BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 1543
Page 1
Date of Hearing: January 12, 2016
Counsel: David Billingsley
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC SAFETY
Bill Quirk, Chair
AB
1543 (Brough) - As Amended January 4, 2016
SUMMARY: Provides that a person who commits animal abuse may be
punished by an additional fine not to exceed $5,000 for each
violation, in addition to the base fine of up to $20,000.
Specifically, this bill:
1)Allows a separate fine, up to $5,000, for each conviction of
animal cruelty, in addition to the base fine of up to $20,000
for each conviction of animal cruelty.
2)Exempts the additional fine from the penalty assessments which
are generally added to fines for criminal offenses.
3)Requires the additional fines to be paid to the local public
animal control agency that has jurisdiction over the location
where the violation occurred.
4)Allows the animal control agency to use moneys from the
specified fine to compensate a person or nonprofit
organization who incurred costs for the animal's medical care
or rehabilitation as a result of the animal cruelty, when the
owner or caretaker of the animal was the person who committed
the animal cruelty.
5)Allows the animal control agency to use moneys from the
AB 1543
Page 2
specified fine to compensate a person, including a nonprofit
organization, who incurs costs for the animal's medical care,
rehabilitation, or recovery when the animal has no
identifiable owner or caretaker.
6)Requires a person who commits animal abuse in a rehabilitative
facility for animals to pay for and successfully complete an
appropriate counseling course, as determined by the court,
designed to evaluate and treat behavior or conduct disorders.
7)Defines "rehabilitative facility for animals" for these
purposes as a facility at which medical care or rehabilitative
services are provided to animals, including, but not limited
to, an animal sanctuary, animal shelter, or aquarium.
EXISTING LAW:
1)Specifies the actions of a person who maliciously and
intentionally maims, mutilates, tortures, or wounds a living
animal, or maliciously and intentionally kills an animal as a
criminal offense. (Pen. Code, § 597.)
2)Specifies when a person overdrives, overloads, drives when
overloaded, overworks, tortures, torments, deprives of
necessary sustenance, drink, or shelter, cruelly beats,
mutilates, or cruelly kills any animal, or causes or procures
any animal to be so overdriven, overloaded, driven when
overloaded, overworked, tortured, tormented, deprived of
necessary sustenance, drink, shelter, or to be cruelly beaten,
mutilated, or cruelly killed; and whoever, having the charge
or custody of any animal, either as owner or otherwise,
subjects any animal to needless suffering, or inflicts
unnecessary cruelty upon the animal, or in any manner abuses
any animal, or fails to provide the animal with proper food,
drink, or shelter or protection from the weather, or who
drives, rides, or otherwise uses the animal when unfit for
labor as a criminal offense. (Pen. Code, § 597, subd. (b).)
3)Specifies the actions of a person who maliciously and
intentionally maims, mutilates, or tortures any mammal, bird,
reptile, amphibian, or fish, as a criminal offense. (Pen.
Code, § 597, subd. (c).)
AB 1543
Page 3
4)Requires punishment as a felony by imprisonment pursuant to
subdivision (h) of Section 1170, or by a fine of not more than
twenty thousand dollars ($20,000), or by both that fine and
imprisonment, or alternatively, as a misdemeanor by
imprisonment in a county jail for not more than one year, or
by a fine of not more than twenty thousand dollars ($20,000),
or by both that fine and imprisonment for violations of Penal
Code section 597(animal cruelty). (Pen. Code, § 597, subd.
(d).)
5)Specifies that upon the conviction of a person charged with a
violation of this section by causing or permitting an act of
cruelty, as specified, all animals lawfully seized and
impounded with respect to the violation by a peace officer,
officer of a humane society, or officer of a pound or animal
regulation department of a public agency shall be adjudged by
the court to be forfeited and shall thereupon be awarded to
the impounding officer for proper disposition. A person
convicted of a violation of this section by causing or
permitting an act of cruelty, as specified, shall be liable to
the impounding officer for all costs of impoundment from the
time of seizure to the time of proper disposition. (Pen. Code,
§ 597, subd. (g).)
6)Specifies that mandatory seizure or impoundment shall not
apply to animals in properly conducted scientific experiments
or investigations performed under the authority of the faculty
of a regularly incorporated medical college or university of
this state. (Pen. Code, § 597, subd. (g).)
