AB 1643: Juveniles: informal supervision.
- Session Year: 2023-2024
- House: Assembly
- Latest Version Date: 2023-10-13
Current Status:
Passed
(2023-10-13: Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 850, Statutes of 2023.)
Introduced
In Committee
First Chamber
In Committee
Second Chamber
Enacted
What does this bill do?
The bill raises the restitution threshold from $1,000 to $5,000 for youths accused of crimes, so a young person who owes more than $5,000 in restitution cannot use an informal supervision program and must have the case referred to prosecutors quickly. It also says a youth’s inability to pay because they are poor cannot be used to deny them eligibility for the supervision program.
The summary is provided by generative AI which can make mistakes. For original language, please view the details in the table below.
Existing law subjects a person between 12 and 17 years of age, inclusive, who commits a crime, and a person under 12 years of age who commits specified crimes, to the jurisdiction of the juvenile court, which may adjudge that person to be a ward of the court. Existing law authorizes a probation officer, in certain circumstances, to delineate a specific program of supervision for a minor who is alleged to have committed a crime. Existing law makes a minor ineligible for that program of supervision for specified reasons, including if the minor is alleged to have committed an offense in which the restitution owed to the victim exceeds $1,000, except in those unusual cases in where the interest of justice would best be served.
This bill would instead prohibit a minor from participating in a program of supervision if the minor has committed an offense in which the restitution owed exceeds $5,000.
Upon receipt of an application to commence proceedings in the juvenile court, as specified, existing law requires a probation officer to make any investigation the officer deems necessary to determine whether proceedings in the juvenile court should be commenced. Existing law requires the probation officer to commence proceedings within 48 hours if the minor has been referred to the probation officer for specified offenses, including if the minor is alleged to have committed an offense in which restitution owed to the victim exceeds $1,000.
This bill would instead require the probation officer to commence proceedings within 48 hours if the minor is alleged to have committed an offense in which restitution owed to the victim exceeds $5,000.
Existing law subjects a person between 12 and 17 years of age, inclusive, who commits a crime, and a person under 12 years of age who commits specified crimes, to the jurisdiction of the juvenile court, which may adjudge that person to be a ward of the court. Existing law authorizes a probation officer, in certain circumstances, to delineate a specific program of supervision for a minor who is alleged to have committed a crime. Existing law makes a minor ineligible for that program of supervision for specified reasons, including if the minor is alleged to have committed an offense in which the restitution owed to the victim exceeds $1,000, except in those unusual cases in where the interest of justice would best be served.
This bill would instead prohibit a minor from participating in a program of supervision if the minor has committed an offense in which the restitution owed exceeds $5,000.
Upon receipt of an application to commence proceedings in the juvenile court, as specified, existing law requires a probation officer to make any investigation the officer deems necessary to determine whether proceedings in the juvenile court should be commenced. Existing law requires the probation officer to commence proceedings within 48 hours if the minor has been referred to the probation officer for specified offenses, including if the minor is alleged to have committed an offense in which restitution owed to the victim exceeds $1,000.
This bill would instead require the probation officer to commence proceedings within 48 hours if the minor is alleged to have committed an offense in which restitution owed to the victim exceeds $5,000.
Existing law subjects a person between 12 and 17 years of age, inclusive, who commits a crime, and a person under 12 years of age who commits specified crimes, to the jurisdiction of the juvenile court, which may adjudge that person to be a ward of the court. Existing law authorizes a probation officer, in certain circumstances, to delineate a specific program of supervision for a minor who is alleged to have committed a crime. Existing law makes a minor ineligible for that program of supervision for specified reasons, including if the minor is alleged to have committed an offense in which the restitution owed to the victim exceeds $1,000, except in those unusual cases in where the interest of justice would best be served.
This bill would instead prohibit a minor from participating in a program of supervision if the minor has committed an offense in which the restitution owed exceeds $5,000.
Upon receipt of an application to commence proceedings in the juvenile court, as specified, existing law requires a probation officer to make any investigation the officer deems necessary to determine whether proceedings in the juvenile court should be commenced. Existing law requires the probation officer to commence proceedings within 48 hours if the minor has been referred to the probation officer for specified offenses, including if the minor is alleged to have committed an offense in which restitution owed to the victim exceeds $1,000.
Existing law requires the county probation department and the child welfare services department to, pursuant to a jointly developed written protocol, initially determine which status will serve the best interest of a minor and the protection of society when the minor appears to come within the description of a dependent of the court and a ward of the court pursuant to specified provisions.This bill would instead require the probation officer to commence proceedings within 48 hours if the minor is alleged to have committed an offense in which restitution owed to the victim exceeds $5,000. The bill would also require, if the minor has an open referral with the county child welfare agency, is a current dependent, or otherwise appears to come within the description of a dependent, the prosecutor to consult with the county probation department and the county child welfare agency to evaluate the necessity of filing a juvenile wardship petition and a report, as specified. By imposing new duties on local entities, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program.
The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.This bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.Existing law subjects a person between 12 and 17 years of age, inclusive, who commits a crime, and a person under 12 years of age who commits specified crimes, to the jurisdiction of the juvenile court, which may adjudge that person to be a ward of the court. Existing law authorizes a probation officer, in certain circumstances, to delineate a specific program of supervision for a minor who is alleged to have committed a crime. Existing law makes a minor ineligible for that program of supervision for specified reasons, including if the minor is alleged to have committed an offense in which the restitution owed to the victim exceeds $1,000, except in those unusual cases in where the interest of justice would best be served.
This bill would instead prohibit a minor from participating in a program of supervision if the minor has committed an offense in which the restitution owed exceeds $5,000.
Upon receipt of an application to commence proceedings in the juvenile court, as specified, existing law requires a probation officer to make any investigation the officer deems necessary to determine whether proceedings in the juvenile court should be commenced. Existing law requires the probation officer to commence proceedings within 48 hours if the minor has been referred to the probation officer for specified offenses, including if the minor is alleged to have committed an offense in which restitution owed to the victim exceeds $1,000.
Existing law requires the county probation department and the child welfare services department to, pursuant to a jointly developed written protocol, initially determine which status will serve the best interest of a minor and the protection of society when the minor appears to come within the description of a dependent of the court and a ward of the court pursuant to specified provisions.
This bill would instead require the probation officer to commence proceedings within 48 hours if the minor is alleged to have committed an offense in which restitution owed to the victim exceeds $5,000. The bill would also require, if the minor has an open referral with the county child welfare agency, is a current dependent, or otherwise appears to come within the description of a dependent, the prosecutor to consult with the county probation department and the county child welfare agency to evaluate the necessity of filing a juvenile wardship petition and a report, as specified. By imposing new duties on local entities, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program.
