BILL ANALYSIS �
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | SB 1363|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: SB 1363
Author: Hancock (D)
Amended: 4/21/14
Vote: 21
SENATE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE : 4-2, 4/29/14
AYES: Hancock, Liu, Mitchell, Steinberg
NOES: Anderson, Knight
NO VOTE RECORDED: De Le�n
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE : 5-2, 5/23/14
AYES: De Le�n, Hill, Lara, Padilla, Steinberg
NOES: Walters, Gaines
SUBJECT : Sentencing: parole
SOURCE : Jon Streeter, Keker & Van Nest, LLP
DIGEST : This bill makes various changes to the parole process
conducted by the Board of Parole Hearings (BPH), as specified.
ANALYSIS : Existing law:
1.Provides that in the case of any inmate sentenced to an
indeterminate sentence the Board of Parole Hearings (BPH)
shall meet with each inmate during the sixth year prior to the
inmate's eligible parole release date for the purposes of
reviewing and documenting the inmates activities and conduct
pertinent to both parole eligibility and to the granting and
withholding of postconviction credit.
CONTINUED
SB 1363
Page
2
2.Provides that one year prior to the inmate's minimum eligible
parole release date a panel of two or more commissioners or
deputy commissioners shall meet with the inmate and shall
normally set a parole release date.
3.Provides that the release date shall be set in a manner that
will provide uniform terms for offenses of similar gravity and
magnitude with respect to their threat to the public, and that
will comply with the sentencing rules that the Judicial
Council may issue and any sentencing information relevant to
setting of the parole release dates. The BPH shall establish
criteria for the setting of parole release dates and in doing
so shall consider the number of victims of crime for which the
inmate was sentenced and other factors in mitigation or
aggravation of the crime.
4.Provides that one year prior to the inmate's minimum eligible
parole release date a panel of two or more commissioners or
deputy commissioners shall again meet with the inmate, and
except as provided, normally set a parole release date as
specified.
5.Provides that any decision of the parole panel finding an
inmate suitable for parole shall become final within 120 days
of the date of the hearing. During that hearing the BPH may
review the panel's decision. The decision shall be come final
unless there was an error of law or an error of fact or new
information that should be presented to the BPH. No decision
of the parole panel shall be disapproved and referred for
rehearing except by a majority vote of the BPH, sitting en
banc, following a public meeting.
6.Provides that an en banc review by the BPH means a review
conducted by a majority of commissioners holding office on the
date the matter is heard by the BPH. An en banc review shall
be conducted in compliance with the following:
A. The commissioners conducting the review shall consider
the entire record of the hearing that resulted in the tie
vote;
B. The review shall be limited to the record of the
hearing;
CONTINUED
SB 1363
Page
3
C. The BPH shall separately state reasons for its decision
to grant or deny parole; and,
D. A commissioner who was involved in the tie vote shall be
recused from consideration of the matter in the en banc
review.
This bill:
1.Provides that the BPH shall establish criteria for setting of
parole release dates and in doing so shall consider:
A. The gravity and magnitude of the offense with respect to
the threat to public safety;
B. The number of victims of the crime for which the inmate
was sentenced and other factors in mitigation or
aggravation of the crime; and,
C. The abstract of judgment.
1.Provides that the panel shall in every case establish the
inmate's base term of incarceration by applying the criteria.
2.Provides that a decision of the parole panel shall not be
disapproved and referred for rehearing by the BPH except by a
majority vote of the commissioners reviewing the decision,
sitting en banc, following a public meeting.
3.Provides that an inmate found suitable for parole shall be
paroled subject to review by the Governor.
4.Provides that when the BPH states the reasons for their
decision, the BPH's stated reasons shall demonstrate, on the
record, an individualized consideration of all relevant
factors. In the case of an inmate who has served beyond
his/her base term of incarceration, a decision by the BPH to
deny parole shall be supported by substantial evidence and
with respect to the entire record.
5.Provides that the BPH shall collect and maintain statistics
that show, annually, the number of inmates in state prison who
are serving a term in excess of their base terms of
CONTINUED
SB 1363
Page
4
incarceration, as adjusted by applicable enhancements or
credits, and the percentage of all cases decided each year in
which the BPH, in its final decision, by a panel or the BPH
sitting en banc, has declined to find an inmate suitable for
parole, despite the fact that the inmate has served a sentence
beyond the base term of incarceration, as adjusted by
applicable enhancements of credits, and shall submit a report
to the legislature on the information.
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes
Local: No
According to the Senate Appropriations Committee:
Additional direct administrative costs to BPH of about
$775,000 (General Fund) annually to provide counsel, make
transcriptions of consultations, and document reasons "on the
record" for parole denials, including substantial evidence for
denials of inmates serving beyond their base terms, as
adjusted.
Potential resource costs of $185,000 (General Fund) for one
commissioner to cover the workload associated with mandated
calculations of adjusted base terms at consultations.
Potentially significant litigation costs in excess of $1
million (General Fund), based on historical experience from
the previous change to the standard of parole suitability
under In re Lawrence 190 P.3d 535, 539 (Cal. 2008).
Unknown, potentially significant future state cost savings
(General Fund) in shorter incarceration terms to the extent
inmates are granted earlier release dates to parole than
otherwise would have occurred under existing law.
To the extent 10 inmates are paroled one year earlier would
result in cost savings of over $250,000.
Additional one-time and ongoing costs (General Fund) to BPH to
collect and report the specified data to the Legislature.
SUPPORT : (Verified 5/23/14)
Jon Streeter, Keker & Van Nest, LLP (source)
American Civil Liberties Union
CONTINUED
SB 1363
Page
5
American Friends Service Committee
Californians United for a Responsible Budget
Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice
Friends Committee on Legislation of California
Justice Now
Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights
Legal Services for Prisoners With Children
Root & Rebound
Rubicon Programs
Taxpayers for Improving Public Safety
OPPOSITION : (Verified 5/23/14)
California District Attorneys Association
San Diego County District Attorney
Citizens for Law and Order, Inc.
Crime Victims Action Alliance
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : According to the author, "This existing
parole system is confusing and convoluted. It often leads to
perverse results in which inmates are found suitable for parole
but must serve additional time (often years) before actually
being paroled. This is because many of the enhancements used to
calculate the adjusted base term are problematic for various
reasons.
"For instance, many enhancements are used against an inmate
twice; once by the trial judge at sentencing, and again
(possibly years later) by BPH when calculating the adjusted base
term. This flies in the face of a determinate sentencing system
in which enhancements are intended to be used at the front end,
at the sentencing stage."
ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION : The California District Attorneys
Association states, "SB 1363 does not appear to advance the
interests of victims and enhance public safety, and instead
provides more avenues for parole grants, lessened scrutiny of
parole grants and great scrutiny of parole denials. Left to
stand, the bill will result in either the early and premature
release of thousands of dangerous life term inmates, 70% of whom
are now found unsuitable for parole, or spawn massive litigation
as inmates, awarded an adjusted base term, but denied a parole
release date because of being found unsuitable, will swarm the
courts, asserting their continued incarceration is presumptively
CONTINUED
SB 1363
Page
6
unconstitutional."
JG:nl 5/23/14 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****
CONTINUED