BILL ANALYSIS
------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | AB 788|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 445-6614 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: AB 788
Author: Maldonado (R)
Amended: 6/5/00 in Senate
Vote: 21
SENATE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE : 5-0, 6/20/00
AYES: Vasconcellos, Burton, Johnston, Polanco, Rainey
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 77-0, 1/18/00 - See last page for vote
SUBJECT : Juvenile justice: balanced and restorative
justice history
SOURCE : Author
DIGEST : The purpose of this bill is to enact a balanced
and restorative justice model for California's juvenile
justice system, as specified.
ANALYSIS : Current law provides that, "[m]inors under the
jurisdiction of the juvenile court as a consequence of
delinquent conduct shall, in conformity with the interests
of public safety and protection, receive care, treatment
and guidance which is consistent with their best interest,
which holds them accountable for their behavior, and which
is appropriate for their circumstances. This guidance may
include punishment that is consistent with the
rehabilitative objectives of this chapter. . . . When the
minor is no longer a ward of the juvenile court, the
guidance he or she received should enable him or her to be
a law-abiding and productive member of his or her family
CONTINUED
AB 788
Page
2
and the community."
This bill recasts and revises these provisions as follows:
1.Adds the word "restoration" to the purpose of juvenile
court law.
2.Deletes the current language in Section 202 concerning
delinquent wards and replace it with the following:
[M]inors under the jurisdiction of the juvenile court as
a consequence of delinquent conduct shall receive
dispositions intended to accomplish public safety through
the following three objectives:
(1) Community protection through a continuum of
appropriate responses to delinquent conduct, ranging
from supervision to incapacitation, which protect
citizens and victims from the threat to public safety
posed by the minor.
(2) Accountability of the minor through restoration of
the losses experienced by the victim and the
community.
(3) Competency development of the minor in basic living
skills necessary for law-abiding citizenship. These
objectives shall be given equal consideration and
shall be equally addressed by juvenile courts,
probation departments, and youth, corrections, and
other agencies that may recommend, order, implement,
or supervise dispositions for delinquent minors.
This bill adds the following legislative intent to this
provision:
It is the intent of the Legislature that the following
five principles form the basis of operation for the
juvenile justice system to achieve long-term public
safety when dealing with delinquent minors:
(1) The public has a right to safe and secure homes and
communities.
AB 788
Page
3
(2) Crime results in injury to the victim, the
community, and the offender. The juvenile justice
system should seek to repair those injuries. Victims
and communities should be actively involved
throughout the juvenile justice process, to the
extent consistent with the offender's right to due
process and the right of victims and minors under
subdivision (b) of section 676.5.
(3) Juvenile offenders should be capable of living in a
responsible and law-abiding manner within the
community and their families when they emerge from
the juvenile court's jurisdiction.
(4) The unique set of experiences and circumstances
contributing to the minor's offensive behavior must
be addressed.
(5) California's juvenile justice system will best
achieve long-term public safety when community
protection, accountability of the offender to the
victim and the community, and offender competency
development are treated as equally weighted goals.
Under current law, permissible sanctions of the juvenile
court may include the following:
(1) Payment of a fine by the minor.
(2) Rendering of compulsory service without
compensation performed for the benefit of the
community by the minor.
(3) Limitations on the minor's liberty imposed as a
condition of probation or parole.
(4) Commitment of the minor to a local detention or
treatment facility, such as a juvenile hall, camp, or
ranch.
(5) Commitment of the minor to the Department of the
Youth Authority.
"Punishment," for the purposes of this chapter, does not
AB 788
Page
4
include retribution.
(f) In addition to the actions authorized by
subdivision (e), the juvenile court may, as
appropriate, direct the offender to complete a victim
impact class, participate in victim offender
conferencing subject to the victim's consent, pay
restitution to the victim or victims, and make a
contribution to the victim restitution fund after all
victim restitution orders and fines have been
satisfied, in order to hold the offender accountable
or restore the victim or community.
This bill adds "participation in a victim-offender
reconciliation program" to the above-cited list of
permissible sanctions under section 202.
