BILL ANALYSIS Ó
SB 352
Page 1
Date of Hearing: July 8, 2015
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Jimmy Gomez, Chair
SB 352
(Block) - As Amended June 17, 2015
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Policy |Public Safety |Vote:|7 - 0 |
|Committee: | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
|-------------+-------------------------------+-----+-------------|
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
|-------------+-------------------------------+-----+-------------|
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program: YesReimbursable:
No
SUMMARY:
This bill requires the court to consider issuing a restraining
order for up to 10 years when a defendant is convicted for an
offense involving abuse of an elder or a dependent adult,
SB 352
Page 2
regardless of the sentence imposed.
FISCAL EFFECT:
Unknown, likely minor state and local costs to the extent this
bill results in longer restraining orders, which could result in
additional probation and parole violations and/or contempt
proceedings.
COMMENTS:
1)Purpose. According to the author, "With 4.2 million
individuals over the age of 65 years, California has the
highest number of aging adults in the nation. Currently,
loopholes in the law restrict a prosecutor's ability to
protect victims of elder abuse through the use of
post-conviction criminal protective orders. This loophole
leaves our most vulnerable crime victims with an unnecessary
level of exposure to revictimization. Elders are also among
the least equipped victims able to pursue protection through
civil remedies such as temporary restraining orders since they
are often complicated, costly and time consuming to obtain."
"Although great progress was made with the recent passage of
SB 910 (Pavley), which provided protection to victims whose
perpetrator is related within two degrees of consanguinity,
more could be done to protect elders. SB 352 expands the
protection of elders in the following cases where current law
falls short:
"Where the victim is unrelated to a defendant which is most
prevalent in cases involving caretakers who are abusive
physically, financially, or through neglect;
SB 352
Page 3
"Where the defendant is a relative of the victim but not
within two degrees of consanguinity, leaving elders exposed
to perpetrators who may be cousins, aunts/uncles,
great-grandchildren, nieces/nephews; step-children; etc.
"Where the defendant gets sentenced to probation and the
defendant and victim are not related within two degrees of
consanguinity. This scenario is most common when there is
elder abuse committed by caretakers."
"SB 352 will close this dangerous loophole in the law that
makes our elder victims vulnerable to further abuse and
anxiety."
2)Background. Current law authorizes the trial court in a
criminal case to issue protective orders when there is a good
cause belief that harm to, or intimidation or dissuasion of a
victim or witness has occurred or is reasonably likely to
occur. Current law also provides that a person violating a
protective order may be punished for any substantive offense
described in provisions of law related to intimidation of
witnesses or victims, or for contempt of court.
In all cases in which a criminal defendant has been convicted
of a crime of domestic violence, as defined in relevant
sections of the Family Code, or any crime that requires the
defendant to register as a sex offender, the court, at the
time of sentencing, shall consider issuing an order
restraining the defendant from any contact with the victim.
The order may be valid for up to 10 years, as determined by
the court.
This bill extends the court's authority to issue no-contact
orders lasting up to 10 years in cases involving the abuse of
an elder or dependent adult.
SB 352
Page 4
3)Argument in Support: According to the San Diego County
District Attorney, the sponsor of this bill, "Senate Bill 352
? closes a loophole that restricts a prosecutor's use of a
post-conviction criminal protective order in certain
situations. Current law allows for post-conviction use of
protective orders in cases where the suspect and victim are
related within two degrees of consanguinity. However, in
cases where suspect and victim are not related within those
two degrees, the protective order is not enforceable."
4)Related Legislation: SB 307 (Pavley), enrolled June 25, 2015,
authorizes restraining orders to be issued by a court for
specified crimes when a defendant's sentence includes a period
of mandatory supervision.
5)Prior Legislation:
a) AB 307 (Campos), Chapter 291, Statutes of 2013, allows
a court to issue a protective order for up to 10 years
when a defendant is convicted of specified sex crimes,
regardless of the sentence imposed.
b) SB 723 (Pavley), Chapter 155, Statutes of 2011, allows
a court to issue a protective order for up to 10 years
when a defendant is convicted for an offense involving
domestic violence, regardless of the sentence imposed.
c) SB 834 (Florez), Chapter 627, Statutes of 2010, allows
a court to issue a protective order for up to 10 years in
sex cases involving a minor victim.
Analysis Prepared by:Pedro R. Reyes / APPR. / (916)
319-2081
SB 352
Page 5