BILL ANALYSIS
AB 750
Page 1
ASSEMBLY THIRD READING
AB 750 (Bass)
As Introduced February 26, 2009
Majority vote
PUBLIC SAFETY 7-0 APPROPRIATIONS 12-5
------------------------------------------------------------------
|Ayes:|Solorio, Hagman, |Ayes:|De Leon, Ammiano, Charles |
| |Furutani, Gilmore, Hill, | |Calderon, Davis, Fuentes, |
| |Ma, Skinner | |Hall, John A. Perez, |
| | | |Price, Skinner, Solorio, |
| | | |Torlakson, Krekorian |
| | | | |
|-----+--------------------------+-----+---------------------------|
| | |Nays:|Nielsen, Duvall, Harkey, |
| | | |Miller, |
| | | |Audra Strickland |
------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY : Creates a deferred entry of judgment (DEJ) program for
first-time, non-violent drug offenders. Specifically, this
bill :
1)Authorizes a superior court, with the concurrence of the
prosecuting attorney of the county, to create a DEJ reentry
program aimed at preventing recidivism among first-time,
non-violent felony drug offenders. Specifies the
characteristics of that program and the process for
eligibility for the program.
2)Provides that a superior court, with the concurrence of the
prosecuting attorney of the county, may create a "Back on
Track" DEJ reentry program aimed at preventing recidivism
among first-time non-violent felony drug offenders. No
defendant convicted of a sex offense violation requiring
registration, serious felonies, or violent felonies shall be
eligible for the program established, as specified. When
creating this program, the prosecuting attorney, together with
the presiding judge and a representative of the criminal
defense bar selected by the presiding judge of the superior
court may agree to establish a Back on Track DEJ program
pursuant to the provisions of this chapter. The agreement
shall specify which low-level, non-violent felony drug
AB 750
Page 2
offenses under the Health and Safety Code will be eligible for
the program and a process for selecting participants.
3)States that the prosecuting attorney shall determine whether a
defendant is eligible for participation in the DEJ reentry
program.
4)Provides that if the prosecuting attorney determines that this
section may be applicable to the defendant, he or she shall
advise the defendant and his or her attorney in writing of
that determination.
5)Provides that if the prosecuting attorney determines that the
defendant is eligible for the program, the prosecuting
attorney shall state for the record the grounds upon which the
determination is based and shall make this information
available to the defendant and his or her attorney. This
procedure is intended to allow the court to set the DEJ
hearing at the arraignment.
6)States that if the prosecuting attorney determines that the
defendant is ineligible for the program, the prosecuting
attorney shall state for the record the grounds upon which the
determination is based and shall make this information
available to the defendant and his or her attorney. The sole
remedy of a defendant who is found ineligible for DEJ is a
post-conviction appeal. If the prosecuting attorney does not
deem the defendant eligible or the defendant does not consent
to participate, the proceedings shall continue as in any other
case.
7)States that upon a motion by the prosecuting attorney for an
entry of judgment, before entering a judgment of guilty, the
court may hold a hearing to determine whether the defendant
has failed to comply with the program and should be terminated
from the program.
8)Provides that a defendant's plea of guilty shall not
constitute a conviction for any purpose unless a judgment of
guilty is entered as specified.
9)States that counties that opt to create a DEJ reentry program
pursuant to this bill shall not seek state reimbursement for
costs associated with the implementation, development, or
AB 750
Page 3
operation of that program.
10)States that local law enforcement agencies and counties
administering the programs may seek state, federal, or private
funding for the purpose of implementing the provisions of this
chapter.
11)Makes legislative findings that any limitation on the
public's right of access to the writings of public officials
and agencies made by its provisions is necessary to provide an
incentive for program participants to complete the diversion
program and to prevent recidivism among nonviolent offenders.
EXISTING LAW :
1)Provides for diversion from criminal prosecution through a DEJ
and sentence when an open case is before any court for
specified violations of drug possession, paraphernalia
possession, being in the presence of drug use, misdemeanor
transportation of marijuana, or harvesting of marijuana for
personal use and it appears to the prosecuting attorney that
specified criteria apply to the defendant:
2)States that the prosecuting attorney shall review his or her
file to determine whether or not the defendant qualifies for a
DEJ program. Upon the agreement of the prosecuting attorney,
law enforcement, the public defender, and the presiding judge
of the criminal division of the superior court, or a judge
designated by the presiding judge, this procedure shall be
completed as soon as possible after the initial filing of the
charges. If the defendant is found eligible, the prosecuting
attorney shall file with the court a declaration in writing or
state for the record the grounds upon which the determination
is based, and shall make this information available to the
defendant and his or her attorney. This procedure is intended
to allow the court to set the hearing for DEJ at the
arraignment. If the defendant is found ineligible for DEJ,
the prosecuting attorney shall file with the court a
declaration in writing or state for the record the grounds
upon which the determination is based, and shall make this
information available to the defendant and his or her
attorney. The sole remedy of a defendant who is found
ineligible for DEJ is a post-conviction appeal.
