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 ****