BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    






                                                                    AB 1006


                                                                     Page A


          Date of Hearing:  April 28, 2015
          Counsel:               David Billingsley


                         ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC SAFETY


                                  Bill Quirk, Chair





          AB  
                       1006 (Levine) - As Amended  April 21, 2015




          SUMMARY: Where a defendant has been convicted of an offense that  
          will result in sentence to state prison sentence or county jail,  
          the defendant or the prosecutor may submit evidence that the  
          defendant suffers from a diagnosable mental illness that  
          contributed to the defendant's crime.   The court may use that  
          evidence to order the defendant to serve part of his or her  
          sentence in a residential mental health treatment facility,  
          order the defendant placed in a mental health program in the  
          state prison or county jail, or order the detention facility to  
          prepare a post release mental health treatment plan.   
          Specifically, this bill:  

          1)Allows the defendant or the prosecutor to submit evidence that  
            the defendant suffers from a diagnosable mental illness that  
            was a substantial factor that contributed to the defendant's  
            criminal conduct, when a defendant has pled guilty or no  
            contest to, or been convicted of, an offense that will result  
            in a sentence to state prison or county jail. 
             
          2)Requires the evidence of diagnosable mental illness, be filed  











                                                                    AB 1006


                                                                     Page B


            after the defendant's plea or conviction, but before his or  
            her sentencing.

          3)Requires that the court consider evidence that the defendant  
            suffers from a diagnosable mental illness that was a  
            substantial factor that contributed to the defendant's  
            criminal conduct in conjunction with the defendant's  
            sentencing.



          4)Allows the court upon consideration of the evidence of mental  
            illness, if the court determines that it is in the best  
            interests of public safety, the court to order one or more of  
            the following:



             a)   That the defendant serve, if the defendant agrees, all  
               or a part of his or her sentence in a residential mental  
               health treatment facility instead of in the state prison or  
               county jail, unless that placement would pose an  
               unreasonable risk of danger to public safety. This does not  
               apply to a defendant has a prior conviction for a serious  
               or violent felony;

             b)   The Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation or  
               county jail authority to the place the defendant in a  
               mental health program within the state prison or county  
               jail system, respectively, at a level of care determined to  
               be appropriate by the department's mental staff or county  
               mental health staff, within 30  s  days, of the defendant's  
               placement in the state prison or county jail; and 
           
             c)   The Department of Correction and Rehabilitation or the  
               county jail authority, as applicable, regardless of the  
               type of crime committed to prepare postrelease mental  
               health treatment plan six months prior to the defendant's  
               release to parole or postrelease community supervision. The  











                                                                    AB 1006


                                                                     Page C


               treatment plan shall specify the manner in which the  
               defendant will receive mental health treatment services  
               following that release, and shall address, if applicable  
               and in the discretion of the court, medication management,  
               housing, and substance abuse treatment.

          5)Allows the defendant or prosecutor to,  at any time, petition  
            the court for approval to transfer the defendant from a  
            residential mental health treatment facility to a mental  
            health program within the state prison or county jail for the  
            remainder of the defendant's sentence.

          6)Allows the defendant, prosecutor, or Department of Corrections  
            and Rehabilitation or county jail authority, as applicable, to  
            at any time, petition the court for permission to remove the  
            defendant from a mental health program within the state prison  
            or county jail authority.

          7)Permits the defendant, prosecutor, or Department of  
            Corrections and Rehabilitation or county jail authority, as  
            applicable, to at any time, petition the court for dismissal  
            of the requirement that the Department of Corrections and  
            Rehabilitation or county jail authority, as applicable prepare  
            a postrelease mental health treatment plan.



          8)Requires that the defendant have the right to counsel for all  
            proceedings under this section.

