BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    Ó



          SENATE COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC SAFETY
                             Senator Loni Hancock, Chair
                                2015 - 2016  Regular 

          Bill No:    SB 333        Hearing Date:    April 28, 2015    
          
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |Author:    |Galgiani                                             |
          |-----------+-----------------------------------------------------|
          |Version:   |April 20, 2015                                       |
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |Urgency:   |No                     |Fiscal:    |Yes              |
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |Consultant:|JM                                                   |
          |           |                                                     |
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 


                           Subject:  Controlled Substances



          HISTORY

          Source:   California District Attorneys Association

          Prior Legislation:None


          Support:  Association for Los Angeles Deputy Sheriffs;  
                    California College and University Police Chiefs  
                    Association; California Correctional Supervisors  
                    Organization; California Narcotic Officers  
                    Association; Los Angeles Police Protective League;  
                    Peace Officers Research Association of California;  
                    Riverside Sheriffs Association; Crime Victims United  
                    of California; San Bernardino County Sheriff;  
                    California Insurance Commissioner Dave Jones


          Opposition:Ella Baker Center for Human Rights; Legal Services  
                    for Prisoners with Children

                                                


          PURPOSE








          SB 333  (Galgiani )                                       PageB  
          of?
          

          The purpose of this bill is to provide that possession of  
          gamma-Hydroxybutyric acid (GHB), flunitrazepam (Rohypnol), or  
          ketamine with the intent to commit a sex crime, as defined, is a  
          felony, punishable by a prison term of sixteen months, two years  
          or three years.

          Existing law provides that the possession of specified  
          controlled substances including ketamine, flunitrazepam, and  
          GHB, unless upon the prescription of a physician, dentist,  
          podiatrist, or veterinarian licensed to practice in this state,  
          is a misdemeanor punishable by up to one year in a county jail,  
          except for a person who has one or more prior convictions for a  
          specified violent felony or has been convicted of a prior  
          offense requiring the person to register as a sex offender, then  
          the penalty shall be a felony. (Health & Saf. Code, §§ 11350,  
          subd. (a) and 11377, subd. (a).)

          Existing law classifies controlled substances in five schedules  
          according to their danger and potential for abuse.  Schedule I  
          controlled substances have the greatest restrictions and  
          penalties, including prohibiting the prescribing of a Schedule I  
          controlled substance.  (Health & Saf. Code, §§ 11054 to 11058.)

          Existing law states, except as provided, that every person who  
          possesses for sale or purchases for purposes of sale any of the  
          specified controlled substances, including cocaine and heroin,  
          shall be punished by imprisonment in a county jail for two,  
          three, or four years.  (Health & Saf. Code, § 11351.)

          Existing law provides that every person that transports, imports  
          into the state, sells, furnishes, administers, or gives away, or  
          offers to transport, import into the state, sell, furnish, or  
          give away, or attempts to import into this state or transport  
          cocaine, cocaine base, or heroin, or other specified controlled  
          substances listed in the controlled substance schedule, without  
          a written prescription from a licensed physician, dentist,  
          podiatrist, or veterinarian shall be punished by imprisonment  
          for three, four, or five years. (Health & Saf. Code, § 11352,  
          subd. (a).)

          Existing law states that the possession for sale of  
          methamphetamine, and other specified controlled substances is  
          punishable by imprisonment in a county jail for 16 months, two  









          SB 333  (Galgiani )                                       PageC  
          of?
          
          or three years. (Health & Saf. Code, § 11378.)

          Existing law provides that every person that transports, imports  
          into the state, sells, furnishes, administers, or gives away, or  
          offers to transport, import into the state, sell, furnish, or  
          give away, or attempts to import into this state or transport  
          methamphetamine, or other specified  controlled substances   
          listed in the controlled substance schedule, without a written  
          prescription from a licensed physician, dentist, podiatrist, or  
          veterinarian shall be punished by imprisonment for two, three,  
          or four years.  (Health & Saf. Code, § 11379, subd. (a).)