AB 750
Page 4
3)Provides that if the prosecuting attorney determines that DEJ
may be applicable to the defendant, he or she shall advise the
defendant and his or her attorney in writing of that
determination.
4)States that if the defendant consents and waives his or her
right to a speedy trial or a speedy preliminary hearing, the
court may refer the case to the probation department or the
court may summarily grant DEJ if the defendant pleads guilty
to the charge or charges and waives time for the pronouncement
of judgment. When directed by the court, the probation
department shall make an investigation and take into
consideration the defendant's age; employment and service
records; educational background; community and family ties;
prior controlled substance use; treatment history, if any;
demonstrable motivation; and, other mitigating factors in
determining whether the defendant is a person who would be
benefited by education, treatment, or rehabilitation. The
probation department shall also determine which programs the
defendant would benefit from and which programs would accept
the defendant. The probation department shall report its
findings and recommendations to the court. The court shall
make the final determination regarding education, treatment,
or rehabilitation for the defendant. If the court determines
that it is appropriate, the court shall grant DEJ if the
defendant pleads guilty to the charge or charges and waives
time for the pronouncement of judgment.
5)Specifies no statement, or any information procured therefrom,
made by the defendant to any probation officer or drug
treatment worker, that is made during the course of any
investigation conducted by the probation department or
treatment program and prior to the reporting of the probation
department's findings and recommendations to the court, shall
be admissible in any action or proceeding brought subsequent
to the investigation. No statement, or any information
procured therefrom, with respect to the specific offense with
which the defendant is charged, that is made to any probation
officer or drug program worker subsequent to the granting of
DEJ, shall be admissible in any action or proceeding,
including a sentencing hearing.
6)States a defendant's plea of guilty pursuant to DEJ shall not
constitute a conviction for any purpose unless a judgment of
AB 750
Page 5
guilty is entered pursuant to unsatisfactory completion of the
DEJ program.
FISCAL EFFECT : According to the Assembly Appropriations
Committee, no direct state or local costs as the program models
provided in this bill are permissive. Local governments and
courts can develop these types of programs, now absent this
bill.
COMMENTS : According to the author, "Every year, more than
120,000 offenders are released from California prisons.
Approximately 70% will re-offend within three years of being
released and return to prison having claimed yet another victim.
Many thousands more cycle in and out of county jails, getting
arrested, jailed, and released, only to commit new crimes again
at enormous cost to local criminal justice systems. This cycle
is detrimental to public safety and a severe strain on precious
public resources.
"Counties need help developing effective recidivism prevention
models as a means to protect public safety and save money. The
San Francisco District Attorney's Office's 'Back On Track'
program provides such a model. Back On Track combines strict
accountability with preparedness training to break the cycle of
crime and prevent recidivism among nonviolent first-time drug
offenders.
"Back On Track was launched in recognition that former offenders
exit jail utterly unprepared to live crime-free and without
having meaningfully addressed their underlying problems that
contributed to criminal behavior, including lack of job
readiness, lack of education, substance abuse problems, and lack
of housing, among others. The program mandates strict court
monitoring and supervision, while providing basic job readiness
skills, parenting accountability, and other training and
oversight to offenders who have sustained their first felony
drug-arrest. After pleading guilty, sentencing is deferred
while offenders are closely monitored and supervised in making
progress over 12 months toward self-sufficiency. Back on Track
connects participants with institutions and individuals who
train participants to secure and embrace legitimate employment
and substantial educational opportunities. The results have
been promising: Back On Track not only reduces recidivism, it
also saves money. Among low-level, non-violent, non-gang
AB 750
Page 6
affiliated drug offenders, the two-year recidivism rate for Back
On Track graduates is less than 10%, significantly lower than
the 54% recidivism rate for drug offenders across the state.
Back On Track costs less than $5,000 per participant, compared
to $35,000 to $50,000 for a year in county jail. As a result,
the Back On Track program has been selected as a national model
by the National District Attorneys Association.
"AB 750 authorizes county agencies to voluntarily undertake this
model at the local level. The Back On Track model outlined in
AB 750 encourages public private partnerships to develop the
program and utilizes existing county and community resources to
provide training to participants. The program's success at
reducing recidivism provides a path for other jurisdictions to
follow. By reducing recidivism and saving money, Back On Track
is an effective public safety program that California should
embrace."
Please see the policy committee for a full discussion of this
bill.
Analysis Prepared by : Gabriel Caswell / PUB. S. / (916)
319-3744
FN: 0001133