7)Requires that if a defendant is granted probation for a
conviction of animal cruelty, the court shall order the
defendant to pay for, and successfully complete, counseling,
as determined by the court, designed to evaluate and treat
behavior or conduct disorders. If the court finds that the
defendant is financially unable to pay for that counseling,
the court may develop a sliding fee schedule based upon the
defendant's ability to pay. The counseling shall be in
addition to any other terms and conditions of probation,
including any term of imprisonment and any fine. If the court
does not order custody as a condition of probation for a
AB 1543
Page 4
conviction under this section, the court shall specify on the
court record the reason or reasons for not ordering custody.
This does not apply to cases involving police dogs or horses
as described in Section 600. (Pen. Code, § 597, subd. (h).)
8)Provides that any person who maliciously strikes, beats,
kicks, stabs, shoots, or throws, hurls, or projects any rock
or object at any horse being used by a peace officer, or any
dog being supervised by a peace officer in the performance of
his or her duties is a public offense. If the injury
inflicted is a serious injury, as specified, the person shall
be punished by imprisonment pursuant to subdivision (h) of
Section 1170 for 16 months, two or three years, or in a county
jail for not exceeding one year, or by a fine not exceeding
two thousand dollars, or by both a fine and imprisonment. If
the injury inflicted is not a serious injury, the person shall
be punished by imprisonment in the county jail for not
exceeding one year, or by a fine not exceeding one thousand
dollars, or by both a fine and imprisonment. (Pen. Code, §
600, subd. (a).)
9)States that any person who willfully and maliciously
interferes with, or obstructs, any horse or dog being used by
a peace officer or any dog being supervised by a peace officer
in the performance of his or her duties by frightening,
teasing, agitating, harassing, or hindering the horse or dog
shall be punished by imprisonment in a county jail not
exceeding one year, by a fine not exceeding $1,000, or by
both. (Pen. Code, § 600, subd. (b).)
10)Provides that any person who, with the intent to inflict
serious injury or death, personally causes the death,
destruction, or serious physical injury of a horse or dog
being used by, or under the direction of, a peace officer
shall, upon conviction of a felony under this section, in
addition and consecutive to the punishment prescribed for the
felony, be punished by an additional term of imprisonment for
one year. (Pen. Code, § 600, subd. (c).)
11)Defines "serious injury" to include bone fracture, loss or
impairment of function of any bodily member, wounds requiring
extensive suturing, or serious crippling. (Pen. Code, § 600,
AB 1543
Page 5
subd. (c).)
12)Provides that any person with the intent to inflict that
injury, personally causes great bodily injury to a person not
an accomplice, shall, upon conviction of a felony under this
section, in addition and consecutive be punished by an
additional term of imprisonment in the state prison for two
years unless the conduct can be punished under Penal Code
section 12022.7 or it is an element of a separate offense for
which the person is convicted. (Pen. Code, § 600, subd. (d).)
13)Requires the defendant to make restitution to the agency
owning the animal and employing the peace officer for any
veterinary bills, replacement costs of the animal if it is
disabled or killed, and the salary of the peace officer for
the period of time his or her services are lost to the agency.
(Pen. Code, § 600, subd. (e).)
14)Specifies that owner or keeper of an abandoned or neglected
animal is personally liable to the seizing agency for the full
cost of the seizure and care of the animal. The charges for
the seizure and care of the animal shall be a lien on the
animal. The animal shall not be returned to its owner until
the charges are paid and the owner demonstrates to the
satisfaction of the seizing agency or the hearing officer that
the owner can and will provide the necessary care for the
animal. (Pen. Code, § 597.1, subd. (f)(4).)
FISCAL EFFECT: Unknown
COMMENTS:
1)Author's Statement: According to the author, "Animal abuse
continues to be an issue in California. Recent high-profile
cases have involved vicious attacks on animals in protective
facilities such as aquariums, sanctuaries and shelters. These
acts are especially egregious and require an elevated
response.
"These nonprofit organizations and local agencies provide care
for abused animals without compensation or assistance except
through charitable donations to the organization. AB 1543
AB 1543
Page 6
acknowledges the work of these organizations and aids their
efforts by directing them an additional portion of penalty
fines.
