BILL ANALYSIS Ó
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | SB 230|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
Bill No: SB 230
Author: Hancock (D)
Amended: 7/16/15
Vote: 21
SENATE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE: 5-2, 4/28/15
AYES: Hancock, Leno, Liu, McGuire, Monning
NOES: Anderson, Stone
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE: Senate Rule 28.8
SENATE FLOOR: 21-15, 5/26/15
AYES: Beall, Block, De León, Hancock, Hernandez, Hertzberg,
Hill, Hueso, Jackson, Lara, Leno, Leyva, Liu, McGuire,
Mendoza, Mitchell, Monning, Pan, Pavley, Wieckowski, Wolk
NOES: Anderson, Bates, Berryhill, Fuller, Gaines, Galgiani,
Huff, Moorlach, Morrell, Nguyen, Nielsen, Roth, Runner, Stone,
Vidak
NO VOTE RECORDED: Allen, Cannella, Hall
ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 41-35, 8/31/15 - See last page for vote
SUBJECT: Sentencing: parole
SOURCE: Author
DIGEST: This bill provides that once a person is found
suitable for parole he or she will be released.
Assembly Amendments add double-jointing language to avoiding
chaptering problems between this bill and AB 487(Gonzalez).
ANALYSIS:
SB 230
Page 2
Existing law:
1)Provides that in the case of any inmate sentenced to an
indeterminate sentence, the Board of Parole Hearings (Board)
shall meet with each inmate during the sixth year prior to the
inmate's eligible parole release date for the purposes of
reviewing and documenting the inmates activities and conduct
pertinent to both parole eligibility and to the granting and
withholding of postconviction credit. (Penal Code § 3041(a))
2)Provides that one year prior to the inmate's minimum eligible
parole release date, a panel of two or more commissioners or
deputy commissioners shall meet with the inmate and shall
normally set a parole release date. (Penal Code § 3041(a))
3)Provides that the release date shall be set in a manner that
will provide uniform terms for offenses of similar gravity and
magnitude with respect to their threat to the public, and that
will comply with the sentencing rules that the Judicial
Council may issue and any sentencing information relevant to
setting of the parole release dates. The Board shall
establish criteria for the setting of parole release dates and
in doing so shall consider the number of victims of crime for
which the inmate was sentenced and other factors in mitigation
or aggravation of the crime. (Penal Code § 3041 (a))
4)Provides that one year prior to the inmate's minimum eligible
parole release date, a panel of two or more commissioners or
deputy commissioners shall again meet with the inmate, and
except as provided, normally set a parole release date as
provided in Section 3041.5. (Penal Code § 3041(a))
5)Provides that any decision of the parole panel finding an
inmate suitable for parole shall become final within 120 days
of the date of the hearing. During that hearing the Board may
review the panel's decision. The decision shall become final
unless there was an error of law or an error of fact or new
information that should be presented to the Board. No
decision of the parole panel shall be disapproved and referred
for rehearing except by a majority vote of the Board, sitting
SB 230
Page 3
en banc, following a public meeting. (Penal Code § 3041(b))
6)Provides that, through regulations, based on facts from the
underlying crime, an inmate can be held for a longer period of
time once they are found suitable for parole.
7)Provides that up to 90 days prior to a scheduled release date,
the Governor may request review of a decision by a parole
authority concerning the grant or denial of parole to any
inmate in state prison. (Penal Code § 3041.1)
This bill:
1)Provides that an inmate found suitable for parole shall be
paroled subject to review by the Governor.
2)Provides that any time before an inmate's release, the
Governor can make a request a review of the decision.
3)Makes technical and conforming changes.
Background
Release upon a finding of suitability. Under existing law, a
person can be found suitable for parole by the Board and still
not be released because of the various enhancements that can be
added to the person's term. The first parole hearing is not
until the date that seems like the person's sentence (ie. 15
years is 15 to life minus any eligible credits etc.), yet
because of the added time a person could be found suitable for
parole and held in prison two, five, or even 10 or more years
beyond that date. This is the case even though the Board, in
determining suitability, takes into consideration the facts of
the original crime, including those that add time, along with
the steps the inmate has taken toward rehabilitation and his or
her current danger to the public. To be found suitable for
parole the Board has found that he or she is not a current
danger; however, the current system keeps them in for longer at
great expense and no added safety to the public.
