Existing law requires the driver of a vehicle involved in an accident involving either injury to a person other than the driver, or the death of a person, to immediately stop and fulfill specified reporting requirements. Existing law provides that failure to fulfill those requirements is a crime. Existing law requires the Department of Motor Vehicles to immediately revoke the driving privileges of a person convicted of a violation of that provision.

Existing law requires the driver of a vehicle involved in an accident involving only damage to property, or a person who parks a vehicle that becomes a runaway vehicle and damages property, to stop, as applicable, and fulfill specified reporting requirements. Existing law provides that failure to fulfill those requirements is a crime. Existing law authorizes a court to suspend the driving privileges of a person convicted of a violation of that provision for not more than 6 months.

This bill would, commencing January 1, 2018, require a prosecutor who agrees to accept a plea of guilty or nolo contendere from a defendant for a charge of a violation of the latter provision described above in satisfaction of, or as a substitute for, a charge for a violation of the former provision to state on the record whether or not the accident in which the defendant was involved was one in which another person was injured. The bill would require the prosecutors statement to occur prior to the defendants waiver of the right to a jury trial. If the prosecution states for the record that the accident in which the defendant was involved was one in which another person was injured, the bill would require the judge to inform the defendant of the consequences described below. If the defense admits that another person was injured in the accident or stipulates to the prosecutions statement and the defendant waives his or her right to a jury trial as to that fact, the bill would require the court, upon accepting the defendants plea of guilty or nolo contendere, to order the suspension of the defendants driving privileges for a period of 6 months, the restriction of the defendants driving privileges to employment purposes only, as specified, for no more than 6 months, or completion of community service, as the court deems appropriate. By changing the penalty for a crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program.

The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.

This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

Existing law requires the driver of a vehicle involved in an accident involving either injury to a person other than the driver, or the death of a person, to immediately stop and fulfill specified reporting requirements. Existing law provides that failure to fulfill those requirements is a crime. Existing law requires the Department of Motor Vehicles to immediately revoke the driving privileges of a person convicted of a violation of that provision.

Existing law requires the driver of a vehicle involved in an accident involving only damage to property, or a person who parks a vehicle that becomes a runaway vehicle and damages property, to stop, as applicable, and fulfill specified reporting requirements. Existing law provides that failure to fulfill those requirements is a crime. Existing law authorizes a court to suspend the driving privileges of a person convicted of a violation of that provision for not more than 6 months.

This bill would, commencing January 1, 2018, require a prosecutor who agrees to accept a plea of guilty or nolo contendere from a defendant for a charge of a violation of the latter provision described above in satisfaction of, or as a substitute for, a charge for a violation of the former provision to state on the record whether or not the accident in which the defendant was involved in an accident in which a was one in which another person was injured. The bill would require the prosecutors statement to occur prior to the defendants waiver of the right to a jury trial. The bill would also require the judge to inform the defendant of the consequences described below before accepting the defendants plea of guilty or nolo contendere under these circumstances. If the court accepts the plea and the prosecutors statement stipulates or does not contest the fact that the defendant was driving the vehicle that caused injury to another individual, If the prosecution states for the record that the accident in which the defendant was involved was one in which another person was injured, the bill would require the judge to inform the defendant of the consequences described below. If the defense admits that another person was injured in the accident or stipulates to the prosecutions statement and the defendant waives his or her right to a jury trial as to that fact, the bill would require the court to immediately suspend the convicted persons court, upon accepting the defendants plea of guilty or nolo contendere, to order the suspension of the defendants driving privileges for a period of 6 months, restrict the convicted persons the restriction of the defendants driving privileges to employment purposes only, as specified, for no more than 6 months, or order the convicted person to complete completion of community service, as the court deems appropriate. By changing the penalty for a crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program.

The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.

This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

Existing law requires the driver of a vehicle involved in an accident involving either injury to a person other than the driver, or the death of a person, to immediately stop and fulfill specified reporting requirements. Existing law provides that failure to fulfill those requirements is a crime. Existing law requires the Department of Motor Vehicles to immediately revoke the driving privileges of a person convicted of a violation of that provision.

Existing law requires the driver of a vehicle involved in an accident involving only damage to property, or a person who parks a vehicle that becomes a runaway vehicle and damages property, to stop, as applicable, and fulfill specified reporting requirements. Existing law provides that failure to fulfill those requirements is a crime. Existing law authorizes a court to suspend the driving privileges of a person convicted of a violation of that provision for not more than 6 months.

This bill would would, commencing January 1, 2018, require a prosecutor who agrees to accept a plea of guilty or nolo contendere from a defendant for a charge of a violation of the latter provision described above in satisfaction of, or as a substitute for, a charge for a violation of the former provision to state on the record whether the defendant was involved in an accident in which a person was injured. The bill would require the prosecutors statement to occur prior to the defendants waiver of the right to a jury trial. The bill would also require the judge to inform the defendant of the consequences described below prior to before accepting the defendants plea of guilty or nolo contendere under these circumstances. If the court accepts the plea and the prosecutors statement stipulates or does not contest the fact that the defendant was driving the vehicle that caused injury to another individual, the bill would require the court to immediately suspend the convicted persons driving privileges for a period of 6 months, restrict the convicted persons driving privileges to employment purposes only, as specified, for no more than 6 months, or order the convicted person to complete community service, as the court deems appropriate. By changing the penalty for a crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program.

The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.

This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

Existing law requires the driver of a vehicle involved in an accident involving either injury to a person other than the driver, or the death of a person, to immediately stop and fulfill specified reporting requirements. Existing law provides that failure to fulfill those requirements is a crime. Existing law requires the Department of Motor Vehicles to immediately revoke the driving privileges of a person convicted of a violation of that provision.

Existing law requires the driver of a vehicle involved in an accident involving only damage to property, or a person who parks a vehicle that becomes a runaway vehicle and damages property, to stop, as applicable, and fulfill specified reporting requirements. Existing law provides that failure to fulfill those requirements is a crime. Existing law authorizes a court to suspend the driving privileges of a person convicted of a violation of that provision for not more than 6 months.

This bill would require a prosecutor who agrees to accept a plea of guilty or nolo contendere from a defendant for a charge of a violation of the latter provision described above in satisfaction of of, or as a substitute for for, a charge for a violation of the former provision to state on the record whether the defendant was involved in an accident in which a person was injured. The bill would require the prosecutors statement to occur prior to the defendants waiver of the right to a jury trial. The bill would also require the judge to inform the defendant of the consequences described below prior to accepting the defendants plea of guilty or nolo contendere under these circumstances. If the court accepts the plea and the prosecutors statement stipulates or does not contest the fact that the defendant was driving the vehicle that caused injury to another individual, the bill would require the court to immediately suspend the convicted persons driving privileges for a period of 6 months months, restrict the convicted persons driving privileges to employment purposes only, as specified, for no more than 6 months, or order the convicted person to complete community service, as the court deems appropriate. By changing the penalty for a crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program.

The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.

This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

Existing law requires the driver of a vehicle involved in an accident involving either injury to a person other than the driver, or the death of a person, to immediately stop and fulfill specified reporting requirements. Existing law provides that failure to fulfill those requirements is a crime. Existing law requires the Department of Motor Vehicles to immediately revoke the driving privileges of a person convicted of a violation of that provision.

Existing law requires the driver of a vehicle involved in an accident involving only damage to property, or a person who parks a vehicle that becomes a runaway vehicle and damages property, to stop, as applicable, and fulfill specified reporting requirements. Existing law provides that failure to fulfill those requirements is a crime. Existing law authorizes a court to suspend the driving privileges of a person convicted of a violation of that provision for not more than 6 months.

This bill would require a prosecutor who agrees to accept a plea of guilty or nolo contendere from a defendant for a charge of a violation of the latter provision described above in satisfaction of or as a substitute for a charge for a violation of the former provision to state on the record whether the defendant was involved in an accident in which a person was injured. The bill would require the prosecutors statement to occur prior to the defendants waiver of the right to a jury trial. The bill would also require the judge to inform the defendant of the consequences described below prior to accepting the defendants plea of guilty or nolo contendere under these circumstances. If the court accepts the plea and the prosecutors statement states that a person was injured in connection with the accident, stipulates or does not contest the fact that the defendant was driving the vehicle that caused injury to another individual, the bill would require the court to immediately suspend the convicted persons driving privileges for a period of 6 months or order the convicted person to complete community service, as the court deems appropriate. By changing the penalty for a crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program.

The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.

This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

Existing law requires the driver of a vehicle involved in an accident involving either injury to a person other than the driver, or the death of a person, to immediately stop and fulfill specified reporting requirements. Existing law provides that failure to fulfill those requirements is a crime. Existing law requires the Department of Motor Vehicles to immediately revoke the driving privileges of a person convicted of a violation of that provision.

Existing law requires the driver of a vehicle involved in an accident involving only damage to property, or a person who parks a vehicle that becomes a runaway vehicle and damages property, to stop, as applicable, and fulfill specified reporting requirements. Existing law provides that failure to fulfill those requirements is a crime. Existing law authorizes a court to suspend the driving privileges of a person convicted of a violation of that provision for not more than 6 months.

This bill would require a prosecutor who agrees to accept a plea of guilty or nolo contendere from a defendant for a charge of a violation of the latter provision described above in satisfaction of or as a substitute for a charge for a violation of the former provision to state on the record whether the defendant was involved in an accident in which a person was injured. If the court accepts the plea and the prosecutors statement states that a person was injured in connection with the accident, the bill would require the court to immediately suspend the convicted persons driving privileges for a period of 6 months or order the convicted person to complete community service, as the court deems appropriate. By changing the penalty for a crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program.

The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.

This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

Existing law requires the driver of a vehicle involved in an accident involving either injury to a person other than the driver, or the death of a person, to immediately stop and fulfill specified reporting requirements. Existing law provides that failure to fulfill those requirements is a crime. Existing law requires the Department of Motor Vehicles to immediately revoke the driving privileges of a person convicted of a violation of that provision.

Existing law requires the driver of a vehicle involved in an accident involving only damage to property, or a person who parks a vehicle that becomes a runaway vehicle and damages property, to stop, as applicable, and fulfill specified reporting requirements. Existing law provides that failure to fulfill those requirements is a crime. Existing law authorizes a court to suspend the driving privileges of a person convicted of a violation of that provision for not more than 6 months.

