BILL ANALYSIS Ó
SENATE COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC SAFETY
Senator Loni Hancock, Chair
2015 - 2016 Regular
Bill No: AB 672 Hearing Date: July 14, 2015
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Author: |Jones-Sawyer |
|-----------+-----------------------------------------------------|
|Version: |June 1, 2015 |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Urgency: |No |Fiscal: |Yes |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Consultant:|JRD |
| | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Inmates: Wrongful Convictions: Assistance Upon Release
HISTORY
Source: California Attorneys for Criminal Justice
Prior Legislation:AB 2308 (Stone) - Chapter 607, Statutes of
2014
SB 618 (Leno) - Chapter 800, Statutes of 2013
Support: Association for Los Angeles Deputy Sheriffs;
California Association of Code Enforcement Officers;
California College and University Police Chiefs
Association; California Narcotics Officers
Association; Los Angeles Police Protective League;
Riverside Sheriffs Association
Opposition:None known
Assembly Floor Vote: 79 - 0
PURPOSE
AB 672 (Jones-Sawyer ) Page
2 of ?
The purpose of this legislation is to require the California
Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) to provide
transitional services to wrongfully convicted persons upon their
release, as specified.
Existing law requires CDCR and the Department of Motor Vehicles
(DMV) to ensure that all eligible inmates released from prison
have valid identification cards issued. (Penal Code § 3007.05.)
Existing law requires CDCR to establish a case management
reentry pilot program for offenders who are likely to benefit
from case management reentry strategies designed to address
homelessness, joblessness, mental disorders, and developmental
disabilities among offenders transitioning from prison into the
community. (Penal Code § 3016.)
Existing law requires the court to inform a person whose
conviction has been set aside based upon a determination that
the person was factually innocent of the charge of the
availability of indemnity for persons erroneously convicted and
the time limitations for presenting those claims. (Penal Code §
851.86.)
Existing law states that if a person has secured a declaration
of factual innocence, the finding shall be sufficient grounds
for compensation by the Victim Compensation and Government
Claims Board (VCGCB). Upon application the VCGCB shall, without
a hearing, recommend to the Legislature that an appropriation be
made. (Penal Code § 851.865.)
Existing law provides that any person who, having been convicted
of any crime against the state amounting to a felony and
imprisoned in the state prison for that conviction, is granted a
pardon by the Governor for the reason that the crime with which
he or she was charged was either not committed at all or, if
committed, was not committed by him or her, or who, being
innocent of the crime with which he or she was charged for
either of the foregoing reasons, shall have served the term or
any part thereof for which he or she was imprisoned, may, as
specified, present a claim against the state to the VCGCB for
the pecuniary injury sustained by him or her through the
AB 672 (Jones-Sawyer ) Page
3 of ?
erroneous conviction and imprisonment. (Penal Code § 4900.)
Existing law gives erroneously convicted and pardoned
individuals two years to file a claim against the state. (Penal
Code § 4901.)
Existing law sets the rate of compensation at $100 per day of
incarceration served subsequent to the claimant's conviction,
and specifies that this appropriation shall not be considered
gross income for state tax purposes. (Penal Code § 4904.)
This bill requires CDCR to provide transitional services to a
wrongfully convicted person, including housing assistance, job
training, and mental health services, as applicable.
This bill states that the extent of the services is to be
determined by CDCR.
This bill specifies that the services shall be provided for a
period of not less than six months and not more than one year
from the date of release.
This bill prohibits charging a fee for the application of an
original, renewal, or replacement driver's license or
identification card issued to any wrongfully-convicted person
released from prison or county jail within the previous six
months.
RECEIVERSHIP/OVERCROWDING CRISIS AGGRAVATION
For the past eight years, this Committee has scrutinized
legislation referred to its jurisdiction for any potential
impact on prison overcrowding. Mindful of the United States
Supreme Court ruling and federal court orders relating to the
state's ability to provide a constitutional level of health care
to its inmate population and the related issue of prison
overcrowding, this Committee has applied its "ROCA" policy as a
content-neutral, provisional measure necessary to ensure that
the Legislature does not erode progress in reducing prison
overcrowding.
