BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    







                      SENATE COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC SAFETY
                             Senator Mark Leno, Chair                A
                             200-2010 Regular Session                B

                                                                     2
                                                                     7
          AB 27 (Jeffries)                                            
          As Introduced December 1, 2008
          Hearing date:  June 23, 2009
          Penal Code
          JM:mc

                      AGGRAVATED ARSON - MONETARY LOSS THRESHOLD  

                                       HISTORY

          Source:  Author

          Prior Legislation: AB 1995 (Jeffries) - 2008, held in Senate  
          Appropriations
                       AB 1907 (Pacheco) - Ch. 135, Stats. 2004
                       SB 555 (Karnette) - Ch. 518, Stats. 1999
                       SB 1309 (Craven) - Ch. 421, Stats. 1994
                       
          Support: League of California Cities; California Fire Chiefs  
                   Association; Fire Districts Association of California;  
                   California District Attorneys Association;  
                   Sheriff-Coroner of San Bernardino County; Riverside  
                   Sheriffs' Association; Association for Los Angeles  
                   Deputy Sheriffs

          Opposition:None known

          Assembly Floor Vote:  Ayes 79 - Noes 0


                                        KEY ISSUES
           
          CONSISTENT WITH PRIOR BILLS THAT HAVE AMENDED THE AGGRAVATED ARSON  
          STATUTE, SHOULD A JANUARY 1, 2014, SUNSET BE PLACED IN THE STATUTE  




                                                                     (More)







                                                           AB 27 (Jeffries)
                                                                      PageB

          TO ALLOW THE LEGISLATURE TO CONSIDER THE EFFECTS OF INFLATION ON THE  
          MONETARY LOSS THRESHOLD?

          SHOULD THE MONETARY LOSS THRESHOLD FOR AGGRAVATED ARSON BE RAISED  
          FROM $5,650,000 TO $6,500,000 TO REFLECT THE EFFECTS OF INFLATION?


                                       PURPOSE

          The purposes of this bill are to 1) set the monetary loss  
          threshold for aggravated arson at $6,500,000 to reflect the  
          effects of inflation; and 2) include a 2014 sunset in the law to  
          review the effects of inflation at that time.

           Existing law  provides that arson that causes great bodily injury  
          is a felony, punishable by imprisonment in the state prison for  
          five, seven, or nine years.  (Pen. Code  451, subd. (a).)

           Existing law  provides that arson of an inhabited dwelling or  
          inhabited structure is a felony, punishable by imprisonment in  
          the state prison for three, five, or eight years.  (Pen. Code   
          451, subd. (b).)

           Existing law  provides that arson of a forestland or structure is  
          a felony punishable by imprisonment in the state prison for two,  
          four, or six years.  (Pen. Code  451, subd. (c).)

           Existing law  provides that arson of property is a felony,  
          punishable by imprisonment in the state prison for 16 months, 2  
          or 3 years.  (Pen. Code  451, subd. (d).)

           Existing law  provides that any person convicted of arson shall  
          be punished by a 3, 4, or 5-year enhancement if one or more of  
          the following circumstances are found to be true:  a) The  
          defendant was previously convicted of felony arson; b) A peace  
          officer, firefighter, or other emergency personnel suffered  
          great bodily injury; c) The defendant proximately caused great  
          bodily injury to more than one victim in a single incident; d)  
          The defendant proximately caused multiple structures to burn;  
          and e) The defendant committed arson by use of a device designed  




                                                                     (More)







                                                           AB 27 (Jeffries)
                                                                      PageC

          to accelerate the fire, or delay ignition.  (Pen. Code  451.1.)

           Existing law  provides that a person is guilty of unlawfully  
          causing a fire when he or she recklessly sets fire to or causes  
          to be burned any structure, forestland, or property a)  
          unlawfully causing a fire that causes great bodily injury is a  
          felony, punishable by imprisonment in the state prison for two,  
          four, or six years; by imprisonment in the county jail not to  
          exceed one year, by a fine, or by both imprisonment and a fine;  
          b) unlawfully causing a fire that causes an inhabited structure  
          or property to burn is a felony, punishable by imprisonment in  
          the state prison for two, three, or four years, by imprisonment  
          in the county jail not to exceed one year; by a fine, or by both  
          imprisonment and a fine; c) unlawfully causing a fire of a  
          structure or forestland is a felony punishable by imprisonment  
          in the state prison for 16 months, 2 or 3 years; by imprisonment  
          in the county jail not to exceed one year, by a fine, or by both  
          imprisonment and a fine; and d) unlawfully causing a fire of  
          property is a misdemeanor.  (Pen. Code  452.) 