This bill would require a prosecutor who agrees to accept a plea of guilty or nolo contendere from a defendant for a charge of a violation of the latter provision described above in satisfaction of or as a substitute for a charge for a violation of the former provision to state on the record whether the defendant was involved in an accident in which a person was injured. If the court accepts the plea and the prosecutors statement states that a person was injured in connection with the accident, the bill would require the court to immediately suspend the convicted persons driving privileges for a period of 6 months or order the convicted person to complete community service, as the court deems appropriate. By changing the penalty for a crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program.

The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.

This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

GOVERNOR'S VETO

GV Bill Id:AB 2088

Author:(Linder)

As Enrolled Ver:August 30, 2016

2/3 vote

Original Committee Reference: PUB. S.

SUMMARY: Requires the court to suspend the driving privilege for six months or impose an appropriate period of community service for any person who pleads guilty or nolo contendere to hit and run with property damage if the charge is a substitute or in satisfaction of the charge of hit and run resulting in injury or death.

The Senate amendments require the defendant to admit or stipulate that a person was injured in the accident and waive his or her right to a jury trial as to that fact in order for the court to impose increased punishment.

EXISTING LAW:

1. Provides that a court may suspend, for not more than six months, the privilege of a person to operate a motor vehicle upon conviction of any of the following offenses:
   1. Failure of a driver involved in an accident where property is damaged to stop and exchange specified information;
   2. Reckless driving proximately causing bodily injury;
   3. Failure of a driver to stop at a railroad crossing as required;
   4. Evading or fleeing from a peace officer in a motor vehicle or upon a bicycle; and,
   5. Knowingly causing or participating in a vehicular collision, or any other vehicular accident, for the purpose of presenting or causing to be presented any false or fraudulent insurance claim.
2. States that the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) immediately shall revoke the privilege of a person to operate a motor vehicle upon receipt of a duly certified abstract of the record of a court showing that the person has been convicted of any of the following crimes or offenses:
   1. Failure of the driver of a vehicle involved in an accident resulting in injury or death to stop or otherwise comply, as specified;
   2. A felony in which a motor vehicle is used, except as specified; and,
   3. Reckless driving causing bodily injury.
3. Provides that the driver of any vehicle involved in an accident resulting in damage to any property, including a vehicle, shall immediately stop the vehicle and exchange information, as specified, or leave in a conspicuous place on the vehicle or other property damaged written notice giving the name and address of the driver of the vehicle involved. The failure to comply with these requirements is a misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment in a county jail not to exceed six months, or by a fine not to exceed $1,000, or by both a fine and imprisonment.
4. Requires the driver of any vehicle involved in an accident resulting in injury to any person, other than himself or herself, or in the death of any person to immediately stop the vehicle at the scene of the accident and to fulfill specified requirements. The failure to comply is punishable by imprisonment in the state prison for 16 months, two or three years, or by imprisonment in a county jail not to exceed one year, or by a fine of not less than $1,000 nor more than $10,000, or by both a fine and imprisonment. If the accident results in death or permanent, serious injury, the offense is punishable by imprisonment in the state prison for two, three, or four years, or in a county jail for not less than 90 days nor more than one year, or by a fine of not less than $1,000 nor more than $10,000, or by both a fine and imprisonment.
5. Provides that a person who flees the scene of the crime after committing vehicular manslaughter with gross negligence or vehicular manslaughter while intoxicated, upon conviction for that offense, in addition and consecutive to the punishment prescribed, shall be punished by an additional term of imprisonment of five years in the state prison. Existing law provides that this additional term shall not be imposed unless the allegation is charged in the accusatory pleading and admitted by the defendant or found to be true by the trier of fact.
6. Provides that every person convicted of vandalism or affixing graffiti, as specified, may be ordered by the court as a condition of probation to perform community service not to exceed 300 hours over a period not to exceed one year during a time other than his or her hours of school attendance or employment.

AS PASSED BY THE ASSEMBLY, this bill:

1. Provided that if the prosecution agrees to a plea of guilty or nolo contendere to a charge of leaving the scene of an accident resulting in property damage without stopping and properly identifying himself or herself, in satisfaction of, or a substitute for the charge of leaving the scene of an accident resulting in injury or death without stopping and properly identifying himself or herself, the prosecutor shall state for the record the factual basis for the satisfaction or substitution, including whether the defendant was involved in an accident in which a person was injured. The prosecution's statement shall occur prior to the defendant's waiver of the right to a jury trial. The judge shall inform the defendant of the consequences of the plea.
2. Stated that if the court accepts the defendant's plea of guilty or nolo contendere to a charge of leaving the scene of an accident resulting in property damage without stopping and properly identifying himself or herself, and the prosecutor's statement that the driver of the vehicle was involved in an accident where a person was struck is not contested, or the defendant stipulates to that fact, the court shall immediately impose one of the following orders:
   1. Suspended the convicted driver's privilege to operate a motor vehicle for a period of six months;
   2. Restricted the convicted driver's privilege to operate a motor vehicle to necessary travel to and from that person's place of employment for not more than six months. If driving a motor vehicle is necessary to perform the duties of the person's scope of employment, the court may restrict the driving privilege to allow driving in that person's scope of employment. Whenever a person's driving privilege is restricted pursuant to this paragraph, the person shall be required to maintain proof of financial responsibility; and,
   3. Required the convicted driver to complete community service as the court deems appropriate.

FISCAL EFFECT: According to the Senate Appropriations Committee:

1. Programming changes: One-time implementation costs to the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) of approximately $110,000 (Special Fund*), primarily for programming changes that allow for reporting of convictions by the courts, retaining convictions on driver records, providing for license suspension and reinstatement, producing mailed notices, and making other changes. Ongoing DMV workload costs and revenues from license reinstatement fees are expected to be minor.
2. Trial courts: Negligible fiscal impact.

*Motor Vehicle Account

COMMENTS: According to the Author, "There's no question that hit-and-runs have reached epidemic proportions in our state with California Highway Patrol (CHP) citing nearly 79,000 total hit-and-run collisions in 2015 alone. This is up from the 73,000 collisions reported in 2014. AB 2088 is an effort to reduce the number of hit-and-runs and bring justice to the victims by ensuring that offenders face consequences for their reckless decisions.

"When committing a hit-and-run carries fewer penalties than driving under the influence, the choice to flee the scene of an accident is tempting for drunk drivers especially since their judgment is already impaired. California's weak penalty structure for hit-and-runs must be corrected to deter potential offenders, protect victims, and create greater highway safety."

Please see the policy committee analysis for a full discussion of this bill.

GOVERNOR'S VETO MESSAGE:

I am returning Assembly Bill 2088 without my signature.

This bill mandates a six month license suspension or restriction, or an appropriate period of community service, for any person who pleads guilty or nolo contendere to hit and run with property damage if the plea is in satisfaction of a charge of hit and run resulting in injury or death.

The prescriptive mandates contained in this bill dealing with one specific plea bargain scenario unnecessarily constrain judicial discretion-each sanction contemplated by this measure is already available to the court.

Analysis Prepared by: Gregory Pagan / PUB. S. / (916) 319-3744 FN: 0005140

CONCURRENCE IN SENATE AMENDMENTS

CSA1 Bill Id:AB 2088

Author:(Linder)

As Amended Ver:August 8, 2016

Majority vote

Original Committee Reference: PUB. S.

SUMMARY: Requires the court to suspend the driving privilege for six months or impose an appropriate period of community service for any person who pleads guilty or nolo contendere to hit and run with property damage if the charge is a substitute or in satisfaction of the charge of hit and run resulting in injury or death.

The Senate amendments require the defendant to admit or stipulate that a person was injured in the accident and waive his or her right to a jury trial as to that fact in order for the court to impose increased punishment.

EXISTING LAW:

1. Provides that a court may suspend, for not more than six months, the privilege of a person to operate a motor vehicle upon conviction of any of the following offenses:
   1. Failure of a driver involved in an accident where property is damaged to stop and exchange specified information;
   2. Reckless driving proximately causing bodily injury;
   3. Failure of a driver to stop at a railroad crossing as required;
   4. Evading or fleeing from a peace officer in a motor vehicle or upon a bicycle; and,
   5. Knowingly causing or participating in a vehicular collision, or any other vehicular accident, for the purpose of presenting or causing to be presented any false or fraudulent insurance claim.
2. States that the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) immediately shall revoke the privilege of a person to operate a motor vehicle upon receipt of a duly certified abstract of the record of a court showing that the person has been convicted of any of the following crimes or offenses:
   1. Failure of the driver of a vehicle involved in an accident resulting in injury or death to stop or otherwise comply, as specified;
   2. A felony in which a motor vehicle is used, except as specified; and,
   3. Reckless driving causing bodily injury.
3. Provides that the driver of any vehicle involved in an accident resulting in damage to any property, including a vehicle, shall immediately stop the vehicle and exchange information, as specified, or leave in a conspicuous place on the vehicle or other property damaged written notice giving the name and address of the driver of the vehicle involved. The failure to comply with these requirements is a misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment in a county jail not to exceed six months, or by a fine not to exceed $1,000, or by both a fine and imprisonment.
4. Requires the driver of any vehicle involved in an accident resulting in injury to any person, other than himself or herself, or in the death of any person to immediately stop the vehicle at the scene of the accident and to fulfill specified requirements. The failure to comply is punishable by imprisonment in the state prison for 16 months, two or three years, or by imprisonment in a county jail not to exceed one year, or by a fine of not less than $1,000 nor more than $10,000, or by both a fine and imprisonment. If the accident results in death or permanent, serious injury, the offense is punishable by imprisonment in the state prison for two, three, or four years, or in a county jail for not less than 90 days nor more than one year, or by a fine of not less than $1,000 nor more than $10,000, or by both a fine and imprisonment.
5. Provides that a person who flees the scene of the crime after committing vehicular manslaughter with gross negligence or vehicular manslaughter while intoxicated, upon conviction for that offense, in addition and consecutive to the punishment prescribed, shall be punished by an additional term of imprisonment of five years in the state prison. Existing law provides that this additional term shall not be imposed unless the allegation is charged in the accusatory pleading and admitted by the defendant or found to be true by the trier of fact.
6. Provides that every person convicted of vandalism or affixing graffiti, as specified, may be ordered by the court as a condition of probation to perform community service not to exceed 300 hours over a period not to exceed one year during a time other than his or her hours of school attendance or employment.

