BILL ANALYSIS
AB 2350
Page 1
Date of Hearing: April 6, 2010
Counsel: Gabriel Caswell
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC SAFETY
Tom Ammiano, Chair
AB 2350 (Hill) - As Amended: April 5, 2010
SUMMARY : Provides that all juveniles held as status offenders
may only be held for 24 hours with the exception of those
out-of-state runaways being held pursuant to the Interstate
Compact on Juveniles (ICJ). Specifically, this bill :
1)Eliminates the provision of existing law which states that
status offenders may be held up to 24 hours after having been
taken into custody, in order to locate the minor's parent or
guardian as soon as possible and to arrange the return of the
minor to his or her parent or guardian, whose parent or
guardian is a resident outside of California wherein the minor
was taken into custody, except that the period may be extended
to no more than 72 hours when the return of the minor cannot
reasonably be accomplished within 24 hours due to the distance
of the parents or guardian from the county of custody,
difficulty in locating the parents or guardian, or difficulty
in locating resources necessary to provide for the return of
the minor.
2)Clarifies those minors who are out of state runaways being
held pursuant to the ICJ, in accordance with the Juvenile
Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act of 2002.
EXISTING LAW :
1)Provides that no minor shall be detained in any jail, lockup,
juvenile hall, or other secure facility who is taken into
custody solely upon the ground that he or she is a status
offender or adjudged to be such or made a ward of the juvenile
court solely upon that ground, except as provided in Welfare
and Institutions Code (WIC) Section 207(b). If such an
offender is detained, he or she shall be detained in a
sheltered-care facility or crisis resolution home as provided
for as specified, or in a non-secure facility provided for as
specified. [WIC Section 207(a).]
AB 2350
Page 2
2)States that a minor taken into custody upon the ground that he
or she is a status offender, or adjudged to be a ward of the
juvenile court solely upon that ground, may be held in a
secure facility, other than a facility in which adults are
held in secure custody, in any of the following circumstances
[WIC Section 207(b)]:
a) For up to 12 hours after having been taken into custody
for the purpose of determining if there are any outstanding
wants, warrants, or holds against the minor in cases where
the arresting officer or probation officer has cause to
believe that the wants, warrants, or holds exist. [WIC
Section 207(b)(1).]
b) For up to 24 hours after having been taken into custody,
in order to locate the minor's parent or guardian as soon
as possible and to arrange the return of the minor to his
or her parent or guardian. [WIC Section 207(b)(2).]
c) For up to 24 hours after having been taken into custody,
in order to locate the minor's parent or guardian as soon
as possible and to arrange the return of the minor to his
or her parent or guardian, whose parent or guardian is a
resident outside of California wherein the minor was taken
into custody, except that the period may be extended to no
more than 72 hours when the return of the minor cannot
reasonably be accomplished within 24 hours due to the
distance of the parents or guardian from the county of
custody, difficulty in locating the parents or guardian, or
difficulty in locating resources necessary to provide for
the return of the minor. [WIC Section 207(b)(3).]
3)States that any minor detained in juvenile hall pursuant to
WIC Section 207(b) may not be permitted to come or remain in
contact with any person detained on the basis that he or she
has been taken into custody upon the ground that he or she is
a person described as specified or adjudged to be such or made
a ward of the juvenile court upon that ground. [WIC Section
207(c).]
4)Provides that minors detained in juvenile hall as specified
may be held in the same facility provided they are not
permitted to come or remain in contact within that facility.
[WIC Section 207(d).]
AB 2350
Page 3
5)States that every county shall keep a record of each minor
detained under WIC Section 207(b) of, the place and length of
time of the detention, and the reasons why the detention was
necessary. Every county shall report this information to the
Board of Corrections on a monthly basis, on forms to be
provided by that agency. The Board shall not disclose the
name of the detainee, or any personally identifying
information contained in reports sent to the Youth Authority
under this subdivision. [WIC Section 207(e).]