           Existing law  (Pen. Code  451.5) provides that any person who  
          willfully, maliciously, or deliberately, with premeditation and  
          with intent to cause injury or to cause damage to property under  
          circumstances likely to produce injury or to cause damage to one  
          or more structures or inhabited dwellings, sets fire to, burns,  
          or causes to be burned any residence or structure is guilty of  
          aggravated arson, punishable by 10-years-to-life in the state  
          prison if one or more of the following aggravating factors  
          exist: 

          ? the defendant was previously convicted of arson on one or more  
            occasions within the past 10 years;
          ? the fire caused damage to, or the destruction of, five or more  
            inhabited structures; and  
          ? the fire caused damage, including fire suppression, in excess  
            of $5,650,000.

           Existing law  provides that possession of an incendiary device  
          with the intent to set a fire is punishable by one year in the  
          county jail or by 16 months, 2 or 3 years in the state prison.   




                                                                     (More)







                                                           AB 27 (Jeffries)
                                                                      PageD

          (Pen. Code  453.) 

           Existing law  includes legislative intent, stated in 2004, that  
          the aggravated arson law be reviewed within five years to  
          determine the effect of inflation on the monetary threshold for  
          the crime.  When amended in 2004 by AB 1907 (Pacheco) Ch. 135,  
          Stats. 2004, a clause was added to sunset the bill in 2010 in  
          order to allow consideration of the monetary threshold.  (Pen.  
          Code  451.5, subd. (b)(2)(B).)

           Existing law  provides that a person convicted of arson,  
          aggravated arson, and attempted arson must register with local  
          law enforcement.  The duty to register is a lifetime requirement  
          except for a person convicted before 1995.  The registration  
          requirement applies to a conviction for Penal Code section 453 -  
          possession or manufacture or an incendiary device with intent to  
          maliciously burn any structure, forest land, or property.  (Pen.  
          Code  457.1, subd. (b)(2).)

           This bill  extends the sunset date until January 1, 2014, on the  
          threshold amount of property damage required under provisions of  
          the aggravated arson statute, and increases the amount of damage  
          required to $6.5 million.


                    RECEIVERSHIP/OVERCROWDING CRISIS AGGRAVATION
          
          California continues to face a severe prison overcrowding  
          crisis.  The Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR)  
          currently has about 170,000 inmates under its jurisdiction.  Due  
          to a lack of traditional housing space available, the department  
          houses roughly 15,000 inmates in gyms and dayrooms.   
          California's prison population has increased by 125% (an average  
          of 4% annually) over the past 20 years, growing from 76,000  
          inmates to 171,000 inmates, far outpacing the state's population  
          growth rate for the age cohort with the highest risk of  








                                                                     (More)







                                                           AB 27 (Jeffries)
                                                                      PageE

          incarceration.<1>

          In December of 2006 plaintiffs in two federal lawsuits against  
          CDCR sought a court-ordered limit on the prison population  
          pursuant to the federal Prison Litigation Reform Act.  On  
          February 9, 2009, the three-judge federal court panel issued a  
          tentative ruling that included the following conclusions with  
          respect to overcrowding:

               No party contests that California's prisons are  
               overcrowded, however measured, and whether considered  
               in comparison to prisons in other states or jails  
               within this state.  There are simply too many  
               prisoners for the existing capacity.  The Governor,  
               the principal defendant, declared a state of emergency  
               in 2006 because of the "severe overcrowding" in  
               California's prisons, which has caused "substantial  
               risk to the health and safety of the men and women who  
               work inside these prisons and the inmates housed in  
               them."  . . .  A state appellate court upheld the  
               Governor's proclamation, holding that the evidence  
               supported the existence of conditions of "extreme  
               peril to the safety of persons and property."  
               (citation omitted)  The Governor's declaration of the  
               state of emergency remains in effect to this day.

               . . .  the evidence is compelling that there is no  
               relief other than a prisoner release order that will  
               remedy the unconstitutional prison conditions.

               . . .

               Although the evidence may be less than perfectly  
               ----------------------
          <1>  "Between 1987 and 2007, California's population of ages 15  
          through 44 - the age cohort with the highest risk for  
          incarceration - grew by an average of less than 1% annually,  
          which is a pace much slower than the growth in prison  
          admissions."  (2009-2010 Budget Analysis Series, Judicial and  
          Criminal Justice, Legislative Analyst's Office (January 30,  
          2009).)



                                                                     (More)







                                                           AB 27 (Jeffries)
                                                                      PageF

               clear, it appears to the Court that in order to  
               alleviate the constitutional violations California's  
               inmate population must be reduced to at most 120% to  
               145% of design capacity, with some institutions or  
               clinical programs at or below 100%.  We caution the  
               parties, however, that these are not firm figures and  
               that the Court reserves the right - until its final  
               ruling - to determine that a higher or lower figure is  
               appropriate in general or in particular types of  
               facilities.

               . . .

