Judicial Council (source)
California Welfare Directors Association
Executive Committee of the Family Law Section of the State Bar
Legal Services for Prisoners with Children
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : According to the author, "Under both
Federal and California law, tribes, tribal officials, and tribal
entities need to have access to juvenile court files of children
who are members of, or are eligible for membership in, that
tribe. Currently, they are not allowed to access those files.
Some courts have instituted local rules to try to get around the
restrictions, but this bill would include them specifically
within the exceptions in Welfare and Institutions Code Section
827, allowing access in relevant cases statewide on a uniform
basis."
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 68-0, 3/28/14
AYES: Achadjian, Alejo, Allen, Ammiano, Atkins, Bloom,
CONTINUED
AB 1618
Page
5
Bocanegra, Bonilla, Bonta, Bradford, Brown, Buchanan, Ian
Calderon, Campos, Chau, Chávez, Chesbro, Conway, Cooley,
Dababneh, Dahle, Daly, Dickinson, Donnelly, Eggman, Fong, Fox,
Frazier, Beth Gaines, Gatto, Gomez, Gonzalez, Gordon, Gray,
Grove, Hall, Roger Hernández, Holden, Levine, Linder,
Lowenthal, Maienschein, Mansoor, Melendez, Mullin, Muratsuchi,
Nazarian, Nestande, Olsen, Pan, Patterson, Perea, V. Manuel
Pérez, Quirk, Quirk-Silva, Rendon, Ridley-Thomas, Rodriguez,
Salas, Skinner, Stone, Ting, Waldron, Weber, Wieckowski, Wilk,
Williams, John A. Pérez
NO VOTE RECORDED: Bigelow, Garcia, Gorell, Hagman, Harkey,
Jones, Jones-Sawyer, Logue, Medina, Morrell, Wagner, Yamada
AL:d 6/11/14 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****
CONTINUED