On February 10, 2014, the federal court ordered California to
reduce its in-state adult institution population to 137.5% of
AB 672 (Jones-Sawyer ) Page
4 of ?
design capacity by February 28, 2016, as follows:
143% of design bed capacity by June 30, 2014;
141.5% of design bed capacity by February 28, 2015; and,
137.5% of design bed capacity by February 28, 2016.
In February of this year the administration reported that as "of
February 11, 2015, 112,993 inmates were housed in the State's 34
adult institutions, which amounts to 136.6% of design bed
capacity, and 8,828 inmates were housed in out-of-state
facilities. This current population is now below the
court-ordered reduction to 137.5% of design bed capacity." (
Defendants' February 2015 Status Report In Response To February
10, 2014 Order, 2:90-cv-00520 KJM DAD PC, 3-Judge Court, Coleman
v. Brown, Plata v. Brown (fn. omitted).
While significant gains have been made in reducing the prison
population, the state now must stabilize these advances and
demonstrate to the federal court that California has in place
the "durable solution" to prison overcrowding "consistently
demanded" by the court. (Opinion Re: Order Granting in Part and
Denying in Part Defendants' Request For Extension of December
31, 2013 Deadline, NO. 2:90-cv-0520 LKK DAD (PC), 3-Judge Court,
Coleman v. Brown, Plata v. Brown (2-10-14). The Committee's
consideration of bills that may impact the prison population
therefore will be informed by the following questions:
Whether a proposal erodes a measure which has contributed
to reducing the prison population;
Whether a proposal addresses a major area of public safety
or criminal activity for which there is no other
reasonable, appropriate remedy;
Whether a proposal addresses a crime which is directly
dangerous to the physical safety of others for which there
is no other reasonably appropriate sanction;
Whether a proposal corrects a constitutional problem or
legislative drafting error; and
Whether a proposal proposes penalties which are
proportionate, and cannot be achieved through any other
reasonably appropriate remedy.
COMMENTS
AB 672 (Jones-Sawyer ) Page
5 of ?
1. Need for Legislation
According to the author:
Wrongful convictions are occurring with more frequency in
our criminal justice system. With the technological
developments of DNA evidence, and a growing number of
Innocence Projects throughout the country, persons
wrongfully convicted of crimes are receiving a second
chance at life. According to an LA Times special report,
the number of people exonerated each year in the Unites
States has nearly tripled over the last two decades. A
total of 1,493 wrongfully convicted inmates have been set
free since the first DNA tests in 1989.
However, after sometimes decades in prison a wrongfully
convicted person is released from detention, they are
released back into the community without any compensation
or reentry services. By contrast, parolees often receive
assistance with various necessities such as food and
clothing vouchers, benefits, job training and housing
placements. Yet, for wrongfully convicted persons, they are
released without such basic necessities.
For example, in 2011, Obie Anthony, after being wrongfully
convicted, was released from detention after spending 17
years in prison. During his court case in 1994, the
prosecution failed to disclose that the key witness had
received a "deal"
with the prosecutor in exchange for the testimony. The
witness eventually recanted and Mr. Obie was released from
custody. Mr. Obie was released with the clothes on his back
and a few dollars in his pocket, despite being in prison
for 17 years.
Mr. Anthony was the inspiration for this bill. If it was
not for his loving family who helped him to readjust after
prison, he would probably not be here today.
2. California Commission on the Fair Administration of Justice
Report and
Recommendations
AB 672 (Jones-Sawyer ) Page
6 of ?
