BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    Ó




           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |SENATE RULES COMMITTEE            |                        SB 266|
          |Office of Senate Floor Analyses   |                              |
          |(916) 651-1520    Fax: (916)      |                              |
          |327-4478                          |                              |
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 


                                UNFINISHED BUSINESS 


          Bill No:  SB 266
          Author:   Block (D), et al.
          Amended:  6/27/16  
          Vote:     21 

           SENATE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE:  7-0, 3/24/15
           AYES:  Hancock, Anderson, Leno, Liu, McGuire, Monning, Stone

           SENATE FLOOR:  36-1, 4/9/15
           AYES:  Allen, Anderson, Bates, Beall, Block, Cannella, De León,  
            Fuller, Gaines, Galgiani, Hall, Hancock, Hernandez, Hertzberg,  
            Hill, Hueso, Huff, Jackson, Lara, Leno, Leyva, Liu, McGuire,  
            Mendoza, Monning, Moorlach, Morrell, Nguyen, Nielsen, Pan,  
            Pavley, Roth, Runner, Stone, Vidak, Wolk
           NOES:  Mitchell
           NO VOTE RECORDED:  Berryhill, Wieckowski

           ASSEMBLY FLOOR:  79-0, 8/18/16 - See last page for vote
           
           SUBJECT:   Probation and mandatory supervision:  flash  
                     incarceration


          SOURCE:    Chief Probation Officers of California


          DIGEST:  This bill authorizes the use of a sanction known as  
          "flash incarceration" for defendants granted probation or placed  
          on mandatory supervision.  


          Assembly Amendments sunset this bill's provisions on January 1,  
          2021, and refine this bill's provisions concerning the  
          imposition of flash incarceration in these cases, as specified.   









                                                                     SB 266  
                                                                    Page  2





          ANALYSIS:   


          Existing law:


          1) Authorizes intermediate sanctions, including flash  
             incarceration, to be imposed  on inmates released from prison  
             after July 1, 2013, and subject to parole.  


          2) Authorizes intermediate sanctions, including flash  
             incarceration, for violating the terms of post-release  
             community supervision (PRCS).  


          3) Defines "flash incarceration" as a period of detention in a  
             city or county jail due to a violation of a person's  
             conditions of parole or PRCS.  The length of the detention  
             period can range between one and 10 consecutive days in a  
             county jail.  


          4) Requires a person placed on PRCS to agree to specified  
             conditions of release, including the waiver of the right to a  
             court hearing prior to the imposition of a period of flash  
             incarceration for any violation of his or her PRCS  
             conditions.  


          5) Authorizes, as a general matter, the court to suspend a  
             felony sentence and order the conditional and revocable  
             release of the defendant in the community to probation  
             supervision.  


          6) Provides if any probation officer, parole officer, or peace  
             officer has probable cause to believe that a supervised  
             person is violating any term or condition of his/her  
             supervision, the officer may arrest the person without a  








                                                                     SB 266  
                                                                    Page  3



             warrant at any time and bring the person before the court for  
             further disposition such as modification, revocation or  
             termination of the person's supervision, as specified.


          7) Gives the sentencing judge discretion to impose two types of  
             sentences to county jail.  The court may commit the defendant  
             for the entire term allowed by law, or the court may impose a  
             "split sentence" in which part of the term is served in  
             custody and the remaining part of the term is comprised of a  
             period of mandatory supervision.  However, the presumption is  
             that the defendant shall receive a split sentence, unless the  
             court finds that, in the interests of justice, it is not  
             appropriate in a particular case.  


          8) States that the traditional procedures used for violations of  
             probation will now be applicable to violations of mandatory  
             supervision.  Also states that procedures used to modify  
             probation are applicable to modify the conditions of  
             mandatory supervision.  


          This bill:


          1) Provides that in any case where the court grants probation or  
             imposes a sentence that includes mandatory supervision, the  
             county probation department is authorized to use flash  
             incarceration for any violation of the 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) Prohibits the denial of probation for refusal to sign a  
             waiver agreeing to flash incarceration.


          3) Requires each county probation department to develop a  
             response matrix that establishes protocols for the imposition  








                                                                     SB 266  
                                                                    Page  4



             of graduated sanctions for violations of the conditions of  
             probation to determine appropriate interventions to include  
             the use of flash incarceration.


          4) Requires a probation department supervisor to approve a term  
             of flash incarceration before its imposition.


          5) Requires the probation department to notify the court, public  
             defender, district attorney, and sheriff upon a decision to  
             impose a period of flash incarceration.


          6) States that if the defendant does not agree to accept a  
             recommended period of flash incarceration, then the probation  
             officer may address the alleged violation by filing a  
             declaration or revocation request with the court.


          7) Defines "flash incarceration" as "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."


