BILL ANALYSIS
------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | SB 33|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 445-6614 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: SB 33
Author: Battin (R)
Amended: 6/2/05
Vote: 21
SENATE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE : 4-1, 4/19/05
AYES: Alquist, Poochigian, Cedillo, Margett
NOES: Migden
NO VOTE RECORDED: Perata, Romero
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE : 13-0, 5/26/05
AYES: Migden, Aanestad, Alarcon, Alquist, Ashburn, Battin,
Dutton, Escutia, Florez, Murray, Ortiz, Poochigian,
Romero
SUBJECT : Lewd conduct with children
SOURCE : National Association to Protect Children
DIGEST : This bill requires the removal of a defendant
from a household of a victim of lewd or lascivious acts, as
specified.
Senate Floor Amendments of 6/2/ remove the provisions of
the bill that were inserted into the bill while it was on
the Senate Appropriations Suspense File.
As amended, this bill is exactly the same as when it passed
the Senate Public Safety Committee.
CONTINUED
SB 33
Page
2
ANALYSIS : Existing law provides that any person who
commits a lewd and lascivious act with a child under the
age of 14 years shall be imprisoned in state prison for
three, six, or eight years. [Section 288 of the Penal Code]
In most cases, the court can or must impose fully
consecutive terms for each separate act. [Section 667.6,
subd. (c) and (d) of the Penal Code]
This bill provides that any person convicted of committing
any lewd or lascivious act including any of the acts
constituting other crimes provided for in Part 1 of the
Penal Code upon or with the body, or any part or member
thereof, of a child under the age of 14 years shall not
have his/her sentence suspended until the court obtains a
report from a reputable psychiatrist, from a reputable
psychologist who meets the specified standards as to the
mental condition of that person.
If the defendant is a member of the victim's household,
probation shall not be granted unless the defendant is
removed from the household of the victim until the court
determines that the best interests of the victim would be
served by his/her return. While removed from the
household, the court shall prohibit contact by the
defendant with the victim, with the exception that the
court may permit supervised contact, upon the request of
the director of the court ordered supervised treatment
program, and with the agreement of the victim and the
victims' parent or legal guardian, other than the
defendant. As used in this subdivision, "contact with the
victim" includes all physical contact, being in the
presence of the victim, communicating by any means,
including by a third party acting on behalf of the
defendant, or sending any gifts.
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes
Local: Yes
According to the Senate Appropriations Committee:
Fiscal Impact (in thousands)
Major Provisions 2005-06 2006-07
2007-08 Fund
CONTINUED
SB 33
Page
3
Incarceration Costs likely in excess of $200
annually General
SUPPORT : (Verified 5/27/05) (Unable to reverify)
National Association to Protect Children (source)
A Minor Consideration
Bikers Against Child Abuse
California Alliance Against Domestic Violence
California Correctional Supervisors Association
California District Attorneys Association
California Protective Parents Association
California State Sheriffs' Association
California Women's Law Center
City of El Cerrito
Feminist Majority
Incest Survivors Speakers Bureau
Mothers of Lost Children
Oxnard Police Department
Peace Officers Research Association of California
Rainbow Community Center of Contra Costa County
Rape Treatment Center at Santa Monica- UCLA
Responsible Citizens Inc
Solano County Board of Supervisors
Valencia Pediatric Associates
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : According to the author, "The vast
majority of child sexual abuse is?committed by adults in a
child's?circle of trust. This abuse takes a?devastating
toll on children. Yet California has virtually
decriminalized child sexual abuse within the family."
The bill's sponsor, National Association to Protect
Children, argues that child victims are pressured to accept
the crime and to accept the offender back into the home.
After the offender has been returned to the home, perhaps
not intending to stop sexually abusing the victim, the
child-victim comes to believe that complaining about abuse
would not be taken seriously, Further, the offender often
has inherent power in the family that the minor lacks.
Proponents have argued that children are often pressured
into agreeing with or supporting a grant of probation. They
CONTINUED
SB 33
Page
4
argue that where an intra-family child molester is returned
to the family, often years after the incident , and the
person molests the original victim or another child, the
victim would be very reluctant to report the second
incident of abuse. Proponents explain low reported
recidivism rates for lewd conduct through the asserted
phenomenon of reluctance to report repeated abuse.
RJG:mel 6/2/05 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****
CONTINUED