AS PASSED BY THE ASSEMBLY, this bill:

1. Provided that if the prosecution agrees to a plea of guilty or nolo contendere to a charge of leaving the scene of an accident resulting in property damage without stopping and properly identifying himself or herself, in satisfaction of, or a substitute for the charge of leaving the scene of an accident resulting in injury or death without stopping and properly identifying himself or herself, the prosecutor shall state for the record the factual basis for the satisfaction or substitution, including whether the defendant was involved in an accident in which a person was injured. The prosecution's statement shall occur prior to the defendant's waiver of the right to a jury trial. The judge shall inform the defendant of the consequences of the plea.
2. Stated that if the court accepts the defendant's plea of guilty or nolo contendere to a charge of leaving the scene of an accident resulting in property damage without stopping and properly identifying himself or herself, and the prosecutor's statement that the driver of the vehicle was involved in an accident where a person was struck is not contested, or the defendant stipulates to that fact, the court shall immediately impose one of the following orders:
   1. Suspended the convicted driver's privilege to operate a motor vehicle for a period of six months;
   2. Restricted the convicted driver's privilege to operate a motor vehicle to necessary travel to and from that person's place of employment for not more than six months. If driving a motor vehicle is necessary to perform the duties of the person's scope of employment, the court may restrict the driving privilege to allow driving in that person's scope of employment. Whenever a person's driving privilege is restricted pursuant to this paragraph, the person shall be required to maintain proof of financial responsibility; and,
   3. Required the convicted driver to complete community service as the court deems appropriate.

FISCAL EFFECT:

According to the Senate Appropriations Committee:

1. Programming changes: One-time implementation costs to the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) of approximately $110,000 (Special Fund*), primarily for programming changes that allow for reporting of convictions by the courts, retaining convictions on driver records, providing for license suspension and reinstatement, producing mailed notices, and making other changes. Ongoing DMV workload costs and revenues from license reinstatement fees are expected to be minor.
2. Trial courts: Negligible fiscal impact.

*Motor Vehicle Account

COMMENTS: According to the Author, "There's no question that hit-and-runs have reached epidemic proportions in our state with California Highway Patrol (CHP) citing nearly 79,000 total hit-and-run collisions in 2015 alone. This is up from the 73,000 collisions reported in 2014. AB 2088 is an effort to reduce the number of hit-and-runs and bring justice to the victims by ensuring that offenders face consequences for their reckless decisions.

"When committing a hit-and-run carries fewer penalties than driving under the influence, the choice to flee the scene of an accident is tempting for drunk drivers especially since their judgment is already impaired. California's weak penalty structure for hit-and-runs must be corrected to deter potential offenders, protect victims, and create greater highway safety."

Please see the policy committee analysis for a full discussion of this bill.

Analysis Prepared by: Gregory Pagan / PUB. S. / (916) 319-3744 FN: 0003906

 THIRD READING  

Bill No: AB 2088

Author:

:

Vote: 21

SENATE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE: 6-0, 6/21/16

AYES: Hancock, Anderson, Glazer, Leno, Liu, Stone

NO VOTE RECORDED: Monning

SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE: 7-0, 8/1/16

AYES: Lara, Bates, Beall, Hill, McGuire, Mendoza, Nielsen

ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 76-2, 5/16/16 - See last page for vote

SUBJECT:

SOURCE: Author

DIGEST: This bill requires the court to suspend the driving privilege for six months or impose an appropriate period of community service for any person who pleads guilty or nolo contendere to hit and run with property damage if the charge is a substitute or in satisfaction of the charge of hit and run resulting in injury or death.

Senate Floor Amendments of 8/8/16 clarify that the defendant must admit that another person was injured in the accident or stipulate to the prosecution’s statement that there was an injury, and waive his or her right to a jury trial for the judge to impose the additional sanction of suspension or restriction of a driver’s license or requirement of community service required under this bill.

ANALYSIS:

Existing law:

1. Provides that a court may suspend, for not more than six months, the privilege of a person to operate a motor vehicle upon conviction of any of the following offenses: a) Failure of a driver involved in an accident where property is damaged to stop and exchange specified information; b) Reckless driving proximately causing bodily injury; c) Failure of a driver to stop at a railroad crossing as required; d) Evading or fleeing from a peace officer in a motor vehicle or upon a bicycle; and, e) Knowingly causing or participating in a vehicular collision, or any other vehicular accident, for the purpose of presenting or causing to be presented any false or fraudulent insurance claim. (Vehicle Code §13201)
2. States that the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) immediately shall revoke the privilege of a person to operate a motor vehicle upon receipt of a duly certified abstract of the record of a court showing that the person has been convicted of any of the following crimes or offenses: a) Failure of the driver of a vehicle involved in an accident resulting in injury or death to stop or otherwise comply, as specified; b) A felony in which a motor vehicle is used, except as specified; and, c) Reckless driving causing bodily injury. (Vehicle Code § 13350 (a).)
3. Provides that the driver of any vehicle involved in an accident resulting in damage to any property, including a vehicle, shall immediately stop the vehicle and exchange information, as specified, or leave in a conspicuous place on the vehicle or other property damaged written notice giving the name and address of the driver of the vehicle involved. The failure to comply with these requirements is a misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment in a county jail not to exceed six months, or by a fine not to exceed $1,000, or by both a fine and imprisonment. (Vehicle Code § 20002.)
4. Requires the driver of any vehicle involved in an accident resulting in injury to any person, other than himself or herself, or in the death of any person to immediately stop the vehicle at the scene of the accident and to fulfill specified requirements. The failure to comply is punishable by imprisonment in the state prison for 16 months, two, or three years, or by imprisonment in a county jail not to exceed one year, or by a fine of not less than $1,000 nor more than $10,000, or by both a fine and imprisonment. If the accident results in death or permanent, serious injury, the offense is punishable by imprisonment in the state prison for two, three, or four years, or in a county jail for not less than 90 days nor more than one year, or by a fine of not less than $1,000 nor more than $10,000, or by both a fine and imprisonment. (Vehicle Code § 20001 (a) & (b).)
5. Provides that a person who flees the scene of the crime after committing vehicular manslaughter with gross negligence or vehicular manslaughter while intoxicated, upon conviction for that offense, in addition and consecutive to the punishment prescribed, shall be punished by an additional term of imprisonment of five years in the state prison. Existing law provides that this additional term shall not be imposed unless the allegation is charged in the accusatory pleading and admitted by the defendant or found to be true by the trier of fact. (Vehicle Code § 20001 (c).)
6. Provides that every person convicted of vandalism or affixing graffiti, as specified, may be ordered by the court as a condition of probation to perform community service not to exceed 300 hours over a period not to exceed one year during a time other than his or her hours of school attendance or employment. (Penal Code § 594.6 (a).)

This bill:

1. Provides that if the prosecution agrees to a plea of guilty or nolo contendere to a charge of fleeing the scene of an accident in satisfaction or substitution for a charge of fleeing the scene the prosecution shall state for the record the factual basis for the satisfaction or substitution including whether the defendant was involved in an accident in which a person was injured.
2. Provides that the prosecution’s statement shall occur prior to the defendant’s waiver of the right to a jury trial.
3. Provides that the judges shall inform the defendant of the specified consequences before accepting the defendant’s plea of guilty.
4. Provides that if the court accepts the defendant’s plea under the above circumstances and the prosecutor’s statement stipulates or does not contest the fact that the defendant was driving the vehicle that caused the injury, the court shall immediately issue an order to impose one of the following consequences:

• Suspend the convicted driver’s privilege to operate a motor vehicle for a period of six months.
• Restrict the convicted driver’s privilege to operate a motor vehicle to necessary travel to and from that person’s place of employment and for work, if driving is necessary, for not more than six months.
• Require the convicted driver to complete community service as the court deems appropriate.

1. Provides that this section shall become operative on January 1, 2018.

Background

This bill requires the court to suspend the driving privilege for six months with or without a to and from work restriction or impose an appropriate period of community service for any person who pleads guilty or nolo contendere to hit and run with property damage if the charge is a substitute or in satisfaction of the charge of hit and run resulting in injury or death.

Vehicle Code Section 13201 authorizes a court to suspend, for not more than six months, the privilege of a person to operate a motor vehicle upon conviction for failure of a driver involved in an accident where property is damaged to stop and exchange specified information.

Additionally, the court may impose any condition of probation reasonably related to the offense and aimed at discouraging such conduct in the future. (See People v. Lent (1975) 15 Cal. 3d 481, 486.) The imposition of a period of community service would be considered a valid condition of probation and well within the courts discretion.

This bill limits the court's discretion in that it requires the court to either suspend the defendant's driving privilege for six months or impose a period of community service. Both of which options the court may already exercise, in appropriate cases, in its discretion.

FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: Fiscal Com.: Local:

According to the Senate Appropriations Committee:

• Programming changes: One-time implementation costs to the DMV of approximately $110,000 (Special Fund*), primarily for programming changes that allow for reporting of convictions by the courts, retaining convictions on driver records, providing for license suspension and reinstatement, producing mailed notices, and making other changes. Ongoing DMV workload costs and revenues from license reinstatement fees are expected to be minor.
• Trial courts: Negligible fiscal impact.

*Motor Vehicle Account

SUPPORT: (Verified 8/8/16)

American Motorcycle Association

Association for Los Angeles Deputy Sheriffs

California Association of Highway Patrol

Crime Victims United

Forged By Fire Foundation

Los Angeles Walks

Orange County Transportation Authority

Peace Officers Research Association of California

OPPOSITION: (Verified 8/8/16)

American Civil Liberties Union

California Public Defenders Association

ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT: According to the author:

Hit-and-runs have reached epidemic proportions in California and unfortunately there’s no sign of them slowing down. CHP has cited an increase in hit-and-run incidents from 73,000 in 2014 to 79,000 in 2015. CHP stats attached.