The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.
This bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.
(a)Whenever any person applies to the probation officer to commence proceedings in the juvenile court, the application shall be in the form of an affidavit alleging that there was or is within the county, or residing therein, a minor within the provisions of Section 602, or that a minor committed an offense described in Section 602 within the county, and setting forth facts in support thereof. The probation officer shall immediately make any investigation the probation officer deems necessary to determine whether proceedings in the juvenile court shall be commenced. If the probation officer determines that it is appropriate to recommend services to the family to prevent or eliminate the need for removal of the minor from the minors home, the probation officer shall make a referral to those services. The probation officer shall refer the youth to services provided by a health agency, community-based organization, local educational agency, an appropriate non-law-enforcement agency, or the probation department.
(b)Except as provided in subdivision (c), if the probation officer determines that proceedings pursuant to Section 650 should be commenced to declare a person to be a ward of the juvenile court on the basis that the minor is a person described in Section 602, the probation officer shall cause the affidavit to be taken to the prosecuting attorney.
(c)Notwithstanding subdivision (b), the probation officer shall cause the affidavit to be taken within 48 hours to the prosecuting attorney in all of the following cases:
(1)If it appears to the probation officer that the minor has been referred to the probation officer for any violation of an offense listed in subdivision (b), paragraph (2) of subdivision (d), or subdivision (e) of Section 707.
(2)If it appears to the probation officer that the minor is under 14 years of age at the date of the offense and that the offense constitutes a second felony referral to the probation officer.
(3)If it appears to the probation officer that the minor was 14 years of age or older at the date of the offense and that the offense constitutes a felony referral to the probation officer.
(4)If it appears to the probation officer that the minor has been referred to the probation officer for the sale or possession for sale of a controlled substance as defined in Chapter 2 (commencing with Section 11053) of Division 10 of the Health and Safety Code.
(5)If it appears to the probation officer that the minor has been referred to the probation officer for a violation of Section 11350 or 11377 of the Health and Safety Code where the violation takes place at a public or private elementary, vocational, junior high school, or high school, or a violation of Section 245.5, 626.9, or 626.10 of the Penal Code.
(6)If it appears to the probation officer that the minor has been referred to the probation officer for a violation of Section 186.22 of the Penal Code.
(7)If it appears to the probation officer that the minor has committed an offense in which the restitution owed to the victim exceeds five thousand dollars ($5,000). For purposes of this paragraph, the definition of victim in paragraph (1) of subdivision (a) of Section 730.6 and restitution in subdivision (h) of Section 730.6 shall apply.
(d)Except for offenses listed in paragraph (5), subdivision (c) shall not apply to a narcotics and drug offense set forth in Section 1000 of the Penal Code.
(e)The prosecuting attorney shall within their discretionary power institute proceedings in accordance with their role as public prosecutor pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 650 and Section 26500 of the Government Code. However, if it appears to the prosecuting attorney that the affidavit was not properly referred, that the offense for which the minor was referred should be charged as a misdemeanor, or that the minor may benefit from a program of informal supervision, they shall refer the matter to the probation officer for whatever action the probation officer may deem appropriate.
(f)In all matters where the minor is not in custody and is already a ward of the court or a probationer under Section 602, the prosecuting attorney, within five judicial days of receipt of the affidavit from the probation officer, shall institute proceedings in accordance with their role as public prosecutor pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 650 of this code and Section 26500 of the Government Code, unless it appears to the prosecuting attorney that the affidavit was not properly referred or that the offense for which the minor was referred requires additional substantiating information, in which case they shall immediately notify the probation officer of what further action they are taking.
(g)This section shall become operative on January 1, 1997.
SEC. 2.Section 654.3 of the Welfare and Institutions Code is amended to read:654.3.(a)A minor shall not be eligible for the program of supervision set forth in Section 654 or 654.2 in the following cases, except where the interests of justice would best be served and the court specifies on the record the reasons for its decision:
(1)A petition alleges that the minor has violated Section 245.5, 626.9, or 626.10 of the Penal Code.
(2)A petition alleges that the minor has violated Section 186.22 of the Penal Code.
(3)The minor has previously participated in a program of supervision pursuant to Section 654.
(4)The minor has previously been adjudged a ward of the court pursuant to Section 602.
(5)(A)A petition alleges that the minor has violated an offense in which the restitution owed to the victim exceeds five thousand dollars ($5,000). However, a minors inability to pay restitution due to the minors indigence shall not be grounds for finding a minor ineligible for the program of supervision or a finding that the minor has failed to comply with the terms of the program of supervision.
(B)For purposes of this paragraph, the definition of victim in paragraph (1) of subdivision (a) of Section 730.6 and restitution in subdivision (h) of Section 730.6 shall apply.
(b)A minor shall not be eligible for the program of supervision set forth in Section 654 or 654.2 in the case of a petition alleging that the minor has violated an offense listed in subdivision (b) of Section 707, except in unusual cases where the court determines the interests of justice would be best served and the court specified on the record the reason for its decision.
(a)Whenever any person applies to the probation officer to commence proceedings in the juvenile court, the application shall be in the form of an affidavit alleging that there was or is within the county, or residing therein, a minor within the provisions of Section 602, or that a minor committed an offense described in Section 602 within the county, and setting forth facts in support thereof. The probation officer shall immediately make any investigation the probation officer deems necessary to determine whether proceedings in the juvenile court shall be commenced. If the probation officer determines that it is appropriate to recommend services to the family to prevent or eliminate the need for removal of the minor from the minors home, the probation officer shall make a referral to those services. The probation officer shall refer the youth to services provided by a health agency, community-based organization, local educational agency, an appropriate non-law-enforcement agency, or the probation department.
(b)Except as provided in subdivision (c), if the probation officer determines that proceedings pursuant to Section 650 should be commenced to declare a person to be a ward of the juvenile court on the basis that the minor is a person described in Section 602, the probation officer shall cause the affidavit to be taken to the prosecuting attorney.
(c)Notwithstanding subdivision (b), the probation officer shall cause the affidavit to be taken within 48 hours to the prosecuting attorney in all of the following cases:
(1)If it appears to the probation officer that the minor has been referred to the probation officer for any violation of an offense listed in subdivision (b), paragraph (2) of subdivision (d), or subdivision (e) of Section 707.
(2)If it appears to the probation officer that the minor is under 14 years of age at the date of the offense and that the offense constitutes a second felony referral to the probation officer.
(3)If it appears to the probation officer that the minor was 14 years of age or older at the date of the offense and that the offense constitutes a felony referral to the probation officer.