          EXISTING LAW:  

          1)Finds and declares that the provision of probation services is  
            an essential element in the administration of criminal  
            justice. The safety of the public, which shall be a primary  
            goal through the enforcement of court-ordered conditions of  
            probation; the nature of the offense; the interests of  
            justice, including punishment, reintegration of the offender  
            into the community, and enforcement of conditions of  











                                                                    AB 1006


                                                                     Page D


            probation; the loss to the victim; and the needs of the  
            defendant shall be the primary considerations in the granting  
            of probation. (Pen. Code,  1202.7.)



          2)In any case in which it appears to the person in charge of a  
            county jail, city jail, or juvenile detention facility, or to  
            any judge of a court in the county in which the jail or  
            juvenile detention facility is located, that a person in  
            custody in that jail or juvenile detention facility may be  
            mentally disordered, he or she may cause the prisoner to be  
            taken to a facility for 72-hour treatment and evaluation  
            pursuant and he or she shall inform the facility in writing,  
            which shall be confidential, of the reasons that the person is  
            being taken to the facility. The local mental health director  
            or his or her designee may examine the prisoner prior to  
            transfer to a facility for treatment and evaluation. (Pen.  
            Code,  4011.6.)



          3)Where the court causes the prisoner to be transferred to a  
            72-hour facility, the court shall forthwith notify the local  
            mental health director or his or her designee, the prosecuting  
            attorney, and counsel for the prisoner in the criminal or  
            juvenile proceedings about that transfer. Where the person in  
            charge of the jail or juvenile detention facility causes the  
            transfer of the prisoner to a 72-hour facility the person  
            shall immediately notify the local mental health director or  
            his or her designee and each court within the county where the  
            prisoner has a pending proceeding about the transfer. Upon  
            notification by the person in charge of the jail or juvenile  
            detention facility the court shall forthwith notify counsel  
            for the prisoner and the prosecuting attorney in the criminal  
            or juvenile proceedings about that transfer. (Pen. Code,   
            4011.6.)













                                                                    AB 1006


                                                                     Page E




          4)If a prisoner is detained in, or remanded to, a mental health  
            facility pursuant, the facility shall transmit a report, which  
            shall be confidential, to the person in charge of the jail or  
            juvenile detention facility or judge of the court who caused  
            the prisoner to be taken to the facility and to the local  
            mental health director or his or her designee, concerning the  
            condition of the prisoner. A new report shall be transmitted  
            at the end of each period of confinement as specified, upon  
            conversion to voluntary status, and upon filing of temporary  
            letters of conservatorship. (Pen. Code,  4011.6.)




          5)A prisoner who has been transferred to an inpatient facility  
            pursuant to this section may convert to voluntary inpatient  
            status without obtaining the consent of the court, the person  
            in charge of the jail or juvenile detention facility, or the  
            local mental health director. At the beginning of that  
            conversion to voluntary status, the person in charge of the  
            facility shall transmit a report to the person in charge of  
            the jail or juvenile detention facility or judge of the court  
            who caused the prisoner to be taken to the facility, counsel  
            for the prisoner, prosecuting attorney, and local mental  
            health director or his or her designee. (Pen. Code,  4011.6.)




          6)If the prisoner is detained in, or remanded to, a mental  
            health facility, the time passed in the facility shall count  
            as part of the prisoner's sentence. When the prisoner is  
            detained in, or remanded to, the facility, the person in  
            charge of the jail or juvenile detention facility shall advise  
            the professional person in charge of the facility of the  
            expiration date of the prisoner's sentence. If the prisoner is  
            to be released from the facility before the expiration date,  











                                                                    AB 1006


                                                                     Page F


            the professional person in charge shall notify the local  
            mental health director or his or her designee, counsel for the  
            prisoner, the prosecuting attorney, and the person in charge  
            of the jail or juvenile detention facility, who shall send  
            for, take, and receive the prisoner back into the jail or  
            juvenile detention facility. (Pen. Code,  4011.6.)




