AB 1412: Pretrial diversion: borderline personality disorder.
- Session Year: 2023-2024
- House: Assembly
- Latest Version Date: 2023-10-10
Current Status:
Passed
(2023-10-10: Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 687, Statutes of 2023.)
Introduced
In Committee
First Chamber
In Committee
Second Chamber
Enacted
What does this bill do?
The bill lets people diagnosed with borderline personality disorder who are charged with most misdemeanors or felonies become eligible for pretrial diversion—programs that delay or drop charges while the person gets mental health treatment—by removing that disorder from the list of exclusions. They would still need a recent diagnosis showing the disorder was a significant factor in the offense and meet the other suitability rules; antisocial personality disorder and pedophilia remain excluded.
The summary is provided by generative AI which can make mistakes. For original language, please view the details in the table below.
Existing law authorizes a court to grant pretrial diversion, for a period no longer than 2 years, to a defendant suffering from a mental disorder, on an accusatory pleading alleging the commission of a misdemeanor or felony offense, in order to allow the defendant to undergo mental health treatment. Existing law conditions eligibility on, among other criteria, a court finding that the defendant suffers from a mental disorder, as specified, excluding antisocial personality disorder, borderline personality disorder, and pedophilia.
This bill would remove borderline personality disorder as an exclusion for pretrial diversion.
This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 1001.36 of the Penal Code proposed by AB 455 to be operative only if this bill and AB 455 are enacted and this bill is enacted last.
Existing law authorizes a court to grant pretrial diversion, for a period no longer than 2 years, to a defendant suffering from a mental disorder, on an accusatory pleading alleging the commission of a misdemeanor or felony offense, in order to allow the defendant to undergo mental health treatment. Existing law conditions eligibility on, among other criteria, a court finding that the defendant suffers from a mental disorder, as specified, excluding antisocial personality disorder, borderline personality disorder, and pedophilia.
This bill would remove borderline personality disorder as an exclusion for pretrial diversion.
This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 1001.36 of the Penal Code proposed by AB 455 to be operative only if this bill and AB 455 are enacted and this bill is enacted last.
Existing law authorizes a court to grant pretrial diversion, for a period no longer than 2 years, to a defendant suffering from a mental disorder, on an accusatory pleading alleging the commission of a misdemeanor or felony offense, in order to allow the defendant to undergo mental health treatment. Existing law conditions eligibility on, among other criteria, a court finding that the defendant suffers from a mental disorder, as specified, excluding antisocal personality disorder, borderline personality disorder, and pedophilia.
This bill would remove borderline personality disorder as an exclusion for pretrial diversion.
This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 1001.36 of the Penal Code proposed by AB 455 to be operative only if this bill and AB 455 are enacted and this bill is enacted last.
Existing law authorizes a court to grant pretrial diversion, for a period no longer than 2 years, to a defendant suffering from a mental disorder, on an accusatory pleading alleging the commission of a misdemeanor or felony offense, in order to allow the defendant to undergo mental health treatment. Existing law conditions eligibility on, among other criteria, a court finding that the defendant suffers from a mental disorder, as specified, excluding antisocal personality disorder, borderline personality disorder, and pedophilia.
This bill would remove borderline personality disorder as an exclusion for pretrial diversion.
(a)On an accusatory pleading alleging the commission of a misdemeanor or felony offense not set forth in subdivision (d), the court may, in its discretion, and after considering the positions of the defense and prosecution, grant pretrial diversion to a defendant pursuant to this section if the defendant satisfies the eligibility requirements for pretrial diversion set forth in subdivision (b) and the court determines that the defendant is suitable for that diversion under the factors set forth in subdivision (c).
(b)A defendant is eligible for pretrial diversion pursuant to this section if both of the following criteria are met:
(1)The defendant has been diagnosed with a mental disorder as identified in the most recent edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, including, but not limited to, bipolar disorder, schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder, or post-traumatic stress disorder, but excluding antisocial personality disorder and pedophilia. Evidence of the defendants mental disorder shall be provided by the defense and shall include a diagnosis or treatment for a diagnosed mental disorder within the last five years by a qualified mental health expert. In opining that a defendant suffers from a qualifying disorder, the qualified mental health expert may rely on an examination of the defendant, the defendants medical records, arrest reports, or any other relevant evidence.
(2)The defendants mental disorder was a significant factor in the commission of the charged offense. If the defendant has been diagnosed with a mental disorder, the court shall find that the defendants mental disorder was a significant factor in the commission of the offense unless there is clear and convincing evidence that it was not a motivating factor, causal factor, or contributing factor to the defendants involvement in the alleged offense. A court may consider any relevant and credible evidence, including, but not limited to, police reports, preliminary hearing transcripts, witness statements, statements by the defendants mental health treatment provider, medical records, records or reports by qualified medical experts, or evidence that the defendant displayed symptoms consistent with the relevant mental disorder at or near the time of the offense.
(c)For any defendant who satisfies the eligibility requirements in subdivision (b), the court must consider whether the defendant is suitable for pretrial diversion. A defendant is suitable for pretrial diversion if all of the following criteria are met:
(1)In the opinion of a qualified mental health expert, the defendants symptoms of the mental disorder causing, contributing to, or motivating the criminal behavior would respond to mental health treatment.
(2)The defendant consents to diversion and waives the defendants right to a speedy trial, unless a defendant has been found to be an appropriate candidate for diversion in lieu of commitment pursuant to clause (iv) of subparagraph (B) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (a) of Section 1370 and, as a result of the defendants mental incompetence, cannot consent to diversion or give a knowing and intelligent waiver of the defendants right to a speedy trial.
(3)The defendant agrees to comply with treatment as a condition of diversion, unless the defendant has been found to be an appropriate candidate for diversion in lieu of commitment for restoration of competency treatment pursuant to clause (iv) of subparagraph (B) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (a) of Section 1370 and, as a result of the defendants mental incompetence, cannot agree to comply with treatment.
(4)The defendant will not pose an unreasonable risk of danger to public safety, as defined in Section 1170.18, if treated in the community. The court may consider the opinions of the district attorney, the defense, or a qualified mental health expert, and may consider the defendants treatment plan, the defendants violence and criminal history, the current charged offense, and any other factors that the court deems appropriate.
(d)A defendant may not be placed into a diversion program, pursuant to this section, for the following current charged offenses:
(1)Murder or voluntary manslaughter.
(2)An offense for which a person, if convicted, would be required to register pursuant to Section 290, except for a violation of Section 314.
(3)Rape.
(4)Lewd or lascivious act on a child under 14 years of age.
(5)Assault with intent to commit rape, sodomy, or oral copulation, in violation of Section 220.
(6)Commission of rape or sexual penetration in concert with another person, in violation of Section 264.1.
(7)Continuous sexual abuse of a child, in violation of Section 288.5.
(8)A violation of subdivision (b) or (c) of Section 11418.
(e)At any stage of the proceedings, the court may require the defendant to make a prima facie showing that the defendant will meet the minimum requirements of eligibility for diversion and that the defendant and the offense are suitable for diversion. The hearing on the prima facie showing shall be informal and may proceed on offers of proof, reliable hearsay, and argument of counsel. If a prima facie showing is not made, the court may summarily deny the request for diversion or grant any other relief as may be deemed appropriate.
(f)As used in this chapter, the following terms have the following meanings:
(1)Pretrial diversion means the postponement of prosecution, either temporarily or permanently, at any point in the judicial process from the point at which the accused is charged until adjudication, to allow the defendant to undergo mental health treatment, subject to all of the following:
(A)(i)The court is satisfied that the recommended inpatient or outpatient program of mental health treatment will meet the specialized mental health treatment needs of the defendant.
(ii)The defendant may be referred to a program of mental health treatment utilizing existing inpatient or outpatient mental health resources. Before approving a proposed treatment program, the court shall consider the request of the defense, the request of the prosecution, the needs of the defendant, and the interests of the community. The treatment may be procured using private or public funds, and a referral may be made to a county mental health agency, existing collaborative courts, or assisted outpatient treatment only if that entity has agreed to accept responsibility for the treatment of the defendant, and mental health services are provided only to the extent that resources are available and the defendant is eligible for those services.
(iii)If the court refers the defendant to a county mental health agency pursuant to this section and the agency determines that it is unable to provide services to the defendant, the court shall accept a written declaration to that effect from the agency in lieu of requiring live testimony. That declaration shall serve only to establish that the program is unable to provide services to the defendant at that time and does not constitute evidence that the defendant is unqualified or unsuitable for diversion under this section.
(B)The provider of the mental health treatment program in which the defendant has been placed shall provide regular reports to the court, the defense, and the prosecutor on the defendants progress in treatment.
(C)The period during which criminal proceedings against the defendant may be diverted is limited as follows:
(i)If the defendant is charged with a felony, the period shall be no longer than two years.
(ii)If the defendant is charged with a misdemeanor, the period shall be no longer than one year.
(D)Upon request, the court shall conduct a hearing to determine whether restitution, as defined in subdivision (f) of Section 1202.4, is owed to any victim as a result of the diverted offense and, if owed, order its payment during the period of diversion. However, a defendants inability to pay restitution due to indigence or mental disorder shall not be grounds for denial of diversion or a finding that the defendant has failed to comply with the terms of diversion.
(2)Qualified mental health expert includes, but is not limited to, a psychiatrist, psychologist, a person described in Section 5751.2 of the Welfare and Institutions Code, or a person whose knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education qualifies them as an expert.
(g)If any of the following circumstances exists, the court shall, after notice to the defendant, defense counsel, and the prosecution, hold a hearing to determine whether the criminal proceedings should be reinstated, whether the treatment should be modified, or whether the defendant should be conserved and referred to the conservatorship investigator of the county of commitment to initiate conservatorship proceedings for the defendant pursuant to Chapter 3 (commencing with Section 5350) of Part 1 of Division 5 of the Welfare and Institutions Code:
(1)The defendant is charged with an additional misdemeanor allegedly committed during the pretrial diversion and that reflects the defendants propensity for violence.
(2)The defendant is charged with an additional felony allegedly committed during the pretrial diversion.
(3)The defendant is engaged in criminal conduct rendering the defendant unsuitable for diversion.
(4)Based on the opinion of a qualified mental health expert whom the court may deem appropriate, either of the following circumstances exists:
(A)The defendant is performing unsatisfactorily in the assigned program.
(B)The defendant is gravely disabled, as defined in subparagraph (B) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (h) of Section 5008 of the Welfare and Institutions Code. A defendant shall only be conserved and referred to the conservatorship investigator pursuant to this finding.
(h)If the defendant has performed satisfactorily in diversion, at the end of the period of diversion, the court shall dismiss the defendants criminal charges that were the subject of the criminal proceedings at the time of the initial diversion. A court may conclude that the defendant has performed satisfactorily if the defendant has substantially complied with the requirements of diversion, has avoided significant new violations of law unrelated to the defendants mental health condition, and has a plan in place for long-term mental health care. If the court dismisses the charges, the clerk of the court shall file a record with the Department of Justice indicating the disposition of the case diverted pursuant to this section. Upon successful completion of diversion, if the court dismisses the charges, the arrest upon which the diversion was based shall be deemed never to have occurred, and the court shall order access to the record of the arrest restricted in accordance with Section 1001.9, except as specified in subdivisions (j) and (k). The defendant who successfully completes diversion may indicate in response to any question concerning the defendants prior criminal record that the defendant was not arrested or diverted for the offense, except as specified in subdivision (j).
(i)A record pertaining to an arrest resulting in successful completion of diversion, or any record generated as a result of the defendants application for or participation in diversion, shall not, without the defendants consent, be used in any way that could result in the denial of any employment, benefit, license, or certificate.
(j)The defendant shall be advised that, regardless of the defendants completion of diversion, both of the following apply:
(1)The arrest upon which the diversion was based may be disclosed by the Department of Justice to any peace officer application request and that, notwithstanding subdivision (i), this section does not relieve the defendant of the obligation to disclose the arrest in response to any direct question contained in any questionnaire or application for a position as a peace officer, as defined in Section 830.
(2)An order to seal records pertaining to an arrest made pursuant to this section has no effect on a criminal justice agencys ability to access and use those sealed records and information regarding sealed arrests, as described in Section 851.92.
(k)A finding that the defendant suffers from a mental disorder, any progress reports concerning the defendants treatment, or any other records related to a mental disorder that were created as a result of participation in, or completion of, diversion pursuant to this section or for use at a hearing on the defendants eligibility for diversion under this section may not be used in any other proceeding without the defendants consent, unless that information is relevant evidence that is admissible under the standards described in paragraph (2) of subdivision (f) of Section 28 of Article I of the California Constitution. However, when determining whether to exercise its discretion to grant diversion under this section, a court may consider previous records of participation in diversion under this section.
(l)The county agency administering the diversion, the defendants mental health treatment providers, the public guardian or conservator, and the court shall, to the extent not prohibited by federal law, have access to the defendants medical and psychological records, including progress reports, during the defendants time in diversion, as needed, for the purpose of providing care and treatment and monitoring treatment for diversion or conservatorship.
SEC. 1.1.Section 1001.36 of the Penal Code is amended to read:1001.36.(a)On an accusatory pleading alleging the commission of a misdemeanor or felony offense not set forth in subdivision (d), the court may, in its discretion, and after considering the positions of the defense and prosecution, grant pretrial diversion to a defendant pursuant to this section if the defendant satisfies the eligibility requirements for pretrial diversion set forth in subdivision (b) and the court determines that the defendant is suitable for that diversion under the factors set forth in subdivision (c).
(b)A defendant is eligible for pretrial diversion pursuant to this section if both of the following criteria are met:
(1)The defendant has been diagnosed with a mental disorder as identified in the most recent edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, including, but not limited to, bipolar disorder, schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder, or post-traumatic stress disorder, but excluding antisocial personality disorder and pedophilia. Evidence of the defendants mental disorder shall be provided by the defense and shall include a diagnosis or treatment for a diagnosed mental disorder within the last five years by a qualified mental health expert. In opining that a defendant suffers from a qualifying disorder, the qualified mental health expert may rely on an examination of the defendant, the defendants medical records, arrest reports, or any other relevant evidence.
(2)The defendants mental disorder was a significant factor in the commission of the charged offense. If the defendant has been diagnosed with a mental disorder, the court shall find that the defendants mental disorder was a significant factor in the commission of the offense unless there is clear and convincing evidence that it was not a motivating factor, causal factor, or contributing factor to the defendants involvement in the alleged offense. A court may consider any relevant and credible evidence, including, but not limited to, police reports, preliminary hearing transcripts, witness statements, statements by the defendants mental health treatment provider, medical records, records or reports by qualified medical experts, or evidence that the defendant displayed symptoms consistent with the relevant mental disorder at or near the time of the offense.
(c)For any defendant who satisfies the eligibility requirements in subdivision (b), the court must consider whether the defendant is suitable for pretrial diversion. A defendant is suitable for pretrial diversion if all of the following criteria are met:
(1)In the opinion of a qualified mental health expert, the defendants symptoms of the mental disorder causing, contributing to, or motivating the criminal behavior would respond to mental health treatment.
(2)The defendant consents to diversion and waives the defendants right to a speedy trial, unless a defendant has been found to be an appropriate candidate for diversion in lieu of commitment pursuant to clause (iv) of subparagraph (B) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (a) of Section 1370 and, as a result of the defendants mental incompetence, cannot consent to diversion or give a knowing and intelligent waiver of the defendants right to a speedy trial.
(3)The defendant agrees to comply with treatment as a condition of diversion, unless the defendant has been found to be an appropriate candidate for diversion in lieu of commitment for restoration of competency treatment pursuant to clause (iv) of subparagraph (B) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (a) of Section 1370 and, as a result of the defendants mental incompetence, cannot agree to comply with treatment.
(4)The defendant will not pose an unreasonable risk of danger to public safety, as defined in Section 1170.18, if treated in the community. The court may consider the opinions of the district attorney, the defense, or a qualified mental health expert, and may consider the defendants treatment plan, the defendants violence and criminal history, the current charged offense, and any other factors that the court deems appropriate.
(d)A defendant may not be placed into a diversion program, pursuant to this section, for the following current charged offenses:
(1)Murder or voluntary manslaughter.
(2)An offense for which a person, if convicted, would be required to register pursuant to Section 290, except for a violation of Section 314.
(3)Rape.
(4)Lewd or lascivious act on a child under 14 years of age.
(5)Assault with intent to commit rape, sodomy, or oral copulation, in violation of Section 220.
(6)Commission of rape or sexual penetration in concert with another person, in violation of Section 264.1.
(7)Continuous sexual abuse of a child, in violation of Section 288.5.
(8)A violation of subdivision (b) or (c) of Section 11418.
(e)At any stage of the proceedings, the court may require the defendant to make a prima facie showing that the defendant will meet the minimum requirements of eligibility for diversion and that the defendant and the offense are suitable for diversion. The hearing on the prima facie showing shall be informal and may proceed on offers of proof, reliable hearsay, and argument of counsel. If a prima facie showing is not made, the court may summarily deny the request for diversion or grant any other relief as may be deemed appropriate.
(f)As used in this chapter, the following terms have the following meanings:
(1)Pretrial diversion means the postponement of prosecution, either temporarily or permanently, at any point in the judicial process from the point at which the accused is charged until adjudication, to allow the defendant to undergo mental health treatment, subject to all of the following:
(A)(i)The court is satisfied that the recommended inpatient or outpatient program of mental health treatment will meet the specialized mental health treatment needs of the defendant.
(ii)The defendant may be referred to a program of mental health treatment utilizing existing inpatient or outpatient mental health resources. Before approving a proposed treatment program, the court shall consider the request of the defense, the request of the prosecution, the needs of the defendant, and the interests of the community. The treatment may be procured using private or public funds, and a referral may be made to a county mental health agency, existing collaborative courts, or assisted outpatient treatment only if that entity has agreed to accept responsibility for the treatment of the defendant, and mental health services are provided only to the extent that resources are available and the defendant is eligible for those services.
(iii)If the court refers the defendant to a county mental health agency pursuant to this section and the agency determines that it is unable to provide services to the defendant, the court shall accept a written declaration to that effect from the agency in lieu of requiring live testimony. That declaration shall serve only to establish that the program is unable to provide services to the defendant at that time and does not constitute evidence that the defendant is unqualified or unsuitable for diversion under this section.
(B)The provider of the mental health treatment program in which the defendant has been placed shall provide regular reports to the court, the defense, and the prosecutor on the defendants progress in treatment.
(C)The period during which criminal proceedings against the defendant may be diverted is limited as follows:
(i)If the defendant is charged with a felony, the period shall be no longer than two years.
(ii)If the defendant is charged with a misdemeanor, the period shall be no longer than one year.
(D)Upon request, the court shall conduct a hearing to determine whether restitution, as defined in subdivision (f) of Section 1202.4, is owed to any victim as a result of the diverted offense and, if owed, order its payment during the period of diversion. However, a defendants inability to pay restitution due to indigence or mental disorder shall not be grounds for denial of diversion or a finding that the defendant has failed to comply with the terms of diversion.
(2)Qualified mental health expert includes, but is not limited to, a psychiatrist, psychologist, a person described in Section 5751.2 of the Welfare and Institutions Code, or a person whose knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education qualifies them as an expert.
(g)If any of the following circumstances exists, the court shall, after notice to the defendant, defense counsel, and the prosecution, hold a hearing to determine whether the criminal proceedings should be reinstated, whether the treatment should be modified, or whether the defendant should be conserved and referred to the conservatorship investigator of the county of commitment to initiate conservatorship proceedings for the defendant pursuant to Chapter 3 (commencing with Section 5350) of Part 1 of Division 5 of the Welfare and Institutions Code:
(1)The defendant is charged with an additional misdemeanor allegedly committed during the pretrial diversion and that reflects the defendants propensity for violence.
(2)The defendant is charged with an additional felony allegedly committed during the pretrial diversion.
(3)The defendant is engaged in criminal conduct rendering the defendant unsuitable for diversion.
(4)Based on the opinion of a qualified mental health expert whom the court may deem appropriate, either of the following circumstances exists:
(A)The defendant is performing unsatisfactorily in the assigned program.
(B)The defendant is gravely disabled, as defined in subparagraph (B) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (h) of Section 5008 of the Welfare and Institutions Code. A defendant shall only be conserved and referred to the conservatorship investigator pursuant to this finding.
(h)If the defendant has performed satisfactorily in diversion, at the end of the period of diversion, the court shall dismiss the defendants criminal charges that were the subject of the criminal proceedings at the time of the initial diversion. A court may conclude that the defendant has performed satisfactorily if the defendant has substantially complied with the requirements of diversion, has avoided significant new violations of law unrelated to the defendants mental health condition, and has a plan in place for long-term mental health care. If the court dismisses the charges, the clerk of the court shall file a record with the Department of Justice indicating the disposition of the case diverted pursuant to this section. Upon successful completion of diversion, if the court dismisses the charges, the arrest upon which the diversion was based shall be deemed never to have occurred, and the court shall order access to the record of the arrest restricted in accordance with Section 1001.9, except as specified in subdivisions (j) and (k). The defendant who successfully completes diversion may indicate in response to any question concerning the defendants prior criminal record that the defendant was not arrested or diverted for the offense, except as specified in subdivision (j).
(i)A record pertaining to an arrest resulting in successful completion of diversion, or any record generated as a result of the defendants application for or participation in diversion, shall not, without the defendants consent, be used in any way that could result in the denial of any employment, benefit, license, or certificate.
(j)The defendant shall be advised that, regardless of the defendants completion of diversion, both of the following apply:
(1)The arrest upon which the diversion was based may be disclosed by the Department of Justice to any peace officer application request and that, notwithstanding subdivision (i), this section does not relieve the defendant of the obligation to disclose the arrest in response to any direct question contained in any questionnaire or application for a position as a peace officer, as defined in Section 830.
(2)An order to seal records pertaining to an arrest made pursuant to this section has no effect on a criminal justice agencys ability to access and use those sealed records and information regarding sealed arrests, as described in Section 851.92.
(k)A finding that the defendant suffers from a mental disorder, any progress reports concerning the defendants treatment, or any other records related to a mental disorder that were created as a result of participation in, or completion of, diversion pursuant to this section or for use at a hearing on the defendants eligibility for diversion under this section may not be used in any other proceeding without the defendants consent, unless that information is relevant evidence that is admissible under the standards described in paragraph (2) of subdivision (f) of Section 28 of Article I of the California Constitution. However, when determining whether to exercise its discretion to grant diversion under this section, a court may consider previous records of participation in diversion under this section.
(l)The county agency administering the diversion, the defendants mental health treatment providers, the public guardian or conservator, and the court shall, to the extent not prohibited by federal law, have access to the defendants medical and psychological records, including progress reports, during the defendants time in diversion, as needed, for the purpose of providing care and treatment and monitoring treatment for diversion or conservatorship.
(m)This section shall remain in effect until July 1, 2024, and as of that date is repealed.
SEC. 1.2.Section 1001.36 is added to the Penal Code, to read:1001.36.(a)On an accusatory pleading alleging the commission of a misdemeanor or felony offense not set forth in subdivision (d), the court may, in its discretion, and after considering the positions of the defense and prosecution, grant pretrial diversion to a defendant pursuant to this section if the defendant satisfies the eligibility requirements for pretrial diversion set forth in subdivision (b) and the court determines that the defendant is suitable for that diversion under the factors set forth in subdivision (c).
(b)A defendant is eligible for pretrial diversion pursuant to this section if both of the following criteria are met:
(1)The defendant has been diagnosed with a mental disorder as identified in the most recent edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, including, but not limited to, bipolar disorder, schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder, or post-traumatic stress disorder, but excluding antisocial personality disorder and pedophilia. Evidence of the defendants mental disorder shall be provided by the defense and shall include a diagnosis or treatment for a diagnosed mental disorder within the last five years by a qualified mental health expert. In opining that a defendant suffers from a qualifying disorder, the qualified mental health expert may rely on an examination of the defendant, the defendants medical records, arrest reports, or any other relevant evidence.