          Existing law states that every person guilty of administering to  
          another any chloroform, ether, laudanum, or any controlled  
          substance, anesthetic, or intoxicating agent, with intent  
          thereby to enable or assist himself or herself or any other  
          person to commit a felony, is guilty of a felony punishable by  
          imprisonment in the state prison for 16 months, or two or three  
          years.  (Pen. Code, § 222.)

          Existing law states that rape is an act of sexual intercourse  
          accomplished where a person is prevented from resisting by any  
          intoxicating or anesthetic substance, or any controlled  
          substance, and this condition was known, or reasonably should  
          have been known, by the accused. (Pen. Code, §§ 261, subd.  
          (a)(3); 262, subd. (a)(2).)

          Existing law specifies felony penalties for any person who  
          commits an act of sodomy, oral copulation or sexual penetration  
          where the victim is prevented from resisting by any intoxicating  
          or anesthetic substance, or any controlled substance, and this  
          condition was known, or reasonably should have been known, by  
          the accused. (Pen. Code, §§ 286, subd. (i); 288a, subd. (i);  
          289, subd. (e).)

          This bill provides that a person who possesses  
          gamma-Hydroxybutyric acid (GHB), ketamine or flunitrazepam, also  
          known by the trade name Rohypnol, with the intent to commit  
          sexual assault, as defined, is guilty of a felony, punishable by  
          imprisonment in state prison for 16 months, or two or three  
          years.

          This bill defines "sexual assault" for the purposes of this bill  
          to include, but not be limited to, violations of specified  









          SB 333  (Galgiani )                                       PageD  
          of?
          
          provisions related to sexual assault committed against a victim  
          who is prevented from resisting by an intoxicating or anesthetic  
          substance, or any controlled substance. 

          This bill states the finding of the Legislature that in order to  
          deter the possession of ketamine, GHB, and Rohypnol by sexual  
          predators and to take steps to prevent the use of these drugs to  
          incapacitate victims for purposes of sexual exploitation, it is  
          necessary and appropriate that an individual who possesses one  
          of these substances for predatory purposes be subject to felony  
          penalties.

                    RECEIVERSHIP/OVERCROWDING CRISIS AGGRAVATION

          For the past eight years, this Committee has scrutinized  
          legislation referred to its jurisdiction for any potential  
          impact on prison overcrowding.  Mindful of the United States  
          Supreme Court ruling and federal court orders relating to the  
          state's ability to provide a constitutional level of health care  
          to its inmate population and the related issue of prison  
          overcrowding, this Committee has applied its "ROCA" policy as a  
          content-neutral, provisional measure necessary to ensure that  
          the Legislature does not erode progress in reducing prison  
          overcrowding.   

          On February 10, 2014, the federal court ordered California to  
          reduce its in-state adult institution population to 137.5% of  
          design capacity by February 28, 2016, as follows:   

                 143% of design bed capacity by June 30, 2014;
                 141.5% of design bed capacity by February 28, 2015; and,
                 137.5% of design bed capacity by February 28, 2016. 

          In February of this year the administration reported that as "of  
          February 11, 2015, 112,993 inmates were housed in the State's 34  
          adult institutions, which amounts to 136.6% of design bed  
          capacity, and 8,828 inmates were housed in out-of-state  
          facilities.  This current population is now below the  
          court-ordered reduction to 137.5% of design bed capacity."(  
          Defendants' February 2015 Status Report In Response To February  
          10, 2014 Order, 2:90-cv-00520 KJM DAD PC, 3-Judge Court, Coleman  
          v. Brown, Plata v. Brown (fn. omitted).

