BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    







                      SENATE COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC SAFETY
                           Senator Carole Migden, Chair              A
                             2005-2006 Regular Session               B

                                                                     2
                                                                     8
                                                                     6
          AB 2869 (Leno)                                             9
          As Amended May 16, 2006 
          Hearing date:  June 20, 2006
          Government Code
          JM:br


                         CRIME VICTIMS REIMBURSEMENT PROGRAM  :  

                       BURIAL EXPENSES AND CRIME SCENE CLEANUP
                                           

                                       HISTORY

          Source:  Author

          Prior Legislation: SB 972 (Poochigian) - Ch. 238, Stats. 2005
                       SB 631 (McPherson) - Ch. 223, Stats. 2004
                       SB 1423 (Chesbro) - Ch. 1141, Stats. 2002
                       AB 2898 (Bowler) - Ch. 1077, Stats. 1996

          Support: Friends Committee on Legislation; Crime Victims United  
          (if amended)

          Opposition:None known

          Assembly Floor Vote:  Ayes 73 - Noes 0


                                         KEY ISSUE
           
          SHOULD THE VICTIMS OF CRIME PROGRAM PROVIDE REIMBURSEMENT FOR CRIME  
          SCENE CLEANUP, FUNERAL AND BURIAL EXPENSES WHERE THE VICTIM WAS ON  




                                                                     (More)







                                                             AB 2869 (Leno)
                                                                      PageB


          PROBATION OR PAROLE, IF THE VICTIM WAS NOT INVOLVED IN THE CRIME IN  
          WHICH THE VICTIM WAS KILLED?



                                       PURPOSE
          
          The purpose of this bill is to provide that where a crime victim  
          was killed during commission of the crime, reimbursement for  
          crime-scene cleanup, funeral and burial expenses may be paid to  
          the victim's family if the victim was on probation or parole, if  
          the victim was not involved in the crime in which he or she was  
          killed.
          
           Existing law  creates the Victims of Crime Program, administered  
          by the California Victim Compensation and Government Claims  
          Board<1>, to reimburse victims of crime for the pecuniary losses  
          they suffer as a direct result of criminal acts.   
          Indemnification is made from the Restitution Fund, which is  
          continuously appropriated to the California Victim Compensation  
          and Government Claims Board for these purposes.  (Govt. Code   
          13950-13968; note that  13969 and .2, .5, and .7 related to a  
          one-time 9/11/01 payment and are repealed effective 1/1/04.)

           Existing statutes  require a minimum restitution fine of $200 in  
          all felony cases and $100 in all misdemeanor cases.  Courts may  
          set a maximum of $10,000 for felonies and $1000 for  
          misdemeanors.  Restitution fines shall be imposed regardless of  
          the defendant's present ability to pay.  Restitution fines are  
          used to pay for the Victims of Crime Program.  (Pen. Code   
          1202.4.)

           Existing law  provides for restitution orders - enforceable as a  
          civil judgment - to ensure that a victim of a crime who incurs  
          any economic loss shall receive restitution directly from any  
          defendant convicted of that crime.  If a restitution order is  
          ---------------------------
          <1>  This entity was formerly known as the State Board of  
          Control.  (Govt. Code  13900 amended by AB 2491 - Ch. 1016,  
          Stats. 2000.)



                                                                     (More)







                                                             AB 2869 (Leno)
                                                                      PageC


          made, the defendant has the right to a hearing before the court  
          to dispute the determination of the amount of the order.  A  
          restitution order may be modified upon motion of the District  
          Attorney, the victim or victims, or the defendant.  (Penal Code  
           1202.4(f) and (i).)  (NOTE:  Penal Code  1202.4, subd. (f)(2)  
          further specifies that a restitution order may also be paid  
          directly to the Restitution Fund to the extent that the victim  
          has received assistance from the Victims of Crime Program.)

           Existing law  provides than an application for compensation shall  
          be filed with the Board in the manner determined by the Board.   
          (Gov. Code  13952, subd. (a).)