          7)A defendant, either charged with or convicted of a criminal  
            offense, or a minor alleged to be within the jurisdiction of  
            the juvenile court, may be concurrently subject to mental  
            health detention as specified by law under the Welfare and  
            Institutions Code. (Pen. Code,  4011.6.)




          8)If a prisoner is detained in a mental health facility pursuant  
            to the Welfare and Institutions Code and if the person in  
            charge of the facility determines that arraignment or trial  
            would be detrimental to the well-being of the prisoner, the  
            time spent in the facility shall not be computed in any  
            statutory time requirements for arraignment or trial in any  
            pending criminal or juvenile proceedings. Otherwise, this  
            section shall not affect any statutory time requirements for  
            arraignment or trial in any pending criminal or juvenile  
            proceedings. (Pen. Code,  4011.6.)




          9)States that upon conviction of any felony in which the  
            defendant is sentenced to state prison, and the court makes  
            any of the findings listed below, a court shall, in addition  
            to any other terms of imprisonment, fine, and conditions,  
            recommend in writing that the defendant participate in a  
            counseling or education program having a substance abuse  











                                                                    AB 1006


                                                                     Page G


            component while imprisoned:




             a)   That the defendant at the time of the commission of the  
               offense was under the influence of any alcoholic beverages;  
               (Pen. Code,  1203.096, subd. (b)(1).)



             b)   That the defendant at the time of the commission of the  
               offense was under the influence of any controlled  
               substance; (Pen. Code,  1203.096, subd. (b)(2).)



             c)   That the defendant has a demonstrated history of  
               substance abuse; and (Pen. Code,  1203.096, subd. (b)(3).)




             d)   That the offense or offenses for which the defendant was  
               convicted are drug related. (Pen. Code,  1203.096, subd.  
               (b)(4).)
          FISCAL EFFECT:  Unknown

          COMMENTS:  

        1)Author's Statement:  According to the author, "Jails and prisons  
          have become California's de facto mental health facilities with  
          those who are mentally ill being far more likely to be  
          incarcerated than to be in a psychiatric hospital. Incarcerating  
          those with mental illness does not make sense from an outcomes  
          or a fiscal stand point. Studies have found that individuals who  
          participate in mental health courts reoffend one third of the  
          time than those who do not and that participant's show  
          significant improvement in quality of life. Furthermore, mental  











                                                                    AB 1006


                                                                     Page H


          health courts have been demonstrated to save $7 in costs for  
          every $1 spent. It costs $51,000 a year to house an inmate, and  
          $20,412 to house and treat a person with mental illness. AB 1006  
          gives the court the ability to consider the presence of a mental  
          illness in criminal sentencing."

        2)Prevalence of Mentally Ill Offenders:  The Department of  
          Corrections and Rehabilitation's (CDCR) Council on Mentally Ill  
          Offenders (COMIO) regards the growing number of inmates  
          suffering from mental health issues as a pressing concern.<1> 
          
          Nationally, a 2009 American Psychiatric Association study "found  
          that 14.5% of male and 31.0% of female inmates recently admitted  
          to jail have a serious mental illness" which is three to six  
          times higher than rates found in the general population.  "A  
          serious mental illness" included major depressive disorder,  
          depressive disorder not otherwise specified, schizophrenia  
          spectrum disorder, schizoaffective disorder, schizophreniform  
          disorder, brief psychotic disorder, delusional disorder, and  
          psychotic disorder not otherwise specified.<2>

          In 2009, the Division of Correctional Health Care Services for  
          the CDCR estimated that 23 percent of California's prison  
          inmates have a serious mental illness.<3>  According to the  
          Berkeley Center for Criminal Justice, an estimated "40 to 70  
          percent of youth in the California juvenile justice system have  
          some mental health disorder or illness," with 15 to 25 percent  
          considered severely mentally ill.  Based on these numbers, youth  
          in California's juvenile justice system are two to four times  
          ---------------------------
          <1> http://www.cdcr.ca.gov/comio/Legislation.html
          <2> Steadman, H., Osher, F. C., Robbins, P. C., Case, B., &  
          Samuels, S. (2009).  Prevalence of serious mental illness among  
          jail inmates. Psychiatric Services, 60(6), 761-765.  
          .
          <3> Administrative Office of the Courts, Center for Families,  
          Children & the Courts.  (2011).  Task Force for Criminal Justice  
          Collaboration on Mental Health Issues: Final Report.  
          . 










