BILL ANALYSIS �
------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | AB 1281|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 445-6614 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: AB 1281
Author: Garrick (R)
Amended: 4/25/11 in Assembly
Vote: 21
SENATE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE : 7-0, 6/14/11
AYES: Hancock, Anderson, Calderon, Harman, Liu, Price,
Steinberg
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 71-0, 5/5/11 - See last page for vote
SUBJECT : Parole hearings: audioconferencing
SOURCE : San Diego County District Attorney
DIGEST : This bill allows prosecutors, victims, family
members of victims, and designated victim representatives
to appear at "lifer" parole hearings through
audioconferencing, if audioconferencing is available.
ANALYSIS : Existing law declares that a victim, next of
kin, members of the victim's family, and two
representatives, as specified, have the right to appear,
personally or by counsel, at a hearing considering parole
suitability or the setting of a parole date and to
adequately and reasonably express their views concerning
the prisoner and the case, as specified. (Penal Code �PEN]
Section 3043, subd. (b)(1))
Existing law grants a life-term prisoner the right counsel
CONTINUED
AB 1281
Page
2
at a hearing for setting, postponing or rescinding a parole
date. The Board of Parole Hearings (BPH) must provide by
rule for the invitation of the prosecutor to represent the
interests of the people at the hearing. BPH shall notify
the prosecutor and the Attorney General at least 30 days
prior to the date of the hearing. The prosecutor shall be
the sole representative of the interests of the People.
(PEN Section 3041.7)
Existing law states that the victim, next of kin, immediate
family members or a designated representative and the
prosecutor may appear by means of videoconferencing, if it
is available at the hearing site. Videoconferencing is
defined as live transmission of audio and video signals
from one physical location to another. (PEN Section
3043.25)
Existing law defines immediate family as the victim's
spouse, parent, grandparent, brother, sister, and children
or grandchildren who are related by blood, marriage or
adoption. (PEN Section 3043.3)
Existing law permits the victim, next of kin, immediate
family, or two designated representatives to file with BPH
a written, audiotaped or videotaped statement, or statement
stored on another recording medium accepted by a court,
expressing his/her views concerning the crime and the
person responsible, as specified. BPH shall consider these
statements prior to reaching a decision. (PEN Section
3043.2)
Existing law mandates that BPH, in deciding whether to
release a person on parole, must consider the entire and
uninterrupted statements of the victim or victims, next of
kin, immediate family members of the victim and the
designated representatives. (PEN Section 3043, subd. (d))
Existing law states that any person interested in the grant
or denial of parole to a prisoner in a state prison has the
right to submit a statement of views in support of or
opposition to the granting of parole.
Existing law provides that the BPH, in deciding whether to
release the person on parole, shall review all information
CONTINUED
AB 1281
Page
3
received from the public to insure that the gravity and
timing of all current or past convicted offenses have been
given adequate consideration and to insure that the safety
of the public has been adequately considered. (PEN Section
3043.5, subd. (b))
Existing law (California Constitution Article 1 Section 28
(b)(7), (15) and (16)) declares that in order to preserve
and protect a victim's rights to justice and due process, a
victim shall be entitled to the following rights:
1. To reasonable notice of all public proceedings,
including delinquency proceedings, upon request, at
which the defendant and the prosecutor are entitled to
be present and of all parole or other post-conviction
release proceedings, and to be present at all such
proceedings.
2. To be informed of all parole procedures, to participate
in the parole process, to provide information to the
parole authority to be considered before the parole of
the offender, and to be notified, upon request, of the
parole or other release of the offender.
3. To have the safety of the victim, the victim's family
and the general public considered before a parole or
other post-judgment release decision is made.
This bill provides that parties with the right to appear at
parole hearings, including prosecutors, victims, family
members of victims and victim representatives, as
specified, have the right to appear via audioconferencing,
if audioconferencing is available.
This bill defines "audioconferencing" as the live
transmission of audio signals by any means from one
physical location to another.
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: No
Local: No
SUPPORT : (Verified 6/14/11)
San Diego County District Attorney (source)
CONTINUED
AB 1281
Page
4
Crime Victims United of California
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : According to the author:
"Penal Code Section 3043.25 is the statute governing the
prosecutor's right to appear at a parole hearing via
video conferencing. In many cases, video conferencing is
not available at the hearing site, or breaks down at the
last minute. In some cases the inmate does not have a
good chance of receiving a parole grant, and in those
circumstances the cost to personally attend the hearing
outweighs the benefits associated with personal
attendance. This amendment would provide that in those
situations a speaker phone, or other device, could be
used to allow audio conferencing as well as video
conferencing at parole hearings. Used wisely, this
additional option could save money and still give us a
voice at appropriate hearings. Although the Board of
Parole Hearings has allowed audio conferencing many times
at parole hearings, it is not done consistently. A
change in the law would correct this and allow for this
option at the prosecutor's discretion so long as a
speaker phone is available at the hearing site."
The San Diego District Attorney, sponsor of this bill,
argues that while existing law allows prosecutors to appear
at parole hearings by video conference, video conferencing
equipment is often not available for hearings. In such a
situation a prosecutor must travel to the hearing. Parole
hearings may be held at prisons across the state. In 2010,
San Diego prosecutors appeared at 335 lifer parole
hearings. The cost of travel can range from $90 to $1,000.
Even video conferencing is itself relatively expensive -
averaging about $170 per hearing. Audioconferencing is
much less costly than personal appearances or
videoconferencing. The average cost of an audio conference
is $15.
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 71-0, 5/5/11
AYES: Achadjian, Allen, Ammiano, Atkins, Beall, Bill
Berryhill, Block, Blumenfield, Bonilla, Bradford,
Brownley, Buchanan, Butler, Charles Calderon, Campos,
Carter, Cedillo, Chesbro, Conway, Cook, Davis, Dickinson,
CONTINUED
AB 1281
Page
5
Donnelly, Eng, Feuer, Fletcher, Fong, Fuentes, Galgiani,
Gatto, Gordon, Grove, Hagman, Halderman, Harkey, Hayashi,
Roger Hern�ndez, Hill, Huber, Hueso, Huffman, Jeffries,
Knight, Lara, Logue, Bonnie Lowenthal, Ma, Mendoza,
Miller, Mitchell, Monning, Morrell, Nestande, Norby,
Olsen, Pan, Perea, V. Manuel P�rez, Portantino, Silva,
Skinner, Smyth, Solorio, Swanson, Torres, Valadao,
Wagner, Wieckowski, Williams, Yamada, John A. P�rez
NO VOTE RECORDED: Alejo, Furutani, Garrick, Gorell, Hall,
Jones, Mansoor, Nielsen, Vacancy
RJG:kc 6/14/11 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****
CONTINUED