           Existing law  provides that the restitution fine shall not be  
          subject to penalty assessments as provided in Section 1464, and  
          shall be deposited in the Restitution Fund in the State  
          Treasury.  (Penal Code  1202.4, subd. (e).)

           Existing law  provides that the application for compensation  
          shall be verified under penalty of perjury by the individual who  
          is seeking compensation, who may be the victim or derivative  
          victim, or an individual seeking reimbursement for burial,  
          funeral, or crime scene cleanup expenses pursuant to specified  
          sections of the Government Code.  (Gov. Code  13952,
          subd. (b)(1).)

           Existing law  provides that if the individual seeking  
          compensation is a minor or is incompetent, the application shall  
          be verified under penalty or perjury or on information and  
          belief by the parent with legal custody, guardian, conservator,  
          or relative caregiver of the victim for whom the application is  
          made.  However, if the minor seeks compensation only for  
          expenses for medical, medical-related, psychiatric,  
          psychological, or other mental health counseling-related  
          services and the minor is authorized by statute to consent to  
          those services, the minor may verify the application for  
          compensation under penalty of perjury.  (Gov. Code  13952,  
          subd. (b)(1).)





                                                                     (More)







                                                             AB 2869 (Leno)
                                                                      PageD


           Existing law  states that except as provided by specified  
          sections of the Government Code, a person shall be eligible for  
          compensation when all of the following requirements are met  
          (Gov. Code  13955):

           The person from whom compensation is being sought is any of  
            the following (Gov. Code  13955, subd. (a)):

                 A victim.  (Gov. Code  13955, subd. (a)(1).)  A  
               derivative victim.  (Gov. Code  13955, subd.  
               (a)(2).)

                 A person who is entitled to reimbursement for  
               funeral, burial or crime scene cleanup expenses  
               pursuant to specified sections of the Government  
               Code.  (Gov. Code  13955, subd. (a)(3).)

                 Either of the following conditions is met (Gov. Code   
               13955, subd. (b)):

                 The crime occurred within California whether or  
               not the victim is a resident of California.  This  
               only applies when the Board determines that there  
               are federal funds available to the state for the  
               compensation of crime victims.  (Gov. Code  13955,  
               subd. (b)(1).)

                 Whether or not the crime occurred within the  
               State of California, the victim was any of the  
               following (Gov. Code  13955(b)(2)):

                    o           A resident of the state.   
                      (Gov. Code  13955, subd. (b)(2)(A).)

               o      A member of the military stationed in  
                 California.  (Gov. Code  13955, subd.  
                 (b)(2)(B).)

               o      A family member living with a member  




                                                                     (More)







                                                             AB 2869 (Leno)
                                                                      PageE


                 of the military station in California.   
                 (Gov. Code  13955, subd. (b)(2)(C).)

                 If compensation is being sought for derivative  
               victim, the derivative victim is a resident of  
               California or the resident of another state who is  
               any of the following (Gov. Code  13955, subd. (c)):

                     At the time of the crimes was the parent,  
                 grandparent, sibling, spouse, child or grandchild  
                 of the victim.  (Gov. Code  13955, subd. (c)(1).)

                     At the time of the crime was living in the  
                 household of the victim.  (Gov. Code  13955,  
                 subd. (c)(2).)

                     At the time of the crime was a person who  
                 had previously lived in the house of the victim  
                 for a person of not less than two years in  
                 relationship substantially similar to a  
                 previously listed relationship.  (Gov. Code   
                 13955, subd. (c)(3).)

                     Another family member of the victim  
                 including, but not limited to, the victim's  
                 fianc? or fianc?e, and who witnessed the  
                 crime.  (Gov. Code  13955, subd. (c)(4).)

                     Is the primary caretaker of a minor victim,  
                 but was not the primary caretaker at the time of  
                 the crime.  (Gov. Code  13955, subd. (c)(5).)