                                                                    AB 1006


                                                                     Page I


          more likely to be in need of mental health care than California  
          youth generally.<4>  The Bureau of Justice Statistics reported  
          in 2006 that 74 percent of mentally ill state prisoners and 76  
          percent of mentally ill local jail inmates also met the criteria  
          for substance dependence or abuse indicating a larger issue with  
          co-occurring disorders among mentally ill offenders.<5>  

        3)Increased Rates of Recidivism Among Mentally Ill Offenders:  A  
          2012 review conducted by the Utah Criminal Justice Center found  
          that released inmates with serious mental illness experience  
          poorer outcomes overall as they are "twice as likely to have  
          their probation or parole revoked, are at an elevated risk for  
          rearrest, incarceration, and homelessness, lack skills to obtain  
          and sustain employment, and have higher rates of medical  
          problems." <6> 
          In 2009, the Council of State Governors Justice Center released  
          a report entitled Improving Outcomes for People with Mental  
          Illnesses under Community Corrections Supervision, which stated  
          that the reasons for increased recidivism among mental ill  
          offenders may be multifaceted: 


             Once people with mental illnesses are finally released, it  
             is often extremely difficult for them to successfully  
             -------------------------


          <4> Berkeley Center for Criminal Justice. (2010). Juvenile  
          Justice Policy Brief Series: Mental Health Issues in  
          California's Juvenile Justice System.  
          
          <5> Treatment Advocacy Center & National Sheriffs' Association.  
          (2010). More Mentally Ill Persons Are in Jails and Prisons Than  
          Hospitals: A Survey of States.  
          
          <6> University of Utah, Utah Criminal Justice Center. (2012).  
          Treating Offenders with Mental Illness: A Review of the  
          Literature.  
          .








                                                                    AB 1006


                                                                     Page J


             transition from incarceration to the community.  Their  
             mental illnesses may be linked to community corrections  
             supervision failure in a number of ways.  Skeem and Loudon  
             have characterized these links as being direct, indirect,  
             or spurious. 


             First, mental illnesses may directly result in probation or  
             parole revocation. For example, an individual may not  
             access treatment, leading him or her to decompensate,  
             behave in a bizarre or dangerous manner in public, get  
             arrested for this behavior, and have his or her probation  
             revoked. 


             Second, mental illnesses may indirectly result in  
             revocation.  For example, an individual with clinical  
             depression may have impaired functioning that prevents him  
             or her from maintaining employment and paying court ordered  
             fines, which are standard conditions of release.  Notably,  
             many people with mental illnesses returning to the  
             community from jail or prison lack financial or social  
             supports.  Some were receiving Medicaid and other forms of  
             public assistance at the time of their arrest, and these  
             benefits are typically terminated rather than suspended  
             during incarceration, and rarely reinstated immediately  
             upon release.  In short, there is often no safety net to  
             compensate for functional impairments that may place  
             individuals with mental illnesses at risk for revocation. 


