BILL ANALYSIS Ó ----------------------------------------------------------------- |SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | SB 266| |Office of Senate Floor Analyses | | |(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | | |327-4478 | | ----------------------------------------------------------------- THIRD READING Bill No: SB 266 Author: Block (D), et al. Amended: 4/7/15 Vote: 21 SENATE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE: 7-0, 3/24/15 AYES: Hancock, Anderson, Leno, Liu, McGuire, Monning, Stone SUBJECT: Probation and mandatory supervision: flash incarceration SOURCE: Chief Probation Officers of California DIGEST: This bill provides that courts may authorize probation officers to use relatively short periods of jail time, known as "flash incarceration," for violations of probation or mandatory supervision, as specified. ANALYSIS: Existing law: 1)Generally authorizes the use of a penalty known as "flash incarceration" for felons who have been released from prison, are subject to supervision by state parole or county probation, and are believed to have violated a condition of their supervision. (Penal Code §§ 3008.8; 3450.) SB 266 Page 2 2)Generally authorizes courts to suspend a felony sentence and order the conditional and revocable release of an offender in the community to probation supervision. (Penal Code § 1203.) 3)Authorizes courts to impose what is known as a "split sentence" on persons convicted of a felony for which any custodial time will be served locally (not in state prison), and where the court imposes a sentence comprised of both time in custody and time subject to what is termed "mandatory supervision" in the community by probation. (Penal Code § 1170(h).) This bill: 1)Gives courts the power to authorize a county probation officer to use flash incarceration for any violation of conditions of probation or mandatory supervision if, at the time of granting probation or ordering mandatory supervision, the court obtains from the defendant a waiver to a court hearing prior to the imposition of a period of flash incarceration. 2)Requires that if the person on probation or mandatory supervision does not agree to accept a recommended period of flash incarceration upon a finding of a violation, the probation officer may address the alleged violation by filing a declaration or revocation request with the court. 3)Provides that for purposes of this section, "flash incarceration" is a "period of detention in a county jail due to a violation of an offender's conditions of probation or mandatory supervision. The length of the detention period may range between one and 10 consecutive days. Shorter, but if necessary more frequent, periods of detention for violations of an offender's conditions of probation or mandatory supervision shall appropriately punish an offender while preventing the disruption in a work or home establishment that typically arises from longer periods of detention." SB 266 Page 3 4)Does not apply to defendants subject to Proposition 36 of 2000, as specified. 5)Contains a sunset clause of January 1, 2021. Background Two provisions in the "2011 Realignment Legislation Addressing Public Safety" changed the responsibilities of probation. First, realignment provided that some inmates released from state prison would be subject to post release community supervision, performed by probation instead of parole. Second, realignment provided that certain persons convicted of felonies would not go to prison, but instead would be sentenced to local punishment which could include jail time, mandatory community supervision, or both (a "split sentence"). Mandatory supervision as part of a "split sentence" is done by probation. Realignment authorized both parole and probation to employ "flash incarceration" as an "intermediate sanction" for parole and PRCS violations. This bill extends this sanction to offenders on probation and mandatory supervision. The sponsor of this bill has provided an example demonstrating that, in some jurisdictions, courts now are including flash incarceration authority in their orders for probation and mandatory supervision through the waiver approach proposed by this bill. NOTE: Please see the policy committee analysis for a full discussion of this bill. FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.:NoLocal: No SUPPORT: (Verified4/6/15) SB 266 Page 4 Chief Probation Officers of California (source) California Probation, Parole and Correctional Association California State Sheriffs' Association OPPOSITION: (Verified4/6/15) California Attorneys for Criminal Justice California Public Defenders Association Legal Services for Prisoners with Children ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT: According to the proponents, this bill gives county probation departments the authority to use flash incarceration for a person on probation or mandatory supervision similar to existing authoring for PRCS offenders. By extending this authority, county probation departments can continue to use this effective, evidence based tool for offenders under their supervision. ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION: Opponents state that the "usage of flash incarceration is a waste of state resources when those resources could be better served by focusing on rehabilitation programs such as community education, counseling, and reentry services." Prepared by:Alison Anderson / PUB. S. / 4/8/15 15:13:18 **** END ****