BILL ANALYSIS Ó ----------------------------------------------------------------- |SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | SB 722| |Office of Senate Floor Analyses | | |(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | | |327-4478 | | ----------------------------------------------------------------- THIRD READING Bill No: SB 722 Author: Bates (R), et al. Amended: 5/5/15 Vote: 21 SENATE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE: 7-0, 4/28/15 AYES: Hancock, Anderson, Leno, Liu, McGuire, Monning, Stone SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE: 7-0, 5/28/15 AYES: Lara, Bates, Beall, Hill, Leyva, Mendoza, Nielsen SUBJECT: Sex offenders: GPS monitoring: removal SOURCE: Author DIGEST: This bill makes it a felony punishable by imprisonment in the state prison, as specified, for a person to willfully remove or disable, or permit another person to remove or disable, an electronic, global positioning system (GPS), or other monitoring device, if the device was affixed as a condition of parole, postrelease community supervision (PRCS), or probation as a result of a conviction for specified sex offenses, and if specified criteria are met. ANALYSIS: Existing law: SB 722 Page 2 1)Authorizes the use of electronic monitoring or GPS devices in the criminal justice system, as specified. 2)Provides that removing or otherwise defeating the operation of a GPS device is a violation of parole or probation, or subject to return to custody from an alternative custody program. 3)Provides that parolees who are registered sex offenders and are required to have a GPS device as a condition of parole shall be subject to parole revocation and incarcerated in a county jail for 180 days if they remove or otherwise disable the device, as specified. (Penal Code § 3010.10.) 4)Includes an enhanced sentencing structure that applies to crimes of rape, oral copulation, sodomy, and sexual penetration committed by force, duress or threats; lewd conduct with a child under the age of 14 and continuous sexual abuse of a child which, depending on the number and kinds of aggravating factors attendant to the crime, require a term of 15 or 25-years-to-life, or life without parole for specified crimes against a minor. (Pen. Code § 667.61.) This bill: 1)Makes it a felony for a person to willfully remove or disable, or permit another person to remove or disable, an electronic, GPS, or other monitoring device affixed to his or her person, if the device was affixed as a condition of parole, PRCS, or probation as a result of a conviction of a specified sex offense, if the person intended to evade supervision and either does not surrender, or is not apprehended, within one week of the issuance of a warrant for absconding. 2)Provides that the felony is punishable by imprisonment in the state prison for 16 months, or two or three years. 3)Provides there shall be a rebuttable presumption that the SB 722 Page 3 person intended to evade supervision. 4)Excludes the removal or disabling of a monitoring device by a physician, emergency medical services technician, or by any other emergency response or medical personnel when doing so is necessary during the course of medical treatment of the person subject to the device. 5)Provides that this bill's provisions do not apply if the removal or disabling of the device is authorized or required by a court, by law enforcement, or by any other entity that is responsible for placing the device upon the person or that has the authority and responsibility to monitor the device. 6)Requires the terms of probation or parole for a person who commits a violation of this bill's provision must include participation and completion of a sex offender management program. Background In October of 2014 the Office of the Inspector General (OIG) issued a report entitled, "Special Review: Assessment of Electronic Monitoring of Sex Offenders on Parole and the Impact of Residency Restrictions." This review, conducted at the request of the Senate Rules Committee, included the following observations: There exists little objective evidence to determine to what extent, if any, GPS tracking is a crime deterrent, although a small 2012 study funded by the National Institute of Justice of 516 high-risk sex offenders found that offenders who were not subjected to GPS monitoring had nearly three times more sex-related parole violations than those who were monitored by GPS technology. Despite the rarity of studies defending GPS as a crime deterrent, the OIG's interviews with parole agents and local law enforcement personnel found that they value GPS technology as a tool for its ability to locate parolees, track SB 722 Page 4 their movements, and provide valuable information in solving crimes. GPS technology adds to parole agents' workloads in certain aspects, while affording time-savings in others. For example, agents spend approximately two hours reviewing and analyzing parolees' tracks for a single-day period. On the other hand, GPS facilitates mandatory face-to-face contacts between parole agents and parolees by allowing the agent to locate parolees more quickly than might be the case in locating a non-GPS parolee. Over 60% of parole agents who supervise sex-offender parolees