               Under the PLRA, any prisoner release order that we  
               issue will be narrowly drawn, extend no further than  
               necessary to correct the violation of constitutional  
               rights, and be the least intrusive means necessary to  
               correct the violation of those rights.  For this  
               reason, it is our present intention to adopt an order  
               requiring the State to develop a plan to reduce the  
               prison population to 120% or 145% of the prison's  
               design capacity (or somewhere in between) within a  
               period of two or three years.<2>

          The final outcome of the panel's tentative decision, as well as  
          any appeal that may be in response to the panel's final  
          decision, is unknown at the time of this writing.

           This bill  does not appear to aggravate the prison overcrowding  
          crisis outlined above.

                                      COMMENTS

          1.  Need for This Bill  
          ---------------------------
          <2>  Three Judge Court Tentative Ruling, Coleman v.  
          Schwarzenegger, Plata v. Schwarzenegger, in the United States  
          District Courts for the Eastern District of California and the  
          Northern District of California United States District Court  
          composed of three judges pursuant to Section 2284, Title 28  
          United States Code (Feb. 9, 2009).



                                                                     (More)







                                                           AB 27 (Jeffries)
                                                                      PageG


          According to the author:










































                                                                     (More)











               Penal Code section 451.5 states that aggravated arson  
               is caused by a person, "who willfully, maliciously,  
               deliberately, with premeditation, and with intent to  
               cause injury to one or more persons or to cause damage  
               to property under circumstances likely to produce  
               injury to one or more persons or to cause damage to  
               one or more structures or inhabited dwellings, sets  
               fire to, burns, or causes to be burned, or aids,  
               counsels, or procures the burning of any residence,  
               structure, forest land, or property."  

               A person is guilty of aggravated arson if any of the  
               following apply:  the person has a previous arson  
               conviction within the past 10 years; if the fire  
               caused damage to or the destruction of, five or more  
               inhabited structures; or, the fire caused property  
               damage and other losses in excess of five million six  
               hundred fifty thousand dollars ($5,650,000).  The  
               costs of fire suppression are included in this  
               monetary limit.

               Unfortunately, the $5,600,000 monetary thresholds for  
               aggravated arson are scheduled to sunset and be  
               eliminated in 2010.  Without legislative action, law  
               enforcement authorities will lose an important tool in  
               bringing arsonists to justice.  
               AB 1995 will extend the sunset provision found in  
               Penal Code Section 451.5 (B) from January 1, 2010, to  
               January 1, 2014.  This bill will adjust for inflation  
               fire damage thresholds which are important and  
               necessary to convict dangerous arsonists and to keep  
               the public safe.  Without this bill, law enforcement  
               authorities will no longer be able to prosecute  
               suspected arsonists for aggravated arson based on  
               monetary damage limits. 

          2.  Consideration and Recalculation of Monetary Threshold for  
          Aggravated Arson  





                                                                     (More)







                                                           AB 27 (Jeffries)
                                                                      PageI

          The aggravated arson statutes were last amended in 2004.  The  
          amendments include a sunset date of 2010 and a statement of  
          legislative intent that the monetary threshold be evaluated  
          within five years to determine the effect of inflation on that  
          amount.  

          The aggravated arson section (Pen. Code  451.5) became  
          effective in 1995 through enactment of SB 1309 (Craven) Ch. 421,  
          Stats. 1994.  As originally enacted, Penal Code section 451.5  
          provided, in relevant part (with bold typeface added):

               In calculating the total amount of property damage and  
               other losses under subparagraph (A) [which sets the  
               property damage element of aggravated arson at $5  
               million], the court shall consider the cost of fire  
               suppression.  It is the intent of the Legislature that  
               this paragraph be reviewed within five years to  
               consider the effects of inflation on the dollar amount  
               stated herein.  For that reason, this paragraph shall  
               remain in effect only until January 1, 1999, and as of  
               that date is repealed, unless a later enacted statute,  
               which is enacted before January 1, 1999, deletes or  
               extends that date.  

          AS EXISTING LAW PROVIDES THAT THE LEGISLATURE SHOULD DETERMINE  
          THE EFFECT OF INFLATION ON THE MONETARY THRESHOLD FOR AGGRAVATED  
          ARSON, SHOULD THE THRESHOLD FOR THIS CRIME BE SET AT $6,500,000  
          TO ACCOUNT FOR INFLATION SINCE IT WAS SET IN 2004?

          AS WELL AS ADJUSTING THE AGGRAVATED ARSON THRESHOLD TO ACCOUNT  
          FOR INFLATION, OR AS AN ALTERNATIVE TO RAISING THE THRESHOLD,  
          SHOULD THE AGGRAVATED ARSON STATUTE PROVIDE THAT THE LEGISLATURE  
          SHOULD REVIEW IN FIVE YEARS THE EFFECT OF INFLATION ON THE  
          THRESHOLD FOR AGGRAVATED ARSON?



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














                                                           AB 27 (Jeffries)
                                                                      PageJ