BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    



                                                                  AB 1376
                                                                  Page  1


          ASSEMBLY THIRD READING
          AB 1376 (Bass)
          As Amended  April 13, 2009
          Majority vote 

           PUBLIC SAFETY       5-2         APPROPRIATIONS      12-5        
           
           ------------------------------------------------------------------ 
          |Ayes:|Solorio, Furutani, Hill,  |Ayes:|De Leon, Ammiano, Charles  |
          |     |Ma, Skinner               |     |Calderon, Davis, Fuentes,  |
          |     |                          |     |Hall, John A. Perez,       |
          |     |                          |     |Price, Skinner, Solorio,   |
          |     |                          |     |Torlakson, Krekorian       |
          |     |                          |     |                           |
          |-----+--------------------------+-----+---------------------------|
          |Nays:|Hagman, Gilmore           |Nays:|Nielsen, Duvall, Harkey,   |
          |     |                          |     |Miller,                    |
          |     |                          |     |Audra Strickland           |
          |     |                          |     |                           |
           ------------------------------------------------------------------ 
           SUMMARY  :  Establishes an independent, multi-jurisdictional body  
          to provide a non-partisan forum for statewide policy  
          development, information development, research and planning  
          concerning criminal sentences and their effect.    

           EXISTING LAW  :

          1)States when a judgment of imprisonment is to be imposed and  
            the statute specifies three possible terms, the court shall  
            order imposition of the middle term unless there are  
            circumstances in aggravation or mitigation of the crime.  At  
            least four days prior to the time set for imposition of  
            judgment, either party or the victim, or the family of the  
            victim if the victim is deceased, may submit a statement in  
            aggravation or mitigation to dispute facts in the record or  
            the probation officer's report or to present additional facts.  
             In determining whether there are circumstances that justify  
            imposition of the upper or lower term, the court may consider  
            the record in the case; the probation officer's report; other  
            reports, including reports received pursuant to existing law  
            and statements in aggravation or mitigation submitted by the  
            prosecution, the defendant, or the victim, or the family of  
            the victim if the victim is deceased; and any further evidence  
            introduced at the sentencing hearing.  The court shall set  








                                                                  AB 1376
                                                                  Page  2


            forth on the record the facts and reasons for imposing the  
            upper or lower term.  The court may not impose an upper term  
            by using the fact of any enhancement upon which sentence is  
            imposed under any provision of law.  A term of imprisonment  
            shall not be specified if imposition of sentence is suspended.  
             

          2)Declares legislative intent that the purpose of imprisonment  
            for crime is punishment.  This purpose is best served by terms  
            proportionate to the seriousness of the offense with provision  
            for uniformity in the sentences of offenders committing the  
            same offense under similar circumstances.  The Legislature  
            further finds and declares that the elimination of disparity  
            and the provision of uniformity of sentences can best be  
            achieved by determinate sentences fixed by statute in  
            proportion to the seriousness of the offense as determined by  
            the Legislature to be imposed by the court with specified  
            discretion.  

           FISCAL EFFECT  :   According to the Assembly Appropriations  
          Committee:

          1)Because this measure is in skeletal form, precise costs cannot  
            be determined.  Based, however, on earlier sentencing  
            commission models, annual costs would be in the range of $2.5  
            million, depending on the authority of the body.

          2)Prospective costs/savings due to actions of the body cannot be  
            determined, though it is likely a non-politicized sentencing  
            commission, using evidence-based practices and models, could  
            recommend a sentencing/parole scheme that results in  
            significant net state savings.

           COMMENTS  :   According to the author, "AB 1376 seeks to create an  
          independent, multi-jurisdictional body to work on policy issues  
          related to the state's criminal justice system.  It is  
          anticipated that such a body could work on issues ranging from  
          the state's sentencing structure to what needs to be done to  
          curtail the cycle of recidivism.  Our current criminal justice  
          sentencing structure leads to seriously overcrowded facilities,  
          financial constraints, an inability to deliver reentry services  
          and high recidivism rates.  California needs to step back and  
          comprehensively look at our system.  A sentencing entity could  
          review our codes; look at individual sentences, policies and  








                                                                  AB 1376
                                                                  Page  3


          programs that are successful or unsuccessful in other states;  
          incarceration and alternatives, as well as rehabilitation and  
          public safety."

          Please see the policy committee for a full discussion of this  
          bill.
           

          Analysis Prepared by  :    Kimberly Horiuchi / PUB. S. / (916)  
          319-3744 

                                                                FN: 0001121