BILL ANALYSIS Ó
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | SB 110|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
VETO
Bill No: SB 110
Author: Fuller (R), et al.
Amended: 8/17/15
Vote: 21
SENATE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE: 6-0, 4/14/15
AYES: Hancock, Anderson, Leno, McGuire, Monning, Stone
NO VOTE RECORDED: Liu
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE: Senate Rule 28.8
SENATE FLOOR: 36-0, 5/18/15
AYES: Allen, Anderson, Bates, Beall, Block, Cannella, De León,
Fuller, Gaines, Galgiani, Hancock, Hernandez, Hertzberg, Hill,
Hueso, Huff, Jackson, Lara, Leno, Leyva, Liu, McGuire,
Mendoza, Mitchell, Monning, Moorlach, Morrell, Nguyen,
Nielsen, Pan, Roth, Runner, Stone, Vidak, Wieckowski, Wolk
NO VOTE RECORDED: Berryhill, Hall, Pavley
SENATE FLOOR: 40-0, 8/27/15
AYES: Allen, Anderson, Bates, Beall, Berryhill, Block,
Cannella, De León, Fuller, Gaines, Galgiani, Glazer, Hall,
Hancock, Hernandez, Hertzberg, Hill, Hueso, Huff, Jackson,
Lara, Leno, Leyva, Liu, McGuire, Mendoza, Mitchell, Monning,
Moorlach, Morrell, Nguyen, Nielsen, Pan, Pavley, Roth, Runner,
Stone, Vidak, Wieckowski, Wolk
ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 75-3, 8/20/15 - See last page for vote
SUBJECT: Threats: schools
SOURCE: Bakersfield Police Department
DIGEST: This bill enacts a new misdemeanor for threatening
SB 110
Page 2
unlawful violence to another person on a school campus or at a
school-sponsored event, as specified.
ANALYSIS:
Existing law:
1)Provides that "any person who willfully threatens to commit a
crime which will result in death or great bodily injury to
another person, with the specific intent that the statement,
made verbally, in writing, or by means of an electronic
communication device, is to be taken as a threat, even if
there is no intent of actually carrying it out, which, on its
face and under the circumstances in which it is made, is so
unequivocal, unconditional, immediate, and specific as to
convey to the person threatened, a gravity of purpose and an
immediate prospect of execution of the threat, and thereby
causes that person reasonably to be in sustained fear for his
or her own safety or for his or her immediate family's safety,
shall be punished by imprisonment in the county jail not to
exceed one year, or by imprisonment in the state prison."
(Penal Code § 422).
2)Provides that every student or employee who, after a hearing,
has been suspended or dismissed from a school and who
willfully and knowingly enters upon the campus or facility to
which he or she has been denied access is guilty of a
misdemeanor. (Penal Code § 626.2)
This bill:
1)Enacts a new crime to provide that anyone who willfully
threatens unlawful violence to another person by any means,
including through an electronic act, to occur upon school
grounds or a location where a school-sponsored event is or
will be taking place and the threat is related both to the
school-sponsored event and to the time period in which the
school-sponsored event will be taking place, with the specific
intent that the statement is to be taken as a threat, even if
there is no intent of carrying it out, and where the threat,
on its face and under the circumstances in which it is made,
is so unequivocal, unconditional, immediate, and specific as
SB 110
Page 3
to convey a gravity of purpose and an immediate prospect of
execution of the threat, shall be punished by imprisonment in
a county jail for a period not exceeding one year, or by
imprisonment, as specified.
2)Defines "disruption" to mean an act likely to interfere with
peaceful activities of the campus or facility.
3)Defines "school" to mean a state preschool, a private or
public elementary, middle, vocational, junior high, or high
school, a community college, a public or private university,
or a location where a school-sponsored event is or will be
taking place.
4)Provides that its provisions not preclude or prohibit
prosecution under any other law, except that a person shall
not be convicted for the same threat under Section 422.2 and
Section 422 of the Penal Code
Background
Recent media reports have described numerous incidents involving
school threats. For example, in San Diego:
?[T]here were 5 percent more suspensions and expulsions in San
Diego County related to making terrorist threats in the
2013-14 school year than in the previous school year, and 35
percent more than in the 2011-12 school year. Threats
typically surface on social media or are made via phone or
email. Once school officials learn of it, police are called
in to investigate, and a school might get locked down, with
everyone on campus kept behind locked doors until the coast is
clear. That could take hours.
Students from high school campuses in Oceanside, San Diego, El
Cajon and San Marcos, have been arrested on suspicion of using
the app to threaten schools.
The CEO, Jonathan Lucas, said recent changes to the app make
it "very clear" that threats of violence and bullying won't be
tolerated. He said users are asked to carefully consider the
contents of their posts and are even shown their IP addresses.
