BILL ANALYSIS Ó ----------------------------------------------------------------- |SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | SB 1004| |Office of Senate Floor Analyses | | |(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | | |327-4478 | | ----------------------------------------------------------------- UNFINISHED BUSINESS Bill No: SB 1004 Author: Hill (D) Amended: 8/18/16 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 SENATE FLOOR: 29-8, 6/2/16 AYES: Allen, Anderson, Beall, Block, Cannella, De León, Galgiani, Glazer, Hall, Hancock, Hernandez, Hertzberg, Hill, Hueso, Huff, Jackson, Lara, Leno, Liu, McGuire, Mendoza, Mitchell, Monning, Moorlach, Pan, Pavley, Roth, Wieckowski, Wolk NOES: Berryhill, Fuller, Gaines, Morrell, Nguyen, Nielsen, Stone, Vidak NO VOTE RECORDED: Bates, Leyva, Runner ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 58-18, 8/22/16 - See last page for vote SUBJECT: Young adults: deferred entry of judgment pilot program SOURCE: Author SB 1004 Page 2 DIGEST: This bill authorizes specified counties, until January 1, 2020, to operate a deferred entry of judgment pilot program whereby certain convicted young adult offenders would serve time in juvenile hall rather than county jail. Assembly Amendments change the name of the program from Transitional Youth Diversion to Deferred Entry of Judgment; require the Board of State and Community Corrections (BSCC) to conduct an evaluation, as specified; require pilots to submit data to the BSCC, as specified; narrow program eligibility to exclude offenses enumerated in Welfare and Institutions Code Section 707(b) and persons required to register as sex offenders; and make additional largely technical revisions consistent with the purposes of the bill. ANALYSIS: Existing law: 1) States 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. "Contact" does not include participation in supervised group therapy or other supervised treatment activities, participation in work furlough programs, or participation in hospital recreational activities which are directly supervised by employees of the hospital, so long as living arrangements are strictly segregated and all precautions are taken to prevent unauthorized associations. 2) Provides, notwithstanding any other law, in any case in which a minor who is detained in or committed to a county institution established for the purpose of housing juveniles 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 SB 1004 Page 3 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 subject to the specified requirements. 3) Requires the county to apply to the Corrections Standard Authority (now 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 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. The authority shall review and approve or deny the application of the county within 30 days of receiving notice of this proposed use. In its review, the authority shall take into account the available programming, capacity, and safety of the institution as a place for the combined confinement and rehabilitation of individuals under the jurisdiction of the juvenile court who are over 19 years of age and those who are under 19 years of age. 4) Authorizes various diversion programs 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. Generally, deferred entry of judgment programs are created and run at the discretion of the district attorney. This bill: 1) Authorizes the Counties of Alameda, Butte, Napa, Nevada and Santa Clara to operate a deferred entry of judgment pilot program. SB 1004 Page 4 2) Provides that a defendant may participate in the program within the county's juvenile hall if that person is charged with committing a felony offense, other than the offenses listed, he or she pleads 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 described; 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 current or prior conviction a violent or serious felony or other specified serious offenses; and, f) Is not required to register as a sex offender. 3) Requires the probation department, in consultation with the superior court, district attorney, and sheriff of the county or the governmental body charged with operating the county jail, to develop an evaluation process using a risk assessment tool to determine eligibility for the program. 4) Excludes a defendant who is required to register as a sex offender or if he or she has been convicted of committing a violent felony, serious felony, or one of the offenses enumerated in existing provisions of law authorizing juveniles to be tried in adult court. 5) States that the court shall grant deferred entry of judgment if an eligible defendant consents to participate in the program, waives his or her right to a speedy trial or a speedy preliminary hearing, pleads guilty to the charge or charges, and waives time for the pronouncement of judgment. SB 1004 Page 5 6) Provides that if the probation department determines that the defendant is not eligible for the deferred entry of judgment program or the defendant does not consent to participate in the program, the proceedings shall continue as in any other case. 7) Authorizes the probation department to file a motion for entry of judgment if it appears to the probation department that the defendant is performing unsatisfactorily in the program as a result of the commission of a new crime or the violation of any of the rules of the juvenile hall or that the defendant is not benefiting from the services in the program. 