          While significant gains have been made in reducing the prison  









          SB 333  (Galgiani )                                       PageE  
          of?
          
          population, the state now must stabilize these advances and  
          demonstrate to the federal court that California has in place  
          the "durable solution" to prison overcrowding "consistently  
          demanded" by the court.  (Opinion Re: Order Granting in Part and  
          Denying in Part Defendants' Request For Extension of December  
          31, 2013 Deadline, NO. 2:90-cv-0520 LKK DAD (PC), 3-Judge Court,  
          Coleman v. Brown, Plata v. Brown (2-10-14).  The Committee's  
          consideration of bills that may impact the prison population  
          therefore will be informed by the following questions:

              Whether a proposal erodes a measure which has contributed  
               to reducing the prison population;
              Whether a proposal addresses a major area of public safety  
               or criminal activity for which there is no other  
               reasonable, appropriate remedy;
              Whether a proposal addresses a crime which is directly  
               dangerous to the physical safety of others for which there  
               is no other reasonably appropriate sanction; 
              Whether a proposal corrects a constitutional problem or  
               legislative drafting error; and
              Whether a proposal proposes penalties which are  
               proportionate, and cannot be achieved through any other  
               reasonably appropriate remedy.


          











          COMMENTS

          1.Need for This Bill

          According to the author:

               In November 2014, Proposition 47 was approved by  









          SB 333  (Galgiani )                                       PageF  
          of?
          
               voters to reclassify many crimes that were previously  
               eligible to be charged as either as a felony, or a  
               misdemeanor, as solely misdemeanors, unless the  
               defendant had a prior sex crime or specified violent  
               felony conviction.  This included reducing the  
               penalties for the illegal possession of the drugs  
               Rohypnol and GHB -commonly known as 'date rape' drugs.  
                The law enforcement community and sexual assault  
               survivor advocate organizations have expressed concern  
               over this change and how it could potentially weaken  
               current sexual assault laws. 

               Originally, Senate Bill 333 would have restored  
               wobbler status for the simple possession of these  
               drugs.  However, after working with concerned parties  
               I have amended the bill to create a new felony crime  
               of possession with the intent to commit sexual assault  
               for the commonly known date rape drugs of Rohypnol,  
               GHB and ketamine.  This will allow prosecutors to  
               bring felony charges against a perpetrator who has  
               been found in possession of these drugs and has taken  
               steps to use them to facilitate a sexual assault. 

               Given the difficult nature of prosecuting sexual  
               assault crimes, California should embrace this  
               opportunity to provide serious consequences for  
               criminals looking to use date rape drugs to facilitate  
               a heinous crime.  Senate Bill 333 recognizes that date  
               rape drugs can be used as a tool for sexual predators  
               and if they are used for this purpose, there must be a  
               instrument available for prosecutors to charge them  
               accordingly.

          2.Difference Between Possession of a Drug with Intent to Commit  
            a Sex Crime and an Attempted Sex Crime

          An attempt is the intent to commit a crime and an affirmative,  
          yet unsuccessful, step towards committing the crime.  For the  
          crime to be an attempt, the intended crime would have been  
          committed had some circumstance not intervened.   "Mere  
          preparation" towards commission of a crime is not an affirmative  
          step.  (People v. Breverman (1998) 19 Cal.4th 142, 154; CALCRIM  
          406.)










          SB 333  (Galgiani )                                       PageG  
          of?
          
          The crime defined in this bill - possession of a specified drug  
          with intent to commit a sexual assault - would allow conviction  
          of defendants who did not go beyond preparation.  For example,  
          the defendant told his companions at a bar that he wanted to  
          drug a woman and have sex with her.  He talks to the woman for a  
          while and then puts a drug in her drink.  Her friends intervene  
          when the defendant tries to get the now extremely intoxicated  
          woman to leave the bar with him.  This could be described as  
          preparation to commit a sex crime, not a direct step towards  
          commission of the crime, and thus not an attempt.  This conduct  
          would constitute guilt of possession of a drug with intent to  
          commit a sex crime.

          3.Difference between Conviction of Possession with Intent to  
            Commit a Sex Crime and Prosecution of a Person Excluded from a  
            Misdemeanor Prosecution under Proposition 47
          
          Defendants with prior sex offenses are excluded from the  
          misdemeanor drug possession provisions in Proposition 47.   
          However, if an excluded defendant's possession of a drug had a  
          sexual motivation or connection, a simple possession conviction  
          would not reflect that.  Even if the prior was a sex offense,  
          there would be nothing about the current conviction indicating a  
          sexual motivation or connection.