This bill additionally states the following legislative
intent:
It is the intent of the Legislature to promote the
mission of the juvenile justice system, long-term
public safety, through the implementation of a juvenile
justice model known as "The Balanced Approach to
Restorative Justice." The Balance Approach to
Restorative Justice holds as its central tenet that
long-term public safety is best served when victims,
the community, and offenders engage together as active
participants in balanced efforts to accomplish all of
the following: (1) assure community protection; (2)
hold offenders personally accountable for repairing the
harm to victims and communities resulting from juvenile
crime; and (3) ensure that juvenile offenders make
measurable gains in educational, vocational, social,
civic, and other areas of competency that enhance their
capacity to function as law-abiding citizens.
Background: Balanced and Restorative Justice: National
Perspective
In September of 1992, the federal Office of Juvenile
Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) awarded a grant
to implement a new project known as the Balanced and
Restorative Justice Project. The Project is developing
AB 788
Page
5
model juvenile systems based on the balanced approach
mission and the restorative justice philosophy. Public
safety, accountability and competency developments
constitute balanced and restorative justice.
According to OJJDP, these three priorities involve the
following:
1. Community Protection . Intermediate, community-based
surveillance and sanctioning systems channel the
offender's time and energy into productive activities
during nonschool working hours. A continuum of
surveillance and sanctions provides a progression of
consequences for noncompliance with supervision
requirements and incentives that reinforce the youth's
progress in meeting competency development and
accountability objectives.
2. Accountability . Restitution, community service and
victim-offender mediation create an awareness in
offenders of the harmful consequences of their actions
for victims, require offenders to take action to make
amends to victims and the community, and, whenever
possible, involve victims directly in the justice
process.
3. Competency Development . Work experience, active
learning, and service provide opportunities for offenders
to develop skills, interact positively with conventional
adults, earn money, and demonstrate publicly that they
are capable of productive, competent behavior.
Balanced and Restorative Justice intends to be a catalyst
for change in the juvenile justice system:
As a concrete mission, the balanced approach allows
juvenile justice systems and agencies to improve their
capacity to protect the community and ensure
accountability of the offender and the system. It
enables offenders to become competent and productive
citizens. Restorative justice, the guiding
philosophical framework for this vision, promotes
maximum involvement of the victim, the offender, and
the community in the justice process and presents a
AB 788
Page
6
clear alternative to sanctions and intervention based
on retributive or traditional treatment assumptions.
Within the context of the restorative justice
philosophy, the balanced approach mission helps
juvenile justice systems become more responsive to the
needs of victims, offenders, and the community.
One key purpose of the Balanced and Restorative Justice
approach is to prompt changes in the juvenile system
involving new performance objectives, new priorities for
intervention and a new view of the role of offenders,
victims and the community in the justice process.
Prior Legislation
This bill is virtually identical to SB 668 (Vasconcellos)
of the 1997-98 Legislative Session, which passed the Senate
with a vote of 37-0, and ultimately vetoed by then-Governor
Wilson.
In his veto message, then-Governor Wilson stated:
"The Balanced and Restorative Justice philosophy is
based upon the assumption that there have been
undesirable swings between those who favor
treatment/rehabilitation and those who favor
incarceration/retribution as the guiding principles of
the juvenile justice system. Neither position
accurately reflects the problems with the current
juvenile justice system.
"In the current system all juveniles, serious offenders
and minor offenders, are basically treated the same.
We mix kids who have made a mistake with kids who make
mistakes a lifestyle. Juvenile court was not designed
to deal with youths who commit serious and violent
crime, gang murderers, rapists, carjackers, or kids who
carry assault weapons. SB 668 would do nothing to
address this problem, it would merely be grafting a new
label onto the current system. By contrast an
examination of the laws of Oregon, Minnesota and
Connecticut, which have adopted the Balanced and
Restorative philosophy, disclose more focused juvenile
justice systems. Each, unlike California, removes
AB 788
Page
7
murder from juvenile court jurisdiction. Oregon
removes rape and robbery as well, while Connecticut
removes burglary in addition to the enumerated violent
felonies.
