Administration of Justice update 4/18/2014
Roundtable Discussion on Juvenile Justice: School to Prison Pipeline: April 24, 2014
The California Institute for Mental Health (CiMH) invites individuals working with youth, youth and families, the school system, law enforcement, corrections, or mental health and substance abuse services to join a roundtable discussion on juvenile justice issues as part of their AB 109 Public Safety Realignment Training Series.
This roundtable will address the call to action to end what has become known as “the school to prison pipeline.” Research suggests that children who fall behind in their education, even at a very early age, are more likely to become involved with the criminal justice system and more likely to become victims themselves.
This event will feature three segments exploring the challenges, research and solutions to keep children on track and out of the criminal justice system. Personal testimony, alternative programs, and legislative solutions will be highlighted.
Event Details:
Thursday April 24,
2014 9:00 AM – 3:00 PM
CSAC Conference Center
If you are interested in participating in this discussion, please click here to register.
Misdemeanor Violations / Amnesty Program
AB 2085 (Fox) – Concerns / Request for Comment
As amended March 19, 2014
After reviewing the language of AB 2085 authored by Assembly Member Steve Fox, which authorizes an amnesty program for delinquent court fines for a year-long period from July 1 to December 31, 2016, CSAC staff would like additional feedback from counties.
As you know, we have engaged with the author’s office and met with the legislative staff in regards to the measure in order to explain several areas of potential concern for counties:
First, the 2012 amnesty program yielded rather minimal revenue recovery. The Judicial Council’s report on that effort revealed that approximately $15 million in delinquent debt was cleared, with qualified individuals paying 50 cents on every dollar owed. That collection level reflects less than 1 percent of what had been estimated to be potentially collectible.
Further, there are additional operational aspects of the bill that are of concern. While CSAC acknowledges and appreciates amendments to clarify that the execution of the amnesty program would be permitted only when both the local court and county agree, from a statewide perspective, however, we question the efficacy of jurisdiction-by-jurisdiction decisions and wonder if a more appropriate model would be one undertaken statewide.
Finally, a more significant structural concern is one of timing. While CSAC does not have a recommended standard for the interval between amnesty programs, our general sense is that it may be too soon to offer a discount on delinquent court-ordered debt. When the jointly sponsored court-county effort to authorize the 2012 amnesty program was enacted in 2010, the previous amnesty program had run in 1996 – some 16 years earlier. To enact a measure now authorizing a program beginning in 2016 effectively signals to the public the notion that it “pays” to ignore court-ordered obligations, because an opportunity to settle the debt at 50 cents on the dollar is just two years away. CSAC believes this timing aspect will further diminish already declining collection receipts.
For these reasons, CSAC has felt compelled to raise concerns regarding AB 2085 and would appreciate any county specific information you could share relating to amnesty programs under your jurisdiction or comments on the matter in general.
AB 2085 (Fox) was approved by the Assembly Public Safety Committee on March 25, 2014 on a 5-0 vote. The next opportunity for members to vote on the bill will be April 21, 2014 in Assembly Transportation Committee. You can view the latest analysis of the bill.
Incompetent to Stand Trial (IST) Legislation: Department of State Hospitals Requests Feedback from Counties
The Department of State Hospitals (DSH) would like support for two administration-sponsored pieces of legislation relating to defendants who are deemed incompetent to stand trial or IST – AB 2625 (Achadjian) and AB 2186 (Lowenthal). Given the cross-cutting jurisdictional issues presented by these bills, CSAC has yet to take a position on the measures. A sharp increase in IST referrals, a lengthening waitlist, and limited access to mental health treatment in the community, are several of the problems prompting DSH to sponsor the introduction of these bills this legislative session.
Both bills are discussed in more detail below. CSAC continues to provide DSH with technical assistance with these measures and will share any comments or concerns with DSH staff as the bills move forward.