SB 110
Page 4
He said the company has been cooperating with all law
enforcement investigations and has a quick process in place to
help investigators locate users who commit crimes. (Winkley,
Lyndsay, and Pat Maio. "Online Schools Threats Up; Officials
Crack down." U-T San Diego. N.p., 22 Mar. 2015. Web. 07 Apr.
2015.)
Similarly, in Los Angeles, an 11th grade student was arrested
for making threats through the social media app, Burnbook,
against a Los Angeles County high school. Investigators were
informed that the student had published the threat online and
was taken into custody the following day. He was charged with
making criminal threats after he confessed to threatening to
bring a weapon to school. The student told deputies that he was
making jokes. ("Student Arrested after Social Media Threats
against School." Student Arrested following Threats on Social
Media against Los Angeles County School. The Associated Press,
12 Mar. 2015. Web. 07 Apr. 2015.)
This bill has been narrowed through the process to address 1st
Amendment concerns. Constitutional principles required to impose
crime penalties for a threat, are that it must be with "specific
intent that the statement is to be taken as a threat, even if
there is no intent of carrying it out, and where the threat, on
its face and under the circumstances in which it is made, is so
unequivocal, unconditional, immediate, and specific as to convey
a gravity of purpose and an immediate prospect of execution of
the threat."
FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: No Fiscal
Com.:YesLocal: Yes
SUPPORT: (Verified10/26/15)
Bakersfield Police Department (source)
California State Sheriffs' Association
City of Bakersfield Office of the Chief of Police
Kern County District Attorney's Office
Kern County Superintendent of Schools
SB 110
Page 5
OPPOSITION: (Verified10/26/15)
American Civil Liberties Union
Legal Services for Prisoners with Children
National Center for Youth Law
Public Counsel
Youth Law Center
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT: The author writes:
The threat of violence in California schools and colleges
through social media or other electronic communication is
a problem. These threats not only instill fear and force
the cancellation of classes and building closures, but
they can cost school districts considerable funds. This
includes the cost to investigate and prosecute
perpetrators, to hire additional safety personnel to
observe student activities and websites, and to purchase
surveillance equipment to monitor non-classroom areas.
The impact expands beyond the incidence, and hinders the
learning environment.
Roughly 30% of violent threats made against schools were
delivered through social media, email, text messaging and
other electronic means from August 2013 to January 2014. It
is believed this percentage has increased and will continue to
rise. These electronic threats include school bomb threats,
shooting threats, hoaxes, and acts of violence.
ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION: Opponents argue generally that minors
should be disciplined through community-based services as an
alternative to incarceration. Youth exposure to the criminal
justice system heightens the likelihood that youth offenders
will recidivate in adulthood. Additionally Penal Code Section
422 addresses threat crimes which include those made through
electronic means.
GOVERNOR'S VETO MESSAGE:
SB 110
Page 6
I am returning Senate Bill 110 without my signature.
No one could be anything but intolerant of threats to cause
great bodily injury, especially on school grounds.
Certainly not legislators, who voted nearly unanimously for
this bill.
While I'm sympathetic and utterly committed to ensuring
maximum safety for California's school children, the
offensive conduct covered by this bill is already illegal.
In recent decades, California has created an unprecedented
number of new and detailed criminal laws. Before we keep
enacting more, I think we should pause and reflect on the
fact that our bulging criminal code now contains in excess
of 5,000 separate provisions, covering almost every
conceivable form of human misbehavior.
ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 75-3, 8/20/15
AYES: Achadjian, Alejo, Travis Allen, Baker, Bigelow, Bloom,
Bonilla, Bonta, Brough, Brown, Burke, Calderon, Campos, Chang,
Chau, Chávez, Chiu, Cooley, Cooper, Dababneh, Dahle, Daly,
Dodd, Eggman, Frazier, Beth Gaines, Gallagher, Cristina
Garcia, Eduardo Garcia, Gatto, Gipson, Gomez, Gordon, Gray,
Grove, Hadley, Harper, Roger Hernández, Holden, Irwin, Jones,
Jones-Sawyer, Kim, Lackey, Levine, Linder, Lopez, Low,
Maienschein, Mathis, Mayes, McCarty, Medina, Melendez, Mullin,
Nazarian, Obernolte, O'Donnell, Olsen, Patterson, Perea,
Quirk, Ridley-Thomas, Rodriguez, Salas, Santiago, Steinorth,
Thurmond, Wagner, Waldron, Weber, Wilk, Williams, Wood, Atkins
NOES: Gonzalez, Mark Stone, Ting
NO VOTE RECORDED: Chu, Rendon
Prepared by:Linda Tenerowicz / PUB. S. /
11/4/15 13:34:21
**** END ****
SB 110
Page 7