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
          
          DIGEST:  This bill authorizes specified counties, until January  
          1, 2020, to operate a deferred entry of judgment pilot program  








                                                                    SB 1004  
                                                                    Page  2



          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  








                                                                    SB 1004  
                                                                    Page  3



             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  
             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  








                                                                    SB 1004  
                                                                    Page  4



             program.


           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.










                                                                    SB 1004  
                                                                    Page  5



           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.


           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  








                                                                    SB 1004  
                                                                    Page  6



             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  
             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  








                                                                    SB 1004  
                                                                    Page  7



             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  
             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. 










                                                                    SB 1004  
                                                                    Page  8



          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
          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.








                                                                    SB 1004 
                                                                    Page  9





            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.


            . . .  (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  








                                                                    SB 1004  
                                                                    Page  10



            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,  
            Mayes, Obernolte, Patterson, Steinorth, Wagner, Waldron
           NO VOTE RECORDED: Chang, Cooper, Kim, Melendez







          Prepared by:Alison Anderson / PUB. S. / 
          8/23/16 18:11:38


                                   ****  END  ****