"Causing harm to an animal in protective care is an indication
of a troubled mental/emotional state. AB 1543 requires that
perpetrators convicted of harming an animal in a shelter,
sanctuary, aquarium or other such safe haven complete an
appropriate court-appointed counseling course. Counseling will
identify depraved behavior and prevent further acts violence
against animals and humans."
2)Current Law Allows a $20,000 Fine for Each Separate Conviction
of Animal Cruelty: The fine of up to $20,000 can be imposed
whether the conviction is for a felony or a misdemeanor. If
the defendant is convicted of multiple counts of animal
cruelty the court can impose a fine of up to $20,000 for each
count. That maximum fine is significantly higher than almost
all other felony convictions. Generally, the maximum fine for
an individual felony conviction is $10,000. Generally, the
maximum fine for an individual misdemeanor conviction is
$1,000.
3)Penalty Assessments and Fees Quadruple the Cost of a $20,000
Fine:
There are penalty assessments and fees assessed on the base fine
for a crime. Assuming a defendant was fined the maximum
$20,000, for a single conviction, as provided by current law,
the following penalty assessments would be imposed pursuant to
the Penal Code and the Government Code:
Base Fine:
?? $
20,000
Penal Code 1464 state penalty on fines:
20,000 ($10 for every $10)
Penal Code 1465.7 state surcharge:
4,000 (20% surcharge)Penal Code 1465.8 court
operation assessment:
40 ($40 fee per offense)
Government Code 70372 court construction penalty:
10, 000 ($5 for every $10) Government Code 70373 assessment:
AB 1543
Page 7
30 ($30 per
felony/misdo) Government Code 76000 penalty:
14,000 ($7 for every $10)
Government Code 76000.5 EMS penalty:
4,000 ($2 for every $10) Government Code 76104.6 DNA
fund penalty: 2,000 ($1 for every
$10) Government Code 76104.7 addt'l DNA fund penalty:
8,000 ($4 for every
$10)
Total Fine with Assessments:
$82,070
4)This Bill Creates an Additional Fine Without Requiring Any
Additional Criminal Conduct: Existing law provides for a fine
of up to $20,000 when a person commits a crime of animal
cruelty. (Pen. Code § 597.) This bill adds a second fine
without requiring any additional conduct by the defendant to
the crime more serious than the conduct which forms the basis
for the fine of up to $20,000.
5)Existing Law Requires Defendants to Make Restitution to
Victims of Their Crime: All persons who suffer losses as a
result of criminal activity have the right to restitution from
those convicted of that crime. (Cal. Const., art. I, § 28(b),
Pen. Code § 1202.4.) In addition, courts can order
restitution as a condition to probation. (Pen. Code § 1203.1,
subd. (a)(3).) The courts' power to order restitution as a
condition of probation is even broader than what is required
under direct victim restitution. Courts can, among other
reasons, direct a defendant to make restitution as a condition
of probation as long as the restitution is reasonably related
to the crime of which the defendant was convicted. (Pen. Code
§ 1203.1, subd. (j).)
Given the requirement of victim restitution and the power of the
court to order restitution as a condition of probation,
current law provides mechanisms for reimbursement to
compensate owners, organizations, or other individuals that
incur costs to rehabilitate animals injured as a result of
animal cruelty.
6)Prioritization of Court-Ordered Debt: Current law prioritizes
AB 1543
Page 8
the order in which delinquent court-ordered debt received is
to be satisfied. The priorities are 1) victim restitution, 2)
state surcharge, 3) restitution fines, penalty assessments,
and other fines, with payments made on a proportional basis to
the total amount levied for all of these items, and 4)
state/county/city reimbursements, and special revenue items.
7)The Additional Fines Collected by This Bill Would Not Be
Distributed to the General Fund: This bill would collect a
fine that would not go to the general fund, as the vast
majority of criminal fines do. Instead the additional fines
collected under the provisions of this bill would be
distributed to the local public animal control agency that has
jurisdiction in the location where the violation was
committed. The local public animal control agency may use the
money to compensate individuals or nonprofits who incurred
costs for the animal's medical care or rehabilitation as a
result of the animal cruelty unless the person was the abuser.