(2)The defendants mental disorder was a significant factor in the commission of the charged offense. If the defendant has been diagnosed with a mental disorder, the court shall find that the defendants mental disorder was a significant factor in the commission of the offense unless there is clear and convincing evidence that it was not a motivating factor, causal factor, or contributing factor to the defendants involvement in the alleged offense. A court may consider any relevant and credible evidence, including, but not limited to, police reports, preliminary hearing transcripts, witness statements, statements by the defendants mental health treatment provider, medical records, records or reports by qualified medical experts, or evidence that the defendant displayed symptoms consistent with the relevant mental disorder at or near the time of the offense.
(c)For any defendant who satisfies the eligibility requirements in subdivision (b), the court must consider whether the defendant is suitable for pretrial diversion. A defendant is suitable for pretrial diversion if all of the following criteria are met:
(1)In the opinion of a qualified mental health expert, the defendants symptoms of the mental disorder causing, contributing to, or motivating the criminal behavior would respond to mental health treatment.
(2)The defendant consents to diversion and waives the defendants right to a speedy trial, unless a defendant has been found to be an appropriate candidate for diversion in lieu of commitment pursuant to clause (iv) of subparagraph (B) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (a) of Section 1370 and, as a result of the defendants mental incompetence, cannot consent to diversion or give a knowing and intelligent waiver of the defendants right to a speedy trial.
(3)The defendant agrees to comply with treatment as a condition of diversion, unless the defendant has been found to be an appropriate candidate for diversion in lieu of commitment for restoration of competency treatment pursuant to clause (iv) of subparagraph (B) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (a) of Section 1370 and, as a result of the defendants mental incompetence, cannot agree to comply with treatment.
(4)The defendant will not pose an unreasonable risk of danger to public safety, as defined in Section 1170.18, if treated in the community. The court may consider the opinions of the district attorney, the defense, or a qualified mental health expert, and may consider the defendants treatment plan, the defendants violence and criminal history, the current charged offense, and any other factors that the court deems appropriate.
(d)A defendant may not be placed into a diversion program, pursuant to this section, for the following current charged offenses:
(1)Murder or voluntary manslaughter.
(2)An offense for which a person, if convicted, would be required to register pursuant to Section 290, except for a violation of Section 314.
(3)Rape.
(4)Lewd or lascivious act on a child under 14 years of age.
(5)Assault with intent to commit rape, sodomy, or oral copulation, in violation of Section 220.
(6)Commission of rape or sexual penetration in concert with another person, in violation of Section 264.1.
(7)Continuous sexual abuse of a child, in violation of Section 288.5.
(8)A violation of subdivision (b) or (c) of Section 11418.
(e)At any stage of the proceedings, the court may require the defendant to make a prima facie showing that the defendant will meet the minimum requirements of eligibility for diversion and that the defendant and the offense are suitable for diversion. The hearing on the prima facie showing shall be informal and may proceed on offers of proof, reliable hearsay, and argument of counsel. If a prima facie showing is not made, the court may summarily deny the request for diversion or grant any other relief as may be deemed appropriate.
(f)As used in this chapter, the following terms have the following meanings:
(1)Pretrial diversion means the postponement of prosecution, either temporarily or permanently, at any point in the judicial process from the point at which the accused is charged until adjudication, to allow the defendant to undergo mental health treatment, subject to all of the following:
(A)(i)The court is satisfied that the recommended inpatient or outpatient program of mental health treatment will meet the specialized mental health treatment needs of the defendant.
(ii)The defendant may be referred to a program of mental health treatment utilizing existing inpatient or outpatient mental health resources. Before approving a proposed treatment program, the court shall consider the request of the defense, the request of the prosecution, the needs of the defendant, and the interests of the community. The treatment may be procured using private or public funds, and a referral may be made to a county mental health agency, existing collaborative courts, or assisted outpatient treatment only if that entity has agreed to accept responsibility for the treatment of the defendant, and mental health services are provided only to the extent that resources are available and the defendant is eligible for those services.
(iii)If the court refers the defendant to a county mental health agency pursuant to this section and the agency determines that it is unable to provide services to the defendant, the court shall accept a written declaration to that effect from the agency in lieu of requiring live testimony. That declaration shall serve only to establish that the program is unable to provide services to the defendant at that time and does not constitute evidence that the defendant is unqualified or unsuitable for diversion under this section.
(B)The provider of the mental health treatment program in which the defendant has been placed shall provide regular reports to the court, the defense, and the prosecutor on the defendants progress in treatment.
(C)The period during which criminal proceedings against the defendant may be diverted is limited as follows:
(i)If the defendant is charged with a felony, the period shall be no longer than two years.
(ii)If the defendant is charged with a misdemeanor, the period shall be no longer than one year.
(D)Upon request, the court shall conduct a hearing to determine whether restitution, as defined in subdivision (f) of Section 1202.4, is owed to any victim as a result of the diverted offense and, if owed, order its payment during the period of diversion. However, a defendants inability to pay restitution due to indigence or mental disorder shall not be grounds for denial of diversion or a finding that the defendant has failed to comply with the terms of diversion.
(2)Qualified mental health expert includes, but is not limited to, a psychiatrist, psychologist, a person described in Section 5751.2 of the Welfare and Institutions Code, or a person whose knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education qualifies them as an expert.
(g)If any of the following circumstances exists, the court shall, after notice to the defendant, defense counsel, and the prosecution, hold a hearing to determine whether the criminal proceedings should be reinstated, whether the treatment should be modified, or whether the defendant should be conserved and referred to the conservatorship investigator of the county of commitment to initiate conservatorship proceedings for the defendant pursuant to Chapter 3 (commencing with Section 5350) of Part 1 of Division 5 of the Welfare and Institutions Code:
(1)The defendant is charged with an additional misdemeanor allegedly committed during the pretrial diversion and that reflects the defendants propensity for violence.
(2)The defendant is charged with an additional felony allegedly committed during the pretrial diversion.
(3)The defendant is engaged in criminal conduct rendering the defendant unsuitable for diversion.
(4)Based on the opinion of a qualified mental health expert whom the court may deem appropriate, either of the following circumstances exists:
(A)The defendant is performing unsatisfactorily in the assigned program.
(B)The defendant is gravely disabled, as defined in subparagraph (B) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (h) of Section 5008 of the Welfare and Institutions Code. A defendant shall only be conserved and referred to the conservatorship investigator pursuant to this finding.
(h)If the defendant has performed satisfactorily in diversion, at the end of the period of diversion, the court shall dismiss the defendants criminal charges that were the subject of the criminal proceedings at the time of the initial diversion. A court may conclude that the defendant has performed satisfactorily if the defendant has substantially complied with the requirements of diversion, has avoided significant new violations of law unrelated to the defendants mental health condition, and has a plan in place for long-term mental health care. If the court dismisses the charges, the clerk of the court shall file a record with the Department of Justice indicating the disposition of the case diverted pursuant to this section. Upon successful completion of diversion, if the court dismisses the charges, the arrest upon which the diversion was based shall be deemed never to have occurred, and the court shall order access to the record of the arrest restricted in accordance with Section 1001.9, except as specified in subdivisions (j) and (k). The defendant who successfully completes diversion may indicate in response to any question concerning the defendants prior criminal record that the defendant was not arrested or diverted for the offense, except as specified in subdivision (j).
(i)A record pertaining to an arrest resulting in successful completion of diversion, or any record generated as a result of the defendants application for or participation in diversion, shall not, without the defendants consent, be used in any way that could result in the denial of any employment, benefit, license, or certificate.
(j)The defendant shall be advised that, regardless of the defendants completion of diversion, both of the following apply:
(1)The arrest upon which the diversion was based may be disclosed by the Department of Justice to any peace officer application request and that, notwithstanding subdivision (i), this section does not relieve the defendant of the obligation to disclose the arrest in response to any direct question contained in any questionnaire or application for a position as a peace officer, as defined in Section 830.
(2)An order to seal records pertaining to an arrest made pursuant to this section has no effect on a criminal justice agencys ability to access and use those sealed records and information regarding sealed arrests, as described in Section 851.92.
(k)A finding that the defendant suffers from a mental disorder, any progress reports concerning the defendants treatment, including, but not limited to, any finding that the defendant be prohibited from owning or controlling a firearm because they are a danger to themselves or others pursuant to subdivision (m), or any other records related to a mental disorder that were created as a result of participation in, or completion of, diversion pursuant to this section or for use at a hearing on the defendants eligibility for diversion under this section may not be used in any other proceeding without the defendants consent, unless that information is relevant evidence that is admissible under the standards described in paragraph (2) of subdivision (f) of Section 28 of Article I of the California Constitution. However, when determining whether to exercise its discretion to grant diversion under this section, a court may consider previous records of participation in diversion under this section.
(l)The county agency administering the diversion, the defendants mental health treatment providers, the public guardian or conservator, and the court shall, to the extent not prohibited by federal law, have access to the defendants medical and psychological records, including progress reports, during the defendants time in diversion, as needed, for the purpose of providing care and treatment and monitoring treatment for diversion or conservatorship.
(m)(1)The prosecution may request an order from the court that the defendant be prohibited from owning or possessing a firearm until they successfully complete diversion because they are a danger to themselves or others pursuant to subdivision (i) of Section 8103 of the Welfare and Institutions Code.
(2)The prosecution shall bear the burden of proving, by clear and convincing evidence, both of the following are true:
(A)The defendant poses a significant danger of causing personal injury to themselves or another by having in their custody or control, owning, purchasing, possessing, or receiving a firearm.
(B)The prohibition is necessary to prevent personal injury to the defendant or any other person because less restrictive alternatives either have been tried and found to be ineffective or are inadequate or inappropriate for the circumstances of the defendant.
(3)(A)If the court finds that the prosecution has not met that burden, the court shall not order that the person is prohibited from having, owning, purchasing, possessing, or receiving a firearm.
(B)If the court finds that the prosecution has met the burden, the court shall order that the person is prohibited, and shall inform the person that they are prohibited, from owning or controlling a firearm until they successfully complete diversion because they are a danger to themselves or others.
(4)An order imposed pursuant to this subdivision shall be in effect until the defendant has successfully completed diversion or until their firearm rights are restored pursuant to paragraph (4) of subdivision (g) of Section 8103 of the Welfare and Institutions Code.
(n)This section shall become operative on July 1, 2024.
SEC. 2.Sections 1.1 and 1.2 of this bill incorporate amendments to Section 1001.36 of the Penal Code proposed by both this bill and AB 455. These sections of this bill shall only become operative if (1) both bills are enacted and become effective on or before January 1, 2024, (2) each bill amends Section 1001.36 of the Penal Code, and (3) this bill is enacted after AB 455, in which case Section 1 of this bill shall not become operative.
(a)On an accusatory pleading alleging the commission of a misdemeanor or felony offense not set forth in subdivision (d), the court may, in its discretion, and after considering the positions of the defense and prosecution, grant pretrial diversion to a defendant pursuant to this section if the defendant satisfies the eligibility requirements for pretrial diversion set forth in subdivision (b) and the court determines that the defendant is suitable for that diversion under the factors set forth in subdivision (c).
(b)A defendant is eligible for pretrial diversion pursuant to this section if both of the following criteria are met:
(1)The defendant has been diagnosed with a mental disorder as identified in the most recent edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, including, but not limited to, bipolar disorder, schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder, or post-traumatic stress disorder, but excluding antisocial personality disorder and pedophilia. Evidence of the defendants mental disorder shall be provided by the defense and shall include a diagnosis or treatment for a diagnosed mental disorder within the last five years by a qualified mental health expert. In opining that a defendant suffers from a qualifying disorder, the qualified mental health expert may rely on an examination of the defendant, the defendants medical records, arrest reports, or any other relevant evidence.
(2)The defendants mental disorder was a significant factor in the commission of the charged offense. If the defendant has been diagnosed with a mental disorder, the court shall find that the defendants mental disorder was a significant factor in the commission of the offense unless there is clear and convincing evidence that it was not a motivating factor, causal factor, or contributing factor to the defendants involvement in the alleged offense. A court may consider any relevant and credible evidence, including, but not limited to, police reports, preliminary hearing transcripts, witness statements, statements by the defendants mental health treatment provider, medical records, records or reports by qualified medical experts, or evidence that the defendant displayed symptoms consistent with the relevant mental disorder at or near the time of the offense.
(c)For any defendant who satisfies the eligibility requirements in subdivision (b), the court must consider whether the defendant is suitable for pretrial diversion. A defendant is suitable for pretrial diversion if all of the following criteria are met:
(1)In the opinion of a qualified mental health expert, the defendants symptoms of the mental disorder causing, contributing to, or motivating the criminal behavior would respond to mental health treatment.
(2)The defendant consents to diversion and waives the defendants right to a speedy trial, unless a defendant has been found to be an appropriate candidate for diversion in lieu of commitment pursuant to clause (iv) of subparagraph (B) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (a) of Section 1370 and, as a result of the defendants mental incompetence, cannot consent to diversion or give a knowing and intelligent waiver of the defendants right to a speedy trial.
(3)The defendant agrees to comply with treatment as a condition of diversion, unless the defendant has been found to be an appropriate candidate for diversion in lieu of commitment for restoration of competency treatment pursuant to clause (iv) of subparagraph (B) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (a) of Section 1370 and, as a result of the defendants mental incompetence, cannot agree to comply with treatment.
(4)The defendant will not pose an unreasonable risk of danger to public safety, as defined in Section 1170.18, if treated in the community. The court may consider the opinions of the district attorney, the defense, or a qualified mental health expert, and may consider the defendants treatment plan, the defendants violence and criminal history, the current charged offense, and any other factors that the court deems appropriate.
(d)A defendant may not be placed into a diversion program, pursuant to this section, for the following current charged offenses:
(1)Murder or voluntary manslaughter.
(2)An offense for which a person, if convicted, would be required to register pursuant to Section 290, except for a violation of Section 314.
(3)Rape.
(4)Lewd or lascivious act on a child under 14 years of age.
(5)Assault with intent to commit rape, sodomy, or oral copulation, in violation of Section 220.
(6)Commission of rape or sexual penetration in concert with another person, in violation of Section 264.1.
(7)Continuous sexual abuse of a child, in violation of Section 288.5.
(8)A violation of subdivision (b) or (c) of Section 11418.
(e)At any stage of the proceedings, the court may require the defendant to make a prima facie showing that the defendant will meet the minimum requirements of eligibility for diversion and that the defendant and the offense are suitable for diversion. The hearing on the prima facie showing shall be informal and may proceed on offers of proof, reliable hearsay, and argument of counsel. If a prima facie showing is not made, the court may summarily deny the request for diversion or grant any other relief as may be deemed appropriate.
(f)As used in this chapter, the following terms have the following meanings:
(1)Pretrial diversion means the postponement of prosecution, either temporarily or permanently, at any point in the judicial process from the point at which the accused is charged until adjudication, to allow the defendant to undergo mental health treatment, subject to all of the following:
(A)(i)The court is satisfied that the recommended inpatient or outpatient program of mental health treatment will meet the specialized mental health treatment needs of the defendant.
(ii)The defendant may be referred to a program of mental health treatment utilizing existing inpatient or outpatient mental health resources. Before approving a proposed treatment program, the court shall consider the request of the defense, the request of the prosecution, the needs of the defendant, and the interests of the community. The treatment may be procured using private or public funds, and a referral may be made to a county mental health agency, existing collaborative courts, or assisted outpatient treatment only if that entity has agreed to accept responsibility for the treatment of the defendant, and mental health services are provided only to the extent that resources are available and the defendant is eligible for those services.
(iii)If the court refers the defendant to a county mental health agency pursuant to this section and the agency determines that it is unable to provide services to the defendant, the court shall accept a written declaration to that effect from the agency in lieu of requiring live testimony. That declaration shall serve only to establish that the program is unable to provide services to the defendant at that time and does not constitute evidence that the defendant is unqualified or unsuitable for diversion under this section.
(B)The provider of the mental health treatment program in which the defendant has been placed shall provide regular reports to the court, the defense, and the prosecutor on the defendants progress in treatment.
(C)The period during which criminal proceedings against the defendant may be diverted is limited as follows:
(i)If the defendant is charged with a felony, the period shall be no longer than two years.
(ii)If the defendant is charged with a misdemeanor, the period shall be no longer than one year.
(D)Upon request, the court shall conduct a hearing to determine whether restitution, as defined in subdivision (f) of Section 1202.4, is owed to any victim as a result of the diverted offense and, if owed, order its payment during the period of diversion. However, a defendants inability to pay restitution due to indigence or mental disorder shall not be grounds for denial of diversion or a finding that the defendant has failed to comply with the terms of diversion.
(2)Qualified mental health expert includes, but is not limited to, a psychiatrist, psychologist, a person described in Section 5751.2 of the Welfare and Institutions Code, or a person whose knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education qualifies them as an expert.
(g)If any of the following circumstances exists, the court shall, after notice to the defendant, defense counsel, and the prosecution, hold a hearing to determine whether the criminal proceedings should be reinstated, whether the treatment should be modified, or whether the defendant should be conserved and referred to the conservatorship investigator of the county of commitment to initiate conservatorship proceedings for the defendant pursuant to Chapter 3 (commencing with Section 5350) of Part 1 of Division 5 of the Welfare and Institutions Code:
(1)The defendant is charged with an additional misdemeanor allegedly committed during the pretrial diversion and that reflects the defendants propensity for violence.
(2)The defendant is charged with an additional felony allegedly committed during the pretrial diversion.
(3)The defendant is engaged in criminal conduct rendering the defendant unsuitable for diversion.
(4)Based on the opinion of a qualified mental health expert whom the court may deem appropriate, either of the following circumstances exists:
(A)The defendant is performing unsatisfactorily in the assigned program.
(B)The defendant is gravely disabled, as defined in subparagraph (B) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (h) of Section 5008 of the Welfare and Institutions Code. A defendant shall only be conserved and referred to the conservatorship investigator pursuant to this finding.
(h)If the defendant has performed satisfactorily in diversion, at the end of the period of diversion, the court shall dismiss the defendants criminal charges that were the subject of the criminal proceedings at the time of the initial diversion. A court may conclude that the defendant has performed satisfactorily if the defendant has substantially complied with the requirements of diversion, has avoided significant new violations of law unrelated to the defendants mental health condition, and has a plan in place for long-term mental health care. If the court dismisses the charges, the clerk of the court shall file a record with the Department of Justice indicating the disposition of the case diverted pursuant to this section. Upon successful completion of diversion, if the court dismisses the charges, the arrest upon which the diversion was based shall be deemed never to have occurred, and the court shall order access to the record of the arrest restricted in accordance with Section 1001.9, except as specified in subdivisions (j) and (k). The defendant who successfully completes diversion may indicate in response to any question concerning the defendants prior criminal record that the defendant was not arrested or diverted for the offense, except as specified in subdivision (j).
(i)A record pertaining to an arrest resulting in successful completion of diversion, or any record generated as a result of the defendants application for or participation in diversion, shall not, without the defendants consent, be used in any way that could result in the denial of any employment, benefit, license, or certificate.
(j)The defendant shall be advised that, regardless of the defendants completion of diversion, both of the following apply:
(1)The arrest upon which the diversion was based may be disclosed by the Department of Justice to any peace officer application request and that, notwithstanding subdivision (i), this section does not relieve the defendant of the obligation to disclose the arrest in response to any direct question contained in any questionnaire or application for a position as a peace officer, as defined in Section 830.
(2)An order to seal records pertaining to an arrest made pursuant to this section has no effect on a criminal justice agencys ability to access and use those sealed records and information regarding sealed arrests, as described in Section 851.92.
(k)A finding that the defendant suffers from a mental disorder, any progress reports concerning the defendants treatment, or any other records related to a mental disorder that were created as a result of participation in, or completion of, diversion pursuant to this section or for use at a hearing on the defendants eligibility for diversion under this section may not be used in any other proceeding without the defendants consent, unless that information is relevant evidence that is admissible under the standards described in paragraph (2) of subdivision (f) of Section 28 of Article I of the California Constitution. However, when determining whether to exercise its discretion to grant diversion under this section, a court may consider previous records of participation in diversion under this section.
(l)The county agency administering the diversion, the defendants mental health treatment providers, the public guardian or conservator, and the court shall, to the extent not prohibited by federal law, have access to the defendants medical and psychological records, including progress reports, during the defendants time in diversion, as needed, for the purpose of providing care and treatment and monitoring treatment for diversion or conservatorship.
SEC. 1.1.Section 1001.36 of the Penal Code is amended to read:1001.36.(a)On an accusatory pleading alleging the commission of a misdemeanor or felony offense not set forth in subdivision (d), the court may, in its discretion, and after considering the positions of the defense and prosecution, grant pretrial diversion to a defendant pursuant to this section if the defendant satisfies the eligibility requirements for pretrial diversion set forth in subdivision (b) and the court determines that the defendant is suitable for that diversion under the factors set forth in subdivision (c).
(b)A defendant is eligible for pretrial diversion pursuant to this section if both of the following criteria are met:
(1)The defendant has been diagnosed with a mental disorder as identified in the most recent edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, including, but not limited to, bipolar disorder, schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder, or post-traumatic stress disorder, but excluding antisocial personality disorder and pedophilia. Evidence of the defendants mental disorder shall be provided by the defense and shall include a diagnosis or treatment for a diagnosed mental disorder within the last five years by a qualified mental health expert. In opining that a defendant suffers from a qualifying disorder, the qualified mental health expert may rely on an examination of the defendant, the defendants medical records, arrest reports, or any other relevant evidence.
(2)The defendants mental disorder was a significant factor in the commission of the charged offense. If the defendant has been diagnosed with a mental disorder, the court shall find that the defendants mental disorder was a significant factor in the commission of the offense unless there is clear and convincing evidence that it was not a motivating factor, causal factor, or contributing factor to the defendants involvement in the alleged offense. A court may consider any relevant and credible evidence, including, but not limited to, police reports, preliminary hearing transcripts, witness statements, statements by the defendants mental health treatment provider, medical records, records or reports by qualified medical experts, or evidence that the defendant displayed symptoms consistent with the relevant mental disorder at or near the time of the offense.
(c)For any defendant who satisfies the eligibility requirements in subdivision (b), the court must consider whether the defendant is suitable for pretrial diversion. A defendant is suitable for pretrial diversion if all of the following criteria are met:
(1)In the opinion of a qualified mental health expert, the defendants symptoms of the mental disorder causing, contributing to, or motivating the criminal behavior would respond to mental health treatment.
(2)The defendant consents to diversion and waives the defendants right to a speedy trial, unless a defendant has been found to be an appropriate candidate for diversion in lieu of commitment pursuant to clause (iv) of subparagraph (B) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (a) of Section 1370 and, as a result of the defendants mental incompetence, cannot consent to diversion or give a knowing and intelligent waiver of the defendants right to a speedy trial.
(3)The defendant agrees to comply with treatment as a condition of diversion, unless the defendant has been found to be an appropriate candidate for diversion in lieu of commitment for restoration of competency treatment pursuant to clause (iv) of subparagraph (B) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (a) of Section 1370 and, as a result of the defendants mental incompetence, cannot agree to comply with treatment.
(4)The defendant will not pose an unreasonable risk of danger to public safety, as defined in Section 1170.18, if treated in the community. The court may consider the opinions of the district attorney, the defense, or a qualified mental health expert, and may consider the defendants treatment plan, the defendants violence and criminal history, the current charged offense, and any other factors that the court deems appropriate.
(d)A defendant may not be placed into a diversion program, pursuant to this section, for the following current charged offenses:
(1)Murder or voluntary manslaughter.
(2)An offense for which a person, if convicted, would be required to register pursuant to Section 290, except for a violation of Section 314.
(3)Rape.
(4)Lewd or lascivious act on a child under 14 years of age.
(5)Assault with intent to commit rape, sodomy, or oral copulation, in violation of Section 220.
(6)Commission of rape or sexual penetration in concert with another person, in violation of Section 264.1.
(7)Continuous sexual abuse of a child, in violation of Section 288.5.
(8)A violation of subdivision (b) or (c) of Section 11418.
(e)At any stage of the proceedings, the court may require the defendant to make a prima facie showing that the defendant will meet the minimum requirements of eligibility for diversion and that the defendant and the offense are suitable for diversion. The hearing on the prima facie showing shall be informal and may proceed on offers of proof, reliable hearsay, and argument of counsel. If a prima facie showing is not made, the court may summarily deny the request for diversion or grant any other relief as may be deemed appropriate.
(f)As used in this chapter, the following terms have the following meanings:
(1)Pretrial diversion means the postponement of prosecution, either temporarily or permanently, at any point in the judicial process from the point at which the accused is charged until adjudication, to allow the defendant to undergo mental health treatment, subject to all of the following:
(A)(i)The court is satisfied that the recommended inpatient or outpatient program of mental health treatment will meet the specialized mental health treatment needs of the defendant.
(ii)The defendant may be referred to a program of mental health treatment utilizing existing inpatient or outpatient mental health resources. Before approving a proposed treatment program, the court shall consider the request of the defense, the request of the prosecution, the needs of the defendant, and the interests of the community. The treatment may be procured using private or public funds, and a referral may be made to a county mental health agency, existing collaborative courts, or assisted outpatient treatment only if that entity has agreed to accept responsibility for the treatment of the defendant, and mental health services are provided only to the extent that resources are available and the defendant is eligible for those services.
(iii)If the court refers the defendant to a county mental health agency pursuant to this section and the agency determines that it is unable to provide services to the defendant, the court shall accept a written declaration to that effect from the agency in lieu of requiring live testimony. That declaration shall serve only to establish that the program is unable to provide services to the defendant at that time and does not constitute evidence that the defendant is unqualified or unsuitable for diversion under this section.
(B)The provider of the mental health treatment program in which the defendant has been placed shall provide regular reports to the court, the defense, and the prosecutor on the defendants progress in treatment.
(C)The period during which criminal proceedings against the defendant may be diverted is limited as follows:
(i)If the defendant is charged with a felony, the period shall be no longer than two years.
(ii)If the defendant is charged with a misdemeanor, the period shall be no longer than one year.
(D)Upon request, the court shall conduct a hearing to determine whether restitution, as defined in subdivision (f) of Section 1202.4, is owed to any victim as a result of the diverted offense and, if owed, order its payment during the period of diversion. However, a defendants inability to pay restitution due to indigence or mental disorder shall not be grounds for denial of diversion or a finding that the defendant has failed to comply with the terms of diversion.
(2)Qualified mental health expert includes, but is not limited to, a psychiatrist, psychologist, a person described in Section 5751.2 of the Welfare and Institutions Code, or a person whose knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education qualifies them as an expert.
(g)If any of the following circumstances exists, the court shall, after notice to the defendant, defense counsel, and the prosecution, hold a hearing to determine whether the criminal proceedings should be reinstated, whether the treatment should be modified, or whether the defendant should be conserved and referred to the conservatorship investigator of the county of commitment to initiate conservatorship proceedings for the defendant pursuant to Chapter 3 (commencing with Section 5350) of Part 1 of Division 5 of the Welfare and Institutions Code:
(1)The defendant is charged with an additional misdemeanor allegedly committed during the pretrial diversion and that reflects the defendants propensity for violence.
(2)The defendant is charged with an additional felony allegedly committed during the pretrial diversion.
(3)The defendant is engaged in criminal conduct rendering the defendant unsuitable for diversion.
(4)Based on the opinion of a qualified mental health expert whom the court may deem appropriate, either of the following circumstances exists:
(A)The defendant is performing unsatisfactorily in the assigned program.
(B)The defendant is gravely disabled, as defined in subparagraph (B) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (h) of Section 5008 of the Welfare and Institutions Code. A defendant shall only be conserved and referred to the conservatorship investigator pursuant to this finding.
(h)If the defendant has performed satisfactorily in diversion, at the end of the period of diversion, the court shall dismiss the defendants criminal charges that were the subject of the criminal proceedings at the time of the initial diversion. A court may conclude that the defendant has performed satisfactorily if the defendant has substantially complied with the requirements of diversion, has avoided significant new violations of law unrelated to the defendants mental health condition, and has a plan in place for long-term mental health care. If the court dismisses the charges, the clerk of the court shall file a record with the Department of Justice indicating the disposition of the case diverted pursuant to this section. Upon successful completion of diversion, if the court dismisses the charges, the arrest upon which the diversion was based shall be deemed never to have occurred, and the court shall order access to the record of the arrest restricted in accordance with Section 1001.9, except as specified in subdivisions (j) and (k). The defendant who successfully completes diversion may indicate in response to any question concerning the defendants prior criminal record that the defendant was not arrested or diverted for the offense, except as specified in subdivision (j).
(i)A record pertaining to an arrest resulting in successful completion of diversion, or any record generated as a result of the defendants application for or participation in diversion, shall not, without the defendants consent, be used in any way that could result in the denial of any employment, benefit, license, or certificate.
(j)The defendant shall be advised that, regardless of the defendants completion of diversion, both of the following apply:
(1)The arrest upon which the diversion was based may be disclosed by the Department of Justice to any peace officer application request and that, notwithstanding subdivision (i), this section does not relieve the defendant of the obligation to disclose the arrest in response to any direct question contained in any questionnaire or application for a position as a peace officer, as defined in Section 830.
(2)An order to seal records pertaining to an arrest made pursuant to this section has no effect on a criminal justice agencys ability to access and use those sealed records and information regarding sealed arrests, as described in Section 851.92.
(k)A finding that the defendant suffers from a mental disorder, any progress reports concerning the defendants treatment, or any other records related to a mental disorder that were created as a result of participation in, or completion of, diversion pursuant to this section or for use at a hearing on the defendants eligibility for diversion under this section may not be used in any other proceeding without the defendants consent, unless that information is relevant evidence that is admissible under the standards described in paragraph (2) of subdivision (f) of Section 28 of Article I of the California Constitution. However, when determining whether to exercise its discretion to grant diversion under this section, a court may consider previous records of participation in diversion under this section.
(l)The county agency administering the diversion, the defendants mental health treatment providers, the public guardian or conservator, and the court shall, to the extent not prohibited by federal law, have access to the defendants medical and psychological records, including progress reports, during the defendants time in diversion, as needed, for the purpose of providing care and treatment and monitoring treatment for diversion or conservatorship.
(m)This section shall remain in effect until July 1, 2024, and as of that date is repealed.
SEC. 1.2.Section 1001.36 is added to the Penal Code, to read:1001.36.(a)On an accusatory pleading alleging the commission of a misdemeanor or felony offense not set forth in subdivision (d), the court may, in its discretion, and after considering the positions of the defense and prosecution, grant pretrial diversion to a defendant pursuant to this section if the defendant satisfies the eligibility requirements for pretrial diversion set forth in subdivision (b) and the court determines that the defendant is suitable for that diversion under the factors set forth in subdivision (c).
(b)A defendant is eligible for pretrial diversion pursuant to this section if both of the following criteria are met:
(1)The defendant has been diagnosed with a mental disorder as identified in the most recent edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, including, but not limited to, bipolar disorder, schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder, or post-traumatic stress disorder, but excluding antisocial personality disorder and pedophilia. Evidence of the defendants mental disorder shall be provided by the defense and shall include a diagnosis or treatment for a diagnosed mental disorder within the last five years by a qualified mental health expert. In opining that a defendant suffers from a qualifying disorder, the qualified mental health expert may rely on an examination of the defendant, the defendants medical records, arrest reports, or any other relevant evidence.
(2)The defendants mental disorder was a significant factor in the commission of the charged offense. If the defendant has been diagnosed with a mental disorder, the court shall find that the defendants mental disorder was a significant factor in the commission of the offense unless there is clear and convincing evidence that it was not a motivating factor, causal factor, or contributing factor to the defendants involvement in the alleged offense. A court may consider any relevant and credible evidence, including, but not limited to, police reports, preliminary hearing transcripts, witness statements, statements by the defendants mental health treatment provider, medical records, records or reports by qualified medical experts, or evidence that the defendant displayed symptoms consistent with the relevant mental disorder at or near the time of the offense.
(c)For any defendant who satisfies the eligibility requirements in subdivision (b), the court must consider whether the defendant is suitable for pretrial diversion. A defendant is suitable for pretrial diversion if all of the following criteria are met:
(1)In the opinion of a qualified mental health expert, the defendants symptoms of the mental disorder causing, contributing to, or motivating the criminal behavior would respond to mental health treatment.
(2)The defendant consents to diversion and waives the defendants right to a speedy trial, unless a defendant has been found to be an appropriate candidate for diversion in lieu of commitment pursuant to clause (iv) of subparagraph (B) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (a) of Section 1370 and, as a result of the defendants mental incompetence, cannot consent to diversion or give a knowing and intelligent waiver of the defendants right to a speedy trial.
(3)The defendant agrees to comply with treatment as a condition of diversion, unless the defendant has been found to be an appropriate candidate for diversion in lieu of commitment for restoration of competency treatment pursuant to clause (iv) of subparagraph (B) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (a) of Section 1370 and, as a result of the defendants mental incompetence, cannot agree to comply with treatment.
(4)The defendant will not pose an unreasonable risk of danger to public safety, as defined in Section 1170.18, if treated in the community. The court may consider the opinions of the district attorney, the defense, or a qualified mental health expert, and may consider the defendants treatment plan, the defendants violence and criminal history, the current charged offense, and any other factors that the court deems appropriate.
(d)A defendant may not be placed into a diversion program, pursuant to this section, for the following current charged offenses:
(1)Murder or voluntary manslaughter.
(2)An offense for which a person, if convicted, would be required to register pursuant to Section 290, except for a violation of Section 314.
(3)Rape.
(4)Lewd or lascivious act on a child under 14 years of age.
(5)Assault with intent to commit rape, sodomy, or oral copulation, in violation of Section 220.
(6)Commission of rape or sexual penetration in concert with another person, in violation of Section 264.1.
(7)Continuous sexual abuse of a child, in violation of Section 288.5.
(8)A violation of subdivision (b) or (c) of Section 11418.
(e)At any stage of the proceedings, the court may require the defendant to make a prima facie showing that the defendant will meet the minimum requirements of eligibility for diversion and that the defendant and the offense are suitable for diversion. The hearing on the prima facie showing shall be informal and may proceed on offers of proof, reliable hearsay, and argument of counsel. If a prima facie showing is not made, the court may summarily deny the request for diversion or grant any other relief as may be deemed appropriate.
(f)As used in this chapter, the following terms have the following meanings:
(1)Pretrial diversion means the postponement of prosecution, either temporarily or permanently, at any point in the judicial process from the point at which the accused is charged until adjudication, to allow the defendant to undergo mental health treatment, subject to all of the following:
(A)(i)The court is satisfied that the recommended inpatient or outpatient program of mental health treatment will meet the specialized mental health treatment needs of the defendant.
(ii)The defendant may be referred to a program of mental health treatment utilizing existing inpatient or outpatient mental health resources. Before approving a proposed treatment program, the court shall consider the request of the defense, the request of the prosecution, the needs of the defendant, and the interests of the community. The treatment may be procured using private or public funds, and a referral may be made to a county mental health agency, existing collaborative courts, or assisted outpatient treatment only if that entity has agreed to accept responsibility for the treatment of the defendant, and mental health services are provided only to the extent that resources are available and the defendant is eligible for those services.
(iii)If the court refers the defendant to a county mental health agency pursuant to this section and the agency determines that it is unable to provide services to the defendant, the court shall accept a written declaration to that effect from the agency in lieu of requiring live testimony. That declaration shall serve only to establish that the program is unable to provide services to the defendant at that time and does not constitute evidence that the defendant is unqualified or unsuitable for diversion under this section.
(B)The provider of the mental health treatment program in which the defendant has been placed shall provide regular reports to the court, the defense, and the prosecutor on the defendants progress in treatment.
(C)The period during which criminal proceedings against the defendant may be diverted is limited as follows:
(i)If the defendant is charged with a felony, the period shall be no longer than two years.
(ii)If the defendant is charged with a misdemeanor, the period shall be no longer than one year.
(D)Upon request, the court shall conduct a hearing to determine whether restitution, as defined in subdivision (f) of Section 1202.4, is owed to any victim as a result of the diverted offense and, if owed, order its payment during the period of diversion. However, a defendants inability to pay restitution due to indigence or mental disorder shall not be grounds for denial of diversion or a finding that the defendant has failed to comply with the terms of diversion.
(2)Qualified mental health expert includes, but is not limited to, a psychiatrist, psychologist, a person described in Section 5751.2 of the Welfare and Institutions Code, or a person whose knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education qualifies them as an expert.
(g)If any of the following circumstances exists, the court shall, after notice to the defendant, defense counsel, and the prosecution, hold a hearing to determine whether the criminal proceedings should be reinstated, whether the treatment should be modified, or whether the defendant should be conserved and referred to the conservatorship investigator of the county of commitment to initiate conservatorship proceedings for the defendant pursuant to Chapter 3 (commencing with Section 5350) of Part 1 of Division 5 of the Welfare and Institutions Code:
(1)The defendant is charged with an additional misdemeanor allegedly committed during the pretrial diversion and that reflects the defendants propensity for violence.
(2)The defendant is charged with an additional felony allegedly committed during the pretrial diversion.
(3)The defendant is engaged in criminal conduct rendering the defendant unsuitable for diversion.
(4)Based on the opinion of a qualified mental health expert whom the court may deem appropriate, either of the following circumstances exists:
(A)The defendant is performing unsatisfactorily in the assigned program.
(B)The defendant is gravely disabled, as defined in subparagraph (B) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (h) of Section 5008 of the Welfare and Institutions Code. A defendant shall only be conserved and referred to the conservatorship investigator pursuant to this finding.
(h)If the defendant has performed satisfactorily in diversion, at the end of the period of diversion, the court shall dismiss the defendants criminal charges that were the subject of the criminal proceedings at the time of the initial diversion. A court may conclude that the defendant has performed satisfactorily if the defendant has substantially complied with the requirements of diversion, has avoided significant new violations of law unrelated to the defendants mental health condition, and has a plan in place for long-term mental health care. If the court dismisses the charges, the clerk of the court shall file a record with the Department of Justice indicating the disposition of the case diverted pursuant to this section. Upon successful completion of diversion, if the court dismisses the charges, the arrest upon which the diversion was based shall be deemed never to have occurred, and the court shall order access to the record of the arrest restricted in accordance with Section 1001.9, except as specified in subdivisions (j) and (k). The defendant who successfully completes diversion may indicate in response to any question concerning the defendants prior criminal record that the defendant was not arrested or diverted for the offense, except as specified in subdivision (j).
(i)A record pertaining to an arrest resulting in successful completion of diversion, or any record generated as a result of the defendants application for or participation in diversion, shall not, without the defendants consent, be used in any way that could result in the denial of any employment, benefit, license, or certificate.
(j)The defendant shall be advised that, regardless of the defendants completion of diversion, both of the following apply:
(1)The arrest upon which the diversion was based may be disclosed by the Department of Justice to any peace officer application request and that, notwithstanding subdivision (i), this section does not relieve the defendant of the obligation to disclose the arrest in response to any direct question contained in any questionnaire or application for a position as a peace officer, as defined in Section 830.
(2)An order to seal records pertaining to an arrest made pursuant to this section has no effect on a criminal justice agencys ability to access and use those sealed records and information regarding sealed arrests, as described in Section 851.92.
(k)A finding that the defendant suffers from a mental disorder, any progress reports concerning the defendants treatment, including, but not limited to, any finding that the defendant be prohibited from owning or controlling a firearm because they are a danger to themselves or others pursuant to subdivision (m), or any other records related to a mental disorder that were created as a result of participation in, or completion of, diversion pursuant to this section or for use at a hearing on the defendants eligibility for diversion under this section may not be used in any other proceeding without the defendants consent, unless that information is relevant evidence that is admissible under the standards described in paragraph (2) of subdivision (f) of Section 28 of Article I of the California Constitution. However, when determining whether to exercise its discretion to grant diversion under this section, a court may consider previous records of participation in diversion under this section.
(l)The county agency administering the diversion, the defendants mental health treatment providers, the public guardian or conservator, and the court shall, to the extent not prohibited by federal law, have access to the defendants medical and psychological records, including progress reports, during the defendants time in diversion, as needed, for the purpose of providing care and treatment and monitoring treatment for diversion or conservatorship.
(m)(1)The prosecution may request an order from the court that the defendant be prohibited from owning or possessing a firearm until they successfully complete diversion because they are a danger to themselves or others pursuant to subdivision (i) of Section 8103 of the Welfare and Institutions Code.
(2)The prosecution shall bear the burden of proving, by clear and convincing evidence, both of the following are true:
(A)The defendant poses a significant danger of causing personal injury to themselves or another by having in their custody or control, owning, purchasing, possessing, or receiving a firearm.
(B)The prohibition is necessary to prevent personal injury to the defendant or any other person because less restrictive alternatives either have been tried and found to be ineffective or are inadequate or inappropriate for the circumstances of the defendant.
(3)(A)If the court finds that the prosecution has not met that burden, the court shall not order that the person is prohibited from having, owning, purchasing, possessing, or receiving a firearm.
(B)If the court finds that the prosecution has met the burden, the court shall order that the person is prohibited, and shall inform the person that they are prohibited, from owning or controlling a firearm until they successfully complete diversion because they are a danger to themselves or others.
(4)An order imposed pursuant to this subdivision shall be in effect until the defendant has successfully completed diversion or until their firearm rights are restored pursuant to paragraph (4) of subdivision (g) of Section 8103 of the Welfare and Institutions Code.
(n)This section shall become operative on July 1, 2024.
SEC. 2.Sections 1.1 and 1.2 of this bill incorporate amendments to Section 1001.36 of the Penal Code proposed by both this bill and AB 455. These sections of this bill shall only become operative if (1) both bills are enacted and become effective on or before January 1, 2024, (2) each bill amends Section 1001.36 of the Penal Code, and (3) this bill is enacted after AB 455, in which case Section 1 of this bill shall not become operative.
(a)On an accusatory pleading alleging the commission of a misdemeanor or felony offense not set forth in subdivision (d), the court may, in its discretion, and after considering the positions of the defense and prosecution, grant pretrial diversion to a defendant pursuant to this section if the defendant satisfies the eligibility requirements for pretrial diversion set forth in subdivision (b) and the court determines that the defendant is suitable for that diversion under the factors set forth in subdivision (c).
(b)A defendant is eligible for pretrial diversion pursuant to this section if both of the following criteria are met:
(1)The defendant has been diagnosed with a mental disorder as identified in the most recent edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, including, but not limited to, bipolar disorder, schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder, or post-traumatic stress disorder, but excluding antisocial personality disorder and pedophilia. Evidence of the defendants mental disorder shall be provided by the defense and shall include a diagnosis or treatment for a diagnosed mental disorder within the last five years by a qualified mental health expert. In opining that a defendant suffers from a qualifying disorder, the qualified mental health expert may rely on an examination of the defendant, the defendants medical records, arrest reports, or any other relevant evidence.
(2)The defendants mental disorder was a significant factor in the commission of the charged offense. If the defendant has been diagnosed with a mental disorder, the court shall find that the defendants mental disorder was a significant factor in the commission of the offense unless there is clear and convincing evidence that it was not a motivating factor, causal factor, or contributing factor to the defendants involvement in the alleged offense. A court may consider any relevant and credible evidence, including, but not limited to, police reports, preliminary hearing transcripts, witness statements, statements by the defendants mental health treatment provider, medical records, records or reports by qualified medical experts, or evidence that the defendant displayed symptoms consistent with the relevant mental disorder at or near the time of the offense.
(c)For any defendant who satisfies the eligibility requirements in subdivision (b), the court must consider whether the defendant is suitable for pretrial diversion. A defendant is suitable for pretrial diversion if all of the following criteria are met:
(1)In the opinion of a qualified mental health expert, the defendants symptoms of the mental disorder causing, contributing to, or motivating the criminal behavior would respond to mental health treatment.
(2)The defendant consents to diversion and waives the defendants right to a speedy trial, unless a defendant has been found to be an appropriate candidate for diversion in lieu of commitment pursuant to clause (iv) of subparagraph (B) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (a) of Section 1370 and, as a result of the defendants mental incompetence, cannot consent to diversion or give a knowing and intelligent waiver of the defendants right to a speedy trial.
(3)The defendant agrees to comply with treatment as a condition of diversion, unless the defendant has been found to be an appropriate candidate for diversion in lieu of commitment for restoration of competency treatment pursuant to clause (iv) of subparagraph (B) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (a) of Section 1370 and, as a result of the defendants mental incompetence, cannot agree to comply with treatment.
(4)The defendant will not pose an unreasonable risk of danger to public safety, as defined in Section 1170.18, if treated in the community. The court may consider the opinions of the district attorney, the defense, or a qualified mental health expert, and may consider the defendants treatment plan, the defendants violence and criminal history, the current charged offense, and any other factors that the court deems appropriate.
(d)A defendant may not be placed into a diversion program, pursuant to this section, for the following current charged offenses:
(1)Murder or voluntary manslaughter.
(2)An offense for which a person, if convicted, would be required to register pursuant to Section 290, except for a violation of Section 314.
(3)Rape.
(4)Lewd or lascivious act on a child under 14 years of age.
(5)Assault with intent to commit rape, sodomy, or oral copulation, in violation of Section 220.
(6)Commission of rape or sexual penetration in concert with another person, in violation of Section 264.1.
(7)Continuous sexual abuse of a child, in violation of Section 288.5.
(8)A violation of subdivision (b) or (c) of Section 11418.
(e)At any stage of the proceedings, the court may require the defendant to make a prima facie showing that the defendant will meet the minimum requirements of eligibility for diversion and that the defendant and the offense are suitable for diversion. The hearing on the prima facie showing shall be informal and may proceed on offers of proof, reliable hearsay, and argument of counsel. If a prima facie showing is not made, the court may summarily deny the request for diversion or grant any other relief as may be deemed appropriate.
(f)As used in this chapter, the following terms have the following meanings:
(1)Pretrial diversion means the postponement of prosecution, either temporarily or permanently, at any point in the judicial process from the point at which the accused is charged until adjudication, to allow the defendant to undergo mental health treatment, subject to all of the following:
(A)(i)The court is satisfied that the recommended inpatient or outpatient program of mental health treatment will meet the specialized mental health treatment needs of the defendant.
(ii)The defendant may be referred to a program of mental health treatment utilizing existing inpatient or outpatient mental health resources. Before approving a proposed treatment program, the court shall consider the request of the defense, the request of the prosecution, the needs of the defendant, and the interests of the community. The treatment may be procured using private or public funds, and a referral may be made to a county mental health agency, existing collaborative courts, or assisted outpatient treatment only if that entity has agreed to accept responsibility for the treatment of the defendant, and mental health services are provided only to the extent that resources are available and the defendant is eligible for those services.
(iii)If the court refers the defendant to a county mental health agency pursuant to this section and the agency determines that it is unable to provide services to the defendant, the court shall accept a written declaration to that effect from the agency in lieu of requiring live testimony. That declaration shall serve only to establish that the program is unable to provide services to the defendant at that time and does not constitute evidence that the defendant is unqualified or unsuitable for diversion under this section.
(B)The provider of the mental health treatment program in which the defendant has been placed shall provide regular reports to the court, the defense, and the prosecutor on the defendants progress in treatment.
(C)The period during which criminal proceedings against the defendant may be diverted is limited as follows:
(i)If the defendant is charged with a felony, the period shall be no longer than two years.
(ii)If the defendant is charged with a misdemeanor, the period shall be no longer than one year.
(D)Upon request, the court shall conduct a hearing to determine whether restitution, as defined in subdivision (f) of Section 1202.4, is owed to any victim as a result of the diverted offense and, if owed, order its payment during the period of diversion. However, a defendants inability to pay restitution due to indigence or mental disorder shall not be grounds for denial of diversion or a finding that the defendant has failed to comply with the terms of diversion.
(2)Qualified mental health expert includes, but is not limited to, a psychiatrist, psychologist, a person described in Section 5751.2 of the Welfare and Institutions Code, or a person whose knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education qualifies them as an expert.
(g)If any of the following circumstances exists, the court shall, after notice to the defendant, defense counsel, and the prosecution, hold a hearing to determine whether the criminal proceedings should be reinstated, whether the treatment should be modified, or whether the defendant should be conserved and referred to the conservatorship investigator of the county of commitment to initiate conservatorship proceedings for the defendant pursuant to Chapter 3 (commencing with Section 5350) of Part 1 of Division 5 of the Welfare and Institutions Code:
(1)The defendant is charged with an additional misdemeanor allegedly committed during the pretrial diversion and that reflects the defendants propensity for violence.
(2)The defendant is charged with an additional felony allegedly committed during the pretrial diversion.
(3)The defendant is engaged in criminal conduct rendering the defendant unsuitable for diversion.
(4)Based on the opinion of a qualified mental health expert whom the court may deem appropriate, either of the following circumstances exists:
(A)The defendant is performing unsatisfactorily in the assigned program.
(B)The defendant is gravely disabled, as defined in subparagraph (B) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (h) of Section 5008 of the Welfare and Institutions Code. A defendant shall only be conserved and referred to the conservatorship investigator pursuant to this finding.
(h)If the defendant has performed satisfactorily in diversion, at the end of the period of diversion, the court shall dismiss the defendants criminal charges that were the subject of the criminal proceedings at the time of the initial diversion. A court may conclude that the defendant has performed satisfactorily if the defendant has substantially complied with the requirements of diversion, has avoided significant new violations of law unrelated to the defendants mental health condition, and has a plan in place for long-term mental health care. If the court dismisses the charges, the clerk of the court shall file a record with the Department of Justice indicating the disposition of the case diverted pursuant to this section. Upon successful completion of diversion, if the court dismisses the charges, the arrest upon which the diversion was based shall be deemed never to have occurred, and the court shall order access to the record of the arrest restricted in accordance with Section 1001.9, except as specified in subdivisions (j) and (k). The defendant who successfully completes diversion may indicate in response to any question concerning the defendants prior criminal record that the defendant was not arrested or diverted for the offense, except as specified in subdivision (j).
(i)A record pertaining to an arrest resulting in successful completion of diversion, or any record generated as a result of the defendants application for or participation in diversion, shall not, without the defendants consent, be used in any way that could result in the denial of any employment, benefit, license, or certificate.
(j)The defendant shall be advised that, regardless of the defendants completion of diversion, both of the following apply:
(1)The arrest upon which the diversion was based may be disclosed by the Department of Justice to any peace officer application request and that, notwithstanding subdivision (i), this section does not relieve the defendant of the obligation to disclose the arrest in response to any direct question contained in any questionnaire or application for a position as a peace officer, as defined in Section 830.
(2)An order to seal records pertaining to an arrest made pursuant to this section has no effect on a criminal justice agencys ability to access and use those sealed records and information regarding sealed arrests, as described in Section 851.92.
(k)A finding that the defendant suffers from a mental disorder, any progress reports concerning the defendants treatment, or any other records related to a mental disorder that were created as a result of participation in, or completion of, diversion pursuant to this section or for use at a hearing on the defendants eligibility for diversion under this section may not be used in any other proceeding without the defendants consent, unless that information is relevant evidence that is admissible under the standards described in paragraph (2) of subdivision (f) of Section 28 of Article I of the California Constitution. However, when determining whether to exercise its discretion to grant diversion under this section, a court may consider previous records of participation in diversion under this section.
(l)The county agency administering the diversion, the defendants mental health treatment providers, the public guardian or conservator, and the court shall, to the extent not prohibited by federal law, have access to the defendants medical and psychological records, including progress reports, during the defendants time in diversion, as needed, for the purpose of providing care and treatment and monitoring treatment for diversion or conservatorship.
SEC. 1.1.Section 1001.36 of the Penal Code is amended to read:1001.36.(a)On an accusatory pleading alleging the commission of a misdemeanor or felony offense not set forth in subdivision (d), the court may, in its discretion, and after considering the positions of the defense and prosecution, grant pretrial diversion to a defendant pursuant to this section if the defendant satisfies the eligibility requirements for pretrial diversion set forth in subdivision (b) and the court determines that the defendant is suitable for that diversion under the factors set forth in subdivision (c).
(b)A defendant is eligible for pretrial diversion pursuant to this section if both of the following criteria are met:
(1)The defendant has been diagnosed with a mental disorder as identified in the most recent edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, including, but not limited to, bipolar disorder, schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder, or post-traumatic stress disorder, but excluding antisocial personality disorder, borderline personality disorder, disorder and pedophilia. Evidence of the defendants mental disorder shall be provided by the defense and shall include a diagnosis or treatment for a diagnosed mental disorder within the last five years by a qualified mental health expert. In opining that a defendant suffers from a qualifying disorder, the qualified mental health expert may rely on an examination of the defendant, the defendants medical records, arrest reports, or any other relevant evidence.
(2)The defendants mental disorder was a significant factor in the commission of the charged offense. If the defendant has been diagnosed with a mental disorder, the court shall find that the defendants mental disorder was a significant factor in the commission of the offense unless there is clear and convincing evidence that it was not a motivating factor, causal factor, or contributing factor to the defendants involvement in the alleged offense. A court may consider any relevant and credible evidence, including, but not limited to, police reports, preliminary hearing transcripts, witness statements, statements by the defendants mental health treatment provider, medical records, records or reports by qualified medical experts, or evidence that the defendant displayed symptoms consistent with the relevant mental disorder at or near the time of the offense.
(c)For any defendant who satisfies the eligibility requirements in subdivision (b), the court must consider whether the defendant is suitable for pretrial diversion. A defendant is suitable for pretrial diversion if all of the following criteria are met:
(1)In the opinion of a qualified mental health expert, the defendants symptoms of the mental disorder causing, contributing to, or motivating the criminal behavior would respond to mental health treatment.
(2)The defendant consents to diversion and waives the defendants right to a speedy trial, unless a defendant has been found to be an appropriate candidate for diversion in lieu of commitment pursuant to clause (iv) of subparagraph (B) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (a) of Section 1370 and, as a result of the defendants mental incompetence, cannot consent to diversion or give a knowing and intelligent waiver of the defendants right to a speedy trial.
(3)The defendant agrees to comply with treatment as a condition of diversion, unless the defendant has been found to be an appropriate candidate for diversion in lieu of commitment for restoration of competency treatment pursuant to clause (iv) of subparagraph (B) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (a) of Section 1370 and, as a result of the defendants mental incompetence, cannot agree to comply with treatment.
(4)The defendant will not pose an unreasonable risk of danger to public safety, as defined in Section 1170.18, if treated in the community. The court may consider the opinions of the district attorney, the defense, or a qualified mental health expert, and may consider the defendants treatment plan, the defendants violence and criminal history, the current charged offense, and any other factors that the court deems appropriate.
(d)A defendant may not be placed into a diversion program, pursuant to this section, for the following current charged offenses:
(1)Murder or voluntary manslaughter.
(2)An offense for which a person, if convicted, would be required to register pursuant to Section 290, except for a violation of Section 314.
(3)Rape.
(4)Lewd or lascivious act on a child under 14 years of age.
(5)Assault with intent to commit rape, sodomy, or oral copulation, in violation of Section 220.
(6)Commission of rape or sexual penetration in concert with another person, in violation of Section 264.1.
(7)Continuous sexual abuse of a child, in violation of Section 288.5.
(8)A violation of subdivision (b) or (c) of Section 11418.
(e)At any stage of the proceedings, the court may require the defendant to make a prima facie showing that the defendant will meet the minimum requirements of eligibility for diversion and that the defendant and the offense are suitable for diversion. The hearing on the prima facie showing shall be informal and may proceed on offers of proof, reliable hearsay, and argument of counsel. If a prima facie showing is not made, the court may summarily deny the request for diversion or grant any other relief as may be deemed appropriate.
(f)As used in this chapter, the following terms have the following meanings:
(1)Pretrial diversion means the postponement of prosecution, either temporarily or permanently, at any point in the judicial process from the point at which the accused is charged until adjudication, to allow the defendant to undergo mental health treatment, subject to all of the following:
(A)(i)The court is satisfied that the recommended inpatient or outpatient program of mental health treatment will meet the specialized mental health treatment needs of the defendant.
(ii)The defendant may be referred to a program of mental health treatment utilizing existing inpatient or outpatient mental health resources. Before approving a proposed treatment program, the court shall consider the request of the defense, the request of the prosecution, the needs of the defendant, and the interests of the community. The treatment may be procured using private or public funds, and a referral may be made to a county mental health agency, existing collaborative courts, or assisted outpatient treatment only if that entity has agreed to accept responsibility for the treatment of the defendant, and mental health services are provided only to the extent that resources are available and the defendant is eligible for those services.
(iii)If the court refers the defendant to a county mental health agency pursuant to this section and the agency determines that it is unable to provide services to the defendant, the court shall accept a written declaration to that effect from the agency in lieu of requiring live testimony. That declaration shall serve only to establish that the program is unable to provide services to the defendant at that time and does not constitute evidence that the defendant is unqualified or unsuitable for diversion under this section.
(B)The provider of the mental health treatment program in which the defendant has been placed shall provide regular reports to the court, the defense, and the prosecutor on the defendants progress in treatment.
(C)The period during which criminal proceedings against the defendant may be diverted is limited as follows:
(i)If the defendant is charged with a felony, the period shall be no longer than two years.
(ii)If the defendant is charged with a misdemeanor, the period shall be no longer than one year.
(D)Upon request, the court shall conduct a hearing to determine whether restitution, as defined in subdivision (f) of Section 1202.4, is owed to any victim as a result of the diverted offense and, if owed, order its payment during the period of diversion. However, a defendants inability to pay restitution due to indigence or mental disorder shall not be grounds for denial of diversion or a finding that the defendant has failed to comply with the terms of diversion.
(2)Qualified mental health expert includes, but is not limited to, a psychiatrist, psychologist, a person described in Section 5751.2 of the Welfare and Institutions Code, or a person whose knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education qualifies them as an expert.
(g)If any of the following circumstances exists, the court shall, after notice to the defendant, defense counsel, and the prosecution, hold a hearing to determine whether the criminal proceedings should be reinstated, whether the treatment should be modified, or whether the defendant should be conserved and referred to the conservatorship investigator of the county of commitment to initiate conservatorship proceedings for the defendant pursuant to Chapter 3 (commencing with Section 5350) of Part 1 of Division 5 of the Welfare and Institutions Code:
(1)The defendant is charged with an additional misdemeanor allegedly committed during the pretrial diversion and that reflects the defendants propensity for violence.
(2)The defendant is charged with an additional felony allegedly committed during the pretrial diversion.
(3)The defendant is engaged in criminal conduct rendering the defendant unsuitable for diversion.
(4)Based on the opinion of a qualified mental health expert whom the court may deem appropriate, either of the following circumstances exists:
(A)The defendant is performing unsatisfactorily in the assigned program.
(B)The defendant is gravely disabled, as defined in subparagraph (B) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (h) of Section 5008 of the Welfare and Institutions Code. A defendant shall only be conserved and referred to the conservatorship investigator pursuant to this finding.
(h)If the defendant has performed satisfactorily in diversion, at the end of the period of diversion, the court shall dismiss the defendants criminal charges that were the subject of the criminal proceedings at the time of the initial diversion. A court may conclude that the defendant has performed satisfactorily if the defendant has substantially complied with the requirements of diversion, has avoided significant new violations of law unrelated to the defendants mental health condition, and has a plan in place for long-term mental health care. If the court dismisses the charges, the clerk of the court shall file a record with the Department of Justice indicating the disposition of the case diverted pursuant to this section. Upon successful completion of diversion, if the court dismisses the charges, the arrest upon which the diversion was based shall be deemed never to have occurred, and the court shall order access to the record of the arrest restricted in accordance with Section 1001.9, except as specified in subdivisions (j) and (k). The defendant who successfully completes diversion may indicate in response to any question concerning the defendants prior criminal record that the defendant was not arrested or diverted for the offense, except as specified in subdivision (j).
(i)A record pertaining to an arrest resulting in successful completion of diversion, or any record generated as a result of the defendants application for or participation in diversion, shall not, without the defendants consent, be used in any way that could result in the denial of any employment, benefit, license, or certificate.
(j)The defendant shall be advised that, regardless of the defendants completion of diversion, both of the following apply:
(1)The arrest upon which the diversion was based may be disclosed by the Department of Justice to any peace officer application request and that, notwithstanding subdivision (i), this section does not relieve the defendant of the obligation to disclose the arrest in response to any direct question contained in any questionnaire or application for a position as a peace officer, as defined in Section 830.
(2)An order to seal records pertaining to an arrest made pursuant to this section has no effect on a criminal justice agencys ability to access and use those sealed records and information regarding sealed arrests, as described in Section 851.92.
(k)A finding that the defendant suffers from a mental disorder, any progress reports concerning the defendants treatment, or any other records related to a mental disorder that were created as a result of participation in, or completion of, diversion pursuant to this section or for use at a hearing on the defendants eligibility for diversion under this section may not be used in any other proceeding without the defendants consent, unless that information is relevant evidence that is admissible under the standards described in paragraph (2) of subdivision (f) of Section 28 of Article I of the California Constitution. However, when determining whether to exercise its discretion to grant diversion under this section, a court may consider previous records of participation in diversion under this section.
(l)The county agency administering the diversion, the defendants mental health treatment providers, the public guardian or conservator, and the court shall, to the extent not prohibited by federal law, have access to the defendants medical and psychological records, including progress reports, during the defendants time in diversion, as needed, for the purpose of providing care and treatment and monitoring treatment for diversion or conservatorship.
(m)This section shall remain in effect until July 1, 2024, and as of that date is repealed.
SEC. 1.2.Section 1001.36 is added to the Penal Code, to read:1001.36.(a)On an accusatory pleading alleging the commission of a misdemeanor or felony offense not set forth in subdivision (d), the court may, in its discretion, and after considering the positions of the defense and prosecution, grant pretrial diversion to a defendant pursuant to this section if the defendant satisfies the eligibility requirements for pretrial diversion set forth in subdivision (b) and the court determines that the defendant is suitable for that diversion under the factors set forth in subdivision (c).
(b)A defendant is eligible for pretrial diversion pursuant to this section if both of the following criteria are met:
(1)The defendant has been diagnosed with a mental disorder as identified in the most recent edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, including, but not limited to, bipolar disorder, schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder, or post-traumatic stress disorder, but excluding antisocial personality disorder and pedophilia. Evidence of the defendants mental disorder shall be provided by the defense and shall include a diagnosis or treatment for a diagnosed mental disorder within the last five years by a qualified mental health expert. In opining that a defendant suffers from a qualifying disorder, the qualified mental health expert may rely on an examination of the defendant, the defendants medical records, arrest reports, or any other relevant evidence.
(2)The defendants mental disorder was a significant factor in the commission of the charged offense. If the defendant has been diagnosed with a mental disorder, the court shall find that the defendants mental disorder was a significant factor in the commission of the offense unless there is clear and convincing evidence that it was not a motivating factor, causal factor, or contributing factor to the defendants involvement in the alleged offense. A court may consider any relevant and credible evidence, including, but not limited to, police reports, preliminary hearing transcripts, witness statements, statements by the defendants mental health treatment provider, medical records, records or reports by qualified medical experts, or evidence that the defendant displayed symptoms consistent with the relevant mental disorder at or near the time of the offense.
(c)For any defendant who satisfies the eligibility requirements in subdivision (b), the court must consider whether the defendant is suitable for pretrial diversion. A defendant is suitable for pretrial diversion if all of the following criteria are met:
(1)In the opinion of a qualified mental health expert, the defendants symptoms of the mental disorder causing, contributing to, or motivating the criminal behavior would respond to mental health treatment.
(2)The defendant consents to diversion and waives the defendants right to a speedy trial, unless a defendant has been found to be an appropriate candidate for diversion in lieu of commitment pursuant to clause (iv) of subparagraph (B) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (a) of Section 1370 and, as a result of the defendants mental incompetence, cannot consent to diversion or give a knowing and intelligent waiver of the defendants right to a speedy trial.
(3)The defendant agrees to comply with treatment as a condition of diversion, unless the defendant has been found to be an appropriate candidate for diversion in lieu of commitment for restoration of competency treatment pursuant to clause (iv) of subparagraph (B) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (a) of Section 1370 and, as a result of the defendants mental incompetence, cannot agree to comply with treatment.
(4)The defendant will not pose an unreasonable risk of danger to public safety, as defined in Section 1170.18, if treated in the community. The court may consider the opinions of the district attorney, the defense, or a qualified mental health expert, and may consider the defendants treatment plan, the defendants violence and criminal history, the current charged offense, and any other factors that the court deems appropriate.
(d)A defendant may not be placed into a diversion program, pursuant to this section, for the following current charged offenses:
(1)Murder or voluntary manslaughter.
(2)An offense for which a person, if convicted, would be required to register pursuant to Section 290, except for a violation of Section 314.
(3)Rape.
(4)Lewd or lascivious act on a child under 14 years of age.
(5)Assault with intent to commit rape, sodomy, or oral copulation, in violation of Section 220.
(6)Commission of rape or sexual penetration in concert with another person, in violation of Section 264.1.
(7)Continuous sexual abuse of a child, in violation of Section 288.5.
(8)A violation of subdivision (b) or (c) of Section 11418.
(e)At any stage of the proceedings, the court may require the defendant to make a prima facie showing that the defendant will meet the minimum requirements of eligibility for diversion and that the defendant and the offense are suitable for diversion. The hearing on the prima facie showing shall be informal and may proceed on offers of proof, reliable hearsay, and argument of counsel. If a prima facie showing is not made, the court may summarily deny the request for diversion or grant any other relief as may be deemed appropriate.
(f)As used in this chapter, the following terms have the following meanings:
(1)Pretrial diversion means the postponement of prosecution, either temporarily or permanently, at any point in the judicial process from the point at which the accused is charged until adjudication, to allow the defendant to undergo mental health treatment, subject to all of the following:
(A)(i)The court is satisfied that the recommended inpatient or outpatient program of mental health treatment will meet the specialized mental health treatment needs of the defendant.
(ii)The defendant may be referred to a program of mental health treatment utilizing existing inpatient or outpatient mental health resources. Before approving a proposed treatment program, the court shall consider the request of the defense, the request of the prosecution, the needs of the defendant, and the interests of the community. The treatment may be procured using private or public funds, and a referral may be made to a county mental health agency, existing collaborative courts, or assisted outpatient treatment only if that entity has agreed to accept responsibility for the treatment of the defendant, and mental health services are provided only to the extent that resources are available and the defendant is eligible for those services.
(iii)If the court refers the defendant to a county mental health agency pursuant to this section and the agency determines that it is unable to provide services to the defendant, the court shall accept a written declaration to that effect from the agency in lieu of requiring live testimony. That declaration shall serve only to establish that the program is unable to provide services to the defendant at that time and does not constitute evidence that the defendant is unqualified or unsuitable for diversion under this section.
(B)The provider of the mental health treatment program in which the defendant has been placed shall provide regular reports to the court, the defense, and the prosecutor on the defendants progress in treatment.
(C)The period during which criminal proceedings against the defendant may be diverted is limited as follows:
(i)If the defendant is charged with a felony, the period shall be no longer than two years.
(ii)If the defendant is charged with a misdemeanor, the period shall be no longer than one year.
(D)Upon request, the court shall conduct a hearing to determine whether restitution, as defined in subdivision (f) of Section 1202.4, is owed to any victim as a result of the diverted offense and, if owed, order its payment during the period of diversion. However, a defendants inability to pay restitution due to indigence or mental disorder shall not be grounds for denial of diversion or a finding that the defendant has failed to comply with the terms of diversion.
(2)Qualified mental health expert includes, but is not limited to, a psychiatrist, psychologist, a person described in Section 5751.2 of the Welfare and Institutions Code, or a person whose knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education qualifies them as an expert.
(g)If any of the following circumstances exists, the court shall, after notice to the defendant, defense counsel, and the prosecution, hold a hearing to determine whether the criminal proceedings should be reinstated, whether the treatment should be modified, or whether the defendant should be conserved and referred to the conservatorship investigator of the county of commitment to initiate conservatorship proceedings for the defendant pursuant to Chapter 3 (commencing with Section 5350) of Part 1 of Division 5 of the Welfare and Institutions Code:
(1)The defendant is charged with an additional misdemeanor allegedly committed during the pretrial diversion and that reflects the defendants propensity for violence.
(2)The defendant is charged with an additional felony allegedly committed during the pretrial diversion.
(3)The defendant is engaged in criminal conduct rendering the defendant unsuitable for diversion.
(4)Based on the opinion of a qualified mental health expert whom the court may deem appropriate, either of the following circumstances exists:
(A)The defendant is performing unsatisfactorily in the assigned program.
(B)The defendant is gravely disabled, as defined in subparagraph (B) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (h) of Section 5008 of the Welfare and Institutions Code. A defendant shall only be conserved and referred to the conservatorship investigator pursuant to this finding.
(h)If the defendant has performed satisfactorily in diversion, at the end of the period of diversion, the court shall dismiss the defendants criminal charges that were the subject of the criminal proceedings at the time of the initial diversion. A court may conclude that the defendant has performed satisfactorily if the defendant has substantially complied with the requirements of diversion, has avoided significant new violations of law unrelated to the defendants mental health condition, and has a plan in place for long-term mental health care. If the court dismisses the charges, the clerk of the court shall file a record with the Department of Justice indicating the disposition of the case diverted pursuant to this section. Upon successful completion of diversion, if the court dismisses the charges, the arrest upon which the diversion was based shall be deemed never to have occurred, and the court shall order access to the record of the arrest restricted in accordance with Section 1001.9, except as specified in subdivisions (j) and (k). The defendant who successfully completes diversion may indicate in response to any question concerning the defendants prior criminal record that the defendant was not arrested or diverted for the offense, except as specified in subdivision (j).
(i)A record pertaining to an arrest resulting in successful completion of diversion, or any record generated as a result of the defendants application for or participation in diversion, shall not, without the defendants consent, be used in any way that could result in the denial of any employment, benefit, license, or certificate.
(j)The defendant shall be advised that, regardless of the defendants completion of diversion, both of the following apply:
(1)The arrest upon which the diversion was based may be disclosed by the Department of Justice to any peace officer application request and that, notwithstanding subdivision (i), this section does not relieve the defendant of the obligation to disclose the arrest in response to any direct question contained in any questionnaire or application for a position as a peace officer, as defined in Section 830.
(2)An order to seal records pertaining to an arrest made pursuant to this section has no effect on a criminal justice agencys ability to access and use those sealed records and information regarding sealed arrests, as described in Section 851.92.
(k)A finding that the defendant suffers from a mental disorder, any progress reports concerning the defendants treatment, including, but not limited to, any finding that the defendant be prohibited from owning or controlling a firearm because they are a danger to themselves or others pursuant to subdivision (m), or any other records related to a mental disorder that were created as a result of participation in, or completion of, diversion pursuant to this section or for use at a hearing on the defendants eligibility for diversion under this section may not be used in any other proceeding without the defendants consent, unless that information is relevant evidence that is admissible under the standards described in paragraph (2) of subdivision (f) of Section 28 of Article I of the California Constitution. However, when determining whether to exercise its discretion to grant diversion under this section, a court may consider previous records of participation in diversion under this section.
(l)The county agency administering the diversion, the defendants mental health treatment providers, the public guardian or conservator, and the court shall, to the extent not prohibited by federal law, have access to the defendants medical and psychological records, including progress reports, during the defendants time in diversion, as needed, for the purpose of providing care and treatment and monitoring treatment for diversion or conservatorship.
(m)(1)The prosecution may request an order from the court that the defendant be prohibited from owning or possessing a firearm until they successfully complete diversion because they are a danger to themselves or others pursuant to subdivision (i) of Section 8103 of the Welfare and Institutions Code.
(2)The prosecution shall bear the burden of proving, by clear and convincing evidence, both of the following are true:
(A)The defendant poses a significant danger of causing personal injury to themselves or another by having in their custody or control, owning, purchasing, possessing, or receiving a firearm.
(B)The prohibition is necessary to prevent personal injury to the defendant or any other person because less restrictive alternatives either have been tried and found to be ineffective or are inadequate or inappropriate for the circumstances of the defendant.
(3)(A)If the court finds that the prosecution has not met that burden, the court shall not order that the person is prohibited from having, owning, purchasing, possessing, or receiving a firearm.
(B)If the court finds that the prosecution has met the burden, the court shall order that the person is prohibited, and shall inform the person that they are prohibited, from owning or controlling a firearm until they successfully complete diversion because they are a danger to themselves or others.
(4)An order imposed pursuant to this subdivision shall be in effect until the defendant has successfully completed diversion or until their firearm rights are restored pursuant to paragraph (4) of subdivision (g) of Section 8103 of the Welfare and Institutions Code.
(n)This section shall become operative on July 1, 2024.
SEC. 2.Sections 1.1 and 1.2 of this bill incorporate amendments to Section 1001.36 of the Penal Code proposed by both this bill and AB 455. These sections of this bill shall only become operative if (1) both bills are enacted and become effective on or before January 1, 2024, (2) each bill amends Section 1001.36 of the Penal Code, and (3) this bill is enacted after AB 455, in which case Section 1 of this bill shall not become operative.
(a)On an accusatory pleading alleging the commission of a misdemeanor or felony offense not set forth in subdivision (d), the court may, in its discretion, and after considering the positions of the defense and prosecution, grant pretrial diversion to a defendant pursuant to this section if the defendant satisfies the eligibility requirements for pretrial diversion set forth in subdivision (b) and the court determines that the defendant is suitable for that diversion under the factors set forth in subdivision (c).
(b)A defendant is eligible for pretrial diversion pursuant to this section if both of the following criteria are met:
(1)The defendant has been diagnosed with a mental disorder as identified in the most recent edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, including, but not limited to, bipolar disorder, schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder, or post-traumatic stress disorder, but excluding antisocial personality disorder, borderline personality disorder, disorder and pedophilia. Evidence of the defendants mental disorder shall be provided by the defense and shall include a diagnosis or treatment for a diagnosed mental disorder within the last five years by a qualified mental health expert. In opining that a defendant suffers from a qualifying disorder, the qualified mental health expert may rely on an examination of the defendant, the defendants medical records, arrest reports, or any other relevant evidence.
(2)The defendants mental disorder was a significant factor in the commission of the charged offense. If the defendant has been diagnosed with a mental disorder, the court shall find that the defendants mental disorder was a significant factor in the commission of the offense unless there is clear and convincing evidence that it was not a motivating factor, causal factor, or contributing factor to the defendants involvement in the alleged offense. A court may consider any relevant and credible evidence, including, but not limited to, police reports, preliminary hearing transcripts, witness statements, statements by the defendants mental health treatment provider, medical records, records or reports by qualified medical experts, or evidence that the defendant displayed symptoms consistent with the relevant mental disorder at or near the time of the offense.
(c)For any defendant who satisfies the eligibility requirements in subdivision (b), the court must consider whether the defendant is suitable for pretrial diversion. A defendant is suitable for pretrial diversion if all of the following criteria are met:
(1)In the opinion of a qualified mental health expert, the defendants symptoms of the mental disorder causing, contributing to, or motivating the criminal behavior would respond to mental health treatment.
(2)The defendant consents to diversion and waives the defendants right to a speedy trial, unless a defendant has been found to be an appropriate candidate for diversion in lieu of commitment pursuant to clause (iv) of subparagraph (B) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (a) of Section 1370 and, as a result of the defendants mental incompetence, cannot consent to diversion or give a knowing and intelligent waiver of the defendants right to a speedy trial.
(3)The defendant agrees to comply with treatment as a condition of diversion, unless the defendant has been found to be an appropriate candidate for diversion in lieu of commitment for restoration of competency treatment pursuant to clause (iv) of subparagraph (B) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (a) of Section 1370 and, as a result of the defendants mental incompetence, cannot agree to comply with treatment.
(4)The defendant will not pose an unreasonable risk of danger to public safety, as defined in Section 1170.18, if treated in the community. The court may consider the opinions of the district attorney, the defense, or a qualified mental health expert, and may consider the defendants treatment plan, the defendants violence and criminal history, the current charged offense, and any other factors that the court deems appropriate.
(d)A defendant may not be placed into a diversion program, pursuant to this section, for the following current charged offenses:
(1)Murder or voluntary manslaughter.
(2)An offense for which a person, if convicted, would be required to register pursuant to Section 290, except for a violation of Section 314.
(3)Rape.
(4)Lewd or lascivious act on a child under 14 years of age.
(5)Assault with intent to commit rape, sodomy, or oral copulation, in violation of Section 220.
(6)Commission of rape or sexual penetration in concert with another person, in violation of Section 264.1.
(7)Continuous sexual abuse of a child, in violation of Section 288.5.
(8)A violation of subdivision (b) or (c) of Section 11418.
(e)At any stage of the proceedings, the court may require the defendant to make a prima facie showing that the defendant will meet the minimum requirements of eligibility for diversion and that the defendant and the offense are suitable for diversion. The hearing on the prima facie showing shall be informal and may proceed on offers of proof, reliable hearsay, and argument of counsel. If a prima facie showing is not made, the court may summarily deny the request for diversion or grant any other relief as may be deemed appropriate.
(f)As used in this chapter, the following terms have the following meanings:
(1)Pretrial diversion means the postponement of prosecution, either temporarily or permanently, at any point in the judicial process from the point at which the accused is charged until adjudication, to allow the defendant to undergo mental health treatment, subject to all of the following:
(A)(i)The court is satisfied that the recommended inpatient or outpatient program of mental health treatment will meet the specialized mental health treatment needs of the defendant.
(ii)The defendant may be referred to a program of mental health treatment utilizing existing inpatient or outpatient mental health resources. Before approving a proposed treatment program, the court shall consider the request of the defense, the request of the prosecution, the needs of the defendant, and the interests of the community. The treatment may be procured using private or public funds, and a referral may be made to a county mental health agency, existing collaborative courts, or assisted outpatient treatment only if that entity has agreed to accept responsibility for the treatment of the defendant, and mental health services are provided only to the extent that resources are available and the defendant is eligible for those services.
(iii)If the court refers the defendant to a county mental health agency pursuant to this section and the agency determines that it is unable to provide services to the defendant, the court shall accept a written declaration to that effect from the agency in lieu of requiring live testimony. That declaration shall serve only to establish that the program is unable to provide services to the defendant at that time and does not constitute evidence that the defendant is unqualified or unsuitable for diversion under this section.
(B)The provider of the mental health treatment program in which the defendant has been placed shall provide regular reports to the court, the defense, and the prosecutor on the defendants progress in treatment.
(C)The period during which criminal proceedings against the defendant may be diverted is limited as follows:
(i)If the defendant is charged with a felony, the period shall be no longer than two years.
(ii)If the defendant is charged with a misdemeanor, the period shall be no longer than one year.
(D)Upon request, the court shall conduct a hearing to determine whether restitution, as defined in subdivision (f) of Section 1202.4, is owed to any victim as a result of the diverted offense and, if owed, order its payment during the period of diversion. However, a defendants inability to pay restitution due to indigence or mental disorder shall not be grounds for denial of diversion or a finding that the defendant has failed to comply with the terms of diversion.
(2)Qualified mental health expert includes, but is not limited to, a psychiatrist, psychologist, a person described in Section 5751.2 of the Welfare and Institutions Code, or a person whose knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education qualifies them as an expert.
(g)If any of the following circumstances exists, the court shall, after notice to the defendant, defense counsel, and the prosecution, hold a hearing to determine whether the criminal proceedings should be reinstated, whether the treatment should be modified, or whether the defendant should be conserved and referred to the conservatorship investigator of the county of commitment to initiate conservatorship proceedings for the defendant pursuant to Chapter 3 (commencing with Section 5350) of Part 1 of Division 5 of the Welfare and Institutions Code:
(1)The defendant is charged with an additional misdemeanor allegedly committed during the pretrial diversion and that reflects the defendants propensity for violence.
(2)The defendant is charged with an additional felony allegedly committed during the pretrial diversion.
(3)The defendant is engaged in criminal conduct rendering the defendant unsuitable for diversion.
(4)Based on the opinion of a qualified mental health expert whom the court may deem appropriate, either of the following circumstances exists:
(A)The defendant is performing unsatisfactorily in the assigned program.
(B)The defendant is gravely disabled, as defined in subparagraph (B) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (h) of Section 5008 of the Welfare and Institutions Code. A defendant shall only be conserved and referred to the conservatorship investigator pursuant to this finding.
(h)If the defendant has performed satisfactorily in diversion, at the end of the period of diversion, the court shall dismiss the defendants criminal charges that were the subject of the criminal proceedings at the time of the initial diversion. A court may conclude that the defendant has performed satisfactorily if the defendant has substantially complied with the requirements of diversion, has avoided significant new violations of law unrelated to the defendants mental health condition, and has a plan in place for long-term mental health care. If the court dismisses the charges, the clerk of the court shall file a record with the Department of Justice indicating the disposition of the case diverted pursuant to this section. Upon successful completion of diversion, if the court dismisses the charges, the arrest upon which the diversion was based shall be deemed never to have occurred, and the court shall order access to the record of the arrest restricted in accordance with Section 1001.9, except as specified in subdivisions (j) and (k). The defendant who successfully completes diversion may indicate in response to any question concerning the defendants prior criminal record that the defendant was not arrested or diverted for the offense, except as specified in subdivision (j).
(i)A record pertaining to an arrest resulting in successful completion of diversion, or any record generated as a result of the defendants application for or participation in diversion, shall not, without the defendants consent, be used in any way that could result in the denial of any employment, benefit, license, or certificate.
(j)The defendant shall be advised that, regardless of the defendants completion of diversion, both of the following apply:
(1)The arrest upon which the diversion was based may be disclosed by the Department of Justice to any peace officer application request and that, notwithstanding subdivision (i), this section does not relieve the defendant of the obligation to disclose the arrest in response to any direct question contained in any questionnaire or application for a position as a peace officer, as defined in Section 830.
(2)An order to seal records pertaining to an arrest made pursuant to this section has no effect on a criminal justice agencys ability to access and use those sealed records and information regarding sealed arrests, as described in Section 851.92.
(k)A finding that the defendant suffers from a mental disorder, any progress reports concerning the defendants treatment, or any other records related to a mental disorder that were created as a result of participation in, or completion of, diversion pursuant to this section or for use at a hearing on the defendants eligibility for diversion under this section may not be used in any other proceeding without the defendants consent, unless that information is relevant evidence that is admissible under the standards described in paragraph (2) of subdivision (f) of Section 28 of Article I of the California Constitution. However, when determining whether to exercise its discretion to grant diversion under this section, a court may consider previous records of participation in diversion under this section.
(l)The county agency administering the diversion, the defendants mental health treatment providers, the public guardian or conservator, and the court shall, to the extent not prohibited by federal law, have access to the defendants medical and psychological records, including progress reports, during the defendants time in diversion, as needed, for the purpose of providing care and treatment and monitoring treatment for diversion or conservatorship.
|
Date
|
Status
|
|---|---|
| Oct 10, 2023 | Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 687, Statutes of 2023. |
| Oct 10, 2023 | Approved by the Governor. |
| Sep 19, 2023 | Enrolled and presented to the Governor at 4 p.m. |
| Sep 12, 2023 | Senate amendments concurred in. To Engrossing and Enrolling. (Ayes 66. Noes 3. Page 3301.). |
| Sep 12, 2023 | Assembly Rule 77 suspended. (Page 3228.) |
| Sep 11, 2023 | In Assembly. Concurrence in Senate amendments pending. May be considered on or after September 13 pursuant to Assembly Rule 77. |
| Sep 11, 2023 | Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Assembly. (Ayes 30. Noes 9. Page 2558.). |
| Sep 7, 2023 | Read second time. Ordered to third reading. |
| Sep 6, 2023 | Read third time and amended. Ordered to second reading. |
| Jun 27, 2023 | Read second time. Ordered to third reading. |
| Jun 26, 2023 | From committee: Be ordered to second reading pursuant to Senate Rule 28.8. |
| Jun 13, 2023 | From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 4. Noes 1.) (June 13). Re-referred to Com. on APPR. |
| May 31, 2023 | Referred to Com. on PUB S. |
| May 23, 2023 | In Senate. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment. |
| May 22, 2023 | Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Senate. (Ayes 66. Noes 4. Page 1700.) |
| May 18, 2023 | Read second time. Ordered to third reading. |
| May 17, 2023 | From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 13. Noes 0.) (May 17). |
| May 3, 2023 | In committee: Hearing postponed by committee. |
| Apr 26, 2023 | In committee: Hearing postponed by committee. |
| Apr 12, 2023 | From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 6. Noes 0.) (April 11). Re-referred to Com. on APPR. |
| Mar 9, 2023 | Referred to Com. on PUB. S. |
| Feb 18, 2023 | From printer. May be heard in committee March 20. |
| Feb 17, 2023 | Read first time. To print. |
|
Date
|
Description
|
Location
|
Votes
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 12, 2023 | AB 1412 Hart Concurrence in Senate Amendments | Assembly Floor |
Passed |
|
| Sep 11, 2023 | Assembly 3rd Reading AB1412 Hart et al. By Wahab | Senate Floor |
Passed |
|
| Jun 13, 2023 | Do pass, but first be re-referred to the Committee on [Appropriations] | Senate Standing Committee on Public Safety |
Passed |
|
| May 22, 2023 | AB 1412 Hart Assembly Third Reading | Assembly Floor |
Passed |
|
| May 17, 2023 | Do pass. | Assembly Standing Committee on Appropriations |
Passed |
|
| Apr 11, 2023 | Do pass and be re-referred to the Committee on [Appropriations] | Assembly Standing Committee on Public Safety |
Passed |
This list shows positions taken on this bill by organizations on the date displayed, which is linked to the original source.
Positions by individuals are not included.
|
Organization
|
Position
|
Date
|
|---|---|---|
| Access Psychology Foundation | ** Support | |
| Aclu California Action | ** Support | |
| California Access Coalition | ** Support | |
| California Attorneys For Criminal Justice | ** Support | |
| California Council Of Community Behavioral Health Agencies | ** Support | |
| California Public Defenders Association | ** Support | |
| California State Association of Psychiatrists | ** Support | |
| Community Solutions for Children, Families, and Individuals | ** Support | |
| Dbsa California | ** Support | |
| Disability Rights California | ** Support | |
| Emotions Matter | ** Support | |
| Emotions Matter INC. | ** Support | |
| National Alliance on Mental Illness California | ** Support | |
| National Association Of Social Workers, California Chapter | ** Support | |
| National Education Alliance for Borderline Personality Disorder | ** Support | |
| New England Personality Disorders Association | ** Support | |
| PathPoint | ** Support | |
| San Francisco Public Defender's Office | * Support | Apr 11, 2023 |
| Tessie Cleveland Community Services Corporation | ** Support |
CONCURRENCE IN SENATE AMENDMENTS
CSA1 Bill Id:AB 1412
Author:(Hart)
As Amended Ver:September 6, 2023
Majority vote
SUMMARY
Removes borderline personality disorder (BPD) from the mental disorders excluding a defendant from eligibility for pretrial mental health diversion.
Senate Amendments
Double joint this bill with AB 455 (Quirk-Silva) of the current legislative session to avoid chaptering out issues.
COMMENTS
According to the Author
"Borderline personality disorder (BPD) affects 2-6% of the world's population with slightly higher rates among women and younger individuals. Current law allows pretrial diversion for individuals with mental health disorders but excludes those diagnosed with borderline personality disorder. Borderline personality disorder is characterized in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders as a pervasive pattern of instability of interpersonal relationships, self-image, and marked impulsivity. The exclusion of BPD from diversion eligibility perpetuates harmful stigma about the disorder and limits access to care for people at high risk of suicide. AB 1412 will ensure that Californians living with borderline personality disorder have equitable access to pretrial diversion and strive to reduce recidivism within an often misunderstood population."
Arguments in Support
According to PathPoint, "This legislation is essential because it recognizes that individuals with BPD are unfairly excluded from the program despite evidence showing that treatment reduces criminal behavior, arrests, and recidivism in this population.
"A study published in the Journal of Forensic Psychiatry and Psychology in 2020 found that individuals with BPD who received Dialectical Behavior Therapy (DBT) had significantly fewer arrests than those who did not receive treatment (Murray et al., 2020). The odds of engaging in criminal behavior were approximately 85% lower for individuals with BPD who received DBT compared to those who did not receive treatment. A review of 33 treatment trials for BPD analyzed data from 2,256 participants and discovered that treatment positively reduced BPD symptoms, self-harm, suicidality, and general psychopathology (Cristea et al., 2017). Additionally, The Holloway Skills Therapy Program (HoST) was created in the UK specifically for incarcerated women with BPD. Those who finished the 8-week treatment saw a remarkable 88.2% decrease in disciplinary actions (Gee & Reed, 2013). These findings suggest that referring people with BPD to treatment achieves rehabilitation in ways that incarceration does not.
"Excluding individuals with BPD from pretrial diversion eligibility entrenches systemic stigma, which exacerbates both public stigma and self-stigma. People with BPD make important contributions to society and deserve equitable and just treatment, and compassion. Treatment is essential for reducing the risk of suicide among people with BPD, as self-harming behaviors are common in BPD, and 10% of people with BPD die by suicide, a higher rate than any other psychiatric disorder.
"Research also shows that BPD is no more dangerous than mental illnesses covered by the diversion program. While the data in this area are limited because BPD is almost always comorbid with other disorders, rates of recidivism associated with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) are similar to BPD, and substance use disorders are associated with higher rates of recidivism than personality disorders (Babinski et al., 2015; Wu et al., 2014).
"BPD is treatable, highly heritable, and associated with significant neurobiological differences. The overwhelming consensus among scholars is that BPD is treatable, and psychotherapy is the first-line intervention for BPD. This is also true for many instances of other disorders. In many studies, the combination of psychotherapy and medication is the most effective. Even in the case of psychosis, psychotherapy is often necessary for addition to or as an alternative to medication. Therefore, it is essential that individuals with BPD have access to the same treatment and support as those with other mental health conditions."
Arguments in Opposition
None on file.
FISCAL COMMENTS
According to the Assembly Appropriations Committee, "Possibly reimbursable costs (local funds, General Fund) of an unknown amount annually to county behavioral health departments. Costs resulting from this bill are difficult to estimate because whether to grant diversion is largely at the discretion of individual judges, who make determinations based on the facts of individual cases. Actual costs will depend on how many criminal defendants with BPD are eligible for mental health diversion, how frequently courts grant mental health diversion to those defendants, and the extent and duration of services provided during diversion. To the extent this bill results in defendants with BPD participating in mental health diversion, county behavioral health departments would incur some costs in providing those defendants with mental health services. Costs to the General Fund will depend on whether the duties imposed by this bill constitute a reimbursable state mandate, as determined by the Commission on State Mandates."
VOTES:
ASM PUBLIC SAFETY: 6-0-2
YES: Jones-Sawyer, Bonta, Jackson, Ortega, Santiago, Zbur
ABS, ABST OR NV: Alanis, Lackey
ASM APPROPRIATIONS: 13-0-3
YES: Holden, Bryan, Calderon, Wendy Carrillo, Dixon, Mike Fong, Hart, Lowenthal, Papan, Pellerin, Robert Rivas, Weber, Ortega
ABS, ABST OR NV: Megan Dahle, Mathis, Sanchez
ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 66-4-10
YES: Addis, Aguiar-Curry, Alanis, Alvarez, Arambula, Bains, Bauer-Kahan, Bennett, Berman, Boerner, Bonta, Bryan, Calderon, Juan Carrillo, Wendy Carrillo, Cervantes, Connolly, Dixon, Mike Fong, Friedman, Gabriel, Garcia, Gipson, Grayson, Haney, Hart, Holden, Hoover, Irwin, Jackson, Jones-Sawyer, Kalra, Lee, Low, Lowenthal, Maienschein, McCarty, McKinnor, Muratsuchi, Stephanie Nguyen, Ortega, Pacheco, Papan, Pellerin, Petrie-Norris, Ramos, Reyes, Luz Rivas, Robert Rivas, Rodriguez, Blanca Rubio, Santiago, Schiavo, Soria, Ting, Valencia, Villapudua, Waldron, Wallis, Ward, Weber, Wicks, Wilson, Wood, Zbur, Rendon
NO: Megan Dahle, Essayli, Gallagher, Joe Patterson
ABS, ABST OR NV: Chen, Davies, Flora, Vince Fong, Lackey, Mathis, Jim Patterson, Quirk-Silva, Sanchez, Ta
SENATE FLOOR: 30-9-1
YES: Allen, Alvarado-Gil, Archuleta, Ashby, Atkins, Becker, Blakespear, Bradford, Cortese, Dodd, Durazo, Glazer, Gonzalez, Hurtado, Laird, Limón, McGuire, Menjivar, Min, Newman, Padilla, Portantino, Roth, Rubio, Skinner, Smallwood-Cuevas, Stern, Umberg, Wahab, Wiener
NO: Dahle, Eggman, Grove, Jones, Nguyen, Niello, Ochoa Bogh, Seyarto, Wilk
ABS, ABST OR NV: Caballero
UPDATED
VERSION: September 6, 2023
CONSULTANT: Liah Burnley / PUB. S. / (916) 319-3744 FN: 0002045
SENATE RULES COMMITTEE Office of Senate Floor Analyses (916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) 327-4478 | AB 1412 |
THIRD READING
Bill No: AB 1412
Author: Hart (D), et al.
Amended: 9/6/23 in Senate
Vote: 21
SENATE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE: 4-1, 6/13/23
AYES: Wahab, Bradford, Skinner, Wiener
NOES: Ochoa Bogh
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE: Senate Rule 28.8
ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 66-4, 5/22/23 - See last page for vote
SUBJECT: Pretrial diversion: borderline personality disorder
SOURCE: California Council of Community Behavioral Health Agencies
DIGEST:
This bill removes borderline personality disorder as an exclusion for mental health diversion.
Senate Floor Amendments of 9/6/23 double-join this bill with AB 455 (Quirk-Silva) to avoid chaptering issues.
ANALYSIS:
Existing law:
- States that the purpose of mental health diversion is to promote the following:
- Increased diversion of individuals with mental disorders to mitigate the individuals’ entry and reentry into the criminal justice system while protecting public safety;
- Allowing local discretion and flexibility for counties in the development and implementation of diversion for individuals with mental disorders across a continuum of care settings; and,
- Providing diversion that meets the unique mental health treatment and support needs of individuals with mental disorders. (Pen. Code, § 1001.35.)
- Authorizes a court to, after considering the positions of the defense and prosecution, grant pretrial diversion to defendant charged with a misdemeanor or felony if the defendant satisfies the eligibility requirements and the court determines that the defendant is suitable for diversion. (Pen. Code, § 1001.36, subd. (a)).
- Provides that a defendant is eligible for pretrial diversion if both of the following criteria are met:
- The defendant has been diagnosed with a mental disorder as identified in the most recent edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, including, but not limited to, bipolar disorder, schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder, or post-traumatic stress disorder, but excluding antisocial personality disorder, borderline personality disorder, and pedophilia. Evidence of the defendant’s mental disorder shall be provided by the defense and shall include a diagnosis or treatment for a diagnosed mental disorder within the last five years by a qualified mental health expert. In opining that a defendant suffers from a qualifying disorder, the qualified mental health expert may rely on an examination of the defendant, the defendant’s medical records, arrest reports, or any other relevant evidence; and,
- The defendant’s mental disorder was a significant factor in the commission of the charged offense. If the defendant has been diagnosed with a mental disorder, the court shall find that the defendant’s mental disorder was a significant factor in the commission of the offense unless there is clear and convincing evidence that it was not a motivating factor, causal factor, or contributing factor to the defendant’s involvement in the alleged offense. A court may consider any relevant and credible evidence, including, but not limited to, police reports, preliminary hearing transcripts, witness statements, statements by the defendant’s mental health treatment provider, medical records, records or reports by qualified medical experts, or evidence that the defendant displayed symptoms consistent with the relevant mental disorder at or near the time of the offense. (Pen. Code, § 1001.36, subd. (b).)
- States that for any defendant who satisfies the eligibility requirements, the court must consider whether the defendant is suitable for pretrial diversion. The defendant is suitable for pretrial diversion if all of the following criteria are met:
- In the opinion of a qualified mental health expert, the defendant’s symptoms of the mental disorder causing, contributing to, or motivating the criminal behavior would respond to mental health treatment;
- The defendant consents to diversion and waives their right to a speedy trial, unless a defendant has been found to be an appropriate candidate for diversion in lieu of commitment due to the their mental incompetence and cannot consent to diversion or give a knowing and intelligent waiver of their right to a speedy trial;
- The defendant agrees to comply with treatment as a condition of diversion, unless a defendant has been found to be an appropriate candidate for diversion in lieu of commitment for restoration of mental incompetence and cannot agree to comply with treatment; and,
- The defendant will not pose an unreasonable risk of danger to public safety, as defined, if treated in the community. In making this determination, the court may consider the opinions of the district attorney, the defense, or a qualified mental health expert, and may consider the defendant’s treatment plan, the defendant’s violence and criminal history, the current charged offense, and any other factors that the court deems appropriate. (Pen. Code, § 1001.36, subds. (c).)
- Excludes defendants charged with the following offenses from mental health diversion eligibility:
- Murder or voluntary manslaughter;
- An offense for which a person, if convicted, would be required to register as a sex offender, except for an indecent exposure violation;
- Rape;
- Lewd or lascivious act on a child under 14 years of age;
- Assault with intent to commit rape, sodomy, or oral copulation;
- Commission of rape or sexual penetration in concert with another person;
- Continuous sexual abuse of a child; and,
- Violations involving weapons of mass destruction. (Pen. Code, § 1001.36, subds. (d).
- Provides that “pretrial diversion” for purposes of mental health diversion means the postponement of prosecution, either temporarily or permanently, at any point in the judicial process from the point at which the accused is charged until adjudication, to allow the defendant to undergo mental health treatment, subject to all of the following:
- The court is satisfied that the recommended inpatient or outpatient program of mental health treatment will meet the specialized mental health treatment needs of the defendant;
- The defendant may be referred to a program of mental health treatment utilizing existing inpatient or outpatient mental health resources. Before approving a proposed treatment program, the court shall consider the request of the defense, the request of the prosecution, the needs of the defendant, and the interests of the community. The treatment may be procured using private or public funds, and a referral may be made to a county mental health agency, existing collaborative courts, or assisted outpatient treatment only if that entity has agreed to accept responsibility for the treatment of the defendant, and mental health services are provided only to the extent that resources are available and the defendant is eligible for those services;
- The provider of the mental health treatment program in which the defendant has been placed shall provide regular reports to the court, the defense, and the prosecutor on the defendant’s progress in treatment;
- The period during which criminal proceedings against the defendant may be diverted shall be no longer than two years for a felony and no longer than one year for a misdemeanor; and
- Upon request, the court shall conduct a hearing to determine whether restitution is owed to any victim as a result of the diverted offense and, if owed, order its payment during the period of diversion. However, a defendant’s inability to pay restitution due to indigence or mental disorder shall not be grounds for denial of diversion or a finding that the defendant has failed to comply with the terms of diversion. (Pen. Code, § 1001.36, subd. (f).)
- States that if any of the following circumstances exists, the court shall, after notice to the defendant, defense counsel, and the prosecution, hold a hearing to determine whether the criminal proceedings should be reinstated, whether the treatment should be modified, or whether the defendant should be conserved and referred to the conservatorship investigator of the county of commitment to initiate conservatorship proceedings for the defendant:
- The defendant is charged with an additional misdemeanor allegedly committed during the pretrial diversion and that reflects the defendant’s propensity for violence;
- The defendant is charged with an additional felony allegedly committed during the pretrial diversion;
- The defendant is engaged in criminal conduct rendering him or her unsuitable for diversion;
- Based on the opinion of a qualified mental health expert whom the court may deem appropriate, either of the following circumstances exists:
- The defendant is performing unsatisfactorily in the assigned program.
- The defendant is gravely disabled, as defined. (Pen. Code, § 1001.36, subd. (g).)
- Provides that if the defendant has performed satisfactorily in diversion, at the end of the period of diversion, the court shall dismiss the defendant’s criminal charges that were the subject of the criminal proceedings at the time of the initial diversion. A court may conclude that the defendant has performed satisfactorily if the defendant has substantially complied with the requirements of diversion, has avoided significant new violations of law unrelated to the defendant’s mental health condition, and has a plan in place for long-term mental health care. (Pen. Code, § 1001.36, subd. (h).)
This bill:
- Removes borderline personality disorder as an exclusion for pretrial diversion.
- Contains double-jointing language to avoid chaptering issues with AB 455 (Quirk-Silva).
Comments
According to the author of this bill:
Borderline personality disorder (BPD) affects 2-6% of the world’s population with slightly higher rates among women and younger individuals. Current law allows pretrial diversion for individuals with mental health disorders but excludes those diagnosed with borderline personality disorder. Borderline personality disorder is characterized in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders as a pervasive pattern of instability of interpersonal relationships, self-image, and marked impulsivity. The exclusion of BPD from diversion eligibility perpetuates harmful stigma about the disorder and limits access to care for people at high risk of suicide. AB 1412 will ensure that Californians living with borderline personality disorder have equitable access to pretrial diversion and strive to reduce recidivism within an often misunderstood population.
FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes Local: No
SUPPORT: (Verified 9/6/23)
California Council of Community Behavioral Health Agencies (source)
ACLU California Action
California Attorneys for Criminal Justice
California Public Defenders Association
California State Association of Psychiatrists
Disability Rights California
Emotions Matter
National Alliance on Mental Illness – California
National Association of Social Workers, California Chapter
National Education Alliance for Borderline Personality Disorder
PathPoint
OPPOSITION: (Verified 9/6/23)
None received
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT: According to California Council of Community Behavioral Health Agencies, the sponsor of this bill:
A study published in the Journal of Forensic Psychiatry and Psychology in 2020 found that individuals with [borderline personality disorder] BPD who received Dialectical Behavior Therapy (DBT) had significantly fewer arrests than those who did not receive treatment (Murray et al., 2020). The odds of engaging in criminal behavior were approximately 85% lower for individuals with BPD who received DBT compared to those who did not receive treatment. A review of 33 treatment trials for BPD analyzed data from 2,256 participants and discovered that treatment positively reduced BPD symptoms, self-harm, suicidality, and general psychopathology (Cristea et al. 2017). Additionally, the Holloway Skills Therapy Program (HoST) was created in the UK specifically for incarcerated women with BPD. Those who finished the 8-week treatment saw a remarkable 88.2% decrease in disciplinary actions (Gee & Reed, 2013). These findings suggest that referring people with BPD to treatment achieves rehabilitation in ways that incarceration does not.
Excluding individuals with BPD from pretrial diversion eligibility entrenches systemic stigma, which exacerbates both public stigma and self-stigma. People with BPD make important contributions to society and deserve equitable and just treatment and compassion. Treatment is essential for reducing the risk of suicide among people with BPD, as self-harming behaviors are common in BPD, and 10% of people with BPD die by suicide, a higher rate than any other psychiatric disorder. Research also shows that BPD is no more dangerous than mental illnesses covered by the diversion program. While the data in this area are limited because BPD is almost always comorbid with other disorders, rates of recidivism associated with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) are similar to BPD, and substance use disorders are associated with higher rates of recidivism than personality disorders (Babinski et al., 2015; Wu et al., 2014).
BPD is treatable, highly heritable, and associated with significant neurobiological differences. The overwhelming consensus among scholars is that BPD is treatable, and psychotherapy is the first-line intervention for BPD. This is also true for many instances of other disorders. In many studies, the combination of psychotherapy and medication is the most effective. Even in the case of psychosis, psychotherapy is often necessary for addition to or as an alternative to medication. Therefore, it is essential that individuals with BPD have access to the same treatment and support as those with other mental health conditions.
ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 66-4, 5/22/23
AYES: Addis, Aguiar-Curry, Alanis, Alvarez, Arambula, Bains, Bauer-Kahan, Bennett, Berman, Boerner, Bonta, Bryan, Calderon, Juan Carrillo, Wendy Carrillo, Cervantes, Connolly, Dixon, Mike Fong, Friedman, Gabriel, Garcia, Gipson, Grayson, Haney, Hart, Holden, Hoover, Irwin, Jackson, Jones-Sawyer, Kalra, Lee, Low, Lowenthal, Maienschein, McCarty, McKinnor, Muratsuchi, Stephanie Nguyen, Ortega, Pacheco, Papan, Pellerin, Petrie-Norris, Ramos, Reyes, Luz Rivas, Robert Rivas, Rodriguez, Blanca Rubio, Santiago, Schiavo, Soria, Ting, Valencia, Villapudua, Waldron, Wallis, Ward, Weber, Wicks, Wilson, Wood, Zbur, Rendon
NOES: Megan Dahle, Essayli, Gallagher, Joe Patterson
NO VOTE RECORDED: Chen, Davies, Flora, Vince Fong, Lackey, Mathis, Jim Patterson, Quirk-Silva, Sanchez, Ta
Prepared by: Stella Choe / PUB. S. /
9/7/23 10:26:40
**** END ****
SENATE COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC SAFETY
Senator Aisha Wahab, Chair
2023 - 2024 Regular
Bill No: AB 1412 Hearing Date: June 13, 2023
Author: | Hart | ||
Version: | February 17, 2023 | ||
Urgency: | No | Fiscal: | Yes |
Consultant: | SC | ||
Subject: Pretrial diversion: borderline personality disorder
HISTORY
Source: California Council of Community Behavioral Health Agencies
Prior Legislation: SB 1223 (Becker), Ch. 735, Stats. 2022
SB 184 (Committee on Budget), Ch. 47, Stats. 2022
SB 666 (Stone), failed Sen. Public Safety, 2019
SB 215 (Beall), Ch. 1005, Stats. 2018
AB 1810 (Committee on Budget), Ch. 34, Stats. 2018
SB 8 (Beall), held on Suspense File in Assem. Appropriations, 2017
Support: California Attorneys for Criminal Justice; California Public Defenders Association; California State Association of Psychiatrists; Disability Rights California; Emotions Matter; National Alliance on Mental Illness - California; National Association of Social Workers, California Chapter; National Education Alliance for Borderline Personality Disorder; Pathpoint
Opposition: None known
Assembly Floor Vote: 66 - 4
PURPOSE
The purpose of this bill is to remove borderline personality disorder as an exclusion for mental health diversion.
Existing law authorizes diversion programs for specified crimes (Pen. Code, §§ 1000 et seq. for drug abuse; Pen. Code, § 1001.12 et seq. for child abuse; Pen. Code, §§ 1001.70 et seq. for contributing to the delinquency of another, Pen. Code, §§ 1001.60 et seq. for writing bad checks) and for specific types of offenders (Pen. Code, §§ 1001.80 et seq. for veterans; Pen. Code, §§ 1001.83 for caregivers; Pen. Code, §§ 1001.35 et seq. for persons with mental disorders).
Existing law states that the purpose of mental health diversion is to promote the following:
- Increased diversion of individuals with mental disorders to mitigate the individuals’ entry and reentry into the criminal justice system while protecting public safety;
- Allowing local discretion and flexibility for counties in the development and implementation of diversion for individuals with mental disorders across a continuum of care settings; and,
- Providing diversion that meets the unique mental health treatment and support needs of individuals with mental disorders. (Pen. Code, § 1001.35.)
Existing law authorizes a court to, after considering the positions of the defense and prosecution, grant pretrial diversion to defendant charged with a misdemeanor or felony if the defendant satisfies the eligibility requirements and the court determines that the defendant is suitable for diversion. (Pen. Code, § 1001.36, subd. (a).
Existing law provides that a defendant is eligible for pretrial diversion if both of the following criteria are met:
- The defendant has been diagnosed with a mental disorder as identified in the most recent edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, including, but not limited to, bipolar disorder, schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder, or post-traumatic stress disorder, but excluding antisocial personality disorder, borderline personality disorder, and pedophilia. Evidence of the defendant’s mental disorder shall be provided by the defense and shall include a diagnosis or treatment for a diagnosed mental disorder within the last five years by a qualified mental health expert. In opining that a defendant suffers from a qualifying disorder, the qualified mental health expert may rely on an examination of the defendant, the defendant’s medical records, arrest reports, or any other relevant evidence; and,
- The defendant’s mental disorder was a significant factor in the commission of the charged offense. If the defendant has been diagnosed with a mental disorder, the court shall find that the defendant’s mental disorder was a significant factor in the commission of the offense unless there is clear and convincing evidence that it was not a motivating factor, causal factor, or contributing factor to the defendant’s involvement in the alleged offense. A court may consider any relevant and credible evidence, including, but not limited to, police reports, preliminary hearing transcripts, witness statements, statements by the defendant’s mental health treatment provider, medical records, records or reports by qualified medical experts, or evidence that the defendant displayed symptoms consistent with the relevant mental disorder at or near the time of the offense. (Pen. Code, § 1001.36, subd. (b).)
Existing law states that for any defendant who satisfies the eligibility requirements, the court must consider whether the defendant is suitable for pretrial diversion. The defendant is suitable for pretrial diversion if all of the following criteria are met:
- In the opinion of a qualified mental health expert, the defendant’s symptoms of the mental disorder causing, contributing to, or motivating the criminal behavior would respond to mental health treatment;
- The defendant consents to diversion and waives their right to a speedy trial, unless a defendant has been found to be an appropriate candidate for diversion in lieu of commitment due to the their mental incompetence and cannot consent to diversion or give a knowing and intelligent waiver of their right to a speedy trial;
- The defendant agrees to comply with treatment as a condition of diversion, unless a defendant has been found to be an appropriate candidate for diversion in lieu of commitment for restoration of mental incompetence and cannot agree to comply with treatment; and,
- The defendant will not pose an unreasonable risk of danger to public safety, as defined, if treated in the community. In making this determination, the court may consider the opinions of the district attorney, the defense, or a qualified mental health expert, and may consider the defendant’s treatment plan, the defendant’s violence and criminal history, the current charged offense, and any other factors that the court deems appropriate. (Pen. Code, § 1001.36, subds. (c).)
Existing law excludes defendants charged with the following offenses from mental health diversion eligibility:
- Murder or voluntary manslaughter;
- An offense for which a person, if convicted, would be required to register as a sex offender, except for an indecent exposure violation;
- Rape;
- Lewd or lascivious act on a child under 14 years of age;
- Assault with intent to commit rape, sodomy, or oral copulation;
- Commission of rape or sexual penetration in concert with another person;
- Continuous sexual abuse of a child; and,
- Violations involving weapons of mass destruction. (Pen. Code, § 1001.36, subds. (d).)
Existing law provides that “pretrial diversion” for purposes of mental health diversion means the postponement of prosecution, either temporarily or permanently, at any point in the judicial process from the point at which the accused is charged until adjudication, to allow the defendant to undergo mental health treatment, subject to all of the following:
- The court is satisfied that the recommended inpatient or outpatient program of mental health treatment will meet the specialized mental health treatment needs of the defendant;
- The defendant may be referred to a program of mental health treatment utilizing existing inpatient or outpatient mental health resources. Before approving a proposed treatment program, the court shall consider the request of the defense, the request of the prosecution, the needs of the defendant, and the interests of the community. The treatment may be procured using private or public funds, and a referral may be made to a county mental health agency, existing collaborative courts, or assisted outpatient treatment only if that entity has agreed to accept responsibility for the treatment of the defendant, and mental health services are provided only to the extent that resources are available and the defendant is eligible for those services;
- The provider of the mental health treatment program in which the defendant has been placed shall provide regular reports to the court, the defense, and the prosecutor on the defendant’s progress in treatment;
- The period during which criminal proceedings against the defendant may be diverted shall be no longer than two years for a felony and no longer than one year for a misdemeanor;
- Upon request, the court shall conduct a hearing to determine whether restitution is owed to any victim as a result of the diverted offense and, if owed, order its payment during the period of diversion. However, a defendant’s inability to pay restitution due to indigence or mental disorder shall not be grounds for denial of diversion or a finding that the defendant has failed to comply with the terms of diversion. (Pen. Code, § 1001.36, subd. (f).)
Existing law states that if any of the following circumstances exists, the court shall, after notice to the defendant, defense counsel, and the prosecution, hold a hearing to determine whether the criminal proceedings should be reinstated, whether the treatment should be modified, or whether the defendant should be conserved and referred to the conservatorship investigator of the county of commitment to initiate conservatorship proceedings for the defendant:
- The defendant is charged with an additional misdemeanor allegedly committed during the pretrial diversion and that reflects the defendant’s propensity for violence;
- The defendant is charged with an additional felony allegedly committed during the pretrial diversion;
- The defendant is engaged in criminal conduct rendering him or her unsuitable for diversion;
- Based on the opinion of a qualified mental health expert whom the court may deem appropriate, either of the following circumstances exists:
- The defendant is performing unsatisfactorily in the assigned program.
- The defendant is gravely disabled, as defined. (Pen. Code, § 1001.36, subd. (g).)
Existing law provides that if the defendant has performed satisfactorily in diversion, at the end of the period of diversion, the court shall dismiss the defendant’s criminal charges that were the subject of the criminal proceedings at the time of the initial diversion. A court may conclude that the defendant has performed satisfactorily if the defendant has substantially complied with the requirements of diversion, has avoided significant new violations of law unrelated to the defendant’s mental health condition, and has a plan in place for long-term mental health care. (Pen. Code, § 1001.36, subd. (h).)
This bill removes borderline personality disorder as an exclusion for pretrial diversion.
COMMENTS
- Need for This Bill
According to the author of this bill:
Borderline personality disorder (BPD) affects 2-6% of the world’s population with slightly higher rates among women and younger individuals. Current law allows pretrial diversion for individuals with mental health disorders but excludes those diagnosed with borderline personality disorder. Borderline personality disorder is characterized in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders as a pervasive pattern of instability of interpersonal relationships, self-image, and marked impulsivity. The exclusion of BPD from diversion eligibility perpetuates harmful stigma about the disorder and limits access to care for people at high risk of suicide. AB 1412 will ensure that Californians living with borderline personality disorder have equitable access to pretrial diversion and strive to reduce recidivism within an often misunderstood population.
- Mental Health Diversion Law
Diversion is the suspension of criminal proceedings for a prescribed time period with certain conditions. A defendant may not be required to admit guilt as a prerequisite for placement in a pretrial diversion program. If diversion is successfully completed, the criminal charges are dismissed and the defendant may, with certain exceptions, legally answer that he or she has never been arrested or charged for the diverted offense. If diversion is not successfully completed, the criminal proceedings resume, however, a hearing to terminate diversion is required.
In 2018, the Legislature enacted a law authorizing pretrial diversion of eligible defendants with mental disorders. Under the mental health diversion law, in order to be eligible for diversion, 1) the defendant must suffer from a mental disorder, except those specifically excluded, 2) that played a significant factor in the commission of the charged offense; 3) in the opinion of a qualified mental health expert, the defendant’s symptoms of the mental disorder causing, contributing to, or motivating the criminal behavior would respond to mental health treatment; 4) the defendant must consent to diversion and waive the right to a speedy trial; 5) the defendant must agree to comply with treatment as a condition of diversion; and 6) the court is satisfied that the defendant will not pose an unreasonable risk of danger to public safety, as defined, if treated in the community. (Pen. Code, § 1001.36, subds. (b)-(c).) The defendant is not eligible if they are charged with specified crimes. (Pen. Code, § 1001.36, subd. (d).)
In addition to the eligibility requirements of the defendant, mental health treatment program must meet the following requirements: 1) the court is satisfied that the recommended inpatient or outpatient program of mental health treatment will meet the specialized mental health treatment needs of the defendant; 2) the defendant may be referred to a program of mental health treatment utilizing existing inpatient or outpatient mental health resources; 3) and the program must submit regular reports to the court and counsel regarding the defendant’s progress in treatment. (Pen. Code, § 1001.36, subd. (f).) The court has the discretion to select the specific program of diversion for the defendant. The county is not required to create a mental health program for the purposes of diversion, and even if a county has existing mental health programs suitable for diversion, the particular program selected by the court must agree to receive the defendant for treatment. (Pen. Code, § 1001.36, subd. (f)(1)(A).)
The diversion program cannot last more than two years for a felony and cannot last for more than a year on a misdemeanor. (Pen. Code, § 1001.36, subd. (f)(1)(C).)If there is a request for victim restitution, the court shall conduct a hearing to determine whether restitution is owed to any victim as a result of the diverted offense and, if owed, order its payment during the period of restitution. (Pen. Code, § 1001.36, subd. (f)(1)(D).)
The stated purpose of the diversion program is “to promote all of the following: . . . Allowing local discretion and flexibility for counties in the development and implementation of diversion for individuals with mental disorders across a continuum of care settings.” (Pen. Code, § 1001.35, subd. (b).) The law gives discretion to courts to grant diversion if the minimum standards are met, and, correspondingly, refuse to grant diversion even though the defendant meets all of the requirements
There may be times, because of the defendant’s circumstances, where the interests of justice do not support diversion of the case. The defendant’s criminal or mental health history may reflect a substantial risk the defendant will commit dangerous crimes beyond the “super strikes” identified in section 1001.36, subdivision (b)(6). It may be that because of the defendant’s level of disability there is no reasonably available and suitable treatment program for the defendant. The defendant’s treatment history may indicate the prospect of successfully completing a program is quite poor. Conduct in prior diversion programs may indicate defendant is now unsuitable. . . .The court may consider the defendant and the community will be better served by the regimen of mental health court. . . .Clearly the court is not limited to excluding persons only because of the risk of committing a “super strike” – the right to exclude because of dangerousness goes well beyond that limited list. In short, the court may consider any factor relevant to whether the defendant is suitable for diversion.
(J. Couzens, Memorandum RE: Mental Health Diversion (Penal Code §§ 1001.35-1001.36) (AB 1810 & SB 215) [revised] (Nov. 14, 2018), p. 4, fn. omitted.)
This bill would remove borderline personality disorder as an exclusion for pretrial diversion. It is unclear from the legislative history of the bills that enacted the mental health diversion law why borderline personality disorder was excluded.
According to the National Institute of Mental Health, borderline personality disorder “severely impacts a person’s ability to manage their emotions. This loss of emotional control can increase impulsivity, affect how a person feels about themselves, and negatively impact their relationships with others.” (https://www.nimh.nih.gov/health/topics/borderline-personality-disorder [as of June 5, 2023].) Symptoms from borderline personality disorder may be improved through evidence-based treatment which can help individuals experience fewer and less severe symptoms and improve functioning. Psychotherapy, which typically occurs with a licensed, trained mental health professional in one-on-one sessions or with other people in group settings, is the main treatment for people with borderline personality disorder. In particular, dialectical behavior therapy (DBT), which was developed specifically for people with borderline personality disorder, teaches skills to help people manage intense emotions, reduce self-destructive behaviors, and improve relationships. (Ibid.)
- Incarceration of Offenders with Mental Disorders
According to a 2019 study, more than 30% of the state’s prison and 23 % of the jail populations have a mental illness. (Stanford Justice Advocacy Project, Confronting California’s Continuing Prison Crisis: The Prevalence And Severity Of Mental Illness Among California Prisoners On The Rise <https://law.stanford.edu/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/Stanford-Report-FINAL.pdf> [as of June 2, 2023].) Not only have the numbers of inmates with mental illness increased, the severity of psychiatric symptoms among inmates is also on the rise. (Id. at p. 2.) This population tends to serve longer sentences than the general population (Id. at p. 1.) and have a higher recidivism rate.
Promoting treatment over incarceration has shown positive results in reducing recidivism:
To avoid incarceration, individuals with serious mental illness need to be diverted from the legal system and offered rehabilitative resources. The homeless comprise a significant share of individuals who come to the attention of law enforcement. A recent review revealed that lifetime arrest rates of homeless individuals with serious mental illness ranged from 62.9% to 90.0%, compared with approximately 15.0% in the general population. For this population, stable housing is a major issue. A recent randomized trial comparing housing first with assertive community treatment with treatment as usual demonstrated significantly decreased rates of arrest among those receiving assertive community treatment at 2 years. These results suggest that efforts to provide stable, affordable, and safe shelter for homeless individuals may lead to lower rates of involvement in the justice system.
. . . .
When individuals with serious mental illness are brought to court attention, several models have demonstrated positive outcomes, including mental health courts, drug courts, and Veterans Treatment Courts. Although they serve different populations, the common goal of all these court formats is to address the causes of behavior that brought an offender to police attention. Mental health courts are becoming more common in different communities, each with slight variations; however, common features include a specialized court docket that emphasizes problem solving, community-based treatment plans that are designed and supervised by judicial and clinical staff, regular follow-up with incentives and sanctions related to treatment adherence, and clearly defined “graduation” criteria. A recent prospective study of 169 individuals showed that the likelihood of perpetrating violence during the following year was significantly lower among participants processed through a mental health court than among individuals in a matched comparison group who were processed through traditional courts (odds ratio, 0.39; 95% CI, 0.16-0.95; P = .04).
(Hirschtritt & Binder, Interrupting the Mental Illness–Incarceration-Recidivism Cycle (Feb. 21, 2017) 317 JAMA 695-696, fn. omitted.)
- Argument in Support
According to California Council of Community Behavioral Health Agencies, the sponsor of this bill:
A study published in the Journal of Forensic Psychiatry and Psychology in 2020 found that individuals with [borderline personality disorder] BPD who received Dialectical Behavior Therapy (DBT) had significantly fewer arrests than those who did not receive treatment (Murray et al., 2020). The odds of engaging in criminal behavior were approximately 85% lower for individuals with BPD who received DBT compared to those who did not receive treatment. A review of 33 treatment trials for BPD analyzed data from 2,256 participants and discovered that treatment positively reduced BPD symptoms, self-harm, suicidality, and general psychopathology (Cristea et al. 2017). Additionally, the Holloway Skills Therapy Program (HoST) was created in the UK specifically for incarcerated women with BPD. Those who finished the 8-week treatment saw a remarkable 88.2% decrease in disciplinary actions (Gee & Reed, 2013). These findings suggest that referring people with BPD to treatment achieves rehabilitation in ways that incarceration does not.
Excluding individuals with BPD from pretrial diversion eligibility entrenches systemic stigma, which exacerbates both public stigma and self-stigma. People with BPD make important contributions to society and deserve equitable and just treatment and compassion. Treatment is essential for reducing the risk of suicide among people with BPD, as self-harming behaviors are common in BPD, and 10% of people with BPD die by suicide, a higher rate than any other psychiatric disorder. Research also shows that BPD is no more dangerous than mental illnesses covered by the diversion program. While the data in this area are limited because BPD is almost always comorbid with other disorders, rates of recidivism associated with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) are similar to BPD, and substance use disorders are associated with higher rates of recidivism than personality disorders (Babinski et al., 2015; Wu et al., 2014).
BPD is treatable, highly heritable, and associated with significant neurobiological differences. The overwhelming consensus among scholars is that BPD is treatable, and psychotherapy is the first-line intervention for BPD. This is also true for many instances of other disorders. In many studies, the combination of psychotherapy and medication is the most effective. Even in the case of psychosis, psychotherapy is often necessary for addition to or as an alternative to medication. Therefore, it is essential that individuals with BPD have access to the same treatment and support as those with other mental health conditions.
-- END –
ASSEMBLY THIRD READING
ATR Bill Id:AB 1412
Author:(Hart)
As Introduced Ver:February 17, 2023
Majority vote
SUMMARY
Removes borderline personality disorder (BPD) from the mental disorders excluding a defendant from eligibility for pretrial mental health diversion.
Major Provisions
COMMENTS
According to the Author
"Borderline personality disorder (BPD) affects 2-6% of the world's population with slightly higher rates among women and younger individuals. Current law allows pretrial diversion for individuals with mental health disorders but excludes those diagnosed with borderline personality disorder. Borderline personality disorder is characterized in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders as a pervasive pattern of instability of interpersonal relationships, self-image, and marked impulsivity. The exclusion of BPD from diversion eligibility perpetuates harmful stigma about the disorder and limits access to care for people at high risk of suicide. AB 1412 will ensure that Californians living with borderline personality disorder have equitable access to pretrial diversion and strive to reduce recidivism within an often misunderstood population."
Arguments in Support
According to PathPoint, "This legislation is essential because it recognizes that individuals with BPD are unfairly excluded from the program despite evidence showing that treatment reduces criminal behavior, arrests, and recidivism in this population.
"A study published in the Journal of Forensic Psychiatry and Psychology in 2020 found that individuals with BPD who received Dialectical Behavior Therapy (DBT) had significantly fewer arrests than those who did not receive treatment (Murray et al., 2020). The odds of engaging in criminal behavior were approximately 85% lower for individuals with BPD who received DBT compared to those who did not receive treatment. A review of 33 treatment trials for BPD analyzed data from 2,256 participants and discovered that treatment positively reduced BPD symptoms, self-harm, suicidality, and general psychopathology (Cristea et al., 2017). Additionally, The Holloway Skills Therapy Program (HoST) was created in the UK specifically for incarcerated women with BPD. Those who finished the 8-week treatment saw a remarkable 88.2% decrease in disciplinary actions (Gee & Reed, 2013). These findings suggest that referring people with BPD to treatment achieves rehabilitation in ways that incarceration does not.
"Excluding individuals with BPD from pretrial diversion eligibility entrenches systemic stigma, which exacerbates both public stigma and self-stigma. People with BPD make important contributions to society and deserve equitable and just treatment, and compassion. Treatment is essential for reducing the risk of suicide among people with BPD, as self-harming behaviors are common in BPD, and 10% of people with BPD die by suicide, a higher rate than any other psychiatric disorder.
"Research also shows that BPD is no more dangerous than mental illnesses covered by the diversion program. While the data in this area are limited because BPD is almost always comorbid with other disorders, rates of recidivism associated with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) are similar to BPD, and substance use disorders are associated with higher rates of recidivism than personality disorders (Babinski et al., 2015; Wu et al., 2014).
"BPD is treatable, highly heritable, and associated with significant neurobiological differences. The overwhelming consensus among scholars is that BPD is treatable, and psychotherapy is the first-line intervention for BPD. This is also true for many instances of other disorders. In many studies, the combination of psychotherapy and medication is the most effective. Even in the case of psychosis, psychotherapy is often necessary for addition to or as an alternative to medication. Therefore, it is essential that individuals with BPD have access to the same treatment and support as those with other mental health conditions."
Arguments in Opposition
None on file.
FISCAL COMMENTS
According to the Assembly Appropriations Committee, "Possibly reimbursable costs (local funds, General Fund) of an unknown amount annually to county behavioral health departments. Costs resulting from this bill are difficult to estimate because whether to grant diversion is largely at the discretion of individual judges, who make determinations based on the facts of individual cases. Actual costs will depend on how many criminal defendants with BPD are eligible for mental health diversion, how frequently courts grant mental health diversion to those defendants, and the extent and duration of services provided during diversion. To the extent this bill results in defendants with BPD participating in mental health diversion, county behavioral health departments would incur some costs in providing those defendants with mental health services. Costs to the General Fund will depend on whether the duties imposed by this bill constitute a reimbursable state mandate, as determined by the Commission on State Mandates."
VOTES
ASM PUBLIC SAFETY: 6-0-2
YES: Jones-Sawyer, Bonta, Jackson, Ortega, Santiago, Zbur
ABS, ABST OR NV: Alanis, Lackey
ASM APPROPRIATIONS: 13-0-3
YES: Holden, Bryan, Calderon, Wendy Carrillo, Dixon, Mike Fong, Hart, Lowenthal, Papan, Pellerin, Robert Rivas, Weber, Ortega
ABS, ABST OR NV: Megan Dahle, Mathis, Sanchez
UPDATED
VERSION: February 17, 2023
CONSULTANT: Liah Burnley / PUB. S. / (916) 319-3744 FN: 0000420
Date of Hearing: May 17, 2023
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Chris Holden, Chair
ABPCA Bill Id:AB 1412
Author:(Hart) – As Introduced Ver:February 17, 2023
Policy Committee: | Public Safety | Vote: | 6 - 0 |
|
| ||
|
|
Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program: No Reimbursable: No
SUMMARY:
This bill removes borderline personality disorder (BPD) from the list of mental health disorders that make a criminal defendant ineligible for pretrial mental health diversion.
FISCAL EFFECT:
Possibly reimbursable costs (local funds, General Fund) of an unknown amount annually to county behavioral health departments. Costs resulting from this bill are difficult to estimate because whether to grant diversion is largely at the discretion of individual judges, who make determinations based on the facts of individual cases. Actual costs will depend on how many criminal defendants with BPD are eligible for mental health diversion, how frequently courts grant mental health diversion to those defendants, and the extent and duration of services provided during diversion. To the extent this bill results in defendants with BPD participating in mental health diversion, county behavioral health departments would incur some costs in providing those defendants with mental health services. Costs to the General Fund will depend on whether the duties imposed by this bill constitute a reimbursable state mandate, as determined by the Commission on State Mandates.
COMMENTS:
- Author’s Statement. According to the author:
Borderline personality disorder (BPD) affects 2-6% of the world’s population with slightly higher rates among women and younger individuals. Current law allows pretrial diversion for individuals with mental health disorders but excludes those diagnosed with borderline personality disorder. Borderline personality disorder is characterized in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders as a pervasive pattern of instability of interpersonal relationships, self-image, and marked impulsivity. The exclusion of BPD from diversion eligibility perpetuates harmful stigma about the disorder and limits access to care for people at high risk of suicide. AB 1412 will ensure that Californians living with borderline personality disorder have equitable access to pretrial diversion and strive to reduce recidivism within an often misunderstood population
- Background. Existing law allows a judge to suspend criminal proceedings and order a qualifying defendant to complete pretrial mental health diversion. Typically a defendant will be required to participate in mental health treatment or other programs. If the defendant successfully completes diversion, the criminal charges against them are dismissed. If the defendant does not successfully complete diversion, the criminal proceedings resume.
To grant mental health diversion, a judge must determine that the defendant’s mental disorder played a significant role in the commission of their offense, and a mental health expert must determine that the symptoms that contributed to the defendant’s criminal behavior would respond to mental health treatment. Currently, defendants are eligible for pretrial mental health diversion if they have been diagnosed with a mental disorder identified in the most recent edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, including bipolar disorder, schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder, and PTSD. However, the law excludes people with antisocial personality disorder, BPD, and pedophilia from eligibility for mental health diversion. Mental health diversion is not available for defendants charged with offenses like murder, use of a weapon of mass destruction, and most sexual offenses.
This bill would remove BPD from the list of mental health diagnoses that make a defendant ineligible for mental health diversion. In other words, this bill would allow a court to grant mental health diversion for a defendant diagnosed with BPD, as long as the defendant met the other statutory requirements for diversion.
- Prior Legislation. SB 1223 (Becker), Chapter 735, Statutes of 2022, made changes to mental health diversion eligibility and suitability provisions.
AB 1810 (Budget Committee) Chapter 34, Statutes of 2018, created mental health diversion.
Analysis Prepared by: Annika Carlson / APPR. / (916) 319-2081
Date of Hearing: April 11, 2023
Counsel: Liah Burnley
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON
Reginald Byron Jones-Sawyer, Sr., Chair
ABPCA Bill Id:
Author:() – As Ver:
SUMMARY:
Removes borderline personality disorder (BPD) from the mental disorders excluding a defendant from eligibility for pretrial mental health diversion.
EXISTING LAW:
- Permits, on an accusatory pleading alleging the commission of a misdemeanor or felony offense, the court, in its discretion, to grant pretrial mental health diversion to a defendant if the defendant satisfies the eligibility requirements and the court determines that the defendant is suitable for that diversion. (Pen. Code, § 1001.36, subd. (a).)
- Defines “Pretrial diversion” as the postponement of prosecution, either temporarily or permanently, at any point in the judicial process from the point at which the accused is charged until adjudication, to allow the defendant to undergo mental health treatment. (Pen. Code, § 1001.36, subd. (f).)
- Provides that a defendant is eligible for pretrial mental health diversion if both of the following criteria are met:
- The defendant has been diagnosed with a mental disorder as identified in the most recent edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), including, but not limited to, bipolar disorder, schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder, or post-traumatic stress disorder, but excluding antisocial personality disorder, BPD, and pedophilia; and
- The defendant’s mental disorder was a significant factor in the commission of the charged offense. (Pen. Code, § 1001.36, subd. (b).)
- The defendant has been diagnosed with a mental disorder as identified in the most recent edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), including, but not limited to, bipolar disorder, schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder, or post-traumatic stress disorder, but excluding antisocial personality disorder, BPD, and pedophilia; and
- Provides that a defendant is suitable for pretrial mental health diversion if all of the following criteria are met:
- In the opinion of a qualified mental health expert, the defendant’s symptoms of the mental disorder causing, contributing to, or motivating the criminal behavior would respond to mental health treatment;
- The defendant consents to diversion and waives their right to a speedy trial;
- The defendant agrees to comply with treatment as a condition of diversion; and,
- The defendant will not pose an unreasonable risk of danger to public safety if treated in the community. (Pen. Code, § 1001.36, subd. (c).)
- States that a defendant may not be placed into a pretrial mental health diversion program for the following offenses:
- Murder or voluntary manslaughter;
- An offense for which a person, if convicted, would be required to register as a sex offender;
- Rape;
- Lewd or lascivious act on a child under 14 years of age;
- Assault with intent to commit rape, sodomy, or oral copulation;
- Commission of rape or sexual penetration in concert with another person;
- Continuous sexual abuse of a child; or,
- Using a weapon of mass destruction, as specified. (Pen. Code, § 1001.36, subd. (d).)
- Provides that, at any stage of the proceedings, the court may require the defendant to make a prima facie showing that they will meet the minimum requirements of eligibility for diversion and that the defendant and the offense are suitable for diversion. (Pen. Code, § 1001.36, subd. (e).)
- States that the period during which criminal proceedings against the defendant may be diverted is limited as follows:
- If the defendant is charged with a felony, the period shall be no longer than two years.
- If the defendant is charged with a misdemeanor, the period shall be no longer than one year. (Pen. Code, § 1001.36, subd. (f).)
- Provides that, if any of the following circumstances exists, the court shall hold a hearing to determine whether the criminal proceedings should be reinstated, the treatment should be modified, or the defendant should be referred to the conservatorship investigator of the county:
- The defendant is charged with an additional misdemeanor allegedly committed during the pretrial diversion and that reflects the defendant’s propensity for violence;
- The defendant is charged with an additional felony allegedly committed during the pretrial diversion;
- The defendant is engaged in criminal conduct rendering the defendant unsuitable for diversion; or,
- Based on the opinion of a qualified mental health expert, the defendant is performing unsatisfactorily in the assigned program or the defendant is gravely disabled. (Pen. Code, § 1001.36, subd. (g).)
- Provides that, if the defendant has performed satisfactorily in diversion, at the end of the period of diversion, the court shall dismiss the defendant’s criminal charges that were the subject of the criminal proceedings at the time of the initial diversion. (Pen. Code, § 1001.36, subd. (h).)
- States that, upon successful completion of diversion, if the court dismisses the charges, the arrest upon which the diversion was based shall be deemed never to have occurred, and the court shall order access to the record of the arrest restricted, except as specified. The defendant who successfully completes diversion may indicate in response to any question concerning the defendant’s prior criminal record that the defendant was not arrested or diverted for the offense, except as specified. (Pen. Code, § 1001.36, subd. (h).)
FISCAL EFFECT:
Unknown
COMMENTS:
- Author's Statement: According to the author, “Borderline personality disorder (BPD) affects 2-6% of the world’s population with slightly higher rates among women and younger individuals. Current law allows pretrial diversion for individuals with mental health disorders but excludes those diagnosed with borderline personality disorder. Borderline personality disorder is characterized in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders as a pervasive pattern of instability of interpersonal relationships, self-image, and marked impulsivity. The exclusion of BPD from diversion eligibility perpetuates harmful stigma about the disorder and limits access to care for people at high risk of suicide. AB 1412 will ensure that Californians living with borderline personality disorder have equitable access to pretrial diversion and strive to reduce recidivism within an often misunderstood population.”
- BPD: BPD is characterized by intense, rapidly fluctuating moods combined with impulsivity and interpersonal difficulties. (Biskin RS, Management of Borderline Personality Disorder (Nov. 2012) <https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3503902/> [as of March 30, 2023].) BPD has been used for decades to “label patients who are ‘hopeless’, those who get therapists upset, and is one of the most controversial mental health diagnoses.” Al-Alem, Linah and Omar, Hatim A., Borderline Personality Disorder: An Overview of History, Diagnosis and Treatment in Adolescents (2008) Pharmacology and Nutritional Sciences Faculty Publications.) The term borderline came into existence because such patients were believed to lie on the borderline between psychosis and neurosis, with the label “borderline” first coined in 1938. (Ibid.) In 1980, BPD was accepted as a psychological term and included in the DSM III and later as a personality disorder, together with histrionic, antisocial, and narcissistic personality disorders. (Ibid.)
BPD can be a difficult diagnosis because of similarities to other conditions, particularly mood disorders. The validity of the current criteria for BPD shares problems with other psychiatric disorders: namely, the absence of biological markers, unclear delimitation from other disorders. The diagnostic criteria for BPD allow for 256 different combinations of symptoms that could lead to a diagnosis. (Biskin RS, Paris J., Diagnosing Borderline Personality Disorder (Nov 2012) <https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3494330/> [as of March 30, 2023].)
In the past, treatment of BPD was considered challenging, but interventions have been developed over the past two decades that have dramatically changed the lives of individuals with BPD. (Ibid.) There have been advances in our understanding and treatment approaches to BPD, which preclude dismissing BPD as an untreatable condition. For example, psychotherapy is the most important component in the treatment of BPD, which results large reductions in symptoms that persist over time. The most popular treatment for BPD is dialectical behavior therapy (DBT). DBT consists of weekly individual sessions and weekly life-skills group sessions that teach skills in four domains: mindfulness, distress tolerance, regulation of emotions and interpersonal effectiveness. Phone consultation with the therapist is available at all hours, and team consultation meetings play an important role. The therapy is designed to last at least one year. (Biskin RS, Paris J., Management of Borderline Personality Disorder (Nov. 2012) <https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3503902/> [as of March 30, 2023].)
In addition to DBT, there are other effective psychotherapies for BPD including schema-focused therapy, mentalization-based therapy, systems training for emotional predictability and problem-solving, and transference-focused psychotherapy. Psychotherapies are usually utilized in a chronic and outpatient setting and have shown to be cost-effective. (Lee JS., Borderline Personality Disorder in the Courtroom (June 2020) <https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8547869/> [as of March 30, 2023].) Although admission to a general psychiatric ward is not recommended in most instances, several specialized inpatient treatments for BPD have been shown to be efficacious. (Biskin RS, Paris J., Management of Borderline Personality Disorder (Nov. 2012) <https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3503902/> [as of March 30, 2023].)
Pharmacologic treatments have also been effective in treating BPD. Medications commonly used for mood and psychotic disorders have shown modest efficacy in improving the mood and behavior of BPD patients, including mood stabilizers and antipsychotics. (Lee JS., Borderline Personality Disorder in the Courtroom (June 2020) <https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8547869/> [as of March 30, 2023].)
- Mental Health Diversion: Existing law permits pretrial diversion programs. (Pen. Code, §1001.) Pre-trial diversion suspends the criminal proceedings without requiring the defendant to enter a plea. (Pen. Code, §§ 1001.1, 1001.3.) The defendant must successfully complete a program or other conditions imposed by the court. If a defendant does not successfully complete the diversion program, criminal proceedings resume but the defendant, having not entered a plea, may still proceed to trial or enter a plea. If diversion is successfully completed, the criminal charges are dismissed and the defendant may, with certain exceptions, legally answer that they have never been arrested or charged for the diverted offense. (Pen. Code, §§ 1001.7, 1001.9.)
In order to be eligible for pretrial mental health diversion, the defendant must suffer from a mental disorder that played a significant role in the commission of the charged offense, and in the opinion of a qualified mental health expert, the defendant’s symptoms motivating the criminal behavior would respond to mental health treatment. (Pen. Code, § 1001.36.) The defendant must consent to diversion, waive their right to a speedy trial, and must agree to comply with treatment as a condition of diversion. (Ibid.)
Defendants are eligible for pretrial mental health diversion if they have been diagnosed with a mental disorder identified in the most recent edition of the DSM, including but not limited to bipolar disorder, schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder, or PTSD. (Pen. Code, § 1001.36, subd. (b)(1).) However, the law specifically excludes individuals with antisocial personality disorder, BPD, and pedophile from eligibility for mental health diversion. (Ibid.)
In addition, all of the following is required for mental health diversion:
- Courts have discretion to refuse to grant diversion even though the defendant meets all of the requirements. (Pen. Code, § 1001.36, subd. (a).)
- Court must consider sides of the defense and prosecution in deciding whether to grant diversion. (Pen. Code, § 1001.36, subd. (a).)
- The defendant must be suitable for pretrial diversion, which includes that the defendant agrees to comply with treatment, and that the defendant will not pose an unreasonable risk of danger to public safety if treated in the community. (Pen. Code, § 1001.36, subd. (c).)
- The court may consider the opinion of the prosecutor, defense, the treatment plan, the defendant’s violence and criminal history, and opinions of qualified mental health professionals. (Pen. Code, § 1001.36, subd. (c).)
- That the defendant cannot be charged with certain offenses like murder or rape and offenses requiring sex offender registration. (Pen. Code, § 1001.36, subd. (d).)
- The court must be satisfied that the recommended mental health treatment will meet the needs of the specialized defendant. (Pen. Code, § 1001.36, subd. (f).)
- The provider of the mental health treatment must provide regular reports to the court. (Pen. Code, § 1001.36, subd. (f).)
- The court can reinstate criminal proceedings if the defendant is engaged in criminal conduct during diversion. (Pen. Code, § 1001.36, subd. (g).)
- The court can reinstate criminal proceedings if the defendant is performing unsatisfactorily during diversion. (Pen. Code, § 1001.36, subd. (g).)
Based on these criteria, and the requirement that a person in mental health diversion cannot be a risk to public safety, should individuals be categorically excluded from mental health diversion on the basis of their BPD diagnosis?
- Disparate Treatment of Personality Disorders in the Criminal Justice System: Within the criminal justice system, there has been a strong push to exclude personality disorders, like BPD, from the types of mental illnesses potentially significant enough to warrant exculpation of fault or consideration of decreased criminal responsibility. Johnson SC, Elbogen EB. Personality Disorders at the Interface of Psychiatry and the Law: Legal Use and Clinical Classification (June 2013) <https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3811091/> [as of March 30, 2023].) “Some state statutes (ie, California and Oregon) go as far as excluding all personality disorders with respect to the insanity defense.” (Ibid.) “Perhaps because of their relatively high prevalence within the criminal justice system, personality disorders have to some degree lost their identity as mental illnesses, and instead are often seen as common population characteristics.” (Ibid.) The diagnoses of certain personality disorders are among the most frequently made diagnoses within offender and prison populations. (Ibid.) “Their expression no longer falls outside of the norms when the offender population is considered the population of concern; thus, they lose their usefulness as differentiating factors within at least part of the legal system.” (Ibid.)
California excludes personality disorders, including BPD in other laws, not just the insanity defense. For example, the court can dismiss enhancements in the interests of justice, but not for people diagnosed with BPD. (Pen. Code, § 1385.) When a plea of not guilty by reason of insanity is entered, the defense is not allowed solely on the basis of a “personality or adjustment disorder, a seizure disorder, or an addiction to, or abuse of, intoxicating substances.” (Pen. Code, § 29.8.)
As explained above, there have been significant advances in our understanding of BPD, which is no longer considered untreatable. Given our progressed understanding of BPD, as well as the advancements in treatment, it would be prudent to reevaluate how individuals with BPD are treated in the criminal justice system. Wholly discounting BPD from mental health diversion excludes a wide swath of defendants who otherwise could be amenable to treatment, and whose entry and reentry into the criminal justice system might otherwise be prevented.
- Some Individuals with BPD May Be Eligible for Diversion, While Others May Be Unfairly Excluded: In Negron v. Superior Court (2021) 70 Cal.App.5th 1007, the California Court of Appeal determined that a “Defendant’s antisocial personality disorder (ASPD) did not disqualify him from mental health diversion, even though ASPD was expressly excluded by Pen. Code, § 1001.36, subd. (b)(1)(A), because defendant also suffered from several qualifying mental health disorders. Section 1001.36, subd. (b)(1)(A), simply disallows defendants from establishing eligibility for diversion based on an excluded disorder. Suffering from an excluded disorder does not categorically bar defendants from establishing eligibility based on a different, qualifying disorder.” (Id. at p. 1016.) Otherwise put, the court determined that a “defendant satisfies section 1001.36(b)(1)(A) so long as he or she suffers from a qualifying disorder, even if he or she is also diagnosed with an excluded disorder.” (Ibid.)
The court further opined that, “It is entirely predictable, and thus certainly within the contemplation of the Legislature, that a person might suffer from included and excluded disorders. Because section 1001.36(b)(1)(A) requires suffering only one included disorder, the Legislature would have been aware a defendant could still meet that requirement notwithstanding suffering from a disorder section 1001.36(b)(1)(A) designates as excluded. Had the Legislature intended to wholly preclude from diversion any person diagnosed with an excluded disorder (regardless of concurrently suffering from included disorders), the sentence phrasing of section 1001.36(b)(1)(A) would have shifted from simply listing excluded disorders to disqualifying persons with any of the excluded disorders.” (Negron v. Superior Court, supra, at p. 1017.)
Therefore, consistent with the court’s reasoning in Negron v. Superior Court, it is possible, that under existing law, a person who has BPD and other mental disorders can participate in mental health diversion, but a person who only has BPD is not eligible. It is inequitable that a person with multiple disorders can participate in diversion and receive treatment, but a person who is diagnosed with BPD only cannot.
- Argument in Support: According to PathPoint, “This legislation is essential because it recognizes that individuals with BPD are unfairly excluded from the program despite evidence showing that treatment reduces criminal behavior, arrests, and recidivism in this population.
“A study published in the Journal of Forensic Psychiatry and Psychology in 2020 found that individuals with BPD who received Dialectical Behavior Therapy (DBT) had significantly fewer arrests than those who did not receive treatment (Murray et al., 2020). The odds of engaging in criminal behavior were approximately 85% lower for individuals with BPD who received DBT compared to those who did not receive treatment. A review of 33 treatment trials for BPD analyzed data from 2,256 participants and discovered that treatment positively reduced BPD symptoms, self-harm, suicidality, and general psychopathology (Cristea et al., 2017). Additionally, The Holloway Skills Therapy Program (HoST) was created in the UK specifically for incarcerated women with BPD. Those who finished the 8-week treatment saw a remarkable 88.2% decrease in disciplinary actions (Gee & Reed, 2013). These findings suggest that referring people with BPD to treatment achieves rehabilitation in ways that incarceration does not.
“Excluding individuals with BPD from pretrial diversion eligibility entrenches systemic stigma, which exacerbates both public stigma and self-stigma. People with BPD make important contributions to society and deserve equitable and just treatment, and compassion. Treatment is essential for reducing the risk of suicide among people with BPD, as self-harming behaviors are common in BPD, and 10% of people with BPD die by suicide, a higher rate than any other psychiatric disorder.
“Research also shows that BPD is no more dangerous than mental illnesses covered by the diversion program. While the data in this area are limited because BPD is almost always comorbid with other disorders, rates of recidivism associated with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) are similar to BPD, and substance use disorders are associated with higher rates of recidivism than personality disorders (Babinski et al., 2015; Wu et al., 2014).
“BPD is treatable, highly heritable, and associated with significant neurobiological differences. The overwhelming consensus among scholars is that BPD is treatable, and psychotherapy is the first-line intervention for BPD. This is also true for many instances of other disorders. In many studies, the combination of psychotherapy and medication is the most effective. Even in the case of psychosis, psychotherapy is often necessary for addition to or as an alternative to medication. Therefore, it is essential that individuals with BPD have access to the same treatment and support as those with other mental health conditions.”
- Related Legislation:
- AB 455 (Quirk-Silva), would prohibit individuals in pretrial mental health diversion for a felony or specified misdemeanor charge from owning a firearm until they successfully complete diversion. AB 455 is pending in Assembly Appropriations Committee.
- AB 1310 (McKinnor), would allow individuals with a firearm enhancement to file a court petition for resentencing, but excludes individuals with certain mental disorders, including BPD. AB 1310 is pending in Assembly Appropriations Committee.
- SB 63 (Ochoa Bogh), would establish a Homeless and Mental Health Court Grant Program to be administered by the Judicial Council and excludes from the program individuals with certain mental disorders, including BPD. SB 63 is pending in Senate Appropriations Committee.
- AB 455 (Quirk-Silva), would prohibit individuals in pretrial mental health diversion for a felony or specified misdemeanor charge from owning a firearm until they successfully complete diversion. AB 455 is pending in Assembly Appropriations Committee.
- Prior Legislation:
- SB 1223 (Becker), Chapter 735, Statutes of 2022, made changes to mental health diversion eligibility and suitability provisions.
- AB 1810 (Budget Committee) Chapter 34, Statutes of 2018, created mental health diversion.
- SB 215 (Beall), Chapter 1005, Statutes of 2018, made certain offenses ineligible for mental health diversion.
- SB 1223 (Becker), Chapter 735, Statutes of 2022, made changes to mental health diversion eligibility and suitability provisions.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:
Support
Access Psychology Foundation
California Access Coalition
California Council of Community Behavioral Health Agencies (CBHA)
California Public Defenders Association (CPDA)
Community Solutions for Children, Families and Individuals
Dbsa California
Emotions Matter INC.
National Association of Social Workers, California Chapter
National Education Alliance for Borderline Personality Disorder
New England Personality Disorders Association
Pathpoint
Tessie Cleveland Community Services Corporation
77 Private Individuals
Opposition
2 Private Individuals
Analysis Prepared by:
Date of Hearing: April 11, 2023
Counsel: Liah Burnley
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON
Reginald Byron Jones-Sawyer, Sr., Chair
ABPCA Bill Id:
Author:() – As Ver:
SUMMARY:
Removes borderline personality disorder (BPD) from the mental disorders excluding a defendant from eligibility for pretrial mental health diversion.
EXISTING LAW:
- Permits, on an accusatory pleading alleging the commission of a misdemeanor or felony offense, the court, in its discretion, to grant pretrial mental health diversion to a defendant if the defendant satisfies the eligibility requirements and the court determines that the defendant is suitable for that diversion. (Pen. Code, § 1001.36, subd. (a).)
- Defines “Pretrial diversion” as the postponement of prosecution, either temporarily or permanently, at any point in the judicial process from the point at which the accused is charged until adjudication, to allow the defendant to undergo mental health treatment. (Pen. Code, § 1001.36, subd. (f).)
- Provides that a defendant is eligible for pretrial mental health diversion if both of the following criteria are met:
- The defendant has been diagnosed with a mental disorder as identified in the most recent edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), including, but not limited to, bipolar disorder, schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder, or post-traumatic stress disorder, but excluding antisocial personality disorder, BPD, and pedophilia; and
- The defendant’s mental disorder was a significant factor in the commission of the charged offense. (Pen. Code, § 1001.36, subd. (b).)
- The defendant has been diagnosed with a mental disorder as identified in the most recent edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), including, but not limited to, bipolar disorder, schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder, or post-traumatic stress disorder, but excluding antisocial personality disorder, BPD, and pedophilia; and
- Provides that a defendant is suitable for pretrial mental health diversion if all of the following criteria are met:
- In the opinion of a qualified mental health expert, the defendant’s symptoms of the mental disorder causing, contributing to, or motivating the criminal behavior would respond to mental health treatment;
- The defendant consents to diversion and waives their right to a speedy trial;
- The defendant agrees to comply with treatment as a condition of diversion; and,
- The defendant will not pose an unreasonable risk of danger to public safety if treated in the community. (Pen. Code, § 1001.36, subd. (c).)
- States that a defendant may not be placed into a pretrial mental health diversion program for the following offenses:
- Murder or voluntary manslaughter;
- An offense for which a person, if convicted, would be required to register as a sex offender;
- Rape;
- Lewd or lascivious act on a child under 14 years of age;
- Assault with intent to commit rape, sodomy, or oral copulation;
- Commission of rape or sexual penetration in concert with another person;
- Continuous sexual abuse of a child; or,
- Using a weapon of mass destruction, as specified. (Pen. Code, § 1001.36, subd. (d).)
- Provides that, at any stage of the proceedings, the court may require the defendant to make a prima facie showing that they will meet the minimum requirements of eligibility for diversion and that the defendant and the offense are suitable for diversion. (Pen. Code, § 1001.36, subd. (e).)
- States that the period during which criminal proceedings against the defendant may be diverted is limited as follows:
- If the defendant is charged with a felony, the period shall be no longer than two years.
- If the defendant is charged with a misdemeanor, the period shall be no longer than one year. (Pen. Code, § 1001.36, subd. (f).)
- Provides that, if any of the following circumstances exists, the court shall hold a hearing to determine whether the criminal proceedings should be reinstated, the treatment should be modified, or the defendant should be referred to the conservatorship investigator of the county:
- The defendant is charged with an additional misdemeanor allegedly committed during the pretrial diversion and that reflects the defendant’s propensity for violence;
- The defendant is charged with an additional felony allegedly committed during the pretrial diversion;
- The defendant is engaged in criminal conduct rendering the defendant unsuitable for diversion; or,
- Based on the opinion of a qualified mental health expert, the defendant is performing unsatisfactorily in the assigned program or the defendant is gravely disabled. (Pen. Code, § 1001.36, subd. (g).)
- Provides that, if the defendant has performed satisfactorily in diversion, at the end of the period of diversion, the court shall dismiss the defendant’s criminal charges that were the subject of the criminal proceedings at the time of the initial diversion. (Pen. Code, § 1001.36, subd. (h).)
- States that, upon successful completion of diversion, if the court dismisses the charges, the arrest upon which the diversion was based shall be deemed never to have occurred, and the court shall order access to the record of the arrest restricted, except as specified. The defendant who successfully completes diversion may indicate in response to any question concerning the defendant’s prior criminal record that the defendant was not arrested or diverted for the offense, except as specified. (Pen. Code, § 1001.36, subd. (h).)
FISCAL EFFECT:
Unknown
COMMENTS:
- Author's Statement: According to the author, “Borderline personality disorder (BPD) affects 2-6% of the world’s population with slightly higher rates among women and younger individuals. Current law allows pretrial diversion for individuals with mental health disorders but excludes those diagnosed with borderline personality disorder. Borderline personality disorder is characterized in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders as a pervasive pattern of instability of interpersonal relationships, self-image, and marked impulsivity. The exclusion of BPD from diversion eligibility perpetuates harmful stigma about the disorder and limits access to care for people at high risk of suicide. AB 1412 will ensure that Californians living with borderline personality disorder have equitable access to pretrial diversion and strive to reduce recidivism within an often misunderstood population.”
- BPD: BPD is characterized by intense, rapidly fluctuating moods combined with impulsivity and interpersonal difficulties. (Biskin RS, Management of Borderline Personality Disorder (Nov. 2012) <https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3503902/> [as of March 30, 2023].) BPD has been used for decades to “label patients who are ‘hopeless’, those who get therapists upset, and is one of the most controversial mental health diagnoses.” Al-Alem, Linah and Omar, Hatim A., Borderline Personality Disorder: An Overview of History, Diagnosis and Treatment in Adolescents (2008) Pharmacology and Nutritional Sciences Faculty Publications.) The term borderline came into existence because such patients were believed to lie on the borderline between psychosis and neurosis, with the label “borderline” first coined in 1938. (Ibid.) In 1980, BPD was accepted as a psychological term and included in the DSM III and later as a personality disorder, together with histrionic, antisocial, and narcissistic personality disorders. (Ibid.)
BPD can be a difficult diagnosis because of similarities to other conditions, particularly mood disorders. The validity of the current criteria for BPD shares problems with other psychiatric disorders: namely, the absence of biological markers, unclear delimitation from other disorders. The diagnostic criteria for BPD allow for 256 different combinations of symptoms that could lead to a diagnosis. (Biskin RS, Paris J., Diagnosing Borderline Personality Disorder (Nov 2012) <https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3494330/> [as of March 30, 2023].)
In the past, treatment of BPD was considered challenging, but interventions have been developed over the past two decades that have dramatically changed the lives of individuals with BPD. (Ibid.) There have been advances in our understanding and treatment approaches to BPD, which preclude dismissing BPD as an untreatable condition. For example, psychotherapy is the most important component in the treatment of BPD, which results large reductions in symptoms that persist over time. The most popular treatment for BPD is dialectical behavior therapy (DBT). DBT consists of weekly individual sessions and weekly life-skills group sessions that teach skills in four domains: mindfulness, distress tolerance, regulation of emotions and interpersonal effectiveness. Phone consultation with the therapist is available at all hours, and team consultation meetings play an important role. The therapy is designed to last at least one year. (Biskin RS, Paris J., Management of Borderline Personality Disorder (Nov. 2012) <https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3503902/> [as of March 30, 2023].)
In addition to DBT, there are other effective psychotherapies for BPD including schema-focused therapy, mentalization-based therapy, systems training for emotional predictability and problem-solving, and transference-focused psychotherapy. Psychotherapies are usually utilized in a chronic and outpatient setting and have shown to be cost-effective. (Lee JS., Borderline Personality Disorder in the Courtroom (June 2020) <https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8547869/> [as of March 30, 2023].) Although admission to a general psychiatric ward is not recommended in most instances, several specialized inpatient treatments for BPD have been shown to be efficacious. (Biskin RS, Paris J., Management of Borderline Personality Disorder (Nov. 2012) <https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3503902/> [as of March 30, 2023].)
Pharmacologic treatments have also been effective in treating BPD. Medications commonly used for mood and psychotic disorders have shown modest efficacy in improving the mood and behavior of BPD patients, including mood stabilizers and antipsychotics. (Lee JS., Borderline Personality Disorder in the Courtroom (June 2020) <https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8547869/> [as of March 30, 2023].)
- Mental Health Diversion: Existing law permits pretrial diversion programs. (Pen. Code, §1001.) Pre-trial diversion suspends the criminal proceedings without requiring the defendant to enter a plea. (Pen. Code, §§ 1001.1, 1001.3.) The defendant must successfully complete a program or other conditions imposed by the court. If a defendant does not successfully complete the diversion program, criminal proceedings resume but the defendant, having not entered a plea, may still proceed to trial or enter a plea. If diversion is successfully completed, the criminal charges are dismissed and the defendant may, with certain exceptions, legally answer that they have never been arrested or charged for the diverted offense. (Pen. Code, §§ 1001.7, 1001.9.)
In order to be eligible for pretrial mental health diversion, the defendant must suffer from a mental disorder that played a significant role in the commission of the charged offense, and in the opinion of a qualified mental health expert, the defendant’s symptoms motivating the criminal behavior would respond to mental health treatment. (Pen. Code, § 1001.36.) The defendant must consent to diversion, waive their right to a speedy trial, and must agree to comply with treatment as a condition of diversion. (Ibid.)
Defendants are eligible for pretrial mental health diversion if they have been diagnosed with a mental disorder identified in the most recent edition of the DSM, including but not limited to bipolar disorder, schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder, or PTSD. (Pen. Code, § 1001.36, subd. (b)(1).) However, the law specifically excludes individuals with antisocial personality disorder, BPD, and pedophile from eligibility for mental health diversion. (Ibid.)
In addition, all of the following is required for mental health diversion:
- Courts have discretion to refuse to grant diversion even though the defendant meets all of the requirements. (Pen. Code, § 1001.36, subd. (a).)
- Court must consider sides of the defense and prosecution in deciding whether to grant diversion. (Pen. Code, § 1001.36, subd. (a).)
- The defendant must be suitable for pretrial diversion, which includes that the defendant agrees to comply with treatment, and that the defendant will not pose an unreasonable risk of danger to public safety if treated in the community. (Pen. Code, § 1001.36, subd. (c).)
- The court may consider the opinion of the prosecutor, defense, the treatment plan, the defendant’s violence and criminal history, and opinions of qualified mental health professionals. (Pen. Code, § 1001.36, subd. (c).)
- That the defendant cannot be charged with certain offenses like murder or rape and offenses requiring sex offender registration. (Pen. Code, § 1001.36, subd. (d).)
- The court must be satisfied that the recommended mental health treatment will meet the needs of the specialized defendant. (Pen. Code, § 1001.36, subd. (f).)
- The provider of the mental health treatment must provide regular reports to the court. (Pen. Code, § 1001.36, subd. (f).)
- The court can reinstate criminal proceedings if the defendant is engaged in criminal conduct during diversion. (Pen. Code, § 1001.36, subd. (g).)
- The court can reinstate criminal proceedings if the defendant is performing unsatisfactorily during diversion. (Pen. Code, § 1001.36, subd. (g).)
Based on these criteria, and the requirement that a person in mental health diversion cannot be a risk to public safety, should individuals be categorically excluded from mental health diversion on the basis of their BPD diagnosis?
- Disparate Treatment of Personality Disorders in the Criminal Justice System: Within the criminal justice system, there has been a strong push to exclude personality disorders, like BPD, from the types of mental illnesses potentially significant enough to warrant exculpation of fault or consideration of decreased criminal responsibility. Johnson SC, Elbogen EB. Personality Disorders at the Interface of Psychiatry and the Law: Legal Use and Clinical Classification (June 2013) <https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3811091/> [as of March 30, 2023].) “Some state statutes (ie, California and Oregon) go as far as excluding all personality disorders with respect to the insanity defense.” (Ibid.) “Perhaps because of their relatively high prevalence within the criminal justice system, personality disorders have to some degree lost their identity as mental illnesses, and instead are often seen as common population characteristics.” (Ibid.) The diagnoses of certain personality disorders are among the most frequently made diagnoses within offender and prison populations. (Ibid.) “Their expression no longer falls outside of the norms when the offender population is considered the population of concern; thus, they lose their usefulness as differentiating factors within at least part of the legal system.” (Ibid.)
California excludes personality disorders, including BPD in other laws, not just the insanity defense. For example, the court can dismiss enhancements in the interests of justice, but not for people diagnosed with BPD. (Pen. Code, § 1385.) When a plea of not guilty by reason of insanity is entered, the defense is not allowed solely on the basis of a “personality or adjustment disorder, a seizure disorder, or an addiction to, or abuse of, intoxicating substances.” (Pen. Code, § 29.8.)
As explained above, there have been significant advances in our understanding of BPD, which is no longer considered untreatable. Given our progressed understanding of BPD, as well as the advancements in treatment, it would be prudent to reevaluate how individuals with BPD are treated in the criminal justice system. Wholly discounting BPD from mental health diversion excludes a wide swath of defendants who otherwise could be amenable to treatment, and whose entry and reentry into the criminal justice system might otherwise be prevented.
- Some Individuals with BPD May Be Eligible for Diversion, While Others May Be Unfairly Excluded: In Negron v. Superior Court (2021) 70 Cal.App.5th 1007, the California Court of Appeal determined that a “Defendant’s antisocial personality disorder (ASPD) did not disqualify him from mental health diversion, even though ASPD was expressly excluded by Pen. Code, § 1001.36, subd. (b)(1)(A), because defendant also suffered from several qualifying mental health disorders. Section 1001.36, subd. (b)(1)(A), simply disallows defendants from establishing eligibility for diversion based on an excluded disorder. Suffering from an excluded disorder does not categorically bar defendants from establishing eligibility based on a different, qualifying disorder.” (Id. at p. 1016.) Otherwise put, the court determined that a “defendant satisfies section 1001.36(b)(1)(A) so long as he or she suffers from a qualifying disorder, even if he or she is also diagnosed with an excluded disorder.” (Ibid.)
The court further opined that, “It is entirely predictable, and thus certainly within the contemplation of the Legislature, that a person might suffer from included and excluded disorders. Because section 1001.36(b)(1)(A) requires suffering only one included disorder, the Legislature would have been aware a defendant could still meet that requirement notwithstanding suffering from a disorder section 1001.36(b)(1)(A) designates as excluded. Had the Legislature intended to wholly preclude from diversion any person diagnosed with an excluded disorder (regardless of concurrently suffering from included disorders), the sentence phrasing of section 1001.36(b)(1)(A) would have shifted from simply listing excluded disorders to disqualifying persons with any of the excluded disorders.” (Negron v. Superior Court, supra, at p. 1017.)
Therefore, consistent with the court’s reasoning in Negron v. Superior Court, it is possible, that under existing law, a person who has BPD and other mental disorders can participate in mental health diversion, but a person who only has BPD is not eligible. It is inequitable that a person with multiple disorders can participate in diversion and receive treatment, but a person who is diagnosed with BPD only cannot.
- Argument in Support: According to PathPoint, “This legislation is essential because it recognizes that individuals with BPD are unfairly excluded from the program despite evidence showing that treatment reduces criminal behavior, arrests, and recidivism in this population.
“A study published in the Journal of Forensic Psychiatry and Psychology in 2020 found that individuals with BPD who received Dialectical Behavior Therapy (DBT) had significantly fewer arrests than those who did not receive treatment (Murray et al., 2020). The odds of engaging in criminal behavior were approximately 85% lower for individuals with BPD who received DBT compared to those who did not receive treatment. A review of 33 treatment trials for BPD analyzed data from 2,256 participants and discovered that treatment positively reduced BPD symptoms, self-harm, suicidality, and general psychopathology (Cristea et al., 2017). Additionally, The Holloway Skills Therapy Program (HoST) was created in the UK specifically for incarcerated women with BPD. Those who finished the 8-week treatment saw a remarkable 88.2% decrease in disciplinary actions (Gee & Reed, 2013). These findings suggest that referring people with BPD to treatment achieves rehabilitation in ways that incarceration does not.
“Excluding individuals with BPD from pretrial diversion eligibility entrenches systemic stigma, which exacerbates both public stigma and self-stigma. People with BPD make important contributions to society and deserve equitable and just treatment, and compassion. Treatment is essential for reducing the risk of suicide among people with BPD, as self-harming behaviors are common in BPD, and 10% of people with BPD die by suicide, a higher rate than any other psychiatric disorder.
“Research also shows that BPD is no more dangerous than mental illnesses covered by the diversion program. While the data in this area are limited because BPD is almost always comorbid with other disorders, rates of recidivism associated with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) are similar to BPD, and substance use disorders are associated with higher rates of recidivism than personality disorders (Babinski et al., 2015; Wu et al., 2014).
“BPD is treatable, highly heritable, and associated with significant neurobiological differences. The overwhelming consensus among scholars is that BPD is treatable, and psychotherapy is the first-line intervention for BPD. This is also true for many instances of other disorders. In many studies, the combination of psychotherapy and medication is the most effective. Even in the case of psychosis, psychotherapy is often necessary for addition to or as an alternative to medication. Therefore, it is essential that individuals with BPD have access to the same treatment and support as those with other mental health conditions.”
- Related Legislation:
- AB 455 (Quirk-Silva), would prohibit individuals in pretrial mental health diversion for a felony or specified misdemeanor charge from owning a firearm until they successfully complete diversion. AB 455 is pending in Assembly Appropriations Committee.
- AB 1310 (McKinnor), would allow individuals with a firearm enhancement to file a court petition for resentencing, but excludes individuals with certain mental disorders, including BPD. AB 1310 is pending in Assembly Appropriations Committee.
- SB 63 (Ochoa Bogh), would establish a Homeless and Mental Health Court Grant Program to be administered by the Judicial Council and excludes from the program individuals with certain mental disorders, including BPD. SB 63 is pending in Senate Appropriations Committee.
- AB 455 (Quirk-Silva), would prohibit individuals in pretrial mental health diversion for a felony or specified misdemeanor charge from owning a firearm until they successfully complete diversion. AB 455 is pending in Assembly Appropriations Committee.
- Prior Legislation:
- SB 1223 (Becker), Chapter 735, Statutes of 2022, made changes to mental health diversion eligibility and suitability provisions.
- AB 1810 (Budget Committee) Chapter 34, Statutes of 2018, created mental health diversion.
- SB 215 (Beall), Chapter 1005, Statutes of 2018, made certain offenses ineligible for mental health diversion.
- SB 1223 (Becker), Chapter 735, Statutes of 2022, made changes to mental health diversion eligibility and suitability provisions.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:
Support
Access Psychology Foundation
California Access Coalition
California Council of Community Behavioral Health Agencies (CBHA)
California Public Defenders Association (CPDA)
Community Solutions for Children, Families and Individuals
Dbsa California
Emotions Matter INC.
National Association of Social Workers, California Chapter
National Education Alliance for Borderline Personality Disorder
New England Personality Disorders Association
Pathpoint
Tessie Cleveland Community Services Corporation
77 Private Individuals
Opposition
2 Private Individuals
Analysis Prepared by:
Discussed in Hearing
45SEC
Assembly Floor
2MIN
Senate Floor
8MIN
Senate Standing Committee on Public Safety
57SEC
Assembly Floor
1MIN
Assembly Standing Committee on Appropriations
7MIN
Assembly Standing Committee on Public Safety
Bill Author
Bill Co-Author(s):
