BILL ANALYSIS Ó
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | SB 1004|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: SB 1004
Author: Hill (D)
Amended: 5/31/16
Vote: 21
SENATE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE: 5-1, 4/12/16
AYES: Hancock, Glazer, Leno, Liu, Monning
NOES: Stone
NO VOTE RECORDED: Anderson
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE: 5-1, 5/27/16
AYES: Lara, Beall, Hill, McGuire, Mendoza
NOES: Nielsen
NO VOTE RECORDED: Bates
SUBJECT: Transitional youth diversion program
SOURCE: Author
DIGEST: This bill authorizes five specified counties to
establish a three-year deferred entry of judgment pilot program
under which young adults (18-20) convicted of non-violent,
non-serious and non-sex felonies and who are otherwise suitable
would serve their custodial time in a juvenile hall instead of a
jail, as specified.
ANALYSIS:
Existing law:
SB 1004
Page 2
1) Includes various diversion and deferred entry of judgment
programs under which a person arrested for and charged with a
crime is diverted from the prosecution system and placed in a
program of rehabilitation or restorative justice. Upon
successful completion of the program, the charges and
underling arrest are deemed to not have occurred, with
specified exceptions.
2) Provides that when any person under 18 years of age is
detained in or sentenced to any institution in which adults
are confined, it shall be unlawful to permit such person to
come or remain in contact with such adults.
3) Provides that in any case in which a minor who is detained
in or committed to a county juvenile institution attains 18
years of age prior to or during the period of detention or
confinement he or she may be allowed to come or remain in
contact with those juveniles until 19 years of age, at which
time he or she, upon the recommendation of the probation
officer, shall be delivered to the custody of the sheriff for
the remainder of the time he or she remains in custody,
unless the juvenile court orders continued detention in a
juvenile facility. If continued detention is ordered for a
ward under the jurisdiction of the juvenile court who is 19
years of age or older but under 21 years of age, the detained
person may be allowed to come into or remain in contact with
any other person detained in the institution, as specified
and limited. The person shall be advised of his or her
ability to petition the court for continued detention in a
juvenile facility at the time of his or her attainment of 19
years of age. The sheriff may allow the person to come into
and remain in contact with other adults in the county jail or
in any other county correctional facility in which he or she
is housed.
4) Provides that a county is required to apply to the Board of
State and Community Corrections (BSCC) for approval of a
county institution established for the purpose of housing
juveniles as a suitable place for confinement before the
institution is used for the detention or commitment of an
SB 1004
Page 3
individual under the jurisdiction of the juvenile court who
is 19 years of age or older but under 21 years of age where
the detained person will come into or remain in contact with
persons under 18 years of age who are detained in the
institution, as specified. (WIC § 208.5.)
This bill:
1) Authorizes the counties of Alameda, Butte, Napa, Nevada and
Santa Clara to establish a pilot juvenile hall program
entitled the "Transitional Youth Diversion Program"
(program), as specified.
2) Provides that the program applies to persons charged with
committing a felony, other than the offenses listed (below),
who plead guilty to the charge or charges, and the probation
department determines that the person meets all of the
following requirements:
a) Is 18 years of age or older, but under 21 years of age
on the date the offense was committed.
b) Is suitable for the program after evaluation using a
risk assessment tool, as specified.
c) Shows the ability to benefit from services generally
reserved for delinquents, including, but not limited to,
cognitive behavioral therapy, other mental health services,
and age-appropriate educational, vocational, and
supervision services, that are currently deployed under the
jurisdiction of the juvenile court.
d) Meets the rules of the juvenile hall.
e) Does not have a prior or current serious or violent
offense conviction, as specified.
SB 1004
Page 4
f) Is not required to register as a sex offender.
3) Requires an evaluation process using a risk assessment tool
to determine eligibility for the program, as specified.
4) Excludes non-felonies, serious and violent felonies, and sex
crimes from the program, as specified.
