BILL ANALYSIS �
SB 210
Page 1
SENATE THIRD READING
SB 210 (Hancock)
As Amended August 7, 2012
Majority vote
SENATE VOTE :32-5
PUBLIC SAFETY 4-1
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Ayes:|Ammiano, Cedillo, | | |
| |Mitchell, Skinner | | |
| | | | |
|-----+--------------------------+-----+--------------------------|
|Nays:|Knight | | |
| | | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY : Specifies that a court shall determine, with public
safety as the primary consideration, whether a defendant charged
with a jail felony is eligible for release on his or her own
recognizance (OR). Specifically, this bill :
1)Authorizes the court, in its discretion, to consider imposing
any of the following conditions or any other reasonable
condition that the court deems appropriate when granting OR
release to ensure public safety and to ensure the defendant's
appearance, as required:
a) Mandatory reporting to the county, a designated law
enforcement agency, county probation department, or other
local governmental agency;
b) Prohibiting contact with alleged victims or potential
witnesses who may testify concerning the offense;
c) Restricting locations, places of abode, and travel;
d) Specifying curfew;
e) Restricting consumption of alcohol; and,
f) Home detention, with or without electronic monitoring.
2)States if the court finds that the imposition of one or more
SB 210
Page 2
of the specified conditions, or any other reasonable condition
the court deems appropriate, would reasonably ensure the
defendant's appearance, as required, and the defendant's
release would not compromise public safety, the court may
release the defendant on OR subject to those conditions.
3)Provides if the judge or magistrate finds that OR release will
compromise public safety or will not reasonably ensure the
appearance of the defendant, as required, the court then set
bail as is reasonably necessary to ensure the appearance of
the defendant.
4)States that a judge or magistrate may set bail in an amount
less than what is specified in the county bail schedule, where
he or she determines that the amount specified in the county
bail schedule is higher than necessary to reasonably ensure
the appearance of the defendant. In making this
determination, the court may consider information included in
a pretrial services report, if one is available.
5)Revises the factors that a judge or magistrate would be
required to consider in setting, reducing or denying bail, and
states that those factors must also be considered when
determining conditions for pretrial release.
6)Lists the following factors that the judge or magistrate may
consider when considering the history and characteristics of
the defendant:
a) The ties of the defendant to the community, including
his or her employment, the duration of his or her
residence, and the defendant's family attachments;
b) The defendant's current educational or vocational
program enrollment and participation; and,
c) The physical and mental condition of the defendant and
the defendant's history related to dependence on alcohol or
controlled substances, including past and current
participation in substance abuse programs and counseling.
7)Provides that in considering the nature and circumstances of
the offense charged, the judge or magistrate shall include
consideration of the seriousness of the offense, the alleged
SB 210
Page 3
injury to the victim, alleged threats to the victim or a
witness to the crime charged, and the alleged use of a firearm
or other deadly weapon in the commission of the crime charged.
8)Revises the criteria for "unusual circumstances" for the
purposes of reducing bail below the amount established by the
bail schedule approved for the county for a person charged
with a serious felony or a violent felony, requiring that a
finding of unusual circumstances not solely be based on the
fact that the defendant has made all prior court appearances
or has not committed any new offenses.
9)Authorizes a sheriff, county probation department, or other
local government agency, with the concurrence of the board of
supervisors, to employ an investigative staff for the purpose
of recommending whether a defendant should be released on OR.
10)States whenever a court, a sheriff, county probation
department, or other local government agency has employed an
investigative staff, before a court may order a defendant
released on OR in any case involving a violent felony, or a
felony offense of driving under the influence causing bodily
injury, a pretrial report shall be prepared by the designated
agency recommending whether the defendant should be released
on OR.
11)Provides that a pretrial investigation report may be prepared
recommending whether the defendant should be released on OR in
any case when a court, a sheriff, county probation department,
or other local government agency has employed an investigative
staff.
12)Provides that only the designated agency shall issue a
pretrial investigation report and that nothing in this bill
shall be construed as requiring multiple pretrial
investigation reports.
13)Requires the pretrial investigation report to include all of
the results of an "evidence-based pretrial risk assessment"
evaluating the defendant's probability of appearing at trial
and potential risk to public safety.
14)Defines "evidence-based pretrial risk assessment" as the
objective, standardized analysis of information about a
SB 210
Page 4
pretrial defendant in a way that is consistent with and guided
by the best available scientific evidence and professional
knowledge that measures the risk of the defendant's
probability of appearing at trial and the potential risk to
public safety while pending case disposition.
15)States that in preparing the pretrial investigation report,
the defendant shall not be interviewed about the facts and
circumstances of the current offense, and any information that
a defendant may provide shall not be included in the report.
Any information provided by the defendant shall be used solely
for the purposes of determining whether the defendant should
be released on OR or in setting the conditions of the
defendant's release or modifying a prior release order. The
reports may be filed as part of the case record.