FISCAL EFFECT : Unknown
COMMENTS :
1)Author's Statement : According to the author, "AB 2350 will
conform California statutes to federal funding standards to
avoid any loss of federal money coming to the state. It does
so by clarifying that the maximum time spent by a non-ICJ
status offender is 24 hours, and that an ICJ status offender
is held no more than currently allowed limit at 72 hours."
2)Background : According to the background submitted by the
author, "In the mid 1950s, a number of federal public safety
and juvenile interest entities worked together to create the
ICJ, with the purpose of creating a system whereby status
offenders across state lines could be returned to their
families. In 1982, the federal government passed the Juvenile
Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act (JJDP Act) as a means
to fund ICJ activities. By 1986, the ICJ was adopted by all
50 states, the District of Columbia, the Virgin Islands, and
Guam.
"In 2008, an audit by the Federal government's Office of
Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) found that
California was out of compliance with its regulations because
it stated that an out-of-state status offender could be held
in custody for up to 72 hours. This was out of compliance
with federal funding guidelines, which stated that a status
offender should be held for no more than 24 hours except if
being held pursuant to the ICJ.
"As a rule, the California Department of Corrections and
Rehabilitation (CDCR) keeps its status offenders in custody
for the least amount of time possible. Now, especially with
AB 2350
Page 4
prison overcrowding and expensive bed space, CDCR has an
incentive to move status offenders out of custody as quickly
as possible.
"However, due to the statutory inconsistency, the OJJDP has
found that California is not in compliance with federal law,
and therefore will be ineligible for federal grants. The
audit suggested that a statutory change be made to correct the
discrepancy.
"If California becomes ineligible, it will lose a significant
amount of funding for juvenile crime prevention. California
gets the largest amount of funding, with $7,272,000 in the
2009 fiscal year alone."
3)Status Offenders : This bill affects minors who are
essentially runaways or habitual truants. These are minors
under the age of 18 years of age who persistently or
habitually refuse to obey reasonable and proper orders or
directions of his or her parents, guardian, or custodian.
Likewise, if a minor has four or more truancies within one
school year, he or she falls under this status offender
category.
4)Compliance Monitoring and Audit Report : CDCR and the
Corrections Standards Authority conducted an audit on whether
California is in compliance with the deinstitutionalization of
status offenders, and the jail and lockup removal provisions
of the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act of
2002. In order for the State of California to continue to
receive Title 2 funds, it must stay in compliance with the
Act.
The audit found that WIC Section 207 holds that a juvenile
status offender may be held securely in a juvenile detention
center for up to 72 hours in some circumstances. Because WIC
Section 207 does not limit the time status offenders may be
securely held to 24 hours prior to and immediately following
the initial hearing, this provision was found to be in
conflict with the Deinstitutionalization of Status Offenders
provision of the Juvenile Justice Delinquency Act of 2002.
The audit further found that as most judges, intake workers, and
other local facility staff are familiar with and will give
precedence to state law, the provision permitting a 72-hour
AB 2350
Page 5
hold is likely to increase violations of federal
Deinstitutionalization of Status Offenders (DSO) requirements.
In addition, when a state's DSO rate exceeds 5.7 but is less
than 29.4 per 100,000 juveniles, a finding of compliance with
de minimis exceptions requires that all or substantially all
of the state's noncompliant incidents are in violation of
state law. The state's eligibility to claim the de mimimis
requirements on its annual compliance monitoring report is,
therefore, diminished by this provision.
The audit recommended that the State of California Legislature
change WIC Section 207 to more fully comport with the federal
act.
This bill eliminates the ability of these minors to be held for
72 hours and limits the time to 24 hours. The exceptions to
this provision are minors who fall within the provisions of
WIC Section 1400 and the ICJ. Those minors are subject to the
same provisions as current law.
5)Interstate Compact on Juveniles : Under this bill, the only
exception to the 24-hour maximum detention rule for out of
state runaway minors are those minors who fall under the ICJ.