SB 230
Page 4
This bill provides that if an inmate is found suitable he or she
shall be released, after the Governor's statutory right of
review. The author believes that this is a truth in sentencing
provision. If a person serves his or her time as imposed by the
sentencing court and is found suitable, he or she is released.
This will also give the inmate a realistic timeframe to work
toward rehabilitating himself or herself. The author believes
that to be found suitable by the Board and then kept longer
because of factors in your original crime, that were already
considered by the Board, does not encourage rehabilitative
behavior by inmates.
Change in time for the Governor to request a review of the
parole decision. Under existing law, the Governor can ask for
the review of a parole decision up to 90 days prior to the
release. This works under the existing system in which a person
can be found suitable for parole but not released for years
afterwards. Under this bill once found suitable, a person will
be released after the 120 days the Governor has to review parole
decisions. Because of this shorter timeframe to release, the
Governor may not have time to ask for a review of the decision
90 days prior to the release. Thus, this bill allows the
Governor to ask for the review any time prior to the release to
give the Governor the time to study the decision and determine
whether to ask for a review.
FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: No Fiscal
Com.:YesLocal: No
According to the Assembly Appropriations Committee, unknown
potential savings to the California Department of Corrections
for reduced incarceration periods. Assuming the annual
contracted bed rate of $29,000 per inmate, the annual General
Fund savings would be $29,000 per each additional year not
served by an inmate paroled timely.
SUPPORT: (Verified 8/31/15)
SB 230
Page 5
American Civil Liberties Union
Californians for Safety and Justice
California Public Defenders Association
Friends Committee on Legislation of California
Legal Services for Prisoners with Children
OPPOSITION: (Verified 8/31/15)
None received
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT: The California Public Defenders
Association states:
The effect of SB 230 is restoration of truth in
sentencing. SB 230 would provide that when an
individual is found suitable for parole by the Board
of Parole Hearings (BPH), that they would actually be
granted parole pending review by the Governor. Under
the current convoluted system of calculating parole
time, an inmate can remain in prison, sometimes
upwards of years, after BPH finds them suitable for
parole. Under current law, BPH considers and adds
additional years to an inmate's incarceration based on
previous criminal charges that the inmate was never
convicted of or enhancements that the sentencing court
already took into account. This opaque parole system
results in inmates who have been found suitable for
parole serving additional time (often years) before
they are actually paroled.
SB 230 simplifies our parole system in a basic and
commonsense way. It saves money and ensures public
safety, by ensuring that suitable inmates are
released.
ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 41-35, 8/31/15
AYES: Bloom, Bonilla, Bonta, Brown, Burke, Calderon, Campos,
Chau, Chiu, Chu, Daly, Dodd, Eggman, Cristina Garcia, Eduardo
SB 230
Page 6
Garcia, Gipson, Gomez, Gonzalez, Gordon, Roger Hernández,
Holden, Jones-Sawyer, Levine, Lopez, Low, McCarty, Mullin,
Nazarian, O'Donnell, Perea, Quirk, Rendon, Ridley-Thomas,
Santiago, Mark Stone, Thurmond, Ting, Weber, Williams, Wood,
Atkins
NOES: Achadjian, Travis Allen, Baker, Bigelow, Brough, Chang,
Chávez, Cooley, Dababneh, Dahle, Beth Gaines, Gallagher,
Gatto, Gray, Grove, Hadley, Harper, Irwin, Jones, Kim, Lackey,
Linder, Maienschein, Mathis, Mayes, Medina, Melendez,
Obernolte, Olsen, Patterson, Salas, Steinorth, Wagner,
Waldron, Wilk
NO VOTE RECORDED: Alejo, Cooper, Frazier, Rodriguez
Prepared by:Mary Kennedy / PUB. S. /
8/31/15 19:58:24
**** END ****