BILL ANALYSIS �
SENATE COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC SAFETY
Senator Loni Hancock, Chair S
2011-2012 Regular Session B
2
1
0
SB 210 (Hancock)
As Amended January 4, 2012
Hearing date: January 10, 2012
Penal Code
AA:mc
DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION:
COMMUNITY PRISONER MOTHER PROGRAM
HISTORY
Source: Author
Prior Legislation: AB 512 (Goggin) - Ch. 1054, Stats. of 1978
Support: California Attorneys for Criminal Justice
Opposition:None known
KEY ISSUE
SHOULD ELIGIBILITY FOR THE "COMMUNITY PRISONER MOTHER PROGRAM" IN
CDCR BE BROADENED BY EXCLUDING CONVICTIONS FOR PLANTING,
CULTIVATING, HARVESTING, DRYING, OR PROCESSING MARIJUANA OR
POSSESSION FOR SALE OF MARIJUANA AS DISQUALIFYING CRIMES FOR THIS
PROGRAM, AS SPECIFIED?
PURPOSE
(More)
SB 210 (Hancock)
PageB
The purpose of this bill is to broaden eligibility for the
"Community Prisoner Mother Program" in CDCR by excluding
convictions for planting, cultivating, harvesting, drying, or
processing marijuana or possession for sale of marijuana as
disqualifying crimes for this program, as specified.
Current law creates in state government the Department of
Corrections and Rehabilitation ("CDCR"), headed by a secretary
who is appointed by the Governor, subject to Senate
confirmation, and serves at the pleasure of the Governor. CDCR
consists of Adult Operations, Adult Programs, Juvenile Justice,
the Corrections Standards Authority, the Board of Parole
Hearings, the State Commission on Juvenile Justice, the Prison
Industry Authority, and the Prison Industry Board. (Government
Code � 12838 (a).)
Current law provides that "the supervision, management and
control of the state prisons, and the responsibility for the
care, custody, treatment, training, discipline and employment of
persons
confined therein are vested in the Secretary of the Department
of Corrections and Rehabilitation." (Penal Code � 5054.)
Current law requires CDCR to establish and implement what is
called the "Community Prisoner Mother Program" ("CPMP"),
described in statute as "a community treatment program under
which women inmates sentenced to state prison . . . who have one
or more children under the age of six years . . . shall be
eligible to participate within the provisions of this section.
The community treatment program shall provide for the release of
the mother and child or children to a public or private facility
in the community suitable to the needs of the mother and child
or children, and which will provide the best possible care for
the mother and child. In establishing and operating such
program, the department shall have as a prime concern the
establishment of a safe and wholesome environment for the
participating children." (Penal Code � 3411.)
Current law requires CDCR to deny placement in the CPMP if it
(More)
SB 210 (Hancock)
PageC
determines that an inmate would pose an unreasonable risk to the
public, or if any one of specified factors exist, except in
unusual circumstances or if mitigating circumstances exist,
including, but not limited to, the remoteness in time of the
commission of the offense. Exclusionary factors include the
inmate having been convicted of any of the following:
A sex offense listed in Section 667.6.
A sex offense requiring registration pursuant
to Section 290.
A violent offense listed in subdivision (c) of
Section 667.5.
Arson as defined in Sections 450 to 455,
inclusive.
The unlawful sale or possession for sale,
manufacture, or transportation of controlled
substances, as specified, if large scale and for
profit, as defined by the department. (Penal Code �
3417(b).)
This bill would exclude convictions for planting, cultivating,
harvesting, drying, or processing marijuana or possession for
sale of marijuana, from this list of disqualifying crimes.
(Specifically, convictions under sections 11358 or 11359 of the
Health and Safety Code would be expressly excluded from this
list.)
RECEIVERSHIP/OVERCROWDING CRISIS AGGRAVATION
For the last several years, severe overcrowding in California's
prisons has been the focus of evolving and expensive litigation.
As these cases have progressed, prison conditions have
continued to be assailed, and the scrutiny of the federal courts
over California's prisons has intensified.