             Third, mental illnesses may not result in revocation.   
             Instead, the relationship between the two may be  
             spurious-that is, more apparent than real-because a third  
             variable associated with mental illness causes revocation.   
             For example, an individual with bipolar disorder may be at  
             risk of committing a new offense not because of his or her  
             mental illness, but because of criminogenic attitudes or  
             affiliation with antisocial peers.  Alternatively, an  











                                                                    AB 1006


                                                                     Page K


             individual with psychosis may be monitored exceptionally  
             closely and revoked readily by his or her probation  
             officer, given that traditional supervision strategies  
             often reflect misconceptions about (and stigma associated  
             with) mental illness.<7>


          CDCR data shows higher rates of recidivism in inmates identified  
          with mental health issues when compared to those without.  Upon  
          release, inmates exhibiting mental health problems are assigned  
          one of two mental health services designations: Enhanced  
          Outpatient Program (EOP) or Correctional Clinical Case  
          Management System (CCCMS).  Inmates with severe mental illness  
          expected to experience difficulty transitioning out of  
          corrections are designated as EOP and receive treatment at a  
          level similar to day treatment services in the community, while  
          inmates receiving CCCMS services are housed within the general  
          population and participate on an outpatient basis.  In the 2012  
          CDCR Outcome Evaluation Report, 76.7 percent of first-release  
          inmates with an EOP designation recidivated after three years,  
          compared to lower rates found in CCCMS designees (70.6 percent)  
          and those without a designation (62 percent).<8> 


          According to a 2005 CDCR report, mental health issues "comprised  
          the single most critical gap in juvenile justice services. ...   
          According to those surveyed, the number of at-risk youth and  
          youthful offenders with mental health problems continues to  
          increase as does the seriousness of their mental illnesses.  The  
          only thing not increasing is the resources to treat and confine  
          these troubled and troubling youth."  Even if juvenile offenders  
          receive assistance, absence of treatment after release may  
          contribute to a path of behavior that includes continued  
          ---------------------------
          ---------------------------
          <7>  
          https://s3.amazonaws.com/static.nicic.gov/Library/023634.pdf.
          <8>  
          http://www.cdcr.ca.gov/adult_research_branch/Research_Documents/A 
          RB_FY_0708_Recidivism_Report_10.23.12.pdf.










                                                                    AB 1006


                                                                     Page L




















































                                                                    AB 1006


                                                                     Page M


          delinquency and adult criminality.<9>

        4)Under Existing Law, Judges Have Discretion to Impose Conditions  
          on Felony or Misdemeanor Cases When a Defendant is Placed on  
          Probation:  Probation is the suspension of the imposition or  
          execution of a sentence and the conditional release of a  
          defendant into the community under the direction of a probation  
          officer.  "Probation is generally reserved for convicted  
          criminals whose conditional release into society poses minimal  
          risk to public safety and promotes rehabilitation." People v.  
          Carbajal (1995) 10 Cal.4th 1114,1120.  Probation can be  
          conditioned on serving a period of incarceration in county jail  
          and on conditions reasonably related to the offense.  Certain  
          convicted felons are not eligible for probation.  Other felons  
          are presumptively ineligible for probation, but may be granted  
          probation in an unusual case. 

          The primary considerations in granting probation are:  (1)  
          Public safety; (2) the nature of the offense; (3) the interests  
          of justice; (4) the victim's loss; and (5) the defendant's  
          needs. (Pen. Code,  1202.7.) 

          Courts have broad general discretion to fashion and impose  
          additional probation conditions that are particularized to the  
           defendants. People v. Smith (2007) 152. Cal.App.4th 1245, 1249.  
          Courts may impose any "reasonable" conditions necessary to  
          secure justice and assist the rehabilitation of the probationer.  
          Under existing law, a judge can impose a condition of probation  
          that a defendant spend a certain amount of time in a residential  
          mental health facility in conjunction with a jail sentence, or  
          as an alternative to a jail sentence. In imposing probation  
          conditions related to mental health, the court is not limited to  
          ordering residential mental health treatment.  The court can  
          order outpatient mental health treatment, or other mental health  
          directives the court finds appropriate.  When a defendant is  
          placed on probation the court retains jurisdiction over the case  
          to ensure the defendant complies with probation.   The court has  


          ---------------------------
          <9> California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation.  
          (2005). Status Report on Juvenile Justice Reform. 










