BILL ANALYSIS
------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | AB 1925|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: AB 1925
Author: Salas (D)
Amended: 8/2/10 in Senate
Vote: 21
SENATE VETERANS AFFAIRS COMMITTEE : 4-0, 6/22/10
AYES: Denham, Correa, Negrete McLeod, Cedillo
NO VOTE RECORDED: Wyland, Vacancy, Vacancy
SENATE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE : 7-0, 6/29/10
AYES: Leno, Cogdill, Cedillo, Hancock, Huff, Steinberg,
Wright
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 76-0, 6/2/10 - See last page for vote
SUBJECT : Veterans courts
SOURCE : Vietnam Veterans of America, California State
Council
DIGEST : This bill authorizes superior courts to develop
and implement veterans courts for eligible veterans of the
United States (U.S.) military with the objective of, among
other things, creation of a dedicated calendar or a locally
developed collaborative court-supervised veterans mental
health program or system that leads to the placement of as
many mentally ill offenders who are veterans of the U.S.
military, including those with post-traumatic stress
disorder, traumatic brain injury, military sexual trauma,
substance abuse, or any mental health problem stemming from
CONTINUED
AB 1925
Page
2
military service, in community treatment as is feasible and
consistent with public safety.
ANALYSIS : Existing law states that in the case of any
person convicted of a criminal offense who would otherwise
be sentenced to county jail or state prison and who alleges
that he or she committed the offense as a result of
post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), substance abuse, or
psychological problems stemming from service in a combat
theater in the United States military, the court shall,
prior to sentencing, hold a hearing to determine whether
the defendant was a member of the military forces of the
United States (U.S.) who served in combat and shall assess
whether the defendant suffers from PTSD, substance abuse,
or psychological problems as a result of that service.
Existing law allows a defendant convicted of a criminal
offense who committed the offense as a result of PTSD,
substance abuse, or psychological problems stemming from
service in a combat theater in the United States military,
and if the defendant is otherwise eligible for probation
and the court places the defendant on probation, the court
may order the defendant into a local, state, federal, or
private nonprofit treatment program for a period not to
exceed that which the defendant would have served in state
prison or county jail, provided the defendant agrees to
participate in the program and the court determines that an
appropriate treatment program exists.
Existing law provides for diversion from criminal
prosecution through a deferred entry of judgment (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, all of the following apply to the defendant:
1. The defendant has no conviction for any offense
involving controlled substances prior to the alleged
commission of the charged offense.
2. The offense charged did not involve a crime of violence
or threatened violence.
CONTINUED
AB 1925
Page
3
3. There is no evidence of a violation relating to
narcotics or restricted dangerous drugs other than a
violation of the sections listed in this subdivision.
4. The defendant's record does not indicate that probation
or parole has ever been revoked without thereafter being
completed.
5. The defendant's record does not indicate that he or she
has successfully completed or been terminated from
diversion or DEJ pursuant to this chapter within five
years prior to the alleged commission of the charged
offense.
6. The defendant has no prior felony conviction within five
years prior to the alleged commission of the charged
offense.
Existing law effectuates July 1, 2001, except as specified,
a person convicted of a non-violent drug possession offense
shall receive probation with completion of a drug treatment
program as a condition of probation.
Existing law provides that certain defendants and parolees
are ineligible for the Substance Abuse Treatment Crime
Prevention Act of 2000 (SACPA), enacted by Proposition 36.
These ineligible persons include persons who possessed
drugs other than for personal use; committed other offenses
along with a drug possession offense; used a firearm while
in possession or under the influence of heroin, cocaine or
PCP; previously convicted of a serious felony and have not
been free of custody or commission of felonies or dangerous
misdemeanors within five years (parolees may not have ever
been convicted of a serious felony); participated in two
prior Proposition 36 treatment programs; and refused
treatment.