On June 30, 2005, in a class action lawsuit filed four years
earlier, the United States District Court for the Northern
District of California established a Receivership to take
(More)
SB 210 (Hancock)
PageD
control of the delivery of medical services to all California
state prisoners confined by the California Department of
Corrections and Rehabilitation ("CDCR"). In December of 2006,
plaintiffs in two federal lawsuits against CDCR sought a
court-ordered limit on the prison population pursuant to the
federal Prison Litigation Reform Act. On January 12, 2010, a
three-judge federal panel issued an order requiring California
to reduce its inmate population to 137.5 percent of design
capacity -- a reduction at that time of roughly 40,000 inmates
-- within two years. The court stayed implementation of its
ruling pending the state's appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.
On May 23, 2011, the United States Supreme Court upheld the
decision of the three-judge panel in its entirety, giving
California two years from the date of its ruling to reduce its
prison population to 137.5 percent of design capacity, subject
to the right of the state to seek modifications in appropriate
circumstances.
In response to the unresolved prison capacity crisis, in early
2007 the Senate Committee on Public Safety began holding
legislative proposals which could further exacerbate prison
overcrowding through new or expanded felony prosecutions.
This bill does not aggravate the prison overcrowding crisis
described above.
COMMENTS
1. Background - The Community Prisoner Mother and Family
Foundation Programs
California statute currently provides for two CDCR programs
targeting essentially the same inmate population: female inmates
who are mothers of young children. The "Community Prisoner
Mother Program" ("CPMP") was established in 1978, AB 512
(Goggin), Ch. 1054, and the "Pregnant and Parenting Women's
Alternative Sentencing Program Act," known as the Family
Foundations Program ("FFP") was enacted in 1994, SB 519
(More)
SB 210 (Hancock)
PageE
(Presley) Ch. 63, Stats. 1994. In 1993, when he presented SB
519 to the Assembly Public Safety Committee,
Senator Presley stated:
During the past several years, there has been a
dramatic increase in the number of incarcerated women
who are single mothers or primary caretakers of
children. Without intervention, children of
incarcerated women have a significantly
(More)
increased likelihood of entering the child welfare and
juvenile justice systems, becoming school dropouts,
substance abusers, and pregnant as adolescents.
Female offenders and their children are presently
being provided services from a disjointed network of
social services, medical providers, and correctional
practitioners. A lack of local coordination often
contributes to the duplication of services and results
in few cost effective, concentrated efforts directed
at this population. Too much cost, too little
service.<1>
Currently, the total population at the FFPs is 42 (capacity is
70), and the CPMP total population is 32 (capacity is 47).
These programs serve the same inmate population, with the
following slight variations and similarities:
-----------------------------------------------------------------
| Family Foundations Program | Community Prisoner Mother |
| (FFP) | Program |
| | (CPMP) |
|--------------------------------+--------------------------------|
| Court ordered | CDCR placement |
| | Sentence no greater |
| | than 6 years & not less |
| | than 90 days remaining |
| | Receive work/behavioral |
| Sentence no greater | credits (day for day |
| than 3 years, reduced to 1 | credits) |
| year | Children can live with |
| | the mother |
| No work/behavioral | One custodial staff |
| credits (no day for day | 23-24 beds per facility |
| credits) | |
| | Leased/contracted |
| Children can live with | facilities |
---------------------------
<1> Analysis of SB 519 (Presley) prepared by the Assembly
Committee on Public Safety (July 13, 1993).
(More)
SB 210 (Hancock)
PageG
| the mother | Vocational & parenting |
| | skills |
| | Substance abuse |
| | prevention |
| One custodial staff | Family reunification |
| | |
| |Counseling |
| | |
| | |
| 35 beds per facility | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| State owned facilities | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| Vocational & parenting | |
| skills | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| Substance abuse | |
| treatment | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| Family reunification | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| Trauma-informed mental | |
| health services | |
| | |
| | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
SB 210 (Hancock)
PageH
2. What This Bill Would Do
As explained above, this bill would broaden eligibility for the
CPMP program by excluding convictions for planting, cultivating,
harvesting, drying, or processing marijuana or possession for
sale of marijuana as crimes that could disqualify an inmate for
this program.
3. Suggested Additional Review
Because the CPMP and FFP programs essentially target the same
populations, the author may wish to explore further amendments
to this bill with the administration and knowledgeable
stakeholders to identify how these programs might be merged and
further revised in a manner consistent with their historic
purposes, successful outcomes, and the criminal justice
realignment of 2011.
***************