Section 600 of the ICJ addresses the return of juveniles.
Rules 6-102 and 6-103 address the return of out-of-state
juvenile runaways.
a) Rule 6-102: Voluntary Return of Out-of-State Juveniles :
Once an out-of-state juvenile is found and detained, the
following procedures shall apply:
i) The holding state's ICJ Office shall be advised of
the juvenile detainment. The holding state's ICJ Office
shall contact the home state's ICJ Office advising it of
case specifics.
ii) The home state's ICJ Office shall immediately
initiate measures to determine the juvenile's residency
and jurisdictional facts in that state.
iii) At a court hearing, the judge in the holding state
shall inform the juvenile of his/her rights under the
ICJ. The court may elect to appoint counsel or a
guardian ad litem to represent the juvenile in this
process.
AB 2350
Page 6
iv) If in agreement with the return, the juvenile will
sign a form consenting to voluntary return.
v) Once consent has been executed, it shall be
forwarded to the Compact Administrator of the holding
state who shall forward it to the Compact Administrator
of the home state.
vi) The home state shall recognize the orders of the
holding state.
vii) Juveniles are to be returned home in a safe manner
within five working days of receipt of the completed
consent. This time period can be extended to an
additional five working days with the consent of both ICJ
offices.
b) Rule 6-103: Non-Voluntary Return of Out-of-State
Juveniles : The following rules shall apply to any juvenile
who refuses to voluntarily be returned to his or her home
state or whose whereabouts is known, but is not in custody:
i) The appropriate person or authority in the
home/demanding state shall prepare a written requisition
within 60 days of notification of refusal of the juvenile
to sign the consent form or the return of a juvenile who
has refused to voluntarily return or to request that a
court take into custody a juvenile that is allegedly
located in their jurisdiction.
ii) Juveniles held in detention, pending receipt of a
requisition, may be held for a maximum of 90 days . The
home/demanding state's office shall maintain regular
contact with the authorities preparing the requisition to
ensure accurate preparation and timely delivery of said
documents to minimize detention time.
iii) If the juvenile is a non-delinquent runaway, the
parent/legal guardian or custodial agency must petition
the court of jurisdiction in the home state for
requisition.
(1) The judge in the home state shall determine
AB 2350
Page 7
if:
(a) The petitioner is entitled to legal
custody of the juvenile;
(b) The juvenile ran away without consent;
(c) The juvenile is an emancipated minor; and,
(d) It is in the best interest of the juvenile
to compel his/her return to the state.
(2) If it is determined that the juvenile should
be returned the judge in the home state shall sign the
requisition.
6)Interstate Compact on Juveniles Background : Forty states have
adopted the ICJ to date. The purpose of the ICJ centers on
ensuring adequate supervision and services for juvenile
offenders; ensuring that the public safety interests of
citizens and victims are adequately protected; and providing
systems, procedures and equitably allocated costs and benefits
for addressing these interests between compacting states. The
new compact was enacted in California in 2009 and thereby
committed California's fidelity to a multi-state process for
promulgating and enforcing rules and regulations governing the
interstate movement of juveniles under the jurisdiction of the
juvenile court. The ICJ essentially delegated the rulemaking
authority for the movement of juveniles in the juvenile
justice system to an interstate commission. This model
closely follows the current Interstate Compact for Adult
Offender Supervision contained in Penal Code Section 11180.
7)California Data: Numbers of Juveniles Handled Pursuant to the
ICJ : According to CDCR, as of 2009 the following cases were
under the former Interstate Compact:
a) Total Active Cases (under the Compact) as of current
date: (approximately) 2,403. This number includes 2,300
county probation cases [2,224 county probation cases
through May 2009, plus approximately 100 more added in June
= 2,300, plus 103 Department of Juvenile Justice (DJJ)
parole cases].
b) The number of cases processed from July 1, 2008 through
AB 2350
Page 8
June 12, 2009: 1,054 county probation cases (650 going out
of California and 404 coming into California) and parole
cases (two outgoing from institutions and seven incoming)
per month (times
12 months) = is estimated at 84 per year.
c) Runaways: DJJ's Interstate Unit processes approximately
60 runaway cases per month [not included in the "number of
cases processed" referenced in item (b) above].
d) Extraditions/out-of-state arrests: DJJ's Interstate
Unit handles all these cases; however, numbers are not
available.
