BILL ANALYSIS �
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | AB 2499|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: AB 2499
Author: Bonilla (D)
Amended: 7/3/14 in Senate
Vote: 21
SENATE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE : 5-0, 6/17/14
AYES: Hancock, De Le�n, Liu, Mitchell, Steinberg
NO VOTE RECORDED: Anderson, Knight
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE : 5-2, 8/4/14
AYES: De Le�n, Hill, Lara, Padilla, Steinberg
NOES: Walters, Gaines
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 56-0, 5/5/14 - See last page for vote
SUBJECT : Offenders: home detention programs
SOURCE : California State Sheriffs Association
Los Angeles County Sheriffs Department
DIGEST : This bill expands the information about offenders on
electronic monitoring that can be provided to law enforcement in
the jurisdiction where the offender is being monitored, as
specified; and provides offenders, who are subject to the
custody of a local correctional administrator, with the
opportunity to earn credit while participating in electronic
monitoring and work release.
ANALYSIS :
CONTINUED
AB 2499
Page
2
Existing law:
1.Authorizes the board of supervisors of any county to authorize
the sheriff or other official in charge of county correctional
facilities to offer a voluntary program under which any person
committed to the facility may participate in a work release
program in which one day of participation will be in lieu of
one day of confinement.
2.States, notwithstanding any other provision of law, the board
of supervisors of any county may authorize the county
correctional administrator to offer a voluntary or involuntary
home detention program in lieu of confinement in the county
jail, or other correctional facility or program under the
auspices of the probation officer.
3.Defines "correctional administrator" as the sheriff, probation
officer, or director of the county department of corrections.
4.Provides that the participant in a home detention program
shall agree to the use of electronic monitoring, which may
include global positioning system (GPS) devices or other
supervising devices for the purpose of helping to verify
his/her compliance with the rules and regulations of the home
detention program.
5.Authorizes the police department of a city where an office is
located to which persons on an electronic monitoring program
report to request the county correctional administrator to
provide information concerning those persons. This
information shall be limited to the name, address, date of
birth, and offense committed by the home detainee. Any
information received by a police department pursuant to this
paragraph shall be used only for the purpose of monitoring the
impact of home detention programs on the community.
6.Authorizes, upon request of a local law enforcement agency
with jurisdiction over the location where a participant in an
electronic monitoring program is placed, the correctional
administrator shall provide the following information
regarding participants in the electronic monitoring program:
A. The participant's name, address, and date of birth;
CONTINUED
AB 2499
Page
3
B. The offense or offenses alleged to have been committed
by the participant;
C. The period of time the participant will be placed on
home detention;
D. Whether the participant successfully completed the
prescribed period of home detention or was returned to a
county correctional facility, and if the person was
returned to a county correctional facility, the reason for
the return; and
E. The gender and ethnicity of the participant.
1.Requires when a defendant has been in custody, including, but
not limited to, any time spent in a jail, camp, work furlough
facility, and other specified facilities, all days of custody
of the defendant, including, home detention for inmates who
otherwise would be in jail in lieu of bail, are credited
toward the term of imprisonment or toward any fine that may be
imposed, at the rate of not less than $30 per day, or more, in
the discretion of the court imposing the sentence.
2.Provides that the time a defendant spent in a jail, camp, work
furlough facility, and other specified facilities, qualifies
as mandatory time in jail if the statute under which the
defendant is sentenced requires a mandatory minimum period of
time in jail.
3.Authorizes good conduct and work performance credit for
prisoners confined in city or county jails, industrial farms
or road camps.
This bill:
1.Authorizes, prospectively, good conduct and work performance
credits to inmates participating in home detention programs
and specified work release programs commensurate with the
credit earning provisions under existing law while in jail
custody.
2.Expands the information a local law enforcement agency may
receive about offenders on electronic monitoring to include
CONTINUED
AB 2499
Page
4
current and historical GPS coordinates, if available, and
restricts the use of this information to investigatory
purposes.
3.Requires an agency (police department) that has knowledge that
the subject in a criminal investigation is a participant in an
electronic monitoring program to make reasonable efforts to
notify the supervising agency prior to serving a warrant or
taking any law enforcement action against a participant.