A 2008 report by the California Commission on the Fair
Administration of Justice addresses some of the obstacles faced
by persons who have established their innocence after conviction
of a crime in gaining access to post-conviction relief,
achieving reintegration into society, and gaining compensation
for their wrongful convictions. As to reintegration in
particular, the report states:
Ironically, even the limited resources made available
to convicted felons who have served their sentences
and are released from prison are not available to
those whose convictions have been set aside. Parolees
are released to the community in which they were
arrested or convicted; services such as counseling and
assistance in locating housing or jobs are limited to
those who remain under parole supervision. But those
who are being released because their conviction is set
aside, including those who have been found innocent,
receive none of these services. Those who have been
released back into the community after successfully
challenging their convictions, whether innocent or
not, face the same obstacles encountered by parolees,
and more. Many are afflicted with post-traumatic
stress disorder, or other psychological damage
resulting from their wrongful incarceration over a
long period of time. Of the States with compensation
laws, only three - Massachusetts, Louisiana and
Vermont - provide for the costs of medical and
psychological care. The New York Times recently
gathered information on 137 of the 206 imprisoned
individuals who have been found innocent by DNA
testing from 1989 through 2007. The reporters also
researched the compensation claims of all 206. They
found that at least 79 of these persons (40%) received
no compensation at all. More than half of those who
did receive compensation waited two years or longer
after exoneration for the first payment. Few received
any government services after their release. They
typically left prison with less help - prerelease
counseling, job training, substance-abuse treatment,
housing assistance and other services - than some
states offer to paroled prisoners. Most found that
AB 672 (Jones-Sawyer ) Page
7 of ?
authorities were slow to wipe the convictions from
their records, if they did so at all. Even those who
were well educated and fully employed at the time of
their wrongful conviction had difficulty finding work
after their release. Roberts & Stanton, A Long Road
Back After Exoneration, and Justice is Slow to Make
Amends, New York Times, Nov. 25, 2007; Santos &
Roberts, Putting a Price on a Wrongful Conviction, New
York Times, Dec. 2, 2007.
The Commission recommends that services to assist with
reintegration into society be available to all those
released from prison after their judgment of
conviction has been reversed, vacated or set aside.
This would include assistance in locating housing, a
cash allowance, clothing, and employment counseling.
(Report and Recommendations on Remedies, California Commission
on the Fair Administration of Justice , pp. 6-8,
http://www.ccfaj.org/documents/reports/incompentence/
official/REPORT%20 AND% 20RECOMMENDATIONS%20ON%20REMEDIES.pdf .)
This legislation helps to implement these recommendations by
requiring CDCR to provide transitional services to a wrongfully
convicted person, including housing assistance, job training,
and mental health services, the extent of which will be
determined by CDCR.
3. Argument in Support
According to the California Attorneys for Criminal Justice, the
sponsor of this bill:
Wrongful convictions are sadly becoming more frequent
in our criminal justice system. With the technological
developments of DNA evidence, and a growing number of
Innocence Projects throughout the state, persons
convicted and incarcerated of crimes they did not
commit are receiving a second chance at life.
According to an LA Times special report, the number of
people exonerated each year in the Unites States has
nearly tripled over the last two decades, according to
the National Registry of Exonerations. A total of
AB 672 (Jones-Sawyer ) Page
8 of ?
1,493 wrongfully convicted inmates have been set free
since the first DNA tests in 1989.
However, once a person is released from state prison
as wrongfully convicted, they are released back into
the community without any compensation or reentry
services. By contrast, parolees often receive
assistance with various necessities such as food and
clothing vouchers, benefits, job training and housing
placement. For persons released after being wrongfully
convicted and incarcerated, these persons are released
without such necessities, identification cards or
drivers licenses, because they are no longer in
custody of the state.
According to the University of Michigan's National
Registry of Exonerations, which provides detailed
information about every known exoneration in the
United States since 1989, has documented the
exonerations in California. Since 2010, 24 persons
have been exonerated in California - an average of
just under 5 exonerees per year. In 2010 and 2014,
there were only two exonerees. Although not many
people would be affected by the bill, this will help
those that deserve assistance.
In 2011, Obie Anthony spent 17 years in prison after
being wrongfully convicted when it was uncovered that
a prosecutor failed to disclose that the key witness
had received a "deal" with the prosecutor in exchange
for the testimony. The witness eventually recanted
and Anthony was released from custody. Obie was
released only with the clothes on his back, a few
dollars in his pocket, and somehow expected to
successfully transition back into the community.
The criminal justice system stole precious years from
Obie; it is an unfortunate reality of our criminal
just system that no services are provided to help
Obie, and others wrongfully convicted. Although there
is a compensation process, it takes months or years to
receive compensation. The critical reentry time is the
first few days and weeks upon release. The California
AB 672 (Jones-Sawyer ) Page
9 of ?
Department of Corrections and Rehabilitations should,
at the very least, provide essential reentry services
to persons wrongfully convicted.
-- END -