                                                                    AB 1006


                                                                     Page N


          the power to impose further punishment if the defendant does not  
          comply with probation.

        5)California's Current Sentencing Scheme Does Not Provide an  
          Option for a Judge to Impose a Split Prison Sentence: Under  
          California's sentencing scheme, if a person is sent to state  
          prison, they are sentenced for a determinate amount of time.   
          Once an individual is sentenced to State Prison they are  
          committed to the custody of CDCR.  Once CDCR has custody of a  
          defendant, CDCR, not the court, decides where and in what type  
          of custodial setting the defendant serves their state prison  
          term.

          When a court sentences a defendant to state prison, the court  
          loses jurisdiction over the individual. 

            "If the judgment is for imprisonment, 'the defendant must  
            forthwith be committed to the custody of the proper officer  
            and by him or her detained until the judgment is complied  
            with.' The sheriff, upon receipt of the certified abstract of  
            judgment "or minute order thereof," is required to deliver the  
            defendant to the warden of the state prison together with the  
            certified abstract of judgment or minute order.  'It is clear  
            then that at least upon the receipt of the abstract of the  
            judgment by the sheriff, the execution of the judgment is in  
            progress.' 

            "Thus, for example, in People v. Banks, we considered the  
            effect of a stay of execution in the context of the trial  
            court's authority to grant probation for certain offenses.  We  
            observed that upon entry of a guilty plea, if the trial court  
            chooses to retain jurisdiction under the statutes dealing with  
            probation, it may pronounce judgment and suspend its execution  
            by refraining from issuing a commitment of the defendant to  
            the prison authority.  We stated: "The critical requirement  
            for control over the defendant and the res of the action is  
            that the court shall not have surrendered its jurisdiction in  
            the premises by committing and delivering the defendant to the  
            prison authority." People v. Karaman, (1992) 4 Cal.4th 335,345  











                                                                    AB 1006


                                                                     Page O


            (citation omitted)(italics added.)

          Because the court loses jurisdiction over a defendant when they  
          are sentenced to state prison, it is unclear who would have the  
          authority to enforce transfer of a defendant from a mental  
          health facility to a state prison if treatment in a residential  
          mental health treatment was ordered for a portion of the  
          defendant's sentence at the beginning of the sentence. The same  
          problem would exist if the court sentenced the defendant to  
          begin their term with state prison, but directed the later part  
          of the state prison term to be served in a mental health  
          facility.

          For the same jurisdictional reasons, it is unclear what remedies  
          would be available if a defendant left a residential mental  
          health treatment facility after being sentenced to such a  
          facility for a portion of, or all of, a state prison sentence. 

        6)Logistical Difficulties of Post Sentencing Procedures to  
          Petition the Court to Change the Defendant's Status Regarding  
          Their Mental Health Treatment:  The proposed legislation allows  
          for the defendant or prosecutor to petition the court to  
          transfer the defendant from a residential mental health facility  
          to a state prison or county jail, and provides that defendants  
          have a right to counsel for those proceedings.  From a practical  
          standpoint, appointing counsel for an individual who is in a  
          residential mental health treatment facility presents challenges  
          for a system where most of the defendants are represented by  
          Public Defender Offices.   Public Defender Offices are  
          accustomed to visiting and representing clients in custody at  
          the local county jail.  To see and represent clients placed in a  
          variety of mental health facilities that can be in disparate  
          geographic regions would present substantial obstacles to such  
          representation.  The same obstacles are present if a defendant  
          in state prison required representation, in the sentencing  
          court, on a petition to remove the defendant from a mental  
          health program in the state prison.

        7)Michigan: The state of Michigan passed Senate Bill 558 in 2014.   