                                                             Other  
                                     specified requirements apply.  (Gov.  
                                     Code  13955, subds. (d)-(g).)

           Existing law  states that a person shall not be eligible for  
          compensation under the follow conditions (Gov. Code  13956):





                                                                     (More)







                                                             AB 2869 (Leno)
                                                                      PageF


           An application shall be denied if the Board finds that  
            the victim or, where compensation is sought by or on  
            behalf of a derivative victim, either the victim or  
            derivative victim knowingly and willing participated in  
            the commission of the crime that result in the  
            pecuniary loss for which compensation is being sought  
            pursuant to specified sections of the Government Code.   
            However, this subdivision shall not apply if the injury  
            or death occurred as a direct result of rape, rape of a  
            spouse, unlawful sexual intercourse, or willful  
            infliction of corporal injury.  (Gov. Code  13956,  
            subd. (a).)

           An application shall be denied if the board finds that  
            the victim or, where compensation is sought by or on  
            behalf of, a derivative victim, either the victim or  
            derivative victim failed to cooperate reasonably with a  
            law enforcement agency in the apprehension and  
            conviction of a criminal committing the crime.   
            However, in determining whether cooperation has been  
            reasonable, the Board shall consider the victim's or  
            derivative victim's age, physical condition, and  
            psychological state, cultural or linguistic barriers,  
            any compelling health and safety concerns including,  
            but not limited to, a reasonable fear of retaliation or  
            harm that would jeopardize the well-being of the victim  
            or the victim's family or the derivative victim or the  
            derivative victim's family, and giving due  
            consideration to the degree of cooperation of which the  
            victim or derivative victim is capable in light of the  
            presence of any of these factors.  (Gov. Code  13956,  
            subd. (b)(1).)

           An application for compensation may be denied, in whole  
            or in part, if the Board finds that denial is  
            appropriate because of the nature of the victim's or  
            other applicant's involvement in the events leading to  
            the crime or the involvement of the persons whose  
            injury or death gives rise to the application.  In the  




                                                                     (More)







                                                             AB 2869 (Leno)
                                                                      PageG


            case of a minor, the Board shall consider the minor's  
            age, physical condition, and psychological state, as  
            well as any compelling health and safety concerns, in  
            determining whether the minor's application should be  
            denied pursuant to this section.  The application of a  
            derivative victim of domestic violence under the age of  
            18 years of age or a derivative victim of trafficking  
            under 18 years of age may not be denied on the basis of  
            the denial of the victim's application under this  
            subdivision.  (Gov. Code  13956, subd. (c).)

           Notwithstanding Government Code Section 13955, no  
            person who is convicted of a felony may be granted  
            compensation until that person has been discharged from  
            probation or has been released from a correctional  
            institution and has been discharged from parole, if  
            any.  In no case shall compensation be granted to an  
            applicant pursuant to this chapter during any period of  
            time the applicant is held in a correctional  
            institution.  (Gov. Code  13956, subd. (d)(1).)

           A person convicted of a felony may apply for  
            compensation pursuant to this chapter at any time, but  
            the award of that compensation may not be considered  
            until the applicant has been discharged from probation  
            or has been discharge from a correctional institution  
            and has been discharged from parole.  (Gov. Code   
            13956, subd. (d)(2).)

           Applications of victims who are not felons shall receive  
            priority in the award of compensation over an application  
            submitted by a felon who has met the requirements for  
            compensation.  (Gov. Code  13956, subd. (d)(3).)

           Existing law  provides that when a victim dies as a result of a  
          crime, the Board may reimburse any individual who voluntarily,  
          and without anticipation of personal gain, pay or assumes the  
          obligation to pay any of the following expenses (Gov. Code   
          13957, subd. (a)(9)):




                                                                     (More)







                                                             AB 2869 (Leno)
                                                                      PageH



           The medical expenses incurred as a direct result of the  
            crime in an amount not to exceed the rates or  
            limitations established by the Board.  (Gov. Code   
            13957, subd. (a)(9)(A).)