8)Argument in Support : None submitted.
9)Argument in Opposition: According to the Youth Law Center ,
"[c]hildren who have run away from home are considered 'status
offenders' and, because they have not committed a crime, they
cannot be held in locked facilities except in strictly
prescribed circumstances. (Calif. Welf. & Inst. Code 207.)
Runaway children from California may be held for only 24
hours, in order to locate their parent or guardian and to
arrange their return (207, subd. (b)(2)); and under current
law, children from out of state may only be held for 24 hours
and an additional 72 hours 'when the return of the minor
cannot reasonably be accomplished within 24 hours due to the
distance of the parents or guardian from the county of
custody, difficulty in locating the parent or guardian, or
difficulty in locating resources necessary to provide for the
return of the minor.' (Cal. Welf. & Inst. Code 207, subd.
(b)(3).) This Bill would completely do away with the time
limits for out-of-state children.
"The bill makes reference to Welfare and Institutions Code
section 1400, California's enactment of the Interstate
Compact on Juveniles, but we are unable to find any time
limits specifically referenced in that legislation, which was
enacted by the Legislature in 2009. (A.B.1053.) In fact,
that legislation addresses only the governance aspect of the
Interstate Compact, not its substance. The previously
existing Compact, which was at Welfare and Institutions Code
section 1300 et seq., was repealed by A.B. 1053. Moreover,
the current enactment is only in place temporarily, and will
be repealed on January 1, 2012, unless additional legislation
AB 2350
Page 9
is enacted. ( 1403.)
"The bottom line is that by repealing existing time limits on
transfer of runaways to their home state, we will be left with
nothing to limit incarceration of out-of-state children. This
is obviously bad for the children, who, by definition, have
committed no crime, and it results in an unnecessary
expenditure of public resources on detention at a time when
every penny counts. So, if this is being motivated by
California's recent decision to join the new Interstate
Compact on Juveniles, it goes too far. The Compact, which
governs transfers of children in delinquency and status
offender cases among the states, has specific provisions for
voluntary and non-voluntary returns of children from other
states which appear nowhere in California law.
"Under the Rules and Regulations for the Interstate Compact on
Juveniles for voluntary returns, the sending state must have
policies in place to assure their 'safe and expedient' return
to their home state. (Rule 6-104.) In providing for transfer
within 4 days, California's current law provides for such a
process, but removing all time limits would not meet that
requirement. A copy of the Rules and Regulations is included
herewith for the Committee's convenience.
"California needs to take a closer look at the interplay between
the Interstate Compact on Juveniles and State law protections
before eliminating this important protection for runaway
children. Apart from the issue of time limits, the Compact
includes requirements for due process -- presumably
appointment of counsel and court hearings - that California
law does not specifically address with respect to these
children, who are held without formal court proceedings.
"Because California will be dealing with many other Interstate
Compact issues when it decides whether to extend its
involvement some time next year, we urge that the issues
involved in A.B. 2350 be tabled until such time as they may be
considered as a part of California's over all legislation on
the Interstate Compact on Juveniles. At the present time, we
think the Bill is ill-conceived and urge a 'No' vote. Thank
you for your consideration."
10)Related Legislation : AB 1053 (Solorio), Chapter 268,
Statutes of 2009, enact a new ICJ.
AB 2350
Page 10
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION :
Support
California District Attorneys Association
Opposition
Youth Law Center
Analysis Prepared by : Gabriel Caswell / PUB. S. / (916)
319-3744