16)States that the pretrial investigation reports are
confidential and shall be sealed upon receipt by the court and
made available only by court order, except that the reports
shall be made available upon request of any of the following:
a) Any local or state criminal justice agency;
b) Any agency to which the defendant is referred for
assessment or treatment; or,
c) Counsel for the defendant who is the subject of the
report.
17)Authorizes supervision staff, employed by the court, sheriff,
county probation department, or other local governmental
agency, with the concurrence of the board of supervisors, for
the purpose of monitoring the defendant's compliance with
release conditions ordered by the court, to do any of the
following:
a) Notify the defendant of court appearance obligations;
b) Require the defendant to report periodically by mail,
telephone, or personal appearance to verify compliance with
release conditions;
c) Monitor and assist the defendant with complying with
release conditions;
SB 210
Page 5
d) Supervise a defendant placed on home detention, with or
without electronic monitoring, as a condition of release;
e) Promptly report violations of release conditions to the
court; and,
f) Provide information to assist any law enforcement
officer with detaining a defendant supervised pursuant to
this section and for whom a bench warrant has been issued.
18)Makes legislative findings and declarations relating to the
need for pretrial custody reform and increasing the use of
evidence-based practices in pretrial service programs.
FISCAL EFFECT : Unknown. This bill is keyed non-fiscal by the
Legislative Counsel.
COMMENTS : According to the author, "Seventy-one (71) percent of
county jail detainees in California have not been sentenced, but
are awaiting trial. Jail overcrowding is largely due to the
increased numbers of pre-trial detainees caused by repeated
increases to the bail schedules, the court's lack of information
as to the defendant's public safety risk, and the limited
authority of the county sheriffs and other agencies to resolve
these issues, particularly when it comes to pre-trial
defendants.
"High rates of pretrial detention are a threat both to public
safety and civil liberties. People with financial resources are
able to get out of jail and return to their jobs, families, and
communities. People who are unable to pay for bail or raise the
necessary collateral, however, must stay in jail awaiting a
trial date that could be months away. Or, they may more readily
decide to accept a plea bargain as a means of getting out of
jail. These results have nothing to do with public safety. They
have everything to do with wealth and poverty.
"Pretrial detention is expensive; costs exceed $100 per inmate
day in urban jurisdictions. A cost-benefit analysis of pretrial
detention found that total costs are lowest when 70 to 90
percent of those arrested are released. If own recognizance (OR)
release is not sufficient to assure appearance or public safety,
pretrial supervision is a cheap alternative to detention-most
estimates are in the range of $2.50 per day, a small fraction of
SB 210
Page 6
the cost of a jail bed in any jurisdiction. (However, these
estimates may be deceptively low because of supervision and
monitoring fees imposed on released defendants.)
"The American Bar Association and the National Association of
Pretrial Services Agencies periodically publish a set of
standards governing pretrial release and pretrial services.
Their recommendations include: quantitative risk assessments,
pretrial notification and follow up after failure to appear,
limited conditions, a wide range of possible sanctions for
failure to adhere to conditions, and mental health screening.
There are limited multi-jurisdictional assessments of pretrial
programs, but a 2007 statistical analysis found that these
measures have a positive impact on failure to appear and
re-arrest rates.
"SB 210 will provide an effective and necessary tool in managing
jail overcrowding by providing a framework for granting OR
release, coupled with pre-trial services, and conditions, for
defendants charged with nonviolent, nonserious, and nonsexual
felony offenses for which a person may be sentenced to county
jail.
"Current law does not expressly authorize any entity other than
the court to conduct investigations to determine whether the
defendant is appropriate for OR release; in practice, this means
that the court rarely receives information regarding the
defendant's appropriateness for pretrial release in any case not
involving a violent felony. Accordingly, SB 210 specifies that
a designated law enforcement agency or county probation may
monitor a defendant released on OR.
"SB 210 will have enormous impact in the reduction of jail
overcrowding. Reports from local jurisdictions support these
findings. Santa Cruz County and Napa County have implemented
pretrial services programs and have achieved successful
outcomes. Santa Cruz County reduced their average daily
population in county jail by 25 percent, and in 2011, Santa Cruz
County's pretrial detention rate was 56 percent, far below the
state-wide average. Napa County reduced their pretrial
population from 80 percent in 2000 to 65 percent after a decade
of implementing pretrial services program. Eleven other states
have implemented similar legislation to provide pretrial
alternatives to detention. Kent County, Michigan, had a
SB 210
Page 7
pretrial population of 60 percent, which fell to 31 percent
after implementation of a pretrial services program in 2003.
The failure to appear rate of those under pretrial supervision
in 2009 was a very low 6 percent. Maryland's Pretrial Release
Services Program reports very low re-arrest (4 percent) and
failure to appear (6 percent) rates for those under supervision.
Florida county pretrial services programs supervised 80,345
individuals in 2009, 5.5 percent of whom were issued a warrant
for failure to appear and 5.8 percent were arrested for any
offense while under supervision. Thus, jurisdictions can
increase access to pretrial release without compromising public
safety."
Please see the policy committee analysis for a full discussion
of this bill.
Analysis Prepared by : Stella Choe / PUB. S. / (916) 319-3744
FN: 0004440