          In contrast, in a prosecution for possession with intent to  
          commit a sex crime under this bill, the defendant's prior  
          convictions and misconduct could be used as evidence of his  
          intent in the current case.  There are limits on the use of  
          prior convictions as proof of a current crime, but prior  
          convictions are admissible to show a defendant's intent, motive  
          or knowledge.  (People v. Ewoldt (1994) 7 Cal.4th 380, 393-394;  
          CALCRIM  375.)  Nevertheless, jurors find prior convictions for  
          a similar offense to the one charged to be very powerful  
          evidence.  Evidence of prior convictions is restricted because  
          the evidence is so convincing.  The main restriction is that the  
          jury can't simply find that the prior conviction itself  
          establishes guilt in the current offense.   However, as many  
          defendants find - as a practical matter, consideration of a  
          prior conviction or prior bad conduct as proof of intent very  
          often leads to a conviction in the current case.

          4.Use of Ketamine, Flunitrazepam or GHB for Prescription  
            Medications, Self-Medication and Intoxication









          SB 333  (Galgiani )                                       PageH  
          of?
          

          Ketamine is an anesthetic-dissociative drug.  It appears to be  
          the drug of choice in pediatric surgery and pediatric emergency  
          pain management, as it blocks the sensation of pain without full  
          unconsciousness and depressed respiration.<1><2>  Ketamine is  
          very widely used in African and other countries with low  
          per-capita income levels, as it is effective, cheap and safe.   
          Greater restrictions of ketamine manufacturing and distribution  
          have caused great alarm in Africa among physicians and public  
          health experts.<3>

          Ketamine has recently been used as an "off label" drug for the  
          treatment of depressions.  Patients report that they lose their  
          depressive symptoms quickly and the effect lasts for months.<4>   
          Clinical trials have been conducted or are underway for use of  
          ketamine as a formally recognized depression treatment. The  
          results of the trials have been remarkably positive.<5><6>

          Ketamine is used for intoxication or mind-altering experiences.   
          Users seek the dissociative experience that would be considered  
          an unwanted or problematic side effect in medial use.  Users  
          lose awareness of their surroundings and report vivid  
          hallucinations.  Some people found them profound and  
          ---------------------------

          ---------------------------
          <1> http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18645539

          <2>  
          http://emupdates.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/ACEP-Ketamine-Gui 
          deline-2011.pdf

          <3>  
          http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/feb/27/raver-drug-ketamine- 
          control-plan-at-un-condemned-as-potential-disaster

          <4>  
          http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/10/business/special-k-a-hallucinog 
          en-raises-hopes-and-concerns-as-a-treatment-for-depression.html?_ 
          r=0

          <5> http://www.nimh.nih.gov/about/director/2014/ketamine.shtml

          <6> http://www.nimh.nih.gov/health/trials/depression.shtml









          SB 333  (Galgiani )                                       PageI  
          of?
          





















































          SB 333  (Galgiani )                                       PageJ  
          of?
          
          enjoyable,<7> others found the experience disturbing.   

          GHB is prescribed to narcoleptics to allow them to sleep deeply  
          at night.  It is often used as a so-called "club drug."<8>  It  
          has been described as being similar to alcohol intoxication, but  
          with more euphoric effects, without a hangover the next day.   
          However, users' experiences are quite variable.<9>  GHB is  
          dangerous when mixed with alcohol, as both are central nervous  
          system depressants.  