4.Clarifies that mandatory supervision commences, unless
otherwise ordered by the court, upon release from physical
custody or an alternative custody program, whichever is later.
5.Allows time spent in camp, work furlough, other facilities to
count as mandatory jail time, even if the underlying statute
does not require mandatory minimum period of jail time.
Background
In 2011, the Legislature approved Governor Brown's local law
enforcement realignment proposal. This state program was
created to reduce California's prison population by redefining
which crimes are subject to state incarceration and state
parolee supervision. Those state inmates whose crimes did not
merit further state incarceration, were transferred to county
jails and county probation officers.
In most cases, the county jails housed transferred state inmates
that had committed non-serious, non-violent, or non-sex
offenses. In addition, counties also received responsibility
for the post-release supervision of these low-level offenders
who are on probation.
Alternative sentencing measures like electronic ankle bracelets
have become a pivotal tool for many county sheriffs to supervise
these low-level offenders.
These so-called "virtual inmates" are tracked by case managers
through GPS electronic monitoring, and their movements are
confined to home, work and essential trips such as grocery
shopping and physician visits.
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes
CONTINUED
AB 2499
Page
5
Local: Yes
According to the Senate Appropriations Committee:
Potentially significant ongoing cost savings to counties
(Local) to the extent inmates on electronic monitoring earn
credits while participating in home detention or work release
programs reduces jail time and/or an increased number of
offenders participate in electronic monitoring in lieu of
jail time.
Potentially significant ongoing local cost savings to the
extent allowing time spent in camps, work furlough, and other
facilities counts as mandatory jail time to an expanded
population of offenders (currently only applicable to
defendants with mandatory minimum jail sentences).
Potential minor state-reimbursable costs (General) for
police departments to make reasonable efforts to notify the
supervising agency (sheriff or probation department) prior to
taking an enforcement action.
SUPPORT : (Verified 8/5/14)
California State Sheriffs' Association (co-source)
Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department (co-source)
Calaveras County, Office of the Sheriff
California Attorneys for Criminal Justice
California Police Chiefs Association
California Probation, Parole and Correctional Association
California Public Defenders Association
Glenn County Sheriff's Office
Inyo County, Office of the Sheriff
Kern County, Office of the Sheriff
Kings County, Office of the Sheriff
San Diego County, Office of the Sheriff
Shasta County, Office of the Sheriff
Yolo County, Office of the Sheriff
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : The California State Sheriffs'
Association states:
Existing law prohibits law enforcement agencies from sharing
certain information regarding persons participating in an
CONTINUED
AB 2499
Page
6
electronic monitoring program. Now that sentenced, realigned
felons can participate in such programs, it is essential that
law enforcement is able to share information such as current
and historical GPS coordinates with other agencies.
This legislation would increase the amount of information that
can be provided to law enforcement in the jurisdiction in
which the offender is on electronic monitoring. This
legislation does, however, limit the release of such
information for solely investigatory purposes.
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 56-0, 5/5/14
AYES: Alejo, Ammiano, Atkins, Bloom, Bocanegra, Bonilla, Bonta,
Bradford, Brown, Buchanan, Ian Calderon, Campos, Chau,
Chesbro, Cooley, Dababneh, Daly, Dickinson, Eggman, Fong,
Frazier, Garcia, Gatto, Gomez, Gonzalez, Gordon, Gray, Hagman,
Hall, Roger Hern�ndez, Holden, Jones-Sawyer, Levine,
Lowenthal, Medina, Mullin, Muratsuchi, Nazarian, Olsen, Pan,
Perea, V. Manuel P�rez, Quirk, Quirk-Silva, Rendon,
Ridley-Thomas, Rodriguez, Salas, Skinner, Stone, Ting, Weber,
Wieckowski, Williams, Yamada, John A. P�rez
NO VOTE RECORDED: Achadjian, Allen, Bigelow, Ch�vez, Conway,
Dahle, Donnelly, Fox, Beth Gaines, Gorell, Grove, Harkey,
Jones, Linder, Logue, Maienschein, Mansoor, Melendez,
Nestande, Patterson, Wagner, Waldron, Wilk, Vacancy
JG:k 8/6/14 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****
CONTINUED