have caseloads exceeding established departmental ratios (parolee-to-agent) when taking into consideration the mix of high-risk vs low-risk parolees per caseload. In addition, the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) has a disparity of caseloads across its parole units, with 14 of the 37 parole units that supervise sex offenders reporting caseload sizes exceeding CDCR's established ratios for all agents assigned to those units. Simultaneously, five other parole units report caseload sizes below CDCR's established ratios for all of their parole agents. The OIG also presented data over the five years prior to the report demonstrating that "transient sex offenders have committed a majority of parole violations among parolee sex offenders over the five year period. In fact, in the most recently completed fiscal year (2013-14), over 76 percent of the sex offender parolees whom the department charged with violating their parole terms were transient. . . . According to the parole administrators the OIG talked to, there are various reasons transient sex offenders violate the conditions of their parole more often than those with a residence. Among the reasons voiced were increased prevalence of mental health issues, lack of a stable support network, increased exposure to drugs and prostitution on the streets, and challenges finding employment." Last session, the Legislature enacted SB 57 (Lieu, Chapter 776, SB 722 Page 5 Statutes of 2013), which originally sought to enact a new felony for felons being supervised in the community - either on parole or postrelease community supervision -- who willfully defeated their GPS/electronic monitoring. That bill was amended to impose the mandatory jail term now reflected in existing law. FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.:YesLocal: Yes According to the Senate Appropriations Committee: Potentially significant increase in state costs (General Fund) to the extent creating the new felony offense leads to additional state prison commitments. Data from the CDCR indicates over 1,200 inmates released onto parole/PRCS under the applicable crimes within the past 12 months. While it is unknown how many cases will be impacted in any one year, to the extent even 1% (12 persons) of potentially eligible cases are impacted, costs would be in excess of $400,000 for 12 months served. Potential decrease in local jail costs (Local Fund) to the extent individuals who otherwise would have been subject to parole revocation and 180 days in county jail are instead charged with the prison-eligible felony. Potential increase in non-reimbursable county probation (Local Fund) and state parole costs (General Fund) for additional persons required to participate and complete a sex offender management program. Annual costs would be dependent on the number of persons convicted of the new prison-eligible offense. SUPPORT: (Verified5/28/15) California District Attorneys Association California State Sheriffs' Association Crime Victims United of California Office of the San Diego District Attorney Orange County Board of Supervisors Orange County District Attorney's Office SB 722 Page 6 Orange County Sheriff's Department Peace Officers Research Association of California OPPOSITION: (Verified5/28/15) American Civil Liberties Union California Attorneys for Criminal Justice California Public Defenders Association Legal Services for Prisoners with Children ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT: The author states in part: SB 722 is needed in order to send the message to convicted sex offenders that cutting off or altering their ankle bracelet is a serious offense and will not be taken lightly. The two men mentioned earlier are known to have re-offended on two different occasions. When they first cut off their devices and fled to Nevada, they should have been prosecuted with more than just a short few months in county jail as this was a deliberate attempt to run from law enforcement. Additionally, the offenses listed in SB 722 deliberately spell out the most serious, egregious sex crimes. These offenses are rape, spousal rape, sexual penetration, lewd or lascivious acts and children, sodomy, oral copulation, and continuous sexual abuse of a child. SB 722 is needed today more than ever to ensure that justice is being served to those that defy law enforcement. ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION: California Attorneys for Criminal Justice, which opposes this SB 722 Page 7 bill, submits in part: In the last two legislative sessions, our laws have been changed to provide certain oversight on tracked sex offenders. However, there has been insufficient time to evaluation whether the implementation of this new law has proven to be effective at deterring persons from disabling or removing their GPS devices. Notwithstanding these laws, sending a person back to prison for a minor offense does not address the root issues of persons being ill-prepared to reenter their communities upon release, The enormous cost of incarceration and parole revocations for even minor offenders continue to contribute to budget constraints and fuel public cries for fiscal reform. Prepared by:Alison Anderson / PUB. S. / 5/29/15 10:01:07 **** END ****