           When the crime occurs in a residence, the reasonable  
            costs to clean the scene of the crime in an amount not  
            to exceed $1000.  (Gov. Code  13957, subd. (a)(9)(B).)

           The funeral and burial expenses incurred as a direct  
            result of the crimes, not to exceed $7,500.  (Gov. Code  
             13957, subd. (a)(9)(B).)

           Existing law  provides that the total award to or on behalf of  
          each victim or derivative victim may no exceed $35,000, except  
          that this amount may be increased to $70,000 if federal funds  
          for that increase are available.  (Gov. Code  13957. subd.  
          (b).)

           This bill  clarifies that the Victims Compensation and Government  
          Claims Board (Board) is required to award compensation to a  
          person seeking reimbursement for crime-scene cleanup, funeral  
          and burial expenses of a victim that died as a result of a crime  
          without respect to any felony status of the victim.

                                      COMMENTS

          1.  Need for This Bill  

          According to the author:

              Current law is sufficiently ambiguous as to allow the  
              Board to deny claims of family members to pay for the  
              burial or funeral costs of their loved ones if they  
              are still on parole or probation at the time of their  
              violent death.

              A group of constituents came to visit me who had been  




                                                                     (More)







                                                             AB 2869 (Leno)
                                                                      PageI


              denied such claims.  These constituents were so proud  
              of their sons/family members who had left their gang  
              pasts behind after release from prison, were working  
              hard to support their families, but were gunned down  
              by their former gang for doing exactly what society  
              had asked them to do - distance themselves from the  
              gang and live honest and hard-working lives.

              The simple fact that their sons were still on parole  
              or probation (for a lesser crime) at the time they  
              were gunned down resulted in a denial of their  
              families' claims for burial/funeral expenses.

              This bill attempts to provide clarity in the statute  
              so that guidance from the Board governing claims for  
              burial or funeral expenses is consistent from year to  
              year so that we treat victims of violent crime  
              consistently,  as long as they were not perpetrators  
              of the crime that resulted in their death  .  This bill  
              provides that clarity, without making it possible for  
              the Board to pay claims for perpetrators of the  
              crime, such as in he 1986 Cabarga case.

          2.  Additional Background Concerning Denial of Claims Submitted by  
            Persons Who were on Probation or Parole at the Time They  
            became Crime Victims

           According to background submitted by the author:

              Current guidance and claim forms issued by the Board  
              indicate that a person is ineligible for compensation  
              as a victim of crime if he/she (the dead person) was  
              on probation or parole at the time of the crime.   
              This includes compensation for burial costs for a  
              victim who dies as a result of the crime.  The Board  
              currently considers the victim to be the dead person,  
              not the family members (derivative victims) who have  
              lost their loved one due to the crime and now are  
              burdened with the costs of burial as a result of the  




                                                                     (More)







                                                             AB 2869 (Leno)
                                                                      PageJ


              crime.

              Under the interpretation of the current Board, a  
              family member who has lost a loved one to violent  
              crime is not considered a 'derivative victim' for  
              purposes of submitting a claim on the Fund unless the  
              deceased victim of crime was not on probation or  
              parole at the time of their killing regardless of  
              whether or not the deceased was a participant in the  
              crime that resulted in their death.

              Legislative Counsel has opined (orally, upon  
              submission of this bill's language) that the current  
              guidance and forms issued by the Board are  
              inconsistent with the underlying statute - that  
              family members ARE entitled to file and collect on  
              claims to cover burial costs under current law and  
              are reluctant to restate current law in the statute.

              Victims of Crime Restitution Fund (VCRF) staff notes  
              that the practice of the Board has been inconsistent  
              over the years.  At times, under previous boards,  
              such claims were honored; under other boards, such  
              claims have been denied.

