BILL ANALYSIS
------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | AB 2480|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: AB 2480
Author: Evans (D)
Amended: 8/14/06 in Senate
Vote: 21
SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE : 3-2, 8/8/06
AYES: Dunn, Escutia, Kuehl
NOES: Morrow, Harman
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE : 8-5, 8/17/06
AYES: Murray, Alarcon, Alquist, Escutia, Florez, Ortiz,
Romero, Torlakson
NOES: Aanestad, Ashburn, Battin, Dutton, Poochigian
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 48-32, 5/31/06 - See last page for vote
SUBJECT : Dependent children: counsel
SOURCE : Childrens Advocacy Institute
Childrens Law Center of Los Angeles
National Center for Youth Law
DIGEST : This bill (1) provides for appellate counsel for
children in dependency proceedings, (2) presumes that a
child over the age of 12 is of sufficient maturity to
consent to invoke the psychotherapist-client privilege,
physician patient privilege, and clergy-penitent privilege
in dependency proceedings, and (3) requires a Judicial
Council of California report on caseload standards for
appointed counsel for children in dependency proceedings.
CONTINUED
AB 2480
Page
2
ANALYSIS : Existing law allows the juvenile court to
adjudge minor children "dependents" of court in response to
allegations of neglect or abuse.
Existing law requires a court to appoint counsel for
children in dependency proceedings who are not represented
by counsel, unless the court finds that the child would not
benefit from that appointment.
This bill requires a court of appeal to appoint separate
counsel when those children are appellants. If a child is
not the appellant, the court shall appoint separate counsel
for the child if the court determines that the appointment
would benefit the child, after considering the
recommendation of the trial counsel or the child's guardian
ad litem.
This bill requires the Judicial Council to implement a Rule
of Court setting forth procedures by which the trial
counsel or guardian ad litem may participate in an appeal,
including factors considered in their recommendation for
appellate counsel.
This bill requires the Judicial Council to report to the
Legislature by July 1, 2008, on the status of appellate
representation of dependent children, results of the
implementation of this bill, and any recommendations.
Existing law allows the child or the child's counsel, with
the informed consent of the child, to invoke the
psychotherapist-client privilege, physician-patient
privilege, and clergy-penitent privilege in a dependency
proceeding. Existing law requires the child to be of
sufficient age and maturity to give their informed consent.
This bill provides that a child over 12 years of age shall
be presumed to be of sufficient age and maturity to consent
if the child is over 12 years of age, subject to rebuttal
by clear and convincing evidence.
Existing law requires appointed counsel to have caseload
and training that ensures adequate representation of the
AB 2480
Page
3
child. The Judicial Council must develop rules of court
establishing those standards.
This bill requires the Judicial Council to report to the
Legislature on steps taken to develop caseload standards,
efforts putting those standards into place, and any
additional resources that would assist implementation of
the standards.
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes
Local: No
According to the Senate Appropriations Committee:
Fiscal Impact (in thousands)
Major Provisions 2006-07 2007-08
2008-09 Fund
Counsel $791 $1,291
General*
Report Minor, absorbable costs
General*
* Trial Court Trust Fund
SUPPORT : (Verified 8/17/06)
Children's Advocacy Institute (co-source)
Children's Law Center of Los Angeles (co-source)
National Center for Youth Law (co-source)
County Welfare Directors Association of California
Judicial Council of California
Junior Leagues of California State Public Affairs Committee
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : According to the author's office,
this bill addresses three issues relating to dependent
children, all intended to benefit dependent children.
First, this bill provides for counsel to dependent children
on appeal. As evidence of the need for the provision, the
author states:
AB 2480
Page
4
"[i]t is well established that children are better
served in legal proceedings by an attorney who
advocates only for that child's 'protection, safety,
and physical and emotional well-being." [Welf. & Inst.
Code 317(c).] A dependent child is not guaranteed the
same level of representation on appeal, however,
despite the fact that appellate decisions are no less
significant and often have greater long-term impact
than those made at the trial level."
Second, this bill addresses the caseloads of appointed
dependency court attorneys. The author contends that:
"[i]t is statutorily required that children in
California who come before the court due to allegations
of abuse or neglect have a right to competent counsel ?
This bill [would] direct the AOC to report back to the
legislature regarding progress made toward developing
caseload standards, recommendations for implementation
statewide of reasonable caseloads, and obstacles that
stand in the way of these standards, for dependency
attorneys."
Finally, the author's office contends that the current
requirement of allowing a child to invoke certain
privileges only if the court finds the child to be of
sufficient age and maturity may "lead to unnecessary court
intervention, especially for older children." The author
states that this intervention:
"can create delays in the proceedings and in the
child's treatment that are not in the child's best
interest. Establishing this presumption at age 12
would be consistent with other areas of dependency law,
such as guardian ship and adoption which both require
the consent of a child age 12 or older."
ASSEMBLY FLOOR :
AYES: Arambula, Baca, Bass, Berg, Bermudez, Calderon,
Canciamilla, Chan, Chavez, Chu, Cohn, Coto, De La Torre,
Dymally, Evans, Frommer, Goldberg, Hancock, Jerome
Horton, Jones, Karnette, Klehs, Koretz, Laird, Leno,
Levine, Lieber, Lieu, Liu, Matthews, Montanez, Mullin,
AB 2480
Page
5
Nation, Nava, Negrete McLeod, Oropeza, Parra, Pavley,
Ridley-Thomas, Ruskin, Saldana, Salinas, Torrico, Umberg,
Vargas, Wolk, Yee, Nunez
NOES: Aghazarian, Benoit, Blakeslee, Bogh, Cogdill,
Daucher, DeVore, Emmerson, Garcia, Harman, Haynes,
Shirley Horton, Houston, Huff, Keene, La Malfa, La Suer,
Leslie, Maze, McCarthy, Mountjoy, Nakanishi, Niello,
Plescia, Richman, Sharon Runner, Spitzer, Strickland,
Tran, Villines, Walters, Wyland
RJG:mel 8/19/06 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****