Current penalties for hit-and-runs do not reflect the seriousness of the crime and do not act as an effective deterrent. Hit-and-run drivers are seldom held accountable for their crimes—either they are handed lenient sentences or never even identified by police. From 2009 through 2012, 87% of drivers who “left victims dead or injured by the side of the road” escaped conviction. Of those who were convicted, the majority served less than a 2-month jail sentence. (Mario Karon, “If You Hit Someone With a Car and Drive Away, You’re Probably Not Getting Punished,” Voice of San Diego, 8 August 2014, http://voiceofsandiego.org/ 2014/08/08/ if-you-hit-someone-with-a-car-and-drive-away-youre-probably-not-getting-punished/)

Under current law, it is possible for a driver who commits a hit-and-run with injury to enter into a plea bargain agreement and only have to pay a couple hundred dollar fine. Driving a motor vehicle is a serious responsibility and should be viewed as a privilege rather than a right. Hit-and-run drivers abuse this privilege and should be held fully accountable for their actions.

ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION: According to the California Public Defenders Association:

DAs are not in the habit of casually reducing injury hit and run charges to non-injury hit and runs. They do it only where there is a real question about whether a true injury occurred or when there are other serious proof problems. Furthermore, the most serious consequences of a hit and run charge, in the eyes of most of the clients we serve, is the loss of their driver’s license because it is essential in their jobs or the proper functioning of their families. To remove the prime defense advantage of reducing the charges to a 20002 is to force more defendants to demand a trial, which will cause more expense to the court system, and is likely to result in more acquittals because the DA wouldn’t offer the reduction if the case didn’t have problems in the first place.

ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 76-2, 5/16/16

AYES: Achadjian, Alejo, Arambula, Atkins, Baker, Bigelow, Bloom, Bonilla, Bonta, Brough, Brown, Burke, Calderon, Campos, Chang, Chau, Chávez, Chiu, Chu, Cooley, Cooper, Dahle, Daly, Dodd, Eggman, Frazier, Beth Gaines, Gallagher, Cristina Garcia, Eduardo Garcia, Gatto, Gipson, Gomez, Gonzalez, Gordon, Gray, Grove, Hadley, Harper, Roger Hernández, Holden, Irwin, Jones, Jones-Sawyer, Kim, Lackey, Levine, Linder, Lopez, Low, Maienschein, Mathis, Mayes, McCarty, Medina, Melendez, Mullin, Nazarian, Obernolte, O'Donnell, Olsen, Patterson, Ridley-Thomas, Rodriguez, Salas, Santiago, Steinorth, Thurmond, Ting, Wagner, Waldron, Weber, Wilk, Williams, Wood, Rendon

NOES: Quirk, Mark Stone

NO VOTE RECORDED: Travis Allen, Dababneh

Prepared by: Mary Kennedy / PUB. S. /

8/10/16 15:57:19

**** END ****

 THIRD READING  

Bill No: AB 2088

Author:

:

Vote:

SENATE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE: 6-0, 6/21/16

AYES: Hancock, Anderson, Glazer, Leno, Liu, Stone

NO VOTE RECORDED: Monning

SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE: 7-0, 8/1/16

AYES: Lara, Bates, Beall, Hill, McGuire, Mendoza, Nielsen

ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 76-2, 5/16/16 - See last page for vote

SUBJECT:

SOURCE: Author

DIGEST: This bill requires the court to suspend the driving privilege for six months or impose an appropriate period of community service for any person who pleads guilty or nolo contendere to hit and run with property damage if the charge is a substitute or in satisfaction of the charge of hit and run resulting in injury or death.

ANALYSIS:

Existing law:

1. Provides that a court may suspend, for not more than six months, the privilege of a person to operate a motor vehicle upon conviction of any of the following offenses: a) Failure of a driver involved in an accident where property is damaged to stop and exchange specified information; b) Reckless driving proximately causing bodily injury; c) Failure of a driver to stop at a railroad crossing as required; d) Evading or fleeing from a peace officer in a motor vehicle or upon a bicycle; and, e) Knowingly causing or participating in a vehicular collision, or any other vehicular accident, for the purpose of presenting or causing to be presented any false or fraudulent insurance claim. (Vehicle Code §13201)
2. States that the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) immediately shall revoke the privilege of a person to operate a motor vehicle upon receipt of a duly certified abstract of the record of a court showing that the person has been convicted of any of the following crimes or offenses: a) Failure of the driver of a vehicle involved in an accident resulting in injury or death to stop or otherwise comply, as specified; b) A felony in which a motor vehicle is used, except as specified; and, c) Reckless driving causing bodily injury. (Vehicle Code § 13350 (a).)
3. Provides that the driver of any vehicle involved in an accident resulting in damage to any property, including a vehicle, shall immediately stop the vehicle and exchange information, as specified, or leave in a conspicuous place on the vehicle or other property damaged written notice giving the name and address of the driver of the vehicle involved. The failure to comply with these requirements is a misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment in a county jail not to exceed six months, or by a fine not to exceed $1,000, or by both a fine and imprisonment. (Vehicle Code § 20002.)
4. Requires the driver of any vehicle involved in an accident resulting in injury to any person, other than himself or herself, or in the death of any person to immediately stop the vehicle at the scene of the accident and to fulfill specified requirements. The failure to comply is punishable by imprisonment in the state prison for 16 months, two, or three years, or by imprisonment in a county jail not to exceed one year, or by a fine of not less than $1,000 nor more than $10,000, or by both a fine and imprisonment. If the accident results in death or permanent, serious injury, the offense is punishable by imprisonment in the state prison for two, three, or four years, or in a county jail for not less than 90 days nor more than one year, or by a fine of not less than $1,000 nor more than $10,000, or by both a fine and imprisonment. (Vehicle Code § 20001 (a) & (b).)
5. Provides that a person who flees the scene of the crime after committing vehicular manslaughter with gross negligence or vehicular manslaughter while intoxicated, upon conviction for that offense, in addition and consecutive to the punishment prescribed, shall be punished by an additional term of imprisonment of five years in the state prison. Existing law provides that this additional term shall not be imposed unless the allegation is charged in the accusatory pleading and admitted by the defendant or found to be true by the trier of fact. (Vehicle Code § 20001 (c).)
6. Provides that every person convicted of vandalism or affixing graffiti, as specified, may be ordered by the court as a condition of probation to perform community service not to exceed 300 hours over a period not to exceed one year during a time other than his or her hours of school attendance or employment. (Penal Code § 594.6 (a).)

This bill:

1. Provides that if the prosecution agrees to a plea of guilty or nolo contendere to a charge of fleeing the scene of an accident in satisfaction or substitution for a charge of fleeing the scene the prosecution shall state for the record the factual basis for the satisfaction or substitution including whether the defendant was involved in an accident in which a person was injured.
2. Provides that the prosecution’s statement shall occur prior to the defendant’s waiver of the right to a jury trial.
3. Provides that the judges shall inform the defendant of the specified consequences before accepting the defendant’s plea of guilty.
4. Provides that if the court accepts the defendant’s plea under the above circumstances and the prosecutor’s statement stipulates or does not contest the fact that the defendant was driving the vehicle that caused the injury, the court shall immediately issue an order to impose one of the following consequences:

• Suspend the convicted driver’s privilege to operate a motor vehicle for a period of six months.
• Restrict the convicted driver’s privilege to operate a motor vehicle to necessary travel to and from that person’s place of employment and for work, if driving is necessary, for not more than six months.
• Require the convicted driver to complete community service as the court deems appropriate.

1. Provides that this section shall become operative on January 1, 2018.

Background

This bill requires the court to suspend the driving privilege for six months with or without a to and from work restriction or impose an appropriate period of community service for any person who pleads guilty or nolo contendere to hit and run with property damage if the charge is a substitute or in satisfaction of the charge of hit and run resulting in injury or death.

Vehicle Code Section 13201 authorizes a court to suspend, for not more than six months, the privilege of a person to operate a motor vehicle upon conviction for failure of a driver involved in an accident where property is damaged to stop and exchange specified information.

Additionally, the court may impose any condition of probation reasonably related to the offense and aimed at discouraging such conduct in the future. (See People v. Lent (1975) 15 Cal. 3d 481, 486.) The imposition of a period of community service would be considered a valid condition of probation and well within the courts discretion.

This bill limits the court's discretion in that it requires the court to either suspend the defendant's driving privilege for six months or impose a period of community service. Both of which options the court may already exercise, in appropriate cases, in its discretion.

FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: Fiscal Com.: Local:

According to the Senate Appropriations Committee:

• Programming changes: One-time implementation costs to the DMV of approximately $110,000 (Special Fund*), primarily for programming changes that allow for reporting of convictions by the courts, retaining convictions on driver records, providing for license suspension and reinstatement, producing mailed notices, and making other changes. Ongoing DMV workload costs and revenues from license reinstatement fees are expected to be minor.
• Trial courts: Negligible fiscal impact.

*Motor Vehicle Account

SUPPORT: (Verified 8/2/16)

American Motorcycle Association

Association for Los Angeles Deputy Sheriffs

California Association of Highway Patrol

Crime Victims United

Forged By Fire Foundation

Los Angeles Walks

Orange County Transportation Authority

Peace Officers Research Association of California

OPPOSITION: (Verified 8/2/16)

American Civil Liberties Union

California Public Defenders Association

ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT: According to the author:

Hit-and-runs have reached epidemic proportions in California and unfortunately there’s no sign of them slowing down. CHP has cited an increase in hit-and-run incidents from 73,000 in 2014 to 79,000 in 2015. CHP stats attached.

Current penalties for hit-and-runs do not reflect the seriousness of the crime and do not act as an effective deterrent. Hit-and-run drivers are seldom held accountable for their crimes—either they are handed lenient sentences or never even identified by police. From 2009 through 2012, 87% of drivers who “left victims dead or injured by the side of the road” escaped conviction. Of those who were convicted, the majority served less than a 2-month jail sentence. (Mario Karon, “If You Hit Someone With a Car and Drive Away, You’re Probably Not Getting Punished,” Voice of San Diego, 8 August 2014, http://voiceofsandiego.org/ 2014/08/08/ if-you-hit-someone-with-a-car-and-drive-away-youre-probably-not-getting-punished/)

Under current law, it is possible for a driver who commits a hit-and-run with injury to enter into a plea bargain agreement and only have to pay a couple hundred dollar fine. Driving a motor vehicle is a serious responsibility and should be viewed as a privilege rather than a right. Hit-and-run drivers abuse this privilege and should be held fully accountable for their actions.

ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION: According to the California Public Defenders Association:

DAs are not in the habit of casually reducing injury hit and run charges to non-injury hit and runs. They do it only where there is a real question about whether a true injury occurred or when there are other serious proof problems. Furthermore, the most serious consequences of a hit and run charge, in the eyes of most of the clients we serve, is the loss of their driver’s license because it is essential in their jobs or the proper functioning of their families. To remove the prime defense advantage of reducing the charges to a 20002 is to force more defendants to demand a trial, which will cause more expense to the court system, and is likely to result in more acquittals because the DA wouldn’t offer the reduction if the case didn’t have problems in the first place.

ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 76-2, 5/16/16

AYES: Achadjian, Alejo, Arambula, Atkins, Baker, Bigelow, Bloom, Bonilla, Bonta, Brough, Brown, Burke, Calderon, Campos, Chang, Chau, Chávez, Chiu, Chu, Cooley, Cooper, Dahle, Daly, Dodd, Eggman, Frazier, Beth Gaines, Gallagher, Cristina Garcia, Eduardo Garcia, Gatto, Gipson, Gomez, Gonzalez, Gordon, Gray, Grove, Hadley, Harper, Roger Hernández, Holden, Irwin, Jones, Jones-Sawyer, Kim, Lackey, Levine, Linder, Lopez, Low, Maienschein, Mathis, Mayes, McCarty, Medina, Melendez, Mullin, Nazarian, Obernolte, O'Donnell, Olsen, Patterson, Ridley-Thomas, Rodriguez, Salas, Santiago, Steinorth, Thurmond, Ting, Wagner, Waldron, Weber, Wilk, Williams, Wood, Rendon

NOES: Quirk, Mark Stone

NO VOTE RECORDED: Travis Allen, Dababneh

Prepared by:

8/3/16 18:56:56

**** END ****

SENATE COMMITTEE ON

Senator Ricardo Lara, Chair

2015 - 2016 Regular Session

AB 2088 (Linder) - Vehicles: hit-and-run accidents: pleas

This bill does not meet the criteria for referral to the Suspense File.

Bill Summary:

AB 2088 would, commencing January 1, 2018, require the court to immediately suspend the driving privilege for a period of six months or order the completion of community service for any person who pleads guilty or nolo contendere to hit and run with property damage if the charge is a substitute for, or in satisfaction of, the charge of hit and run resulting in injury or death.

Fiscal Impact:

• Programming changes: One-time implementation costs to the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) of approximately $110,000 (Special Fund*), primarily for programming changes that allow for reporting of convictions by the courts, retaining convictions on driver records, providing for license suspension and reinstatement, producing mailed notices, and making other changes. Ongoing DMV workload costs and revenues from license reinstatement fees are expected to be minor.
• Trial courts: Negligible fiscal impact.

*Motor Vehicle Account

Background:

Existing law requires the driver of any vehicle involved in an accident resulting in damage to any property, including a vehicle, to immediately stop the vehicle and exchange information, as specified, or leave in a conspicuous place on the vehicle or other property damaged written notice given the name and address of the driver of the vehicle involved. The failure to comply with these requirements is a misdemeanor, punishable by imprisonment in a county jail for up to six months, a fine of up to $1,000, or by both imprisonment and the fine. (Vehicle Code (VC) § 20002.)

Existing law requires the driver of any vehicle involved in an accident resulting in injury or death of any person to immediately stop the vehicle at the scene of the accident and to fulfill specified requirements. For accidents resulting in injury, the failure to comply is punishable by imprisonment in the state prison for 16 months, two years, or three years, or by imprisonment in county jail for up to one year, by a fine of not less than $1,000 nor more than $10,000, or by both a fine and imprisonment. For accidents resulting in the death of a person, the failure to comply is punishable by imprisonment in state prison for two, three, or four years, or in a county jail for not less than 90 days nor more than one year, or by a fine of not less than $1,000 nor more than $10,000, or by both that imprisonment and fine. The court, in the interests of justice and for reasons stated in the record, may reduce or eliminate the minimum imprisonment. (VC § 20001.)

Existing law authorizes a court to suspend, for not more than six months, the privilege of a person to operate a motor vehicle upon conviction of any of the following offenses:

• Failure of the driver of a vehicle involved in an accident in which property is damaged to stop and exchange specified information.
• Reckless driving proximately causing bodily injury to a person, as specified.
• Failure of the driver of a vehicle to stop at a railway grade crossing, as specified.
• Evading or fleeing from a peace officer, as specified, in a motor vehicle or upon a bicycle.
• Knowingly causing or participating in a vehicular collision, or any other vehicular accident, for the purpose of presenting or causing to be presented any false or fraudulent insurance claim. (VC § 13201.)

Under existing law, the DMV is required to immediately revoke the driving privileges of a person convicted of any of the following crimes or offenses and shall not reinstate the privilege revoked until the expiration of one year after the date of revocation and until the person whose privilege was revoked gives proof of financial responsibility:

• Failure of the driver of a vehicle involved in an accident resulting in injury or death to a person to stop and exchange specified information.
• A felony in the commission of which a motor vehicle is used, except as specified.
• Reckless driving causing bodily injury. (VC § 13350 (a).)

Proposed Law:

This bill provides that if the prosecution agrees to a plea of guilty or nolo contendere to a charge of fleeing the scene of an accident (VC § 20002) in satisfaction of or substitution for a charge of fleeing the scene of an accident resulting in injury or death (VC § 20001), the prosecution shall state for the record the factual basis for the satisfaction or substitution, including whether the defendant was involved in an accident in which a person was injured. Additionally, this bill:

• Provides that the prosecution’s statement shall occur prior to the defendant’s waiver of the right to a jury trial.
• Requires the judge to inform the defendant of the specified consequences before accepting the defendant’s plea of guilty.
• Provides that if the court accepts the defendant’s plea under the above circumstances and the prosecutor’s statement stipulates or does not contest the fact that the defendant was driving the vehicle that caused the injury, the court shall immediately issue an order to impose one of the following consequences:
• Suspend the convicted driver’s privilege to operate a motor vehicle for a period of six months.
• Restrict the convicted driver’s privilege to operate a motor vehicle to necessary travel to and from that person’s place of employment and for work, if driving is necessary, for not more than six months.
• Require the convicted driver to complete community service as the court deems appropriate.
• Provides the provisions of the bill become operative on January 1, 2018.

Related Legislation:

AB 534 (Linder) 2015 would have required the court to suspend the driving privilege for six months of any person who pleads guilty or nolo contendere to hit and run with property damage if the charge is a substitute or in satisfaction of the charge of hit and run resulting in injury or death. This bill failed passage in the Assembly Committee on Public Safety.

AB 1532 (Gatto) 2014 would have required that the privilege to operate a motor vehicle shall be suspended for six months for any person convicted of being a driver of a vehicle involved in an accident where a person is struck, but not injured, and the driver of the vehicle leaves the scene of the accident without exchanging required information, as specified. This bill was vetoed by the Governor with the following message:

I am returning Assembly Bill 1532 without my signature. California has a very extensive set of criminal laws and penalties. This measure would create a new crime that includes a fine and penalty assessments up to $4,231 and possible jail time of six months. I don't find sufficient justification for creating a new crime when no injury to person or property occurred. I think current law is adequate.

AB 2337 (Linder) 2014 would have increased from one to two years the mandatory suspension of the privilege to operate a motor vehicle for any person convicted of leaving the scene of an accident resulting in injury or death without exchanging required identification information. This bill was vetoed by the Governor.

Staff Comments:

The DMV has indicated one-time programming costs of $110,000 (Motor Vehicle Account) to implement the provisions of this measure by January 1, 2018.

The Judicial Council does not anticipate a significant fiscal impact to trial court operations associated with the mandatory judicial advisement and specified court orders.

Staff notes that under current law, courts already have within their discretion the ability to suspend for six months, the driving privilege of any defendant convicted of a violation of VC § 20002 – regardless of whether a defendant was involved in an accident where a person was injured (VC § 13201).

-- END --

SENATE COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC SAFETY

Senator Loni Hancock, Chair

2015 - 2016 Regular

Bill No: AB 2088 Hearing Date: June 21, 2016

Subject: Vehicles: Hit-and-Run Accidents: Pleas

HISTORY

Source: Author

Prior Legislation: AB 534 (Linder) – failed ACoPS, 2015

AB 1532 (Gatto) – Vetoed, 2014

AB 2337 (Linder) – Vetoed, 2014

Support: American Motorcycle Association; The Association for Los Angeles Deputy Sheriffs; California Association of Highway Patrol; Crime Victims United; Forged By Fire Foundation; Los Angeles Walks

Opposition: American Civil Liberties Union; California Public Defenders Association

Assembly Floor Vote: 76 - 2

PURPOSE

The purpose of this bill is to require the court to suspend the driving privilege for six months or impose an appropriate period of community service for any person who pleads guilty or nolo contendere to hit and run with property damage if the charge is a substitute or in satisfaction of the charge of hit and run resulting in injury or death.

Existing law provides that a court may suspend, for not more than six months, the privilege of a person to operate a motor vehicle upon conviction of any of the following offenses: a) Failure of a driver involved in an accident where property is damaged to stop and exchange specified information; b) Reckless driving proximately causing bodily injury; c) Failure of a driver to stop at a railroad crossing as required; d) Evading or fleeing from a peace officer in a motor vehicle or upon a bicycle; and, e) Knowingly causing or participating in a vehicular collision, or any other vehicular accident, for the purpose of presenting or causing to be presented any false or fraudulent insurance claim. (Vehicle Code, §13201)

Existing law states that the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) immediately shall revoke the privilege of a person to operate a motor vehicle upon receipt of a duly certified abstract of the record of a court showing that the person has been convicted of any of the following crimes or offenses: a) Failure of the driver of a vehicle involved in an accident resulting in injury or death to stop or otherwise comply, as specified; b) A felony in which a motor vehicle is used, except as specified; and, c) Reckless driving causing bodily injury. (Vehicle Code, § 13350 (a).)

Existing law provides that the driver of any vehicle involved in an accident resulting in damage to any property, including a vehicle, shall immediately stop the vehicle and exchange information, as specified, or leave in a conspicuous place on the vehicle or other property damaged written notice giving the name and address of the driver of the vehicle involved. The failure to comply with these requirements is a misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment in a county jail not to exceed six months, or by a fine not to exceed $1,000, or by both a fine and imprisonment. (Vehicle Code, § 20002.)