          Flunitrazepam is a benzodiazepine, the class of  
          sedative-hypnotic drugs that include Xanax, valium, and many  
          others.  It was developed in 1965.  It has been described as 10  
          times more potent than Valium, but is typically prescribed in  
          doses that are 1/10th of that of a common Valium dose.  It is  
          not available legally in the United States, but it is available  
          around the world.  It is the most widely prescribed drug of its  
          class in Europe.<10>  It has been successfully used to treat  
          alcoholics suffering from delirium tremens during withdrawal.   
          Flunitrazepam is very widely used by heroin addicts to boost the  
          effects of the drug without risking overdose, to ease  
          withdrawal.<11><12> Studies of drug facilitated sexual assault  
          found examples of women who likely used the drug in connection  
          with opiate addiction or cocaine use.  The University of  
          Illinois study described in Comment # 7 noted this use of the  
          drug. 

          5.Proposition 47

          On November 4, 2014, California voters approved Proposition 47 -  
          the Safe Neighborhoods and Schools Act - which reduced penalties  
          ---------------------------

          <7> https://www.erowid.org/experiences/exp.php?ID=38360

          <8> 'The silent 'G'" Contemporary Drug Problems, 2012

          <9>  
          https://www.erowid.org/experiences/subs/exp_GHB.shtml#General

          <10> http://www.cesar.umd.edu/cesar/drugs/rohypnol.asp

          <11> http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8102333

          <12> http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3454351/








          SB 333  (Galgiani )                                       PageK  
          of?
          
          for certain offenders convicted of nonserious and nonviolent  
          property and drug crimes.  Proposition 47 also allows inmates  
          serving sentences for crimes affected by the reduced penalties  
          to apply to be resentenced.  According to the California  
          Secretary of State's web site, 59.6 percent of voters approved  
          Proposition 47. (See  
           [as of Mar. 14, 2015].)  The purpose of the measure  
          was "to maximize alternatives for nonserious, nonviolent crime,  
          and to invest the savings generated from this act into  
          prevention and support programs in K-12 schools, victim  
          services, and mental health and drug treatment." (Ballot Pamp.,  
          Gen. Elec. (Nov. 4, 2014), Text of Proposed Laws, p. 70.)  One  
          of the ways the measure created savings was by requiring  
          misdemeanor penalties instead of felonies for nonserious,  
          nonviolent crimes like petty theft and drug possession for  
          personal use, unless the defendant has prior convictions for  
          specified violent crimes. (Ibid.)  

          Four months into its implementation, Proposition 47 has resulted  
          in fewer inmates in state prisons and county jails.  According  
          to the Legislative Analysts' Office (LAO), "As of January 28,  
          2015, the inmate population in the state's prisons was about  
          113,500, or 3,600 inmates below the February 2015 cap, and  
          slightly below the final February 2016 cap. The expected impact  
          of Proposition 47 on the prison population will make it easier  
          for the state to remain below the population cap."  (LAO, The  
          2015-16 Budget: Implementation of Proposition 47 (Feb. 2015), p.  
          10.)  The LAO report also found that Proposition 47 will likely  
          reduce the costs of criminal justice for counties, by freeing up  
          jail beds and reducing the time probation departments need to  
          follow prisoners after they are released. (Id., at p. 17.)

          

          6. California Constitutional Limitations on Amending a Voter  
            Initiative

          Because Proposition 47 was a voter initiative, the Legislature  
          may not amend the initiative without subsequent voter approval  
          unless the initiative permits such amendment, and then only upon  
          whatever conditions the voters attached to the Legislature's  
          amendatory powers.  (People v. Superior Court (Pearson) (2010)  
          48 Cal.4th 564, 568; see also Cal. Const., art. II, § 10, subd.  









          SB 333  (Galgiani )                                       PageL  
          of?
          
          (c).) Courts have a duty to jealously guard the people's  
          initiative power and, hence, to apply a liberal construction to  
          this power wherever it is challenged in order that the right to  
          resort to the initiative process is not improperly annulled by a  
          legislative body.  (Proposition 103 Enforcement Project v.  
          Quackenbush (1998) 64 Cal.App.4th 1473.)  Yet, despite the  
          strict bar on the Legislature's authority to amend initiative  
          statutes, judicial decisions have recognized that the  
          Legislature is not thereby precluded from enacting laws  
          addressing the general subject matter of an initiative.  The  
          Legislature remains free to address a "related but distinct  
          area" or a matter that an initiative measure "does not  
          specifically authorize or prohibit." (People v. Kelly (2010) 47  
          Cal.4th 1008, 1025-1026.) 