"There is national concern with the failure of juvenile
courts to hold juveniles accountable for their
offenses. To address these problems, I introduced a
package of ten bills to reform the juvenile justice
system. Other important bills were introduced by the
Los Angeles County District Attorney, the California
District Attorneys Association, and several concerned
legislators this year and in 1996. They would have
addressed numerous aspects of the juvenile justice
system which prevent the system from being effective,
fail to hold juveniles accountable, and fail to
adequately protect the public or address the needs of
victims. Unfortunately most of these bills have
failed.
"Balanced and Restorative Justice should only be
considered in the context of a broader substantive and
structural reform of the juvenile justice system which
ensures that juveniles are held accountable for their
offenses, public safety is protected, and procedures
which hamper implementation of effective intervention
and rehabilitation programs are eliminated.
"I have this day (8/25/97) signed SB 1095 (Lockyer)
which authorizes focused educational intervention
programs for at risk juveniles. These programs will
hopefully from part of a more comprehensive response."
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: No
Local: No
SUPPORT : (Verified 6/22/00)
Chief Probation Officers of California
Little Hoover Commission
California District Attorneys Association (introduced
version)
Doris Tate Crime Victims Bureau
California State Sheriffs' Association
AB 788
Page
8
California Child, Youth and Family Coalition
Friends Committee on Legislation of California
California Catholic Conference
Children's Advocacy Institute
OPPOSITION : (Verified 6/22/00)
California Attorneys for Criminal Justice
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : According to the author's office:
"AB 788 is an attempt to teach juveniles the
consequences of their actions (crimes) and the cost to
their victims through the "Balanced Approach" to
restorative justice before they become serious
offenders. The bill attempts to respond quickly to
juvenile offenders to deter future offenses. For those
youths that can and will learn a better way to conduct
themselves the bill offers an opportunity to truly
learn from their mistakes."
ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION : According to the California
Attorneys for Criminal Justice (CAJC):
"CAJC strongly supports the balanced and restorative
approach to juvenile justice embodies in AB 788. This
approach appropriately recognizes that addressing the
individual circumstances of each juvenile offender and
helping each young person develop skills that will
allow him or her to live a law abiding life in the
community are in the interest both of the juvenile and
of long term public policy.
"Our concern with AB 788 centers on language stricken
from existing law, which is located on page 5 of the
bill. Beginning on line 38, this bill strikes the
language providing that juvenile court guidance "may
include punishment that is consistent with the
rehabilitative objectives of this chapter."
Rehabilitation, in addition to the balanced and
restorative approach, should be a primary policy goal.
In addition to protecting the public safety, we should
strive to rehabilitate young people so they can avoid
engaging in additional delinquent behavior and instead
AB 788
Page
9
live productive lives.
"Should you decide to retain the rehabilitative
objective, CAJC would be pleased to support AB 788. If
not, CAJC respectfully opposes."
ASSEMBLY FLOOR :
AYES: Aanestad, Ackerman, Alquist, Aroner, Ashburn,
Baldwin, Bates, Baugh, Bock, Briggs, Calderon, Campbell,
Cardenas, Cardoza, Cedillo, Corbett, Correa, Cox,
Cunneen, Davis, Dickerson, Ducheny, Dutra, Firebaugh,
Florez, Floyd, Frusetta, Gallegos, Granlund, Havice,
Hertzberg, Honda, House, Jackson, Kaloogian, Keeley,
Knox, Kuehl, Leach, Lempert, Leonard, Longville,
Lowenthal, Machado, Maddox, Maldonado, Margett, Mazzoni,
McClintock, Migden, Nakano, Olberg, Oller, Robert
Pacheco, Rod Pacheco, Papan, Pescetti, Reyes, Romero,
Runner, Scott, Shelley, Soto, Steinberg, Strickland,
Strom-Martin, Thompson, Thomson, Torlakson, Vincent,
Washington, Wayne, Wesson, Wiggins, Wildman, Wright,
Zettel
RJG:cm 6/22/00 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****