          8) States that in cases where there are multiple violations in a  
             single incident, only one flash incarceration booking is  
             authorized and may range between one and 10 consecutive days.


          9) Excludes application of flash incarceration to any defendant  
             convicted of a nonviolent drug possession offense who  
             receives probation under Proposition 36 of 2000.










                                                                     SB 266  
                                                                    Page  5



          10)         Provides that if the supervised person's probation  
             or mandatory supervision is revoked, credits earned for a  
             period of flash incarceration count towards the term to be  
             served.


          11)         Sunsets these provisions on January 1, 2021.


          Background


          According to the author, "The passage of Realignment in 2011  
          overhauled how certain convicted felons would serve their  
          sentences with a strong emphasis on rehabilitation and keeping  
          these offenders in their local communities.  As a result,  
          probation departments now have the responsibility to supervise  
          Post-Release Community Supervision (PRCS) offenders, along with  
          persons on mandatory supervision. 


          "A tool currently afforded to probation departments to supervise  
          Post-Release Community Supervision (PRCS) offenders that has  
          been successful is the use of flash incarceration.  This  
          immediate, evidence-based tool, allows departments to address  
          serious violations of a condition of probation while minimally  
          disrupting the offenders' rehabilitation progress. 


          "Currently however, the use of flash incarceration is not  
          authorized on individuals under mandatory supervision (MS) or  
          those on probation.  The result is that when an individual under  
          MS or probation commits a serious violation of a condition of  
          probation, the only existing mechanism to address these  
          violations is to initiate a petition for revocation of  
          probation.  The revocation process disrupts offenders'  
          rehabilitation by removing them from their jobs, re-entry  
          programs, school, and/or family for a much longer period of time  
          compared to the use of flash incarceration. 


          "By authorizing flash incarceration on MS and probationers, SB  








                                                                     SB 266  
                                                                    Page  6



          266 will provide an additional tool to local probation  
          departments to address serious violations of a condition of  
          probation while not disrupting an individual's progress to  
          re-entry.  Flash incarceration requires an individual to serve  
          up to 10 days in county jail after a violation is found. 


          "The bill has recently been amended to do several important  
          things.  First, it will allow a person to decline flash at any  
          time and choose to go the traditional court hearing route via a  
          petition for revocation.  Second, it prohibits probation from  
          being denied for refusal to sign the waiver.  Third, it sets  
          forth a notification process to stakeholders upon an imposition  
          of flash, requires development of a local response matrix based  
          on evidence based practices, and requires supervisor approval of  
          the imposition of flash.  Additionally, the bill clarifies that  
          while credits are not applied during a period of flash  
          incarceration, credits earned during a period of flash would be  
          applied to a custody term if the person on probation or  
          mandatory supervision was revoked.  Lastly, the bill includes a  
          sunset date  . . . .


          "SB 266 utilizes evidence-based intermediate sanctions which  
          balances holding offenders accountable while focusing on shorter  
          and few disruptions from work, home, and programming"


          FISCAL EFFECT:   Appropriation:    No          Fiscal  
          Com.:NoLocal:    No


          SUPPORT:   (Verified8/18/16)


          Chief Probation Officers of California (source)
          California Probation, Parole and Correctional Association
          California State Sheriffs' Association


          OPPOSITION:   (Verified8/18/16)









                                                                     SB 266  
                                                                    Page  7




          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." 

           ASSEMBLY FLOOR:  79-0, 8/18/16
           AYES:  Achadjian, Alejo, Travis Allen, Arambula, Atkins, Baker,  
            Bigelow, Bloom, Bonilla, Bonta, Brough, Brown, Burke,  
            Calderon, Campos, Chang, Chau, Chávez, Chiu, Chu, Cooley,  
            Cooper, Dababneh, Dahle, Daly, Dodd, Eggman, Frazier, Beth  
            Gaines, Gallagher, Cristina Garcia, Eduardo Garcia, Gatto,  
            Gipson, Gomez, Gonzalez, Gordon, Gray, Grove, Hadley, Harper,  
            Holden, Irwin, Jones, Jones-Sawyer, Kim, Lackey, Levine,  
            Linder, Lopez, Low, Maienschein, Mathis, Mayes, McCarty,  
            Medina, Melendez, Mullin, Nazarian, Obernolte, O'Donnell,  
            Olsen, Patterson, Quirk, Ridley-Thomas, Rodriguez, Salas,  
            Santiago, Steinorth, Mark Stone, Thurmond, Ting, Wagner,  
            Waldron, Weber, Wilk, Williams, Wood, Rendon
           NO VOTE RECORDED:  Roger Hernández





          Prepared by:Alison Anderson / PUB. S. / 
          8/19/16 19:37:19








                                                                     SB 266  
                                                                    Page  8





                                   ****  END  ****