              VCRF staff members have provided the following  
              historical explanation for the inconsistency:  "About  
              20 years ago, three-year-old Tara B. and her 10-year  
              old brother, Jeremy, were abducted from their car in  
              a store parking lot.  Jeremy escaped after a short  
              period of time, but Tara was held for several weeks.   
              The kidnappers, Luis (Tree Frog) Johnson and Alex  
              Cabarga, were ultimately arrested and sent to prison.  
               Cabarga filed a $700 claim for mental health  
              treatment received in prison, which was paid in 1986  
              by the Board.  Although victims' claims are  
              confidential, the news of the inmate claim was leaked  
              to the press, which caused much public outrage,  
              resulting in the felon/probationer exclusion in the  




                                                                     (More)







                                                             AB 2869 (Leno)
                                                                      PageK


              statute."

              Members of the public who have been denied claims to  
              assist them in burying their loved ones have appealed  
              to the author's office for assistance.  Former gang  
              members who were still on parole and were trying  
              desperately to distance themselves from their former  
              associates and gang members were gunned down for  
              doing exactly what society expects of them - leaving  
              the gang life.  Many of them are from poor families  
              still reeling from the economic impact of losing an  
              income while their family member was in prison.  Now,  
              they must try to deal with their loss without victim  
              assistance and face further economic hardship to  
              cover the burial or funeral costs.

              The author believes this is unfair, as well as  
              inconsistent with the statute.  This bill attempts to  
              provide clarity in the statute so that guidance does  
              not vary according to the membership of the Board at  
              any given time.

          3.  Related Bill - AB 2413 (Spitzer) - Eliminates the Requirement  
            that the Victim of a Crime be Killed During the Crime before  
            Reimbursement for Crime Scene Cleanup Can be Made  

          AB 2413 (Spitzer), also set for hearing on June 20, 2006 makes  
          changes to the same paragraph of the victims of crime  
          reimbursement program that is amended by this bill.  In  
          particular, AB 2413 deletes the requirement that a victim has to  
          die as a result of a crime before reimbursement for crime scene  
          cleanup can be paid.  It appears that this bill and AB 2413 can  
          be described as complimentary measures.

          4.  Inconsistent Provisions Concerning Crime Scene Cleanup,  
          Funeral and Burial Expenses  

          Existing law (Gov. Code  13955, subd. (a) and 13957 (a)(9))  
          provides that a person who, in response to a murder, pays crime  




                                                                     (More)







                                                             AB 2869 (Leno)
                                                                      PageL


          scene cleanup, funeral or burial expenses may be eligible for  
          reimbursement.  This bill states that provisions allowing  
          reimbursement for crime scene cleanup, funeral and burial  
          expenses apply "without respect to any felony status of the  
          victim."  This bill refers to expenses allowed under Section  
          13957, subdivision (a)(9).  However, AB 2413 (Spitzer) amends  
          subdivision (a) of Section 13957 to place the provisions  
          concerning crime scene cleanup in paragraph (10) of subdivision  
          (a).  AB 2413 also provides that the victim of the crime need  
          not die to allow reimbursement for crime scene cleanup.

          Thus, this bill states that crime scene cleanup reimbursement  
          can be paid to a person regardless of "felon status," but the  
          bill refers to a paragraph that will not include reimbursement  
          for crime scene cleanup if AB 2413 is enacted.

          DO THE PROVISIONS OF THIS BILL AND THOSE IN AB 2413 (SPITZER)  
          NEED TO BE COORDINATED IN ORDER TO ELIMINATE A CONFLICT IN  
          STATUTORY REFERENCES AS CONCERNS REIMBURSEMENT FOR CRIME SCENE  
          CLEANUP?

