BILL ANALYSIS �
AB 2089
Page 1
Date of Hearing: May 2, 2012
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Felipe Fuentes, Chair
AB 2089 (Alejo) - As Amended: April 11, 2012
Policy Committee: Public
SafetyVote: 4-2
Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program:
Reimbursable: Yes
SUMMARY
This bill authorizes a peace officer who takes a minor into
temporary custody to issue a civil citation if the minor has not
committed a previous offense. Specifically, this bill:
1)Requires the officer, upon issuing a civil citation, to notify
the probation department, the prosecutor, the minor's parents
or guardian, and the victim of the offense.
2)Requires the minor to report to the probation department
within seven days of the citation.
3)Requires probation to conduct a risk and needs assessment of
the minor. Following the assessment, the probation department
shall require the minor to serve no more than 50 hours of
community service, and may require the minor to participate in
intervention services. At the end of the minor's civil
citation program, probation shall prepare and maintain a
report.
4)Requires probation, if the minor fails to report to probation,
fails to complete community service, fails to comply with
assigned intervention services or commits a subsequent
offense, to present an affidavit describing the facts of the
original offense to the prosecuting attorney.
5)Specifies a minor cited under this section may refuse the
civil citation and return to temporary custody for processing
under current law.
FISCAL EFFECT
AB 2089
Page 2
Unknown reimbursable GF costs, potentially in excess of
$150,000, to county probation departments to the extent this
bill requires risk and needs assessments, and subsequent
counseling and treatment services, for youths who otherwise
might not be cited at all. In addition, mandatory community
service and preparation of referrals to district attorneys for
program failure will create additional probation workload.
Costs will depend on the number of youth cited.
COMMENTS
1)Rationale . The author's intent is to provide a more efficient
disposition for minors commit minor acts of delinquency. The
author has modeled this proposal on a similar program
operating in Florida.
According to the author, "Starting in 2007, the Florida county
of Miami-Dade has successfully administered the Civil Citation
Program that allows officer to circumvent arrests of minors
who have committed a minor first-time misdemeanor offense. As
an alternative to arrest, an officer refers eligible minors to
a county juvenile justice department where they receive an
assessment and application of appropriate, targeted
interventions?.
"Bringing this model to California allows for a change in the
systemic prevention model by allowing minors to attain
complete targeted treatment services outside of the systems
that currently exist and without the shame of a criminal
record. This bill would create the opportunity for cost
savings, decreased arrests will reduce the time and resources
spent on law enforcement, state attorneys, public defenders,
probation, and court personnel."
2)Concerns. Several prominent juvenile justice organizations,
while citing the positive intent of the author, oppose the
bill for the following reasons:
a) The bill is unnecessary. Probation departments already
have the ability to divert minors from the criminal justice
system through community service, counseling, and informal
probation.
b) The bill will likely result in net-widening. Allowing
AB 2089
Page 3
peace officers to issue a civil citation, rather than
counseling and releasing, will likely add more minors to
the system.
c) The bill reduces the discretion of probation officers by
requiring risk and needs assessments and requiring
community service.
d) Cost. Risk and needs assessments, monitory mandatory
community service, and requiring probation referrals to the
district attorney add potentially significant costs to
probation department workloads that are currently straining
under budget cuts and correctional realignment.
3)Support . According to the California Catholic Conference, this
bill "allows officers to circumvent arrests of minors who have
committed a minor first-time misdemeanor offense?. Bringing
this model to California allows for a change in the systematic
prevention model by allowing minors to attain complete
treatment services in venues that are outside of the systems
that currently respond and without shame of a criminal
record."
4)Opposition . This bill is opposed by the California District
Attorneys Association (CDAA), and several juvenile justice
organizations.
a) According to CDAA, "Unfortunately, it is unclear what
this bill is attempting to achieve. Under current law, less
onerous (on the minor) mechanisms and procedures are
available that achieve the same result. While this might
be an attempt to decriminalize misdemeanors committed by
minors who are first-time offenders, under Welfare and
Institutions Code section 654, the probation officer
already has the discretion on first-time misdemeanants
(subject to certain exceptions) to divert the minor into a
maximum six-month program of informal supervision, which
can include community service and intervention services.
b) According to the Commonweal Juvenile Justice Program,
"The bill requires the minor to appear before the probation
officer within 7 days-a relatively short period of
compliance. Upon appearance, the probation officer must
conduct a risk and needs assessment-whether the case
warrants that level of intervention in the officer's
AB 2089
Page 4
judgment, or not. In this sense, AB 2089 eliminates the
probation officer's current discretion, upon investigation,
to decline further action by not filing a petition.
Furthermore, the bill challenges due process concepts by
stating that "Following the assessment, the probation
department shall require the minor to serve" up to 50 hours
of community service, with other discretionary probation
sanctions. This is like the old saw that goes, "We'll
give you fair trial and then hang you". No child should
have mandatory sanctions imposed without some opportunity
to consult an attorney or deny the allegations. No
probation officer should be required by law to impose
sanctions that he or she may not believe to be necessary
based on the circumstances of the case or the results of an
assessment."
Analysis Prepared by : Geoff Long / APPR. / (916) 319-2081