                                                                    AB 1006


                                                                     Page P


          That law requires county law enforcement and community mental  
          health service programs, in coordination with courts and other  
          key local partners, to create policies and practices that would  
          provide mental health treatment and assistance to individuals  
          with mental illness. Specifically, the policies and practices  
          created would focus on individuals who are considered at risk of  
           entering the criminal justice system; who not receiving needed  
          mental health services during incarceration in a county jail or  
          state prison; and who are not receiving needed mental health  
          treatment services upon release or discharge from a county jail.
           http://michigan.gov/snyder/0,4668,7-277-57577-323279--,00.html  

        8)Argument in Support:  According to David Mills (Chairman) and  
          Michael Romano(Director), of the Stanford Law School Three  
          Strikes and Justice Advocacy Project, "The Mental Health Justice  
          Act (AB 1006) is the embodiment of the first reform proposed in  
          our report.  The bill is critically important because it  
          will-for the first time-empower Superior Court Judges  
          discretionary authority to order psychiatric treatment for  
          criminal offenders who commit crimes as a result of mental  
          illness.  The bill does not require courts to do anything and  
          protects public safety by forbidding judges from departing from  
          traditional sentencing if doing so would endanger the public.   
          Involving the courts in the identification and treatment of  
          mentally ill offenders is a crucial step in addressing the  
          massive problem of mental ill offenders in the justice system.   
          We believe the measure will also save tax dollars and reduce  
          recidivism by providing earlier interruption in the cycle of  
          mental illness and incarceration. 

          "According to a recent report from the national Sheriff's  
          Association and Treatment Advocacy Center, ten times as many  
          mentally ill people are in prison and jail in the United States  
          than there are in mental health treatment facilities.  In  
          California, 45% of the state's prison population is estimated to  
          be mentally ill.  In the last fifteen years the number of  
          mentally ill people in prison has almost doubled.  

          "Furthermore, there are five times the numbers of seriously  











                                                                    AB 1006


                                                                     Page Q


          mental ill prisoners confined in state prison than there are  
          patients in psychiatric hospitals, making the California  
          Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation the de facto mental  
          health treatment provider in the state.   

          "This bill will reform the way California sentences the mentally  
          ill by allowing a court do determine if the mental illness is a  
          substantial factor in the crime and give the court the ability  
          to order treatment for that illness."

        9)Prior Legislation:  

             a)   SB 1054 (Steinberg), Chapter 436, Statutes of 2014,  
               clarifies that mental health grants be divided equally  
               between adult and juvenile mentally ill offender crime  
               reduction grants and streamline the grant process.

             b)   SB 1323 (Cedillo), of the 2005-06 Legislative Session,  
               would have appropriated $350,000 from the General Fund to  
               the department for allocation, over 5 years, to the County  
               of Los Angeles, at the consent of the county, for the  
               purpose of funding one position to work, in conjunction  
               with the Los Angeles County Superior Court, on a 5-year  
               Prototype Court Pilot Program for nonviolent felony  
               offenders in the state who have been identified as having  
               both serious mental health and substance abuse problems.   
               SB 1323 was held in the Senate Appropriations Committee.

             c)   SB 643 (Ortiz), of the 2001-02 Legislative Session,  
               would  have enacted the Mental Health Enhancement and Crime  
               Prevention Act of 2001, which would require the board to  
               reimburse counties meeting specified requirements for the  
               excess cost of providing more effective psychotropic  
               medications to inmates in county correctional facilities  
               during their incarceration and after release.  SB 643 was  
               held in the Assembly Appropriations Committee.


          REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:











                                                                    AB 1006


                                                                     Page R



          Support
          
          Steinberg Institute (Sponsor)
          California Council of Community Mental Health Agencies
          Mental Health America of California
          Chairman and Director of the Stanford Law School Three Strikes  
          and Justice Advocacy Project
          Legal Services for Prisoners with Children

          Opposition
          
          California District Attorneys Association

          Analysis Prepared  
          by:              David Billingsley / PUB. S. / (916) 319-3744