          Further, this bill raises the issue of whether or not  
                                                reimbursement for crime scene cleanup can be paid to the victim  
          of a crime, not a third party, particularly where the victim is  
          a felon.  Staff members at the Board told Committee staff that  
          the Board interprets "felon status" to mean that a person is on  
          probation or parole.  The Board also would expect that  
          reimbursement for crime scene cleanup would not be paid to a  
          person who is on felony probation or parole.  However, the terms  
          of AB 2413 and this bill can certainly be read to allow or  
          require that reimbursement for crime scene cleanup be paid to  
          the victim of a violent crime who is on felony probation or  
          parole.

          DOES THE TERM "FELON STATUS" MEAN THAT A PERSON IS ON PROBATION  
          OR PAROLE, OR DOES THIS MEAN THAT THE PERSON HAS BEEN PREVIOUSLY  
          CONVICTED OF A FELONY?

          WOULD A CRIME VICTIM WHO IS ON FELONY PROBATION OR PAROLE BE  




                                                                     (More)







                                                             AB 2869 (Leno)
                                                                      PageM


          ELIGIBLE FOR REIMBURSEMENT FOR CRIME SCENE CLEANUP (IF THE  
          VICTIM WAS NOT INVOLVED IN THE CRIME) THROUGH THE JOINT  
          OPERATION OF THIS BILL AND AB 2413 (SPITZER)?








































                                                                     (More)











          5.  Crime Victims United - Request for Monitoring of Additional  
          Claims Related to This Bill  

          Crime Victims United (CVUC) would support this bill "if amended  
          to address a single concern."  The suggested amendment is to  
          provide that "the additional claims that the Board would fulfill  
          as a result of this clarification in law be tracked and  
          monitored.  This information would provide helpful insight into  
          the impact that this clarification would have on the ability of  
          the Board to pay its claims to all victims in need."

          Crime Victims United does not state how the information about  
          claims by persons who have been convicted of felonies would be  
          used to set policy.  Perhaps CVUC would seek additional funding  
          for the program if claims related to the bill increase the  
          number of claims made to the program.  Perhaps CVUC would seek  
          to limit or prohibit claims by persons who have been convicted  
          of felonies that are unrelated to the claim.

          6. Fund Surplus and Expenses Information  

          It appears that the Fund is in good financial shape.  The fund  
          has a rising surplus and collections have improved significantly  
          in recent years.

        2005 Projections for the Status of the Restitution Fund<2>

                   Surplus/reserve:  It was projected that the  
                reserve for the Fund would increase from the prior  
                fiscal year's $44.5 million by about that same  
                amount.  It will continue to increase slightly from  
                about $66.2 million at the end of 2004-05 to an  
                estimated $72.5 million at the end of fiscal year  
                2005-06.

                   Claims:  It was estimated that 2005 claim  
              ----------------------
          <2>  This information is taken from the analysis of SB 972  
          (Poochigian), Ch. 238, Stats. 2005, and is based upon data from  
          the Board.



                                                                     (More)







                                                             AB 2869 (Leno)
                                                                      PageO


                payments to victims from the Restitution Fund would  
                total $75 million, an increase of $7.8 million or  
                11.6% from the prior year.  In fiscal year 2005-06,  
                estimated claims payments were projected to increase  
                by $8 million, or 10.7% to $83 million.

           2006-07 Budget Year Projections (Budget Committee Information)

                  Surplus/reserve:  It is projected that at the end  
                of fiscal year 2006-07, the Fund will have a surplus  
                of $109.8 million.

                  Expenses:  It is projected that total expenditures  
                (claims and administrative costs) in fiscal year 2006-07  
                will be $101.3 million.  Expenditures will rise slowly to  
                $102.7 million for 2006-07.

          IS THE RESTITUTION FUND IN GOOD FINANCIAL SHAPE?

          SHOULD EXISTING LAW BE CLARIFIED SO AS TO CONFIRM THAT CRIME  
          SCENE CLEANUP, FUNERAL AND BURIAL EXPENSES MAY BE PAID  
          REGARDLESS OF THE FELON STATUS OF THE VICTIM, UNLESS THE VICTIM  
          WAS INVOLVED IN THE UNDERLYING CRIME?



                                   ***************