Existing law requires the driver of any vehicle involved in an accident resulting in injury to any person, other than himself or herself, or in the death of any person to immediately stop the vehicle at the scene of the accident and to fulfill specified requirements. The failure to comply is punishable by imprisonment in the state prison for 16 months, two, or three years, or by imprisonment in a county jail not to exceed one year, or by a fine of not less than $1,000 nor more than $10,000, or by both a fine and imprisonment. If the accident results in death or permanent, serious injury, the offense is punishable by imprisonment in the state prison for two, three, or four years, or in a county jail for not less than 90 days nor more than one year, or by a fine of not less than $1,000 nor more than $10,000, or by both a fine and imprisonment. (Vehicle Code, § 20001 (a) & (b).)

Existing law provides that a person who flees the scene of the crime after committing vehicular manslaughter with gross negligence or vehicular manslaughter while intoxicated, upon conviction for that offense, in addition and consecutive to the punishment prescribed, shall be punished by an additional term of imprisonment of five years in the state prison. Existing law provides that this additional term shall not be imposed unless the allegation is charged in the accusatory pleading and admitted by the defendant or found to be true by the trier of fact. (Vehicle Code, § 20001 (c).)

Existing law provides that every person convicted of vandalism or affixing graffiti, as specified, may be ordered by the court as a condition of probation to perform community service not to exceed 300 hours over a period not to exceed one year during a time other than his or hers hours of school attendance or employment. (Pen Code, § 594.6 (a).)

This bill provides that if the prosecution agrees to a plea of guilty or nolo contender to a charge of fleeing the scene of an accident in satisfaction or substitution for a charge of fleeing the scene the prosecution shall state for the record the factual basis for the satisfaction or substitution including whether the defendant was involved in an accident in which a person was injured.

This bill provides that the prosecution’s statement shall occur prior to the defendant’s waiver of the right to a jury trial.

This bill provides that the judges shall inform the defendant of the specified consequences before accepting the defendant’s plea of guilty.

This bill provides that if the court accepts the defendant’s plea under the above circumstances and the prosecutor’s statement stipulates or does not contest the fact that the defendant was driving the vehicle that caused the injury, the court shall immediately issue an order to impose one of the following consequences:

• Suspend the convicted driver’s privilege to operate a motor vehicle for a period of six months.
• Restrict the convicted driver’s privilege to operate a motor vehicle to necessary travel to and from that person’s place of employment and for work, if driving is necessary, for not more than six months.
• Require the convicted driver to complete community service as the court deems appropriate.

RECEIVERSHIP/OVERCROWDING CRISIS AGGRAVATION

For the past several years this Committee has scrutinized legislation referred to its jurisdiction for any potential impact on prison overcrowding. Mindful of the United States Supreme Court ruling and federal court orders relating to the state’s ability to provide a constitutional level of health care to its inmate population and the related issue of prison overcrowding, this Committee has applied its “ROCA” policy as a content-neutral, provisional measure necessary to ensure that the Legislature does not erode progress in reducing prison overcrowding.

On February 10, 2014, the federal court ordered California to reduce its in-state adult institution population to 137.5% of design capacity by February 28, 2016, as follows:

• 143% of design bed capacity by June 30, 2014;
• 141.5% of design bed capacity by February 28, 2015; and,
• 137.5% of design bed capacity by February 28, 2016.

In December of 2015 the administration reported that as “of December 9, 2015, 112,510 inmates were housed in the State’s 34 adult institutions, which amounts to 136.0% of design bed capacity, and 5,264 inmates were housed in out-of-state facilities. The current population is 1,212 inmates below the final court-ordered population benchmark of 137.5% of design bed capacity, and has been under that benchmark since February 2015.” (Defendants’ December 2015 Status Report in Response to February 10, 2014 Order, 2:90-cv-00520 KJM DAD PC, 3-Judge Court, Coleman v. Brown, Plata v. Brown (fn. omitted).) One year ago, 115,826 inmates were housed in the State’s 34 adult institutions, which amounted to 140.0% of design bed capacity, and 8,864 inmates were housed in out-of-state facilities. (Defendants’ December 2014 Status Report in Response to February 10, 2014 Order, 2:90-cv-00520 KJM DAD PC, 3-Judge Court, Coleman v. Brown, Plata v. Brown (fn. omitted).)

While significant gains have been made in reducing the prison population, the state must stabilize these advances and demonstrate to the federal court that California has in place the “durable solution” to prison overcrowding “consistently demanded” by the court. (Opinion Re: Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Defendants’ Request For Extension of December 31, 2013 Deadline, NO. 2:90-cv-0520 LKK DAD (PC), 3-Judge Court, Coleman v. Brown, Plata v. Brown (2-10-14). The Committee’s consideration of bills that may impact the prison population therefore will be informed by the following questions:

• Whether a proposal erodes a measure which has contributed to reducing the prison population;
• Whether a proposal addresses a major area of public safety or criminal activity for which there is no other reasonable, appropriate remedy;
• Whether a proposal addresses a crime which is directly dangerous to the physical safety of others for which there is no other reasonably appropriate sanction;
• Whether a proposal corrects a constitutional problem or legislative drafting error; and
• Whether a proposal proposes penalties which are proportionate, and cannot be achieved through any other reasonably appropriate remedy.

COMMENTS

1. Need for This Bill

According to the author:

Hit-and-runs have reached epidemic proportions in California and unfortunately there’s no sign of them slowing down. CHP has cited an increase in hit-and-run incidents from 73,000 in 2014 to 79,000 in 2015. CHP stats attached.

Current penalties for hit-and-runs do not reflect the seriousness of the crime and do not act as an effective deterrent. Hit-and-run drivers are seldom held accountable for their crimes—either they are handed lenient sentences or never even identified by police. From 2009 through 2012, 87% of drivers who “left victims dead or injured by the side of the road” escaped conviction. Of those who were convicted, the majority served less than a 2-month jail sentence.^[1]

Under current law, it is possible for a driver who commits a hit-and-run with injury to enter into a plea bargain agreement and only have to pay a couple hundred dollar fine. Driving a motor vehicle is a serious responsibility and should be viewed as a privilege rather than a right. Hit-and-run drivers abuse this privilege and should be held fully accountable for their actions.

2. Limits Court Discretion in a Plea Bargain

This bill requires the court to suspend the driving privilege for six months with or without a two and from work restriction or impose a an appropriate period of community service for any person who pleads guilty or nolo contendere to hit and run with property damage if the charge is a substitute or in satisfaction of the charge of hit and run resulting in injury or death.

Vehicle Code Section 13201 authorizes a court to suspend, for not more than six months, the privilege of a person to operate a motor vehicle upon conviction for failure of a driver involved in an accident where property is damaged to stop and exchange specified information.

Additionally, the court may impose any condition of probation reasonably related to the offense and aimed at discouraging such conduct in the future. (See People v. Lent (1975) 15 Cal. 3d 481, 486.) The imposition of a period of community service would be considered a valid condition of probation and well within the courts discretion.

This bill limits the court's discretion in that it requires the court to either suspend the defendant's driving privilege for six months or impose a period of community service. Both of which options the court may already exercise, in appropriate cases, in its discretion.

3. Apprendi v. New Jersey

In this bill, in order for the court to impose the additional sanction of, either, a six month license suspension or community service, the prosecution must state on the record the factual basis for the substitution for the original charge, including whether the defendant was involved in an accident in which a person was injured.

The Sixth Amendment right to a jury trial applies to any factual finding, other than that of a prior conviction, necessary to warrant any sentence beyond the presumptive maximum. (Apprendi v. New Jersey (2000) 530 U.S. 466, 490; Blakely v. Washington (2004) 524 U.S. 296, 301, 303-304.)

In Cunningham v. California (2007) 549 U.S. 270, the United States Supreme Court held California's Determinate Sentencing Law (DSL) violated a defendant's right to trial by jury by placing sentence-elevating fact finding within the judge's province. (Id. at p. 274.) The DSL authorized the court to increase the defendant's sentence by finding facts not reflected in the jury verdict. Specifically, the trial judge could find factors in aggravation by a preponderance of evidence to increase the offender's sentence from the presumptive middle term to the upper term and, as such, was constitutionally flawed. The Court stated, "Because the DSL authorizes the judge, not the jury, to find the facts permitting an upper term sentence, the sentence cannot withstand measurement against our Sixth Amendment precedent." (Id. at p. 293.)

In this bill, the additional punishment of a license suspension or community service is triggered by a factual finding by the court, based on a statement by the prosecution that the defendant was involved in an accident and a person was injured appears to violate the defendant's Sixth Amendment right to a jury trial as to the finding of that particular fact.

-- END –

1. Mario Karon, “If You Hit Someone With a Car and Drive Away, You’re Probably Not Getting Punished,” Voice of San Diego, 8 August 2014, http://voiceofsandiego.org/2014/08/08/if-you-hit-someone-with-a-car-and-drive-away-youre-probably-not-getting-punished/ ↑

ASSEMBLY THIRD READING

ATR Bill Id:AB 2088

Author:(Linder)

As Amended Ver:April 27, 2016

Majority vote

SUMMARY:

Requires the court to suspend the driving privilege for six months or impose an appropriate period of community service for any person who pleads guilty or nolo contendere to hit and run with property damage if the charge is a substitute or in satisfaction of the charge of hit and run resulting in injury or death. Specifically, this bill:

1. Provides that if the prosecution agrees to a plea of guilty or nolo contendere to a charge of leaving the scene of an accident resulting in property damage without stopping and properly identifying himself or herself, in satisfaction of, or a substitute for the charge of leaving the scene of an accident resulting in injury or death without stopping and properly identifying himself or herself, the prosecutor shall state for the record the factual basis for the satisfaction or substitution, including whether the defendant was involved in an accident in which a person was injured. The prosecution's statement shall occur prior to the defendant's waiver of the right to a jury trial. The judge shall inform the defendant of the consequences of the plea.
2. States that if the court accepts the defendant's plea of guilty or nolo contendere to a charge of leaving the scene of an accident resulting in property damage without stopping and properly identifying himself or herself, and the prosecutor's statement that the driver of the vehicle was involved in an accident where a person was struck is not contested, or the defendant stipulates to that fact, the court shall immediately impose one of the following orders:
   1. Suspend the convicted driver's privilege to operate a motor vehicle for a period of six months;
   2. Restrict the convicted driver's privilege to operate a motor vehicle to necessary travel to and from that person's place of employment for not more than six months. If driving a motor vehicle is necessary to perform the duties of the person's scope of employment, the court may restrict the driving privilege to allow driving in that person's scope of employment. Whenever a person's driving privilege is restricted pursuant to this paragraph, the person shall be required to maintain proof of financial responsibility; and,
   3. Require the convicted driver to complete community service as the court deems appropriate.