          Proposition 47 states:  "This act shall be broadly construed to  
          accomplish its purposes.  The provisions of this measure may be  
          amended by a two thirds vote of the members of each house of the  
                         Legislature and signed by the Governor so long as the amendments  
          are consistent with and further the intent of this act.  The  
          Legislature may by majority vote amend, add, or repeal  
          provisions to further reduce the penalties for any of the  
          offenses addressed by this act."  (Ballot Pamp., Gen. Elec.  
          (Nov. 4, 2014), Text of Proposed Laws, p. 74.) 

          This bill in its original form would have amended Proposition  
          47's provisions that require misdemeanor penalties for the crime  
          of drug possession for personal use, by allowing felony  
          penalties for the drugs covered by this bill.  As amended, this  
          bill does not affect Proposition 47 because this bill no longer  
          deals with simple possession of drug use.  Similar to the  
          statutes that require specific intent to sell controlled  
          substances which remain felonies, this bill will require  
          specific intent to commit sexual assault in order to charge a  
          defendant with a felony.  Because the bill as amended does not  
          affect Proposition 47, this bill will no longer have to go  
          before the voters. 

          7.Drug-Facilitated Sexual Assault Statistics

          The limited studies on this issue have found that although a  
          person may be surreptitiously drugged with Rohypnol, GHB, or  
          ketamine in order to incapacitate that person, it is much more  
          common for a person to consume these drugs voluntarily for its  









          SB 333  (Galgiani )                                       PageM  
          of?
          
          intoxicating effects. 

          One study, funded by the National Institute of Justice, examined  
          the prevalence, nature, and reporting of various types of sexual  
          assault experienced by college students.  (Krebs, et al., The  
          Campus Sexual Assault Study, National Institute of Justice (Oct.  
          2007).)  The researchers worked with two large, public  
          universities to collect data from over 6,800 undergraduate  
          students (5,466 women and 1,375 men).  The data indicated that  
          7.8% of women were sexually assaulted when they were  
          incapacitated after voluntarily consuming drugs and/or alcohol  
          and 0.6% were sexually assaulted when they were incapacitated  
          after having been given a drug without their knowledge.  (Id.,  
          at p. iv; see also § 6-1.)  The study found that the majority of  
          the sexual assault victims that were incapacitated reported  
          having consumed alcohol (89%) or being intoxicated prior to  
          being assaulted (82%). (Id., § 5.1.3.) 

          Another study conducted by the University of Illinois at  
          Chicago, funded by the U.S. Department of Justice, worked with  
          four clinics (Texas, California, Minnesota, and Washington  
          State) to study the prevalence of drugs in sexual assault cases  
          received by these clinics. (Negruz, et al., Estimate of the  
          Incidence of Drug-Facilitated Sexual Assault in the U.S, Univ.  
          of Illinois, Chicago (Nov. 2005).)  The study used  
          self-reporting surveys as well as toxicological analyses of the  
          subjects.  The drugs inquired about in the self-reporting survey  
          included marijuana, cocaine, and amphetamines.  These three  
          drugs were chosen because they are not normally given  
          surreptitiously. (Id., at pp. 7-8.)  The toxicological analyses  
          tested for those three drugs, as well as other drugs that are  
          often considered "date rape drugs" which include Rohypnol, GHB,  
          ketamine, clonazepam and scopolamine. (Id., at p. 112.)  Testing  
          positive for one of these drugs could be due to several  
          different reasons: valid prescription use by the subject,  
          recreational drug use by the subject, surreptitious drug  
          administration by a potential assailant, or, in the case of GHB,  
          endogenous levels because GHB exists naturally in the human  
          body. (Id. at pp. 112-113.)  