8)This Bill Adds a Counseling Requirement for a Defendant
Convicted of Animal Abuse in a Rehabilitative Facility for
Animals that is Duplicative of Existing Law: Existing law
requires any defendant granted probation for a violation of
animal abuse to complete counseling as determined by the court
to treat behavior or conduct disorders. (Pen. Code § 597,
subd. (h).) This bill adds the same counseling requirement if
the defendant commits the violation of animal cruelty in a
rehabilitative facility for animals. There is no need to add
a provision to require counseling based on a narrower set of
circumstances.
9)Argument in Support: According to The Humane Society,
"Despite felony animal cruelty provisions in state law,
violent attacks on animals are all too common in California.
Vicious attacks on rescued animals who are in the care of
government or non-profit animal care organizations are
thankfully rare, but are especially egregious. By seeking
enhanced penalties and counseling for criminals who harm these
most vulnerable animals, AB 1543 is another step toward
deterring such acts. We understand you plan to amend AB 1543
to direct the additional $5,000 penalty to the local animal
care agency where an eligible crime occurs, which we think
AB 1543
Page 9
makes your legislation even more efficient and appropriate.
"Strong laws to protect animals from cruelty are obviously
important for the animals' sake. But a number of studies have
drawn links between the abuse of animals and violence against
people. A 2001-2004 study by the Chicago Police Department
"revealed a startling propensity for offenders charged with
crimes against animals to commit other violent offenses toward
human victims." Of those arrested for animal crimes, 65% had
been arrested for battery against another person. (Degenhardt,
B. 2005. Statistical Summary of Offenders Charged with Crimes
against Companion Animals July 2001-July 2005. Report from the
Chicago Police Department.) Of 36 convicted multiple murderers
questioned in one study, 46% admitted committing acts of
animal torture as adolescents. (Cohen, W. (1996).
Congressional Register, 142(141), Oct. 3.) And of seven school
shootings that took place across the country between 1997 and
2001, all involved boys who had previously committed acts of
animal cruelty."
10)Argument in Opposition: According to the ACLU of California,
"Given that existing fines appear sufficient to punish the
conduct underlying Penal Code section 597, we do not believe
this bill is necessary.
"Current law already provides adequate fines for those who
violate Penal Code section 597. A person convicted of either
a felony or misdemeanor violation of the statute can be
punished, in addition to any applicable terms of imprisonment,
by a fine of up to $20,000. A fine of $20,000 is already
equal to 66% of the average per capita annual income in
California. The additional $5,000, as proposed by the bill
could result in a person being required to pay a total fine
equal to 83% the average annual income. Such fines, nearly
impossible for an average Californian to pay without being
rendered penniless, will only further expand the growing
number of Californians saddled with court-ordered debt and
increase the existing $10 billion in debt yet to be collected.
Thus, increasing fines as proposed by the bill makes little
sense, especially when there is no indication that existing
fines have been insufficient."
AB 1543
Page 10
11)Prior Legislation:
a) AB 1117 (Smyth), Chapter 553, Statutes of 2011,
specified that the owner of an animal seized pursuant to a
search warrant shall be liable for the costs of caring for
and treating the animal and that these costs will be a lien
on the animal which must be paid before the animal is
returned.
b) SB 917 (Lieu), Chapter 131, Statutes of 2011, conformed
the misdemeanor penalty for overloading, torturing,
tormenting, maims, mutilates, tortures or wound a living
animal, punishable by up to one year in jail.
c) AB 2012 (Lieu), of the Legislative Session of 2009-2010,
would have conformed the misdemeanor penalty for
overloading, torturing, tormenting, maims, mutilates,
tortures or wounds a living animal, punishable for up to
one year in jail for the misdemeanor portion of the
existing wobbler. AB 2012 was vetoed by the governor.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:
Support
American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals
Aquarium of the Pacific
Beagle Freedom Project
California Civil Liberties Advocacy
California Council for Wildlife Rehabilitators
City of Jorupa Valley
Humane Society
In Defense of Animals
Pacific Marine Mammal Center
Opposition
American Civil Liberties Union of California
Analysis Prepared
by: David Billingsley / PUB. S. / (916) 319-3744
AB 1543
Page 11