EXISTING LAW:

1. Provides that a court may suspend, for not more than six months, the privilege of a person to operate a motor vehicle upon conviction of any of the following offenses:
   1. Failure of a driver involved in an accident where property is damaged to stop and exchange specified information;
   2. Reckless driving proximately causing bodily injury;
   3. Failure of a driver to stop at a railroad crossing as required;
   4. Evading or fleeing from a peace officer in a motor vehicle or upon a bicycle; and,
   5. Knowingly causing or participating in a vehicular collision, or any other vehicular accident, for the purpose of presenting or causing to be presented any false or fraudulent insurance claim.
2. States that the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) immediately shall revoke the privilege of a person to operate a motor vehicle upon receipt of a duly certified abstract of the record of a court showing that the person has been convicted of any of the following crimes or offenses:
   1. Failure of the driver of a vehicle involved in an accident resulting in injury or death to stop or otherwise comply, as specified;
   2. A felony in which a motor vehicle is used, except as specified; and,
   3. Reckless driving causing bodily injury.
3. Provides that the driver of any vehicle involved in an accident resulting in damage to any property, including a vehicle, shall immediately stop the vehicle and exchange information, as specified, or leave in a conspicuous place on the vehicle or other property damaged written notice giving the name and address of the driver of the vehicle involved. The failure to comply with these requirements is a misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment in a county jail not to exceed six months, or by a fine not to exceed $1,000, or by both a fine and imprisonment.
4. Requires the driver of any vehicle involved in an accident resulting in injury to any person, other than himself or herself, or in the death of any person to immediately stop the vehicle at the scene of the accident and to fulfill specified requirements. The failure to comply is punishable by imprisonment in the state prison for 16 months, two or three years, or by imprisonment in a county jail not to exceed one year, or by a fine of not less than $1,000 nor more than $10,000, or by both a fine and imprisonment. If the accident results in death or permanent, serious injury, the offense is punishable by imprisonment in the state prison for two, three, or four years, or in a county jail for not less than 90 days nor more than one year, or by a fine of not less than $1,000 nor more than $10,000, or by both a fine and imprisonment.
5. Provides that a person who flees the scene of the crime after committing vehicular manslaughter with gross negligence or vehicular manslaughter while intoxicated, upon conviction for that offense, in addition and consecutive to the punishment prescribed, shall be punished by an additional term of imprisonment of five years in the state prison. Existing law provides that this additional term shall not be imposed unless the allegation is charged in the accusatory pleading and admitted by the defendant or found to be true by the trier of fact.
6. Provides that every person convicted of vandalism or affixing graffiti, as specified, may be ordered by the court as a condition of probation to perform community service not to exceed 300 hours over a period not to exceed one year during a time other than his or hers hours of school attendance or employment.

FISCAL EFFECT:

According to the Assembly Appropriations Committee, minor absorbable costs to the trial courts and DMV.

COMMENTS:

According to the Author, "There's no question that hit-and-runs have reached epidemic proportions in our state with California Highway Patrol (CHP) citing nearly 79,000 total hit-and-run collisions in 2015 alone. This is up from the 73,000 collisions reported in 2014. AB 2088 is an effort to reduce the number of hit-and-runs and bring justice to the victims by ensuring that offenders face consequences for their reckless decisions.

“When committing a hit-and-run carries fewer penalties than driving under the influence, the choice to flee the scene of an accident is tempting for drunk drivers especially since their judgment is already impaired. California's weak penalty structure for hit-and-runs must be corrected to deter potential offenders, protect victims, and create greater highway safety."

Analysis Prepared by: Gregory Pagan/ PUB. S. / (916) 319-3744 FN: 0002796

Date of Hearing: April 20, 2016

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS

Lorena Gonzalez, Chair

ABPCA Bill Id:AB 2088

Author:(Linder) – As Amended Ver:April 13, 2016

Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program: Yes Reimbursable: No

SUMMARY:

This bill requires the court to suspend the driving privilege for six months or impose an appropriate period of community service for any person who pleads guilty or nolo contendere to hit and run with property damage if the charge is a substitute or in satisfaction of the charge of hit and run resulting in injury or death.

FISCAL EFFECT:

Minor absorbable costs to the trial courts and DMV.

COMMENTS:

1. Background. Current law provides a court may suspend, for up to six months, the privilege of a person to operate a motor vehicle upon conviction of any of several offenses, including failure of a driver involved in an accident where property is damaged to stop and exchange specified information

Current law requires the driver of any vehicle involved in an accident resulting in injury to any person, other than himself or herself, or in the death of any person to immediately stop the vehicle at the scene of the accident and to fulfill specified requirements. The failure to comply is punishable by imprisonment in the state prison for 16 months, two, or three years, or by imprisonment in a county jail not to exceed one year, and/or by a fine of not less than $1,000 nor more than $10,000. If the accident results in death or permanent, serious injury, the offense is punishable by imprisonment in the state prison for two, three, or four years, or in a county jail for not less than 90 days nor more than one year, or by a fine of not less than $1,000 nor more than $10,000, or by both a fine and imprisonment.

1. Purpose. According to the author, "There’s no question that hit-and-runs have reached epidemic proportions in our state with California Highway Patrol (CHP) citing nearly 79,000 total hit-and-run collisions in 2015 alone. This is up from the 73,000 collisions reported in 2014. AB 2088 is an effort to reduce the number of hit-and-runs and bring justice to the victims by ensuring that offenders face consequences for their reckless decisions.

“When committing a hit-and-run carries fewer penalties than driving under the influence, the choice to flee the scene of an accident is tempting for drunk drivers especially since their judgment is already impaired. California’s weak penalty structure for hit-and-runs must be corrected to deter potential offenders, protect victims, and create greater highway safety."

Court discretion. This bill requires the court to suspend the driving privilege for six months or impose an appropriate period of community service for any person who pleads guilty or nolo contendere to hit and run with property damage if the charge is a substitute or in satisfaction of the charge of hit and run resulting in injury or death. However, current law authorizes a court to suspend, for not more than six months, the privilege of a person to operate a motor vehicle upon conviction for failure of a driver involved in an accident where property is damaged to stop and exchange specified information. Also, the court may impose any condition of probation reasonably related to the offense and aimed at discouraging such conduct in the future. Arguably, the imposition of a period of community service would be considered a valid condition of probation and well within the courts discretion. Therefore, AB 2088 reduces existing court discretion.

1. Support: According to Santa Monica Spoke, “Current penalties for hit-and-runs do not reflect the seriousness of the crime nor act as an effective deterrent. It is unconscionable for instance that, under current law, it is possible for hit-and-run drivers who leave their injured victims on the side of the road to enter plea bargain agreements whereby they evade punishment and are able to return to their normal lives like nothing happened.”
2. Opposition: The American Civil Liberties Union is concerned AB 2088 unnecessarily removes a court’s discretion to suspend a defendant’s driver’s privilege in appropriate circumstances.
3. Prior Legislation:
   
4. AB 534 (Linder), of the 2015-2016 Legislative Session, required the court to suspend the driving privilege for six months of any person who pleads guilty or nolo contendere to hit and run with property damage if the charge is a substitute or in satisfaction of the charge of hit and run resulting in injury or death. AB 534 failed passage in the Assembly Public Safety Committee.
   
5. AB 1532 (Gatto), of the 2013-2014 Legislative Session, would have required that the privilege to operate a motor vehicle shall be suspended for six months for any person convicted of being a driver of a vehicle involved in an accident where a person is struck, but not injured, and the driver of the vehicle leaves the scene of the accident without exchanging required information, as specified. AB 1532 was vetoed by the Governor, he thought the current law was adequate.
   
6. AB 2337 (Linder), of the 2013-2014 Legislative Session, would have increased from one to two years the mandatory suspension of the privilege to operate a motor vehicle for any person convicted of leaving the scene of an accident resulting in injury or death without exchanging required identification information. AB 2337 was vetoed by the Governor, he considered the current penalties to be at the appropriate level.

Analysis Prepared by: Pedro Reyes / APPR. / (916) 319-2081

Date of Hearing:

Chief Counsel: Gregory Pagan

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC SAFETY

Reginald Byron Jones-Sawyer, Sr., Chair

ABPCA Bill Id:AB 2088

Author:(Linder) – As Introduced Ver:

SUMMARY:

Requires the court to suspend the driving privilege for six months or impose an appropriate period of community service for any person who pleads guilty or nolo contendere to hit and run with property damage if the charge is a substitute or in satisfaction of the charge of hit and run resulting in injury or death. Specifically, this bill:

1. Provides that if the prosecution agrees to a plea of guilty or nolo contendere to a charge of leaving the scene of an accident resulting in property damage without stopping and properly identifying himself or herself, in satisfaction of, or a substitute for the charge of leaving the scene of an accident resulting in injury or death without stopping and properly identifying himself or herself, the prosecutor shall state for the record the factual basis for the satisfaction or substitution, including whether the defendant was involved in an accident in which a person was injured.
   
2. States that if the court accepts the defendant's plea of guilty or nolo contendere to a charge of leaving the scene of an accident resulting in property damage without stopping and properly identifying himself or herself, and the prosecutor's states that the driver of the vehicle was involved in an accident where a person was struck, the court shall immediately suspend the convicted driver's privilege to operate a motor vehicle for a period of six months or require the convicted driver to complete community service as the court deems appropriate.