(4)If it appears to the probation officer that the minor has been referred to the probation officer for the sale or possession for sale of a controlled substance as defined in Chapter 2 (commencing with Section 11053) of Division 10 of the Health and Safety Code.
(5)If it appears to the probation officer that the minor has been referred to the probation officer for a violation of Section 11350 or 11377 of the Health and Safety Code where the violation takes place at a public or private elementary, vocational, junior high school, or high school, or a violation of Section 245.5, 626.9, or 626.10 of the Penal Code.
(6)If it appears to the probation officer that the minor has been referred to the probation officer for a violation of Section 186.22 of the Penal Code.
(7)If it appears to the probation officer that the minor has committed an offense in which the restitution owed to the victim exceeds five thousand dollars ($5,000). For purposes of this paragraph, the definition of victim in paragraph (1) of subdivision (a) of Section 730.6 and restitution in subdivision (h) of Section 730.6 shall apply.
(d)Except for offenses listed in paragraph (5), subdivision (c) shall not apply to a narcotics and drug offense set forth in Section 1000 of the Penal Code.
(e)The prosecuting attorney shall within their discretionary power institute proceedings in accordance with their role as public prosecutor pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 650 and Section 26500 of the Government Code. However, if it appears to the prosecuting attorney that the affidavit was not properly referred, that the offense for which the minor was referred should be charged as a misdemeanor, or that the minor may benefit from a program of informal supervision, they shall refer the matter to the probation officer for whatever action the probation officer may deem appropriate.
(f)In all matters where the minor is not in custody and is already a ward of the court or a probationer under Section 602, the prosecuting attorney, within five judicial days of receipt of the affidavit from the probation officer, shall institute proceedings in accordance with their role as public prosecutor pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 650 of this code and Section 26500 of the Government Code, unless it appears to the prosecuting attorney that the affidavit was not properly referred or that the offense for which the minor was referred requires additional substantiating information, in which case they shall immediately notify the probation officer of what further action they are taking.
(g)This section shall become operative on January 1, 1997.
SEC. 2.Section 654.3 of the Welfare and Institutions Code is amended to read:654.3.(a)A minor shall not be eligible for the program of supervision set forth in Section 654 or 654.2 in the following cases, except where the interests of justice would best be served and the court specifies on the record the reasons for its decision:
(1)A petition alleges that the minor has violated Section 245.5, 626.9, or 626.10 of the Penal Code.
(2)A petition alleges that the minor has violated Section 186.22 of the Penal Code.
(3)The minor has previously participated in a program of supervision pursuant to Section 654.
(4)The minor has previously been adjudged a ward of the court pursuant to Section 602.
(5)(A)A petition alleges that the minor has violated an offense in which the restitution owed to the victim exceeds five thousand dollars ($5,000). However, a minors inability to pay restitution due to the minors indigence shall not be grounds for finding a minor ineligible for the program of supervision or a finding that the minor has failed to comply with the terms of the program of supervision.
(B)For purposes of this paragraph, the definition of victim in paragraph (1) of subdivision (a) of Section 730.6 and restitution in subdivision (h) of Section 730.6 shall apply.
(b)A minor shall not be eligible for the program of supervision set forth in Section 654 or 654.2 in the case of a petition alleging that the minor has violated an offense listed in subdivision (b) of Section 707, except in unusual cases where the court determines the interests of justice would be best served and the court specified on the record the reason for its decision.
(a)Whenever any person applies to the probation officer to commence proceedings in the juvenile court, the application shall be in the form of an affidavit alleging that there was or is within the county, or residing therein, a minor within the provisions of Section 602, or that a minor committed an offense described in Section 602 within the county, and setting forth facts in support thereof. The probation officer shall immediately make any investigation the probation officer deems necessary to determine whether proceedings in the juvenile court shall be commenced. If the probation officer determines that it is appropriate to recommend services to the family to prevent or eliminate the need for removal of the minor from the minors home, the probation officer shall make a referral to those services. The probation officer shall refer the youth to services provided by a health agency, community-based organization, local educational agency, an appropriate non-law-enforcement agency, or the probation department.
(b)Except as provided in subdivision (c), if the probation officer determines that proceedings pursuant to Section 650 should be commenced to declare a person to be a ward of the juvenile court on the basis that the minor is a person described in Section 602, the probation officer shall cause the affidavit to be taken to the prosecuting attorney.
(c)Notwithstanding subdivision (b), the probation officer shall cause the affidavit to be taken within 48 hours to the prosecuting attorney in all of the following cases:
(1)If it appears to the probation officer that the minor has been referred to the probation officer for any violation of an offense listed in subdivision (b), paragraph (2) of subdivision (d), or subdivision (e) of Section 707.
(2)If it appears to the probation officer that the minor is under 14 years of age at the date of the offense and that the offense constitutes a second felony referral to the probation officer.
(3)If it appears to the probation officer that the minor was 14 years of age or older at the date of the offense and that the offense constitutes a felony referral to the probation officer.
(4)If it appears to the probation officer that the minor has been referred to the probation officer for the sale or possession for sale of a controlled substance as defined in Chapter 2 (commencing with Section 11053) of Division 10 of the Health and Safety Code.
(5)If it appears to the probation officer that the minor has been referred to the probation officer for a violation of Section 11350 or 11377 of the Health and Safety Code where the violation takes place at a public or private elementary, vocational, junior high school, or high school, or a violation of Section 245.5, 626.9, or 626.10 of the Penal Code.
(6)If it appears to the probation officer that the minor has been referred to the probation officer for a violation of Section 186.22 of the Penal Code.
(7)If it appears to the probation officer that the minor has committed an offense in which the restitution owed to the victim exceeds five thousand dollars ($5,000). For purposes of this paragraph, the definition of victim in paragraph (1) of subdivision (a) of Section 730.6 and restitution in subdivision (h) of Section 730.6 shall apply.
(d)Except for offenses listed in paragraph (5), subdivision (c) shall not apply to a narcotics and drug offense set forth in Section 1000 of the Penal Code.
(e)The prosecuting attorney shall within their discretionary power institute proceedings in accordance with their role as public prosecutor pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 650 and Section 26500 of the Government Code. However, if it appears to the prosecuting attorney that the affidavit was not properly referred, that the offense for which the minor was referred should be charged as a misdemeanor, or that the minor may benefit from a program of informal supervision, they shall refer the matter to the probation officer for whatever action the probation officer may deem appropriate. If the youth has an open referral with the county child welfare agency, is a current dependent, or otherwise appears to come within the description of Section 300, the prosecuting attorney shall consult with the county probation department and the county child welfare agency to evaluate the necessity of filing a juvenile wardship petition and a report pursuant to Section 241.1.