          Among the 144 participants, 61.8% tested positive for one of the  
          drugs being analyzed in the study.  (Negruz, Estimate of the  
          Incidence of Drug-Facilitated Sexual Assault in the U.S, supra,  
          at p. 2.)  The drugs separated out as "date rape" drugs were  









          SB 333  (Galgiani )                                       PageN  
          of?
          
          found in seven subjects (4.86%), of which three had a  
          prescription. No one admitted to having a prescription for GHB,  
          or using it recreationally, and GHB was only found in levels  
          considered to be endogenous - produced by the body naturally.   
          (Id., at p. 113.)  However, the study does note that GHB has a  
          short detection time of 10-12 hours and because only four  
          subjects reported to the clinic within 12 hours, if any of the  
          subjects had been given GHB, the levels would have been  
          undetectable.  (Id., at p. 121.)  Ketamine and scopolamine were  
          not reported to by any of the subjects in the surveys, and were  
          not found.  Flunitrazepam (Rohypnol) was not admitted to by  
          anyone, but was found in four subjects. (Id., at p. 113.)   
          However, when tested a second time a week later, some of these  
          subjects tested positive for flunitrazepam, indicating that the  
          subjects were self-medicating or using the drug recreationally,  
          but did not report that in the survey.  (Id., at pp. 89, 189.)   
          The study concluded that most of the subjects testing positive  
          for these drugs had taken them by their own accord and not  
          received them surreptitiously. (Id., at p. 189.)

          The study also evaluated whether participants truthfully  
          reported their drug use. The number of subjects who admitted to  
          taking drugs voluntarily was 40%, as compared to the 61.8% of  
          subjects who tested positive for one of the analyzed drugs.   
          (Negruz, Estimate of the Incidence of Drug-Facilitated Sexual  
          Assault in the U.S, supra, at p. 190.)  Researchers hypothesized  
          that the subjects' under-reporting of their drug usage may be  
          attributed to the fact that the drugs being analyzed are illegal  
          and a person may face prosecution for its use, or that the  
          subjects may have felt that that their recreational use of  
          illegal drugs could negatively affect the course of a sexual  
          assault prosecution. (Id., at pp. 16, 190.) 

          While drug-facilitated sexual assault is a serious problem,  
          these studies confirm that it occurs most often after an  
          individual's own recreational use of drugs, rather than  
          surreptitious drugging by another person. Drugs such as  
          Rohypnol, ketamine and GHB may be used to facilitate sexual  
          assault of an incapacitated person, but these are not the only  
          drugs that can be used, nor are they the most commonly used.   
          The substance that is most commonly found in sexual assault  
          victims is alcohol. (Krebs, The Campus Sexual Assault Study,  
          supra at p. 89; also see Grimes, Alcohol is by far the most  
          dangerous "date rape drug" (Sept. 22, 2014) The Guardian,  









          SB 333  (Galgiani )                                       PageO  
          of?
          
           [as of Mar. 19,  
          2015].)  

          This bill targets persons who possess these drugs for predatory  
          purposes, rather than those who merely possess these drugs for  
          personal use.  This will ensure that victims of these crimes who  
          may have consumed these drugs voluntarily prior to being  
          assaulted will not have to fear prosecution of a felony when  
          deciding whether to report the incident.  

          8.Proposition 36 of 2000 - the Substance Abuse and Crime  
            Prevention Act (SACPA)
          
          Proposition 36 of 2000 - the Substance Abuse and Crime  
          Prevention Act (SACPA) - requires that drug possessors be  
          offered treatment without jail.   Opponents of SACPA argued that  
          defendants who possessed "date rape" drugs would escape  
          punishment and scrutiny.  That is, these defendants would have  
          no problem completing drug treatment, since they did not take  
          the drugs themselves.  They would never have a positive drug  
          test and they would show no outward signs of being sex  
          offenders.  They would have their records cleared - including  
          the arrest - and be free to commit sex crimes without any  
          scrutiny.  This problem simply did not happen.  It appears that  
          there have been no reports of sexual predators escaping  
          detection and punishment under SACPA in the 15 years since its  
          passage.


                                      -- END -