Existing law allows a superior court, with the concurrence
of the prosecuting attorney of the county, may create a
"Back on Track" deferred entry of judgment reentry program
aimed at preventing recidivism among first-time nonviolent
felony drug offenders. No defendant who has been convicted
of a violation of a sex offense shall be eligible for the
CONTINUED
AB 1925
Page
4
program established in this chapter. 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" deferred
entry of judgment program pursuant to the provisions, as
specified. The agreement shall specify which low-level
nonviolent felony drug offenses under the Health and Safety
Code will be eligible for the program and a process for
selecting participants. The program shall have the
following characteristics:
1. A dedicated calendar.
2. Leadership by a superior court judicial officer who is
assigned by the presiding judge.
3. Clearly defined eligibility criteria to enter the
program and clearly defined criteria for completion of
the program.
4. Legal incentives for defendants to successfully complete
the program, including dismissal or reduction of
criminal charges upon successful completion of the
program.
5. Close supervision to hold participants accountable to
program compliance, including the use of graduated
sanctions and frequent, ongoing appearances before the
court regarding participants' program progress and
compliance with all program terms and conditions. The
court may use available legal mechanisms, including
return to custody if necessary, for failure to comply
with the supervised plan.
6. Appropriate transitional programming for participants,
based on available resources from county and community
service providers and other agencies. The transitional
programming may include, but is not limited to, any of
the following:
7. Vocational training, readiness, and placement.
8. Educational training, including assistance with
CONTINUED
AB 1925
Page
5
acquiring a GED or high school diploma and assistance
with admission to college.
9. Substance abuse treatment.
10.Assistance with obtaining identification cards and
driver's licenses.
11.Parenting skills training and assistance in becoming
compliant with child support obligations.
12.The program may develop a local, public-private
partnership between law enforcement, government
agencies, private employers, and community-based
organizations for the purpose of creating meaningful
employment opportunities for participants and to take
advantage of incentives for hiring program participants.
This bill:
1. Authorizes superior courts to develop and implement
veterans courts for eligible veterans of the United
States (U.S.) military with the objective of, among
other things, creation of a dedicated calendar or a
locally developed collaborative court-supervised
veterans mental health program or system that leads to
the placement of as many mentally ill offenders who are
veterans of the U.S. military, including those with
post-traumatic stress disorder, traumatic brain injury,
military sexual trauma, substance abuse, or any mental
health problem stemming from military service, in
community treatment as is feasible and consistent with
public safety.
2. Provides that county participation is voluntary.
3. Declares the intents of the Legislature that, where
there are statutory requirements for certain education
or counseling programs to be included in the terms of
probation, the components of those counseling terms is
required to be incorporated into the treatment programs
that are designed to treat the underlying psychological
disorders rather than requiring them in lieu of the
CONTINUED
AB 1925
Page
6
psychological treatments.
Background
UCSF and San Francisco VA Medical Center Study on Veterans
and PTSD . An article appearing in Science Daily (online)
on March 13, 2007, discussed a study conducted by the
University of California-San Francisco and the San
Francisco Veterans Affairs Medical Center finding that
approximately one-third of veterans returning from Iraq
received one or more mental health or psychosocial
diagnoses. The study appeared in the Journal of the
American Medical Association and Archives Journals.
Another study reported in the New England Journal of
Medicine in 2004 stated that the rate of post-traumatic
stress syndrome (PTSD) among Iraq and Afghanistan veterans
increased in a linear manner with increased exposure to
combat. (Hoge, Combat Duty in Iraq and Afghanistan, Mental
Health Problems, and Barriers to Care (2004) 351 N. Engl.
J. Med. 13-22.)
Studies also indicate that PTSD may drive or exacerbate
drug and alcohol abuse by veterans. (Stress & Substance
Abuse: A Special Report, National Institute on Drug Abuse
(Sept. 12, 2005).) Mental health and substance abuse
problems are linked to future incarceration in veterans.
In a Bureau of Justice study, 35 percent to 45 percent of
incarcerated veterans reported symptoms of mental health
disorders in the previous 12 months, including mania,
psychotic disorders, and major depressive episodes.
(Noonan & Mumola, U.S. Dep't of Justice, Veterans in State
and Federal Prison, 2004 (2007), p. 6.) Three-quarters of
veterans in state prisons reported past drug use and
one-quarter reported being on drugs at the time of the
offense for which they were incarcerated. (Id. at p. 5.)