(f)In all matters where the minor is not in custody and is already a ward of the court or a probationer under Section 602, the prosecuting attorney, within five judicial days of receipt of the affidavit from the probation officer, shall institute proceedings in accordance with their role as public prosecutor pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 650 of this code and Section 26500 of the Government Code, unless it appears to the prosecuting attorney that the affidavit was not properly referred or that the offense for which the minor was referred requires additional substantiating information, in which case they shall immediately notify the probation officer of what further action they are taking.
(g)This section shall become operative on January 1, 1997.
SEC. 2.Section 654.3 of the Welfare and Institutions Code is amended to read:654.3.(a)A minor shall not be eligible for the program of supervision set forth in Section 654 or 654.2 in the following cases, except where the interests of justice would best be served and the court specifies on the record the reasons for its decision:
(1)A petition alleges that the minor has violated Section 245.5, 626.9, or 626.10 of the Penal Code.
(2)A petition alleges that the minor has violated Section 186.22 of the Penal Code.
(3)The minor has previously participated in a program of supervision pursuant to Section 654.
(4)The minor has previously been adjudged a ward of the court pursuant to Section 602.
(5)(A)A petition alleges that the minor has violated an offense in which the restitution owed to the victim exceeds five thousand dollars ($5,000). However, a minors inability to pay restitution due to the minors indigence shall not be grounds for finding a minor ineligible for the program of supervision or a finding that the minor has failed to comply with the terms of the program of supervision.
(B)For purposes of this paragraph, the definition of victim in paragraph (1) of subdivision (a) of Section 730.6 and restitution in subdivision (h) of Section 730.6 shall apply.
(b)A minor shall not be eligible for the program of supervision set forth in Section 654 or 654.2 in the case of a petition alleging that the minor has violated an offense listed in subdivision (b) of Section 707, except in unusual cases where the court determines the interests of justice would be best served and the court specified on the record the reason for its decision.
SEC. 3.If the Commission on State Mandates determines that this act contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement to local agencies and school districts for those costs shall be made pursuant to Part 7 (commencing with Section 17500) of Division 4 of Title 2 of the Government Code. REVISIONS: HeadingLine 2.(a)Whenever any person applies to the probation officer to commence proceedings in the juvenile court, the application shall be in the form of an affidavit alleging that there was or is within the county, or residing therein, a minor within the provisions of Section 602, or that a minor committed an offense described in Section 602 within the county, and setting forth facts in support thereof. The probation officer shall immediately make any investigation the probation officer deems necessary to determine whether proceedings in the juvenile court shall be commenced. If the probation officer determines that it is appropriate to recommend services to the family to prevent or eliminate the need for removal of the minor from the minors home, the probation officer shall make a referral to those services. The probation officer shall refer the youth to services provided by a health agency, community-based organization, local educational agency, an appropriate non-law-enforcement agency, or the probation department.
(b)Except as provided in subdivision (c), if the probation officer determines that proceedings pursuant to Section 650 should be commenced to declare a person to be a ward of the juvenile court on the basis that the minor is a person described in Section 602, the probation officer shall cause the affidavit to be taken to the prosecuting attorney.
(c)Notwithstanding subdivision (b), the probation officer shall cause the affidavit to be taken within 48 hours to the prosecuting attorney in all of the following cases:
(1)If it appears to the probation officer that the minor has been referred to the probation officer for any violation of an offense listed in subdivision (b), paragraph (2) of subdivision (d), or subdivision (e) of Section 707.
(2)If it appears to the probation officer that the minor is under 14 years of age at the date of the offense and that the offense constitutes a second felony referral to the probation officer.
(3)If it appears to the probation officer that the minor was 14 years of age or older at the date of the offense and that the offense constitutes a felony referral to the probation officer.
(4)If it appears to the probation officer that the minor has been referred to the probation officer for the sale or possession for sale of a controlled substance as defined in Chapter 2 (commencing with Section 11053) of Division 10 of the Health and Safety Code.
(5)If it appears to the probation officer that the minor has been referred to the probation officer for a violation of Section 11350 or 11377 of the Health and Safety Code where the violation takes place at a public or private elementary, vocational, junior high school, or high school, or a violation of Section 245.5, 626.9, or 626.10 of the Penal Code.
(6)If it appears to the probation officer that the minor has been referred to the probation officer for a violation of Section 186.22 of the Penal Code.
(7)If it appears to the probation officer that the minor has committed an offense in which the restitution owed to the victim exceeds one five thousand dollars ($1,000). ($5,000). For purposes of this paragraph, the definition of victim in paragraph (1) of subdivision (a) of Section 730.6 and restitution in subdivision (h) of Section 730.6 shall apply.
Except
(d)Except for offenses listed in paragraph (5), subdivision (c) shall not apply to a narcotics and drug offense set forth in Section 1000 of the Penal Code.
The
(e)The prosecuting attorney shall within their discretionary power institute proceedings in accordance with their role as public prosecutor pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 650 and Section 26500 of the Government Code. However, if it appears to the prosecuting attorney that the affidavit was not properly referred, that the offense for which the minor was referred should be charged as a misdemeanor, or that the minor may benefit from a program of informal supervision, they shall refer the matter to the probation officer for whatever action the probation officer may deem appropriate. If the youth has an open referral with the county child welfare agency, is a current dependent, or otherwise appears to come within the description of Section 300, the prosecuting attorney shall consult with the county probation department and the county child welfare agency to evaluate the necessity of filing a juvenile wardship petition and a report pursuant to Section 241.1.
(d)(f)In all matters where the minor is not in custody and is already a ward of the court or a probationer under Section 602, the prosecuting attorney, within five judicial days of receipt of the affidavit from the probation officer, shall institute proceedings in accordance with their role as public prosecutor pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 650 of this code and Section 26500 of the Government Code, unless it appears to the prosecuting attorney that the affidavit was not properly referred or that the offense for which the minor was referred requires additional substantiating information, in which case they shall immediately notify the probation officer of what further action they are taking.
(e)(g)This section shall become operative on January 1, 1997.
SEC. 2.Section 654.3 of the Welfare and Institutions Code is amended to read:654.3.(a)A minor shall not be eligible for the program of supervision set forth in Section 654 or 654.2 in the following cases, except where the interests of justice would best be served and the court specifies on the record the reasons for its decision:
(1)A petition alleges that the minor has violated Section 245.5, 626.9, or 626.10 of the Penal Code.
(2)A petition alleges that the minor has violated Section 186.22 of the Penal Code.