Defendants: Competence
AB 2625 (Achadjian) – Pending
As amended March 19, 2014
This bill, authored by Assembly Member Katcho Achadjian, contains three provisions designed to streamline the process for returning IST defendants to their county of commitment after exhausting treatment at a State Hospital.
Under the bill:
- Counties must receive IST defendants whom they’ve committed to a state hospital no later than 10 days after the superior court has received notification from the hospital that there is no substantial likelihood that the defendant will regain competency.
- The Department of State Hospitals must notify the patient’s defense counsel and the district attorney of the Department’s determination that the defendant is unlikely to regain competency. Additionally, the Department must notify the Sheriff of the committing county so that transportation can be arranged.
- IST defendants who do not restore to competency at a State Hospital within a three-year period must be returned to their county of commitment 90 days prior to the statutory three-year length of stay cap.
DSH believes these changes, if implemented, will increase the number of beds available for waitlisted IST patients and reserve space for those who are most likely to benefit from treatment at a State Hospital. However, by imposing additional responsibilities on medical directors at local facilities, the bill would undoubtedly impose a state-mandated local program.
Defendants: Involuntary Medication
AB 2186 (Lowenthal) – Pending
As introduced February 20, 2014
This bill, authored by Assemblywoman Lowenthal, aims to make a number of changes relating to the administration of involuntary medication (IM) orders for defendants who have been deemed incompetent to stand trial (IST) and have been committed to a State Hospital. Specifically, this bill has four main provisions:
- First, the bill would allow an IM order issued by a superior court to follow a patient between jurisdictions. Under current law, an IM order is only valid for a State Hospital facility. As such, the Department of State Hospitals (DSH) believes that IST patients that have restored to competency may unnecessarily decompensate in county jail while awaiting a new IM order authorizing continued medication at the local level.
- Second, the bill would allow a superior court to extend an IM order by 14 days when approved by an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) upon a finding of good cause. Under current law, an ALJ may issue an IM order after a hearing at a State Hospital, but the order will expire after 21 days at which point a new order must be secured from the superior court. DSH believes that superior courts do not have the resources necessary to keep up with the demand for new IM hearings and extensions, approved for good cause, would serve as an alternative tool to ensure that patients continue to receive medication essential for the success of their ongoing treatment plan.
- Third, the bill would allow a superior court to issue a one year extension on a previously issued IM order upon a finding of good cause. Under current law, after one year, a new petition and superior court hearing must take place to continue involuntary medication of the patient. DSH believes that a showing of good cause is sufficient to merit an extension of an IM order given that staff has limited resources and treatment plans often exceed one year.
- Fourth, the bill would make minor adjustments to the the timing of competency progress reports and IM reports. Specifically, the bill would synchronize due dates to reduce staff workload and ensure a more coordinated delivery to the courts.
AB 2625 and AB 2186 will be heard in Assembly Public Safety committee on Tuesday April 22nd. Although DSH believes that the passage of these bills will result in more appropriate program placement for IST individuals and reduce unnecessary interruption in treatment, it is important to note that by imposing additional duties on local agencies, these bills would impose a state-mandated local program.
Mandatory Supervision
AB 579 (Melendez) – Request for Signature
As amended March 14, 2014
AB 579 by Assembly Member Melissa Melendez is an urgency measure that seeks to clarify in state law that the period of mandatory supervision period begins immediately upon release from custody for individuals who have been given a split sentence under Penal Code Section 1170 (h) as a result of 2011 Public Safety Realignment.
This is not a new policy, but rather clean-up language necessary to correct a chaptering out issue created by 2013 legislation which amended the same code section and inadvertently removed the mandatory supervision language.
CSAC urges the Governor to sign this measure as quickly as possible as it will ensure that county probation departments are – once again – able to initiate their mandatory supervision duties as originally intended by statute.
AB 579 is co-sponsored by the California State Sheriffs’ Association and the Chief Probation Officers of California. The bill has received no dissenting votes to date and is currently awaiting signature by the Governor