EXISTING LAW:

1. Provides that a court may suspend, for not more than six months, the privilege of a person to operate a motor vehicle upon conviction of any of the following offenses:
   
   1. Failure of a driver involved in an accident where property is damaged to stop and exchange specified information;
      
   2. Reckless driving proximately causing bodily injury;
      
   3. Failure of a driver to stop at a railroad crossing as required;
      
   4. Evading or fleeing from a peace officer in a motor vehicle or upon a bicycle; and,
      
   5. Knowingly causing or participating in a vehicular collision, or any other vehicular accident, for the purpose of presenting or causing to be presented any false or fraudulent insurance claim. (Veh. Code, §13201.)
      
2. States that the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) immediately shall revoke the privilege of a person to operate a motor vehicle upon receipt of a duly certified abstract of the record of a court showing that the person has been convicted of any of the following crimes or offenses:
   
   1. Failure of the driver of a vehicle involved in an accident resulting in injury or death to stop or otherwise comply, as specified;
      
   2. A felony in which a motor vehicle is used, except as specified; and,
      
   3. Reckless driving causing bodily injury. (Veh. Code, § 13350, subd. (a).)
      
3. Provides that the driver of any vehicle involved in an accident resulting in damage to any property, including a vehicle, shall immediately stop the vehicle and exchange information, as specified, or leave in a conspicuous place on the vehicle or other property damaged written notice giving the name and address of the driver of the vehicle involved. The failure to comply with these requirements is a misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment in a county jail not to exceed six months, or by a fine not to exceed $1,000, or by both a fine and imprisonment. (Veh. Code, § 20002.)
   
4. Requires the driver of any vehicle involved in an accident resulting in injury to any person, other than himself or herself, or in the death of any person to immediately stop the vehicle at the scene of the accident and to fulfill specified requirements. The failure to comply is punishable by imprisonment in the state prison for 16 months, two, or three years, or by imprisonment in a county jail not to exceed one year, or by a fine of not less than $1,000 nor more than $10,000, or by both a fine and imprisonment. If the accident results in death or permanent, serious injury, the offense is punishable by imprisonment in the state prison for two, three, or four years, or in a county jail for not less than 90 days nor more than one year, or by a fine of not less than $1,000 nor more than $10,000, or by both a fine and imprisonment. (Veh. Code, § 20001, subds. (a) & (b).)
   
5. Provides that a person who flees the scene of the crime after committing vehicular manslaughter with gross negligence or vehicular manslaughter while intoxicated, upon conviction for that offense, in addition and consecutive to the punishment prescribed, shall be punished by an additional term of imprisonment of five years in the state prison. Existing law provides that this additional term shall not be imposed unless the allegation is charged in the accusatory pleading and admitted by the defendant or found to be true by the trier of fact. (Veh. Code, § 20001, subd. (c).)
   
6. Provides that every person convicted of vandalism or affixing graffiti, as specified, may be ordered by the court as a condition of probation to perform community service not to exceed 300 hours over a period not to exceed one year during a time other than his or hers hours of school attendance or employment. (Pen Code, § 594.6, subd. (a).)

FISCAL EFFECT:

Unknown

COMMENTS:

1. Author's Statement: According to the author, "There’s no question that hit-and-runs have reached epidemic proportions in our state with California Highway Patrol (CHP) citing nearly 79,000 total hit-and-run collisions in 2015 alone. This is up from the 73,000 collisions reported in 2014. AB 2088 is an effort to reduce the number of hit-and-runs and bring justice to the victims by ensuring that offenders face consequences for their reckless decisions.
   
   “When committing a hit-and-run carries fewer penalties than driving under the influence, the choice to flee the scene of an accident is tempting for drunk drivers especially since their judgment is already impaired. California’s weak penalty structure for hit-and-runs must be corrected to deter potential offenders, protect victims, and create greater highway safety."
   
2. Limits Court Discretion: This bill requires the court to suspend the driving privilege for six months or impose a an appropriate period of community service for any person who pleads guilty or nolo contendere to hit and run with property damage if the charge is a substitute or in satisfaction of the charge of hit and run resulting in injury or death.
   
   Vehicle Code Section 13201 authorizes a court to suspend, for not more than six months, the privilege of a person to operate a motor vehicle upon conviction for failure of a driver involved in an accident where property is damaged to stop and exchange specified information.
   
   Additionally, the court may impose any condition of probation reasonably related to the offense and aimed at discouraging such conduct in the future. (See People v. Lent (1975) 15 Cal. 3d 481, 486.) The imposition of a period of community service would be considered a valid condition of probation and well within the courts discretion.
   

This bill limits the court's discretion in that it requires the court to either suspend the defendant's driving privilege for six months or impose a period of community service. Both of which options the court may already exercise, in appropriate cases, in the sound exercise of its discretion.

1. Violates Apprendi v. New Jersey: In this bill, in order for the court to impose the additional sanction of, either, a six month license suspension or community service, the prosecution must state on the record the factual basis for the substitution for the original charge, including whether the defendant was involved in an accident in which a person was injured.
   
   The Sixth amendment right to a jury trial applies to any factual finding, other than that of a prior conviction, necessary to warrant any sentence beyond the presumptive maximum. (Apprendi v. New Jersey (2000) 530 U.S. 466, 490; Blakely v. Washington (2004) 524 U.S. 296, 301, 303-304.)
   
   In Cunningham v. California (2007) 549 U.S. 270, the United States Supreme Court held California's Determinate Sentencing Law (DSL) violated a defendant's right to trial by jury by placing sentence-elevating fact finding within the judge's province. (Id. at p. 274.) The DSL authorized the court to increase the defendant's sentence by finding facts not reflected in the jury verdict. Specifically, the trial judge could find factors in aggravation by a preponderance of evidence to increase the offender's sentence from the presumptive middle term to the upper term and, as such, was constitutionally flawed. The Court stated, "Because the DSL authorizes the judge, not the jury, to find the facts permitting an upper term sentence, the sentence cannot withstand measurement against our Sixth Amendment precedent." (Id. at p. 293.)
   
   In this bill, the additional punishment of a license suspension or community service is triggered by a factual finding by the court, based on a statement by the prosecution that the defendant was involved in an accident and a person was injured clearly violates the defendant's Sixth amendment right to a jury trial as to the finding of that particular fact.
   
2. Argument in Support: According to Santa Monica Spoke, "As you are well aware the number of hit-and-run incidents in California has grown to epidemic proportions in the past few years. In the Los Angeles area alone we know there are about 20,000 hit-and-run traffic incidents each year. We have long been in support of legislation to stiffen penalties for this crime that we feel represents a symptom of disconnect to humanity in our communities. Victims of hit-and-runs are not limited to just other motor vehicle drivers, but in fact pedestrians and bicyclists who’s injuries are more severe or life threatening as more venerable road users.
   
   “Current penalties for hit-and-runs do not reflect the seriousness of the crime nor act as an effective deterrent. It is unconscionable for instance that, under current law, it is possible for hit-and-run drivers who leave their injured victims on the side of the road to enter plea bargain agreements whereby they evade punishment and are able to return to their normal lives like nothing happened.
   
   “As a society we must ensuring hit-and-run drivers face consequences for their reckless inhumane decision to flee the scene of an collision. AB 2088 will increase roadway safety, bring justice to victims, and deter others from committing hit-and-run crimes.”
   
3. Argument in Opposition: According to the American Civil Liberties Union, "AB 2088 would require a court to either immediately suspend the driving privileges of all defendants who plead guilty or nolo contendere to a violation of Vehicle Code section 20002 under circumstances specified by the bill, or require the convicted driver to complete community service as the court deems appropriate. We believe that this bill unnecessarily removes a court’s discretion to suspend a defendant’s driver’s privilege in appropriate circumstances.
   
   “Specifically, AB 2088 would require courts to immediately suspend, for six months, the driver’s privilege of any defendant who pleads guilty or nolo contendere to a violation of Vehicle Code section 20002 (failure to comply with specified requirements in accidents resulting only in damage to property) which was originally charged as a violation of Vehicle Code section 20001 (failure to comply with specified requirements in accidents resulting in injury to a person) when the prosecution states for the record that the driver for the vehicle was involved in an accident in which a person was struck. (See Vehicle §§ 20001, 20002.) Alternatively, the court must require the convicted driver to complete community service as the court deems appropriate.
   
   “However, under current law, courts already have within their discretion the ability to suspend, for six months, the driver’s privilege of any defendant convicted of a violation of

“Vehicle Code section 20002 – regardless of whether the defendant was involved in an accident in which a person was struck. (Vehicle Code § 13201.) Likewise, courts already have discretion to order community service as a term of probation. (Penal Code § 1203.1, subd. (j).) By requiring courts to immediately suspend drivers’ privileges in all cases in which a defendant is convicted of a violation of Vehicle section 20002 under the circumstances specified by the bill or otherwise order the convicted driver to complete community service, AB 2088 unnecessarily an improperly strips courts of their discretion.”

1. Prior Legislation:
   
   1. AB 534 (Linder), of the 2015-2016 Legislative Session, required the court to suspend the driving privilege for six months of any person who pleads guilty or nolo contendere to hit and run with property damage if the charge is a substitute or in satisfaction of the charge of hit and run resulting in injury or death. AB 534 failed passage in the Assembly Public Safety Committee.
      
   2. AB 1532 (Gatto), of the 2013-2014 Legislative Session, would have required that the privilege to operate a motor vehicle shall be suspended for six months for any person convicted of being a driver of a vehicle involved in an accident where a person is struck, but not injured, and the driver of the vehicle leaves the scene of the accident without exchanging required information, as specified. AB 1532 was vetoed by the Governor.
      
   3. AB 2337 (Linder), of the 2013-2014 Legislative Session, would have increased from one to two years the mandatory suspension of the privilege to operate a motor vehicle for any person convicted of leaving the scene of an accident resulting in injury or death without exchanging required identification information. AB 2337 was vetoed by the Governor.

REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:

Support

American Motorcyclist Association
Crime Victims United of California
Association for Los Angeles Deputy Sheriffs
Los Angeles Police Protective League
Riverside Sheriffs' Association
Walk and Bike Mendocino
West Hollywood Bicycle Coalition
Santa Monica Spoke
Streets Are For Everyone
Los Angeles Walks
Los Angeles County Bicycle Coalition
Forged By Fire Coalition

Opposition

American Civil Liberties Union
California Attorney for Criminal Justice
California Public Defenders Association

Analysis Prepared by:

Gregory Pagan / PUB. S. / (916) 319-3744