(3)The minor has previously participated in a program of supervision pursuant to Section 654.
(4)The minor has previously been adjudged a ward of the court pursuant to Section 602.
(5)(A)A petition alleges that the minor has violated an offense in which the restitution owed to the victim exceeds one five thousand dollars ($1,000). ($5,000). However, a minors inability to pay restitution due to the minors indigence shall not be grounds for finding a minor ineligible for the program of supervision or a finding that the minor has failed to comply with the terms of the program of supervision.
(B)For purposes of this paragraph, the definition of victim in paragraph (1) of subdivision (a) of Section 730.6 and restitution in subdivision (h) of Section 730.6 shall apply.
(b)A minor shall not be eligible for the program of supervision set forth in Section 654 or 654.2 in the case of a petition alleging that the minor has violated an offense listed in subdivision (b) of Section 707, except in unusual cases where the court determines the interests of justice would be best served and the court specified on the record the reason for its decision.
SEC. 3.If the Commission on State Mandates determines that this act contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement to local agencies and school districts for those costs shall be made pursuant to Part 7 (commencing with Section 17500) of Division 4 of Title 2 of the Government Code.
|
Date
|
Status
|
|---|---|
| Oct 13, 2023 | Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 850, Statutes of 2023. |
| Oct 13, 2023 | Approved by the Governor. |
| Sep 12, 2023 | Enrolled and presented to the Governor at 2 p.m. |
| Sep 5, 2023 | In Assembly. Ordered to Engrossing and Enrolling. |
| Sep 5, 2023 | Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Assembly. (Ayes 30. Noes 8. Page 2355.). |
| 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 6, 2023 | From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 5. Noes 0.) (June 6). Re-referred to Com. on APPR. |
| May 17, 2023 | Referred to Com. on PUB S. |
| May 9, 2023 | In Senate. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment. |
| May 8, 2023 | Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Senate. (Ayes 56. Noes 8. Page 1491.) |
| May 4, 2023 | Read second time. Ordered to third reading. |
| May 3, 2023 | From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 12. Noes 4.) (May 3). |
| Apr 26, 2023 | In committee: Hearing postponed by committee. |
| Apr 12, 2023 | From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 7. Noes 0.) (April 11). Re-referred to Com. on APPR. |
| Apr 12, 2023 | Coauthors revised. |
| Mar 15, 2023 | Re-referred to Com. on PUB. S. |
| Mar 14, 2023 | From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to Com. on PUB. S. Read second time and amended. |
| 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 5, 2023 | Assembly 3rd Reading AB1643 Bauer-Kahan et al. By Menjivar | Senate Floor |
Passed |
|
| Jun 6, 2023 | Do pass, but first be re-referred to the Committee on [Appropriations] | Senate Standing Committee on Public Safety |
Passed |
|
| May 8, 2023 | AB 1643 Bauer-Kahan Assembly Third Reading | Assembly Floor |
Passed |
|
| May 3, 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
|
|---|---|---|
| Aclu California Action | ** Support | |
| Anti-Recidivism Coalition | ** Support | |
| California Alliance for Youth and Community Justice | ** Support | |
| California Public Defenders Association | ** Support | |
| Californians for Safety and Justice | * Support | Apr 11, 2023 |
| Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice | ** Support | |
| Ceres Policy Research | ** Support | |
| Children's Defense Fund- California | ** Support | |
| Communities United for Restorative Youth Justice | ** Support | |
| Community Interventions | ** Support | |
| Ella Baker Center For Human Rights | ** Support | |
| Fresh Lifelines for Youth | ** Support | |
| Fresno Barrios Unidos | ** Support | |
| Fresno County Public Defender's Office | ** Support | |
| Haywood Burns Institute | ** Support | |
| Kids in Common | ** Support | |
| National Center for Youth Law | ** Support | |
| National Institute for Criminal Justice Reform | ** Support | |
| Pacific Juvenile Defender Center | ** Support | |
| Prosecutors Alliance of California | ** Support | |
| San Francisco Public Defender | ** Support | |
| Santa Clara County Juvenile Justice Commission | ** Support | |
| Santa Clara Juvenile Justice Commission | ** Support | |
| Santa Clara Public Defender's Office | * Support | Jun 6, 2023 |
| Santa Cruz Barrios Unidos | ** Support | |
| Young Women’s Freedom Center | ** Support |
SENATE RULES COMMITTEE Office of Senate Floor Analyses (916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) 327-4478 | AB 1643 |
THIRD READING
Bill No: AB 1643
Author: Bauer-Kahan (D), et al.
Amended: 3/14/23 in Assembly
Vote: 21
SENATE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE: 5-0, 6/6/23
AYES: Wahab, Ochoa Bogh, Bradford, Skinner, Wiener
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE: Senate Rule 28.8
ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 56-8, 5/8/23 - See last page for vote
SUBJECT: Juveniles: informal supervision
SOURCE: Pacific Juvenile Defender Center
DIGEST:
This bill increases the threshold amount of victim restitution which makes a minor presumptively ineligible for a program of informal supervision from $1,000 to $5,000.
ANALYSIS:
Existing law:
- Provides, generally, that a minor who is between 12 years of age and 17 years of age, inclusive, when the minor violates any law defining a crime, is subject to the jurisdiction of the juvenile court and to adjudication as a ward. (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 602, subd. (a).)
- Provides that in any case in which a probation officer, after investigation of an application for a petition or any other investigation the probation officer is authorized to make, concludes that a minor is within the jurisdiction of the juvenile court, or would come within the jurisdiction of the court if a petition were filed, the probation officer may, in lieu of filing a petition to declare a minor a ward of the court or requesting that a petition be filed by the prosecuting attorney to declare a minor a ward of the court and with consent of the minor and the minor’s parent or guardian, refer the minor to services provided by a health agency, community-based organization, local educational agency, an appropriate non-law-enforcement agency, or the probation department. Provides that if the services are provided by the probation department, the probation officer may delineate specific programs of supervision for the minor, not to exceed six months, and attempt thereby to adjust the situation that brings the minor within the jurisdiction of the court. (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 654, subd. (a).)
- Provides that if a petition has been filed by the prosecuting attorney to declare a minor a ward of the court under Section 602, the court may, without adjudging the minor a ward of the court and with the consent of the minor and the minor’s parents or guardian, continue any hearing on a petition for six months and order the minor to participate in a program of informal supervision. (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 654.2, subd. (a).)
- Excludes, explicitly, from eligibility for informal supervision, a minor in the following cases, except in an unusual case where the interests of justice would best be served and the court specifies on the record the reasons for its decision. Provides that minors presumptively excluded are those alleged to have committed an offense in which victim restitution exceeds $1,000. (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 654.3.)
