BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    Ó



          SENATE COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC SAFETY
                             Senator Loni Hancock, Chair
                                2015 - 2016  Regular 

          Bill No:    AB 1771       Hearing Date:    June 28, 2016    
          
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |Author:    |O'Donnell                                            |
          |-----------+-----------------------------------------------------|
          |Version:   |May 19, 2016                                         |
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |Urgency:   |No                     |Fiscal:    |Yes              |
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |Consultant:|JM                                                   |
          |           |                                                     |
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 


                               Subject:  Prostitution



          HISTORY

          Source:   Long Beach City Prosecutor

          Prior Legislation:AB 1695 (Knox) Ch. 981, Stats. 1998

          Support:  California District Attorneys Association; California  
                    Statewide Law Enforcement Association; City of Long  
                    Beach; Junior Leagues of California State Public  
                    Affairs Committee; Long Beach Human Trafficking Task  
                    Force; Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors;  
                    National Council of Jewish Women Long Beach


          Opposition: American Civil Liberties Union; California Attorneys  
                    for Criminal Justice; California Public Defenders  
                    Association; Legal Services for Prisoners with  
                    Children




          Assembly Floor Vote:                 79 - 1









          AB 1771  (O'Donnell )                                      Page  
          2 of ?
          
          
          PURPOSE

          The purpose of this bill is to: 1) increase the penalty for the  
          misdemeanor of aiding or supervising a prostitute from six  
          months to one year in jail; 2) provide that repeatedly speaking,  
          watching or monitoring a person soliciting for prostitution, as  
          defined, is evidence of the crime of aiding or supervising a  
          prostitute; 3) provide that receiving money from a person  
          soliciting for prostitution, as defined, is evidence of aiding  
          or supervising a prostitute; and 4) specifically authorize a  
          juvenile court judge to dismiss a petition for aiding or  
          supervising a prostitute where the minor committed the offense  
          through duress or coercion.

          Existing law provides that any person who lives or derives  
          support or maintenance in whole or in part from the earnings or  
          proceeds from another person's prostitution is guilty of a  
          felony, with a sentence of 3, 4, or 6 years in state prison.  If  
          the prostitute is under the age of 16, the penalty is 3, 6, or 8  
          years.  (Pen. Code § 266h.)

          Existing law provides that any person who procures, encourages,  
          persuades or induces another person to become a prostitute is  
          guilty of a felony, with a sentence of 3, 4, or 6 years in state  
          prison.  If the prostitute is under the age of 16, the penalty  
          is 3, 6, or 8 years.  (Penal Code § 266i.)

          Existing law provides that it is unlawful for a person to  
          direct, supervise, recruit, or otherwise aid another person in  
          the commission of a violation of specified prostitution  
          offenses.  Additionally, a person may not collect or receive all  
          or part of the proceeds earned from an act or acts of  
          prostitution committed by another person.  Violation of these  
          provisions is a misdemeanor punishable by up to six months in  
          the county jail.  (Pen. Code § 653.23, subds. (a) & (b); Pen.  
          Code § 653.26.)  

          Existing law provides that in determining whether a person is  
          guilty of directing or supervising a prostitute - defined as a  
          person loitering for the purposes of prostitution - the  
          following circumstances may be considered:  

             a)   The offender repeatedly speaks or communicates with  
               another person who is acting in violation of loitering for  








          AB 1771  (O'Donnell )                                      Page  
          3 of ?
          
          
               the purpose of engaging in prostitution.

             b)   The offender repeatedly or continuously monitors or  
               watches another person who is acting in violation of  
               loitering for the purpose of engaging in prostitution.

             c)   The offender repeatedly engages or attempts to engage in  
               conversation with pedestrians or motorists to solicit,  
               arrange, or facilitate an act of prostitution between the  
               pedestrians or motorists and another person who is acting  
               in violation of loitering for the purpose of engaging in  
               prostitution. 

             d)   The offender repeatedly stops or attempts to stop  
               pedestrians or motorists to solicit, arrange, or facilitate  
               an act of prostitution between pedestrians or motorists and  
               another person who is acting in violation of loitering for  
               the purpose of engaging in prostitution.

             e)   The offender circles an area in a motor vehicle and  
               repeatedly beckons to, contacts, or attempts to contact or  
               stop pedestrians or other motorists to solicit, arrange, or  
               facilitate an act of prostitution between the pedestrians  
               or motorists and another person who is acting in violation  
               of loitering for the purpose of engaging in prostitution.

             f)   The offender receives or appears to receive money from  
               another person who is acting in violation of loitering for  
               the purpose of engaging in prostitution.

             g)   The offender engages in any of the behavior described  
               above, inclusive, in regard to, or on behalf of two or more  
               persons who are in violation of loitering for the purpose  
               of engaging in prostitution. 

             h)   The offender has been convicted of violating specified  
               prostitution related offenses.

             i)   The offender has engaged, within six months prior to the  
               arrest in any behavior described in this subdivision, or in  
               any other behavior indicative of prostitution activity.

