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 ****