- Prohibits a court from using a minor’s inability to pay restitution due to indigence as grounds for finding them ineligible for the program of supervision or a finding that the minor has failed to comply with the terms of the program of supervision. (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 654.3, subd. (a)(5)(A).)
- Requires the probation officer to refer specified cases to the prosecutor within 48 hours, including cases in which it appears to the probation officer that the minor has committed an offense in which the restitution owed to the victim exceeds $1,000. (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 653.5, subd. (c)(7).)
- Provides that, in order to preserve and protect a victim’s rights to justice and due process, a victim shall be entitled specified rights, including among others, restitution. (Cal. Const., art. I, § 28, subd. (b)(13).)
- States that it is the unequivocal intention of the People of the State of California that all persons who suffer losses as a result of criminal activity shall have the right to seek and secure restitution from the persons convicted of the crimes causing the losses they suffer. (Cal. Const., art. I, § 28, subd. (b)(13)(A).)
- Provides that restitution shall be ordered from the convicted wrongdoer in every case, regardless of the sentence or disposition imposed, in which a crime victim suffers a loss. (Cal. Const., art. I, § 28, subd. (b)(13)(B).)
- Permits the juvenile court to, as appropriate, direct a minor under its jurisdiction to pay restitution to the victim or victims and make a contribution to the victim restitution fund after all victim restitution orders and fines have been satisfied, in order to hold them accountable or restore the victim or community. (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 202, subd. (f).)
- States the intent of the Legislature that a victim who incurs an economic loss because of a minor’s conduct shall receive restitution directly from that minor. (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 730.6, subd. (a)(1).)
- Requires the court to order the minor to pay, in addition to any other penalty provided or imposed under the law, restitution to the victim or victims in the amount of losses, as determined. (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 730.6, subds. (a)(2)(B) & (h)(1).)
- Requires the court to order full restitution unless it finds compelling and extraordinary reasons for not doing so, and states them on the record. Prohibits a minor’s inability to pay from being considered a compelling or extraordinary reason not to impose a restitution order. Prohibits the minor’s inability to pay from being considered in determining the amount of the restitution order. (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 730.6, subd. (h)(1).)
This bill:
- Provides that a minor is not eligible for a program of informal supervision, except where the interests of justice would best be served and the court specifies on the record the reasons for its decision, if it appears that the minor has committed an offense in which victim restitution exceeds $5,000, instead of $1,000.
- Raises the amount which requires the probation officer to commence proceedings within 48 hours if the minor is alleged to have committed an offense in which victim restitution is owed, from exceeding $1,000 to exceeding $5,000.
Background
Juvenile delinquency actions are begun by the filing of a petition under Welfare and Institutions Code section 602. The petition alleges criminal offenses and is brought by the district attorney. Welfare and Institutions Code section 654 provides an opportunity for pre-petition informal supervision, also known as diversion. (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 654.) If the probation officer concludes that the minor is within the juvenile court’s jurisdiction, or likely soon will be, the officer can delineate a specific program of supervision for the minor for up to six months to try to adjust the situation that brings the minor within the juvenile court’s jurisdiction. (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 654; In re Adam R. (1997) 57 Cal.App.4th 348.) After the filing of a petition, the court may also offer informal supervision. (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 654.2.)
Informal supervision is a voluntary contract between the probation officer, the minor, and the parents or guardians. If the juvenile successfully completes this program, the case is then closed. If the juvenile is unsuccessful at any time during the six-month period, the probation department may make a referral to the district attorney’s office for a formal petition to the juvenile court. (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 654.) Importantly, the court cannot require a minor to admit the truth of the petition before granting informal supervision. (In re Ricky J. (2005) 128 Cal.App.4th 783.)
Under current law, a number of circumstances render a minor presumptively ineligible for informal supervision. For example, a minor is presumptively ineligible for informal supervision where the petition alleges that the minor has committed an offense in which victim restitution exceeds $1,000. (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 654.3, subd. (a)(5).) Additionally, probation is required to refer certain types of cases to the prosecutor within 48 hours. These include cases in which it appears to the probation officer that the minor has committed an offense in which the restitution owed to the victim exceeds $1,000. (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 653.5, subd. (b)(7).)
These dollar thresholds were established in 1989 via AB 332 (Nolan, Chapter 930, Statutes of 1989) and SB 1275 (Presley, Chapter 1117, Statutes of 1989). They have not been updated since that time. This bill would increase the thresholds to $5,000 which the bill’s sponsor asserts partly reflects inflation but also recognizes that diversion of youth leads to better outcomes for both the youth and public safety than formal processing through the juvenile justice system.
FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes Local: No
SUPPORT: (Verified 6/26/23)
Pacific Juvenile Defender Center (source)
ACLU California Action
Anti-Recidivism Coalition
California Alliance for Youth and Community Justice
California Public Defenders Association
Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice
Ceres Policy Research
Children’s Defense Fund- California
Communities United for Restorative Youth Justice
Community Interventions
Ella Baker Center for Human Rights
Fresh Lifelines for Youth
Fresno County Public Defender’s Office
Haywood Burns Institute
Kids in Common
National Center for Youth Law
National Institute for Criminal Justice Reform
Prosecutors Alliance of California
San Francisco Public Defender
Santa Clara Juvenile Justice Commission
Santa Cruz Barrios Unidos
Young Women’s Freedom Center
OPPOSITION: (Verified 6/26/23)
None received
ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 56-8, 5/8/23
AYES: Addis, Aguiar-Curry, Alanis, Alvarez, Bains, Bauer-Kahan, Bennett, Berman, Boerner, Bonta, Bryan, Calderon, Wendy Carrillo, Connolly, Mike Fong, Friedman, Gabriel, Garcia, Gipson, Grayson, Haney, Holden, Irwin, Jackson, Jones-Sawyer, Kalra, Low, Lowenthal, Maienschein, McKinnor, Muratsuchi, Stephanie Nguyen, Pacheco, Papan, Pellerin, Petrie-Norris, Quirk-Silva, Ramos, Reyes, Luz Rivas, Robert Rivas, Rodriguez, Blanca Rubio, Santiago, Schiavo, Soria, Ting, Valencia, Villapudua, Waldron, Weber, Wicks, Wilson, Wood, Zbur, Rendon
NOES: Davies, Dixon, Essayli, Vince Fong, Mathis, Joe Patterson, Sanchez, Ta
NO VOTE RECORDED: Arambula, Juan Carrillo, Cervantes, Chen, Megan Dahle, Flora, Gallagher, Hart, Hoover, Lackey, Lee, McCarty, Ortega, Jim Patterson, Wallis, Ward
Prepared by: Stephanie Jordan / PUB. S. /
6/28/23 11:12:30
**** END ****
SENATE COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC SAFETY
Senator Aisha Wahab, Chair
2023 - 2024 Regular
Bill No: AB 1643 Hearing Date: June 6, 2023
Author: | Bauer-Kahan | ||
Version: | March 14, 2023 | ||
Urgency: | No | Fiscal: | Yes |
Consultant: | SJ | ||
Subject: Juveniles: informal supervision
HISTORY
Source: Pacific Juvenile Defender Center
Prior Legislation: SB 383 (Cortese), Ch. 603, Stats. 2021
SB 1275 (Presley), Ch. 1117, Stats. 1989
AB 332 (Nolan), Ch. 930, Stats. 1989
Support: ACLU California Action; Anti-Recidivism Coalition; California Alliance for Youth and Community Justice; California Public Defenders Association; Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice; Ceres Policy Research; Children’s Defense Fund- California; Communities United for Restorative Youth Justice; Community Interventions; Ella Baker Center for Human Rights; Fresh Lifelines for Youth; Fresno County Public Defender’s Office; Kids in Common; National Center for Youth Law; Prosecutors Alliance of California; San Francisco Public Defender; Santa Clara Juvenile Justice Commission; Santa Cruz Barrios Unidos; W. Haywood Burns Institute; Young Women’s Freedom Center
Opposition: None known
Assembly Floor Vote: 56 - 8
PURPOSE
The purpose of this bill is to increase the threshold amount of victim restitution which makes a minor presumptively ineligible for a program of informal supervision from $1,000 to $5,000.