8) States that if the defendant has performed satisfactorily during the period in which deferred entry of judgment was granted, at the end of that period, the court shall dismiss the criminal charge or charges. 9) Limits the time a defendant may serve in juvenile hall to one year. 10)Requires the probation department to develop a plan for reentry services, including, but not limited to, housing, employment, and education services, as a component of the program. 11)States that the probation department shall submit data relating to the effectiveness of the program to the Division of Recidivism Reduction and Re-Entry, within the Department of Justice, including recidivism rates for program participants as compared to recidivism rates for similar populations in the adult system within the county. 12)Prohibits defendants participating in the program from coming into contact with minors within the juvenile hall for SB 1004 Page 6 any purpose. 13)Requires a county to apply to 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. 14)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. 15)Specifies that the program applies to a defendant who would otherwise serve time in custody in a county jail, and participation in the program shall not be authorized as an alternative to a sentence involving community supervision. 16)Requires each county to establish a multidisciplinary team that meets periodically to review and discuss the implementation, practices, and impact of the program, and specifies groups that shall be represented on the team. 17)Requires a county that establishes a pilot program pursuant to the provisions in this bill to submit data to BSCC and requires BSCC to conduct an evaluation of the pilot program's impact and effectiveness. 18)Specifies that the data submitted to BSCC must be used for purposes of evaluating the pilot program's impact and effectiveness. 19)Specifies that BSCC's evaluation shall include, but not be limited to, evaluating each pilot program's impact on sentencing and impact on opportunities for community supervision, monitoring the program's effect on minors in the juvenile facility, if any, and its effectiveness with respect SB 1004 Page 7 to program participants, including outcome-related data for program participants compared to young adult offenders sentenced for comparable crimes. 20)Requires each evaluation to be combined into an inclusive report and submitted to the Assembly and Senate Public Safety Committees. 21)Provides that BSCC may contract out to an independent entity, including, but not limited to, the University of California, to perform the evaluation. FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.:YesLocal: No According to the Assembly Appropriations Committee: 1)Unknown nonreimbursable cost to the five participating counties for housing and programming; however, these costs are offset by avoiding longer terms served in county jails and by keeping participating young offenders out of the system in the future. 2)Minor absorbable cost to the Department of Justice to process recidivism data submitted by the participating counties. 3)Minor absorbable cost to BSCC to review the suitability of the county institution for confinement of program participants prior to county's participation. The required review can take place as part of the existing audit/certification role over juvenile halls. SUPPORT: (Verified8/22/16) Alameda County Board of Supervisors SB 1004 Page 8 Butte County Board of Supervisors California Police Chiefs Association California Public Defenders Association California Youth Empowerment Network Chief Probation Officers of California Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors OPPOSITION: (Verified8/22/16) 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 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: SB 1004 Page 9 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. . . . (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. ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 58-18, 8/22/16 AYES: Achadjian, Alejo, Arambula, Atkins, Baker, Bloom, Bonilla, Bonta, Brown, Burke, Calderon, Campos, Chau, Chiu, Chu, Cooley, Dababneh, Daly, Dodd, Eggman, Frazier, Gallagher, Cristina Garcia, Eduardo Garcia, Gatto, Gipson, Gomez, Gonzalez, Gordon, Gray, Hadley, Roger Hernández, Holden, Irwin, Jones-Sawyer, Lackey, Levine, Lopez, Low, McCarty, Medina, Mullin, Nazarian, O'Donnell, Olsen, Quirk, Ridley-Thomas, Rodriguez, Salas, Santiago, Mark Stone, Thurmond, Ting, Weber, Wilk, Williams, Wood, Rendon NOES: Travis Allen, Bigelow, Brough, Chávez, Dahle, Beth Gaines, Grove, Harper, Jones, Linder, Maienschein, Mathis, SB 1004 Page 10 Mayes, Obernolte, Patterson, Steinorth, Wagner, Waldron NO VOTE RECORDED: Chang, Cooper, Kim, Melendez Prepared by: Alison Anderson / PUB. S 8/22/16 22:53:13 **** END ****