          Existing law provides that where an act is declared to be a  
          public offenses and no penalty is specified, the offense is a  








          AB 1771  (O'Donnell )                                      Page  
          4 of ?
          
          
          misdemeanor.  (Pen. Code § 19.4)

          Existing law provides, in the absence of any more specific  
          penalty, that a misdemeanor is punishable by imprisonment in a  
          county jail for up to six months, a fine of up to $1,000, or  
          both.  (Pen. Code § 19.) 

          This bill increases the penalty for soliciting or aiding a  
          prostitute from a maximum sentence of 6 months in the county  
          jail to a maximum of one year in the county jail.  

          This bill specifies that if someone is repeatedly speaking to or  
          communicating with a person who is soliciting sex for money or a  
          person who is offering sexual services for compensation - as  
          prohibited by Penal Code Section 647, subdivision (b) - the  
          person speaking to or communicating with the other party may be  
          guilty of the crime of supervising or aiding a prostitute.  

          This bill specifies that if someone repeatedly or continuously  
          monitors or watches another person who is soliciting sex for  
          money or a person who is offering sexual services for  
          compensation - as prohibited by Penal Code Section 647,  
          subdivision (b) - the person speaking to or communicating with  
          the other party may be guilty of the crime of supervising or  
          aiding a prostitute.  

          This bill specifies that if someone receives or appears to  
          receive money from another person who is soliciting sex for  
          money or a person who is offering sexual services for  
          compensation - as prohibited by Penal Code Section 647,  
          subdivision (b) - they may be guilty of the crime of supervising  
          or aiding a prostitute.  

          This bill permits prior human trafficking convictions to be  
          considered in determining whether a person may be guilty of the  
          crime of supervising or aiding a prostitute.  

          This bill permits a juvenile court, on grounds that the minor  
          was coerced or subject to duress, to dismiss a petition alleging  
          that a minor directed of supervised a prostitute.

                    RECEIVERSHIP/OVERCROWDING CRISIS AGGRAVATION

          For the past several years this Committee has scrutinized  








          AB 1771  (O'Donnell )                                      Page  
          5 of ?
          
          
          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  
          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 December of 2015 the administration reported that as "of  
          December 9, 2015, 112,510 inmates were housed in the State's 34  
          adult institutions, which amounts to 136.0% of design bed  
          capacity, and 5,264 inmates were housed in out-of-state  
          facilities.  The current population is 1,212 inmates below the  
          final court-ordered population benchmark of 137.5% of design bed  
          capacity, and has been under that benchmark since February  
          2015."  (Defendants' December 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).)  One  
          year ago, 115,826 inmates were housed in the State's 34 adult  
          institutions, which amounted to 140.0% of design bed capacity,  
          and 8,864 inmates were housed in out-of-state facilities.   
          (Defendants' December 2014 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 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  








          AB 1771  (O'Donnell )                                      Page  
          6 of ?
          
          
          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

          1.Need for This Bill

          According to the author:

               While law enforcement has had some success curtailing  
               this activity, the nature of human trafficking creates  
               obstacles for prosecutors trying to keep offenders  
               behind bars. While pimping and human trafficking are  
               subject to felony prosecution, this charge is only  
               applied on relatively few occasions because sex  
               trafficking victims often do not cooperate with law  
               enforcement.  This is especially true in cases where  
               the victim fears retaliation from her pimp or  
               trafficker. In cases where victims do not provide  
               statements against the pimp or trafficker, only the  
               misdemeanor charge of "supervising a prostitute" can  
               be filed.

               On October 4, 2014 an undercover police officer  
               arrested Jerome Hubbard during a bust of an "escort  
               service" acting as a front for prostitution.  Despite  
               phone messages on Hubbard's phone indicating he  
               oversaw multiple acts of prostitution, without the  
               testimony of the victim, Hubbard could only be charged  
               with "supervising a prostitute" and not pimping or  








          AB 1771  (O'Donnell )                                      Page  
          7 of ?
          
          
               human trafficking.  Hubbard faced a maximum six-month  
               jail sentence (the same as the "prostitute") for this  
               misdemeanor charge.  Due to the limitations in  
               sentencing options, criminals like Hubbard can be  
               released and free to resume their criminal activity in  
               a matter of months.

               The Hubbard case highlights a problem with our ability  
               to keep offenders behind bars when they facilitate the  
               illicit activities of these gangs.  Obtaining evidence  
               of the boasts of committing the crime and catching  
               them in the act are not enough to keep these  
               individuals behind bars for a reasonable period of  
               time.  The six-month maximum sentence on the  
               misdemeanor of "supervising a prostitute" does not  
               recognize the role this crime plays in human  
               trafficking operations.

          2.Differences Between Supervising or Aiding a Prostitute and  
            Pimping and Pandering

          Supervising or aiding a prostitute and pimping or pandering are  
          related crimes, but they have distinct elements.  

             a)   Pimping in Contrast with Aiding a Prostitute
            
             Pimping is a felony and may be punished by three, four, or  
            six years in state prison (or three, six, or eight years if  
            the prostitute was under 16 years of age.  Aiding a prostitute  
            is a misdemeanor and may be punished by six months in the  
            county jail, a fine of no more than one thousand dollars  
            ($1,000), or both.  Pimping is defined as either soliciting  
            prostitution by finding a customer - "john" - for a prostitute  
            and collecting a fee from the john or some of the prostitute's  
            pay, or collecting some or all of a prostitute's pay even if  
            you played no part in finding the john.  

            Pimping includes an element that the defendant helped find  
            customers for a prostitute and received some money for his or  
            her role in the transaction.  But one can be convicted of  
            aiding a prostitute even if he or she did not find the john or  
            arrange the transaction, and even if he or she received no  
            money for your role.  To be convict a defendant of pimping,  
            the prosecutor must show that the defendant lived off of the  








          AB 1771  (O'Donnell )                                      Page  
          8 of ?
          
          
            earnings of a prostitute and knew that the other person was a  
            prostitute.  In contrast, a person can be convicted of aiding  
            a prostitute if he or she received any money that was earned  
            from prostitution, for any reason.  One cannot be convicted of  
            pimping unless a prostitution transaction actually occurred.   
            But one can be convicted of aiding a prostitute by simply  
            helping another person  loiter with the intent to commit  
            prostitution-even without proof that a prostitution offense  
            occurred.  

             b)   Pandering in Contrast That With Aiding a Prostitute

            Pandering is similar to pimping.  A person can violate  
            California's law against pandering when you encourage or  
            persuade someone to engage in prostitution, and make that  
            person available for the purpose of prostitution.   Like  
            pimping, pandering is a felony and may be punished by three,  
            four, or six years in state prison (or three, six, or eight  
            years if the prostitute was under the age of 16.   The crime  
            of supervising or aiding a prostitute includes "recruiting"  
            someone to engage in an act of prostitution or to loiter for  
            the purpose of prostitution.    Appellate decisions have  
            reversed convictions on the basis that a defendant only  
            violates Penal Code 653.23 PC by recruiting "customers for  
            prostitutes or prostitutes for customers," not by recruiting  
            someone to become a prostitute.   In other words, a person is  
            guilty of supervising or otherwise aiding a prostitute only if  
            the person who was recruited actually starts working as a  
            prostitute or loitering for prostitution. 


          SHOULD THIS BILL INCLUDE A PROVISION THAT A PROSECUTION FOR  
          SUPERVISING A PROSTITUTE DOES NOT LIMIT PROSECUTION UNDER ANY  
          OTHER PROVISION OF LAW?
          
          3.Dismissal of Juvenile Court Delinquency Petitions for Aiding  
            Prostitution Where the Offense was Committed Under Duress or  
            Coercion
          
          Human trafficking generally includes an element or inherent  
          character of control over the victim. It has been noted that  
          many victims of human trafficking and other exploited minors are  
          coerced into committing crimes to benefit the trafficker or  
          controlling person.  Numerous bills have considered authority  








          AB 1771  (O'Donnell )                                      Page  
          9 of ?
          
          
          for courts to clear the records of those who committed offenses  
          under duress.  (See, AB 1585 (Alejo) Ch. 708, Stats. 2014.)   
          This bill would take the more direct step of specifically  
          authorizing the juvenile court to dismiss a delinquency petition  
          of the minor committed the crime because of duress or coercion.



                                      -- END -