Existing law provides, generally, that a minor who is between 12 years of age and 17 years of age, inclusive, when the minor violates any law defining a crime, is subject to the jurisdiction of the juvenile court and to adjudication as a ward. (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 602, subd. (a).)
Existing law provides that in any case in which a probation officer, after investigation of an application for a petition or any other investigation the probation officer is authorized to make, concludes that a minor is within the jurisdiction of the juvenile court, or would come within the jurisdiction of the court if a petition were filed, the probation officer may, in lieu of filing a petition to declare a minor a ward of the court or requesting that a petition be filed by the prosecuting attorney to declare a minor a ward of the court and with consent of the minor and the minor’s parent or guardian, refer the minor to services provided by a health agency, community-based organization, local educational agency, an appropriate non-law-enforcement agency, or the probation department. Provides that if the services are provided by the probation department, the
probation officer may delineate specific programs of supervision for the minor, not to exceed six months, and attempt thereby to adjust the situation that brings the minor within the jurisdiction of the court. (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 654, subd. (a).)
Existing law provides that if a petition has been filed by the prosecuting attorney to declare a minor a ward of the court under Section 602, the court may, without adjudging the minor a ward of the court and with the consent of the minor and the minor’s parents or guardian, continue any hearing on a petition for six months and order the minor to participate in a program of informal supervision. (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 654.2, subd. (a).)
Existing law explicitly excludes from eligibility for informal supervision, a minor in the following cases, except in an unusual case where the interests of justice would best be served and the court specifies on the record the reasons for its decision. Provides that minors presumptively excluded are those alleged to have committed an offense in which victim restitution exceeds $1,000. (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 654.3.)
Existing law prohibits a court from using a minor’s inability to pay restitution due to indigence as grounds for finding them ineligible for the program of supervision or a finding that the minor has failed to comply with the terms of the program of supervision. (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 654.3, subd. (a)(5)(A).)
Existing law requires the probation officer to refer specified cases to the prosecutor within 48 hours, including cases in which it appears to the probation officer that the minor has committed an offense in which the restitution owed to the victim exceeds $1,000. (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 653.5, subd. (c)(7).)
Existing law provides that, in order to preserve and protect a victim’s rights to justice and due process, a victim shall be entitled specified rights, including among others, restitution. (Cal. Const., art. I, § 28, subd. (b)(13).)
Existing law states that it is the unequivocal intention of the People of the State of California that all persons who suffer losses as a result of criminal activity shall have the right to seek and secure restitution from the persons convicted of the crimes causing the losses they suffer. (Cal. Const., art. I, § 28, subd. (b)(13)(A).)
Existing law provides that restitution shall be ordered from the convicted wrongdoer in every case, regardless of the sentence or disposition imposed, in which a crime victim suffers a loss. (Cal. Const., art. I, § 28, subd. (b)(13)(B).)
Existing law permits the juvenile court to, as appropriate, direct a minor under its jurisdiction to pay restitution to the victim or victims and make a contribution to the victim restitution fund after all victim restitution orders and fines have been satisfied, in order to hold them accountable or restore the victim or community. (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 202, subd. (f).)
Existing law states the intent of the Legislature that a victim who incurs an economic loss because of a minor’s conduct shall receive restitution directly from that minor. (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 730.6, subd. (a)(1).)
Existing law requires the court to order the minor to pay, in addition to any other penalty provided or imposed under the law, restitution to the victim or victims in the amount of losses, as determined. (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 730.6, subds. (a)(2)(B) & (h)(1).)
Existing law requires the court to order full restitution unless it finds compelling and extraordinary reasons for not doing so, and states them on the record. Prohibits a minor’s inability to pay from being considered a compelling or extraordinary reason not to impose a restitution order. Prohibits the minor’s inability to pay from being considered in determining the amount of the restitution order. (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 730.6, subd. (h)(1).)
This bill provides that a minor is not eligible for a program of informal supervision, except where the interests of justice would best be served and the court specifies on the record the reasons for its decision, if it appears that the minor has committed an offense in which victim restitution exceeds $5,000, instead of $1,000.
This bill raises the amount which requires the probation officer to commence proceedings within 48 hours if the minor is alleged to have committed an offense in which victim restitution is owed, from exceeding $1,000 to exceeding $5,000.
COMMENTS
- Need For This Bill
According to the author:
Our laws have not kept up with our world. A $1,000 theft in the 1980’s is not the same as today. One iPhone in a snatched purse can be the difference between rehabilitation and jail for a misguided youth offender. Informal probation has been repeatedly shown to improve outcomes for youth, diverting them away from the system and saving them from the traps of repeat offenses. Outdated financial barriers should not stand in the way of helping youth who would otherwise be eligible for diversion from the system.