5) Provides that the program would apply to a defendant who
would otherwise serve time in custody in a county jail, and
would not be authorized as an alternative to a sentence
involving community supervision.
6) Provides that a defendant shall serve no longer than one
year in custody within a county's juvenile hall pursuant to
the program.
7) Requires a county to apply to the BSCC for approval of a
county institution as a suitable place for confinement for
the purpose of the pilot program prior to establishing the
program, as specified.
8) Requires that a defendant participating in the program
"shall not come into contact with minors within the juvenile
hall for any purpose, including, but not limited to, housing,
recreation, or education."
9) Requires that a county that establishes this program to work
with the BSCC to ensure compliance with requirements of the
federal Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act
relating to "sight and sound" separation between juveniles
and adult inmates.
10)Provides for dismissal of the criminal charges of the
SB 1004
Page 5
defendant performs satisfactorily during the program, and for
entry of judgment if and when the defendant performs
unsatisfactorily, as specified.
11)Requires probation to develop a plan for reentry services,
as specified.
12)Requires probation to submit data relating to the
effectiveness of the program to the Division of Recidivism
Reduction and Re-Entry, within the Department of Justice, as
specified.
13)Require participating counties to establish a
multidisciplinary team with specified members, which meets
periodically to review and discuss the implementation,
practices, and impact of the program.
14)Requires participating counties to conduct an evaluation of
its impact and effectiveness, as specified.
15)Sunsets this program on January 1, 2020.
16)Contains legislative findings authorizing the specification
of certain counties in the bill.
Background
This bill authorizes five counties - Alameda, Butte, Napa,
Nevada, and Santa Clara - to operative a pilot program where
certain young adult offenders would serve their time in a
juvenile hall instead of a jail. The young adults must be under
the age of 21, and not convicted of a serious, violent or sex
crime. They also would have to be assessed and found suitable
for the program.
SB 1004
Page 6
As structured by this bill, this would be a deferred entry of
judgment program - which means while participants would have to
plead guilty to be eligible for the program, if they succeed in
the program the criminal charges would be dismissed. Probation
would be required to develop a plan for reentry services,
including, but not limited to, housing, employment, and
education services, as a component of the program. This bill
has a three-year sunset.
As discussed by the Senate Public Safetly Committee in many
hearings on juvenile law and sentencing youthful offenders over
the past several years, the science of adolescent brain
development has become very relevant in crafting state and
national law and policy.
A 2014 policy paper quoted in the policy analysis of this bill
noted in part, "There is now incontrovertible evidence that
adolescence is a period of significant changes in brain
structure and function. Although most of this work has appeared
just in the past 15 years, there is already strong consensus
among developmental neuroscientists about the nature of these
changes. And the most important conclusion to emerge from recent
research is that important changes in brain anatomy and activity
take place far longer into development than had been previously
thought. . . . These structural and functional changes do not
all take place along one uniform timetable, and the differences
in their timing raise two important points relevant to the use
of neuroscience in public policy. First, there is no simple
answer to the question of when an adolescent brain becomes an
adult brain. Brain systems implicated in basic cognitive
processes reach adult levels of maturity by mid-adolescence,
whereas those that are active in self-regulation do not fully
mature until late adolescence or even early adulthood. In other
words, adolescents mature intellectually before they mature
socially or emotionally, a fact that helps explain why teenagers
who are so smart in some respects sometimes do surprisingly dumb
things."
FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: No Fiscal
Com.:YesLocal: No
SB 1004
Page 7
According to the Senate Appropriations Committee:
County probation: Major increase in custodial and operational
costs to county probation departments, potentially in the
millions of dollars (Local Funds/General Fund*/General Fund**)
each year of the pilot for young adults (non-minors) to spend
custodial time in juvenile halls (ranging from $26/day in Lake
County to over $500/day in Santa Clara County) in lieu of
county jail. Costs would be dependent on the number of
counties electing to participate in the pilot and the number
of young adults eligible and participating in the program.
Pilot counties would incur costs to develop an evaluation
process in consultation with specified agencies, arrange for
treatment and other services, and provide case management
activities.
Local jails: Major local cost savings (Local Funds) resulting
from reduced incarceration of non-minors in county jail
facilities.
BSCC: Minor costs (General Fund) to review and approve
applications from five counties for suitability of county
facilities for confinement of program participants.
Department of Justice: Minor ongoing workload to accept
program data submitted by probation departments of the pilot
counties.
Proposition 30*: Exempts the state from mandate reimbursement
for realigned responsibilities for "public safety services"
including the provision of treatment and services for juvenile
and adult offenders, however, legislation enacted after
September 30, 2012, that has an overall effect of increasing
the costs already borne by a local agency for public safety
services apply to local agencies only to the extent that the
state provides annual funding for the cost increase. The
provisions of Proposition 30 have not been interpreted through
the formal court process to date, however, to the extent the
SB 1004
Page 8
local agency costs resulting from this measure are determined
to be applicable under the provisions of Proposition 30, could
result in additional costs to the state.
Proposition 47**: Appropriations Committee staff notes the
funds to be disbursed to the BSCC under the Safe Neighborhoods
and Schools Act (65 percent of calculated savings) for mental
health services and substance abuse treatment for people in
the criminal justice system, with emphasis on programs that
reduce recidivism of people convicted of less serious crimes
could potentially be used for the purposes specified in this
measure.
**Safe Neighborhoods and Schools Fund (annual transfer from the
General Fund)
SUPPORT: (Verified5/31/16)
Alameda County Board of Supervisors
Butte County Board of Supervisors
California Police Chiefs Association
California Public Defenders Association
Chief Probation Officers of California
California Youth Empowerment Network
Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors
OPPOSITION: (Verified5/31/16)
Commonweal The Juvenile Justice Program
Pacific Juvenile Defender Center
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT: The author states in part:
Under current law, young adult offenders convicted of
specified crimes serve their sentence locally in county jails.
But while legally they are adults, young offenders age 18-21
SB 1004
Page 9
are still undergoing significant brain development and it's
becoming clear that this age group may be better served by the
juvenile justice system with corresponding age appropriate
intensive services. Research shows that people do not develop
adult-quality decision-making skills until their early 20's.
This can be referred to as the "maturity gap." Because of
this, young adults are more likely to engage in risk-seeking
behavior which may be cultivated in adult county jails where
the young adults are surrounded by older, more hardened
criminals.
As such, in order to address the criminogenic and behavioral
needs of young adults, it is important that age appropriate
services are provided, services they may not get in adult
county jails. Juvenile detention facilities have such services
available for young adults including, but not limited to,
cognitive behavioral therapy, mental health treatment,
vocational training, and education, among others.
ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION: The Pacific Juvenile Defender
Center states in part:
Though we strongly support efforts to allow transitional age
youth to access rehabilitative services, the approach taken by
SB 1004 runs counter to the research that shows that
incarceration and detention of youth may increase recidivism
and impede successful life outcomes.
The program outlined in SB 1004 is troubling primarily because
the program is based in a custodial setting and appears to be
intended for those charged with misdemeanor offenses. Such
individuals would be better served by a community-based,
out-of-custody rehabilitation setting than an in-custody
program provided by probation. Studies have shown that
incarcerating youth can increase recidivism. Researchers have
reported higher levels of substance abuse, school
difficulties, delinquency, violence and adjustment
difficulties in adulthood for those who have been treated in
settings where deviant/delinquent youth are brought together
for treatment.
SB 1004
Page 10
. . . (T)his bill is troubling because this program could
very well have a greater impact on communities of color. As it
stands, African Americans and Latinos make up a
disproportionate percentage of drug arrests and jail and
prison populations. Without any purposeful measures to ensure
against such overrepresentation by African American and Latino
defendants, these diversion programs could he yet another
reflection of that disproportionate impact.
Prepared by:Alison Anderson / PUB. S. /
5/31/16 21:31:44
**** END ****