Veterans are also more likely than non-veterans to report
past intravenous drug use. (Ibid; See also Badkhen,
Shelters Take Many Vets of Iraq, Afghan Wars, Boston Globe
(Aug. 7, 2007).)
It appears that veterans are disproportionately represented
in the prison population. Veterans make up 10% of state
prisoners. (Noonan & Mumola, supra, at p. 1.) By 2004,
veterans of the current conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan
CONTINUED
AB 1925
Page
7
already comprised 4% of the veterans in state and federal
prisons. (Ibid.)
Studies have concluded approximately two-thirds of mentally
ill prisoners receive no treatment. (James & Glaze, U.S.
Dep't of Just., Bureau of Just. Stats., Mental Health
Problems of Prison and Jail Inmates (Sept. 2006) pp. 1, 9.)
Providing meaningful mental health treatment has been
shown to significantly reduce recidivism rates, with
studies showing decreases of over 20 percent. (Wash. State
Inst. For Pub. Policy, Evidence-Based Policy Options to
Reduce Future Prison Construction, Criminal Justice Costs,
and Crime Rates (2006).)
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: No
Local: No
SUPPORT : (Verified 8/4/10)
Vietnam Veterans of America, California State Council
(source)
American Legion, Department of California
AMVETS Post 40 of Sonoma County
AMVETS, Department of California
California Association of County Veterans Service Officers
California Attorneys for Criminal Justice
California Psychiatric Association
California Psychological Association
California Public Defenders Association
California State Commanders Veterans Council
National Alliance on Mental Illness California
Public Counsel Law Center of Los Angeles
Swords to Plowshares
Veterans of Foreign Wars, Department of California
Veterans Village of San Diego
OPPOSITION : (Verified 8/4/10)
Crime Victims United of California
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : The author's office states,
"Veterans with combat-related mental illness in the
criminal justice system often face unique challenges which
traditional courts are often ill-equipped to address. AB
CONTINUED
AB 1925
Page
8
1925 modifies the California Penal Code to better address
the particular needs of veterans by providing a template
for the creation of new veterans' courts throughout the
state. AB 1925 sets the stage for the formalization of
relationships between judges, district attorneys, public
defenders, veterans' service agencies, residential
treatment organizations, and others. AB 1925 standardizes
the structure of veterans' courts and establishes a clear
process for the formation of new courts, while maintaining
local control over the establishment of these courts."
ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION : The Department of Finance
opposes this bill and writes the following, "Finance is
opposed to this measure because by creating a reimbursable
state-mandated local program, it would result in General
Fund costs that are not included in the Administration's
current fiscal plan. Additionally, it would create a
General Fund cost pressure for the courts and create the
expectation that these courts would be created. During
this time of limited resources and already decreased
capabilities to meet mandated workload,, Finance does not
believe imposing this workload and expectation of a new
program at this time is appropriate."
ASSEMBLY FLOOR :
AYES: Adams, Ammiano, Anderson, Arambula, Bass, Beall, Bill
Berryhill, Blakeslee, Block, Blumenfield, Bradford,
Brownley, Buchanan, Caballero, Charles Calderon, Carter,
Chesbro, Conway, Cook, Coto, Davis, De La Torre, De Leon,
DeVore, Emmerson, Eng, Evans, Feuer, Fletcher, Fong,
Fuentes, Fuller, Furutani, Gaines, Galgiani, Garrick,
Gilmore, Hagman, Hall, Harkey, Hayashi, Hernandez, Hill,
Huber, Huffman, Jeffries, Jones, Knight, Logue, Bonnie
Lowenthal, Ma, Mendoza, Miller, Monning, Nava, Nestande,
Niello, Nielsen, Norby, V. Manuel Perez, Portantino,
Ruskin, Salas, Saldana, Silva, Skinner, Smyth, Solorio,
Swanson, Torlakson, Torres, Torrico, Tran, Villines,
Yamada, John A. Perez
NO VOTE RECORDED: Tom Berryhill, Lieu, Audra Strickland,
Vacancy
CTW:TSM:do 8/4/10 Senate Floor Analyses
CONTINUED
AB 1925
Page
9
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****
CONTINUED