- Informal Supervision
Juvenile delinquency actions are begun by the filing of a petition under Welfare and Institutions Code section 602. The petition alleges criminal offenses and is brought by the district attorney. Welfare and Institutions Code section 654 provides an opportunity for pre-petition informal supervision, also known as diversion. (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 654.) If the probation officer concludes that the minor is within the juvenile court’s jurisdiction, or likely soon will be, the officer can delineate a specific program of supervision for the minor for up to six months to try to adjust the situation that brings the minor within the juvenile court’s jurisdiction. (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 654; In re Adam R. (1997) 57 Cal.App.4th 348.) After the filing of a petition, the court may also offer informal supervision. (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 654.2.)
Informal supervision is a voluntary contract between the probation officer, the minor, and the parents or guardians. If the juvenile successfully completes this program, the case is then closed. If the juvenile is unsuccessful at any time during the six-month period, the probation department may make a referral to the district attorney’s office for a formal petition to the juvenile court. (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 654.) Importantly, the court cannot require a minor to admit the truth of the petition before granting informal supervision. (In re Ricky J. (2005) 128 Cal.App.4th 783.)
Under current law, a number of circumstances render a minor presumptively ineligible for informal supervision. For example, a minor is presumptively ineligible for informal supervision where the petition alleges that the minor has committed an offense in which victim restitution exceeds $1,000. (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 654.3, subd. (a)(5).) Additionally, probation is required to refer certain types of cases to the prosecutor within 48 hours. These include cases in which it appears to the probation officer that the minor has committed an offense in which the restitution owed to the victim exceeds $1,000. (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 653.5, subd. (b)(7).)
These dollar thresholds were established in 1989 via AB 332 (Nolan, Chapter 930, Statutes of 1989) and SB 1275 (Presley, Chapter 1117, Statutes of 1989). They have not been updated since that time. This bill would increase the thresholds to $5,000 which the bill’s sponsor asserts partly reflects inflation but also recognizes that diversion of youth leads to better outcomes for both the youth and public safety than formal processing through the juvenile justice system.
- Argument in Support
The Pacific Juvenile Defender Center, the bill’s sponsor writes:
The $1,000 threshold for minors to be informally supervised by probation or allowed to participate in informal supervision by the juvenile court has not been adjusted since first codified in 1989. Most obviously, the figure has not been adjusted for inflation. But even more importantly, the figure does not account for technological change: In 1989, smartphones — perhaps the most commonly-stolen technology item — had not yet been invented, let alone reached total ubiquity as today. Under the current statutory scheme, if a youth steals or damages an iPhone, even if the youth has no record and is doing well in all other aspects of their life, two decisions must follow. First, the youth must be referred to the DA’s Office for filing of charges and is not eligible for pre-filing diversion. Second, once charges are filed, the youth is presumptively ineligible for informal probation.
A.B. 1643 will increase the presumptive disqualifying dollar threshold for informal supervision to $5,000. This is a common-sense change that recognizes that diversion of youth produces better outcomes for the youth and public safety than formal juvenile justice system processing. It also recognizes that there is a slim (if any) connection between a restitution amount and a youth’s likelihood of success on diversion….
It has become well-recognized that diverting youth away from formal justice system processing for lower-level offenses leads to better, healthier, and more equitable outcomes for youth and the community, and permits diverted youth to connect to services without juvenile court involvement and extended contact with law enforcement. With the restitution threshold raised to $5,000, more youth will be able to access informal supervision and take advantage of the benefits of the program, allowing the harm caused by low-risk youth to be addressed outside of the formal juvenile justice system. The expansion of informal supervision will contribute to decreasing recidivism rates and increase the accessibility of community-based interventions. Youth who receive responses to their behavior that are restorative (rather than punitive) are healthier, less likely to recidivate, and more likely to repair harm. Research also shows that community-based strategies can increase public safety and lessen exposure to the justice system, reducing the need for the system to expend resources. As such, studies consistently recommend increasing community-based interventions like diversion, and reducing the detention of youth except when necessary for public safety.
Moreover, allowing more youth to access informal supervision directly facilitates more equitable outcomes for youth of color, who are more likely to be criminalized for the same behavior and less likely to be given access to diversion. Specifically, Black and Latino youth who are referred to probation are more likely than white youth to have a petition filed for every category of offense. A.B. 1643 thus places an additional safeguard in place to protect youth of color from being ensnared in the juvenile justice system.
The juvenile justice system strives to rehabilitate and support youth, and to remove them from the school-to-prison pipeline. Current law, however, reflects an outdated standard based on a disproven mentality of requiring formal system involvement for low-level offenses, and invokes a restitution metric that has no actual relation to whether a youth can be successful without formal system involvement. A.B. 1643 will help ensure that more youth are able to participate in community-based solutions.
-- END --
ASSEMBLY THIRD READING
ATR Bill Id:AB 1643
Author:(Bauer-Kahan)
As Amended Ver:March 14, 2023
Majority vote
SUMMARY
Increases the threshold amount of victim restitution which makes a minor presumptively ineligible for a program of informal supervision from $1,000 to $5,000.
Major Provisions
- Provides that a minor is not eligible for a program of informal supervision, except where the interests of justice would best be served and the court specifies on the record the reasons for its decision, if it appears that the minor has committed an offense in which victim restitution exceeds $5,000, instead of $1,000.
- Raises the amount which requires the probation officer to commence proceedings within 48 hours if the minor is alleged to have committed an offense in which victim restitution is owed, from exceeding $1,000 to exceeding $5,000.
COMMENTS
According to the Author
"Our laws have not kept up with our world. A $1,000 theft in the 1980's is not the same as today. One iphone in a snatched purse can be the difference between rehabilitation and jail for a misguided youth offender. Informal probation has been repeatedly shown to improve outcomes for youth, diverting them away from the system and saving them from the traps of repeat offenses. Outdated financial barriers should not stand in the way of helping youth who would otherwise be eligible for diversion from the system."
Arguments in Support
According to Pacific Juvenile Defender Center, the sponsor of this bill, "The $1,000 threshold for minors to be informally supervised by probation or allowed to participate in informal supervision by the juvenile court has not been adjusted since first codified in 1989. Most obviously, the figure has not been adjusted for inflation. But even more importantly, the figure does not account for technological change: In 1989, smartphones – perhaps the most commonly-stolen technology item – had not yet been invented, let alone reached total ubiquity as today. Under the current statutory scheme, if a youth steals or damages an iPhone, even if the youth has no record and is doing well in all other aspects of their life, two decisions must follow. First, the youth must be referred to the [District Attorney] (DA's) Office for filing of charges and is not eligible for pre-filing diversion. Second, once charges are filed, the youth is presumptively ineligible for informal probation.
"AB 1643 will increase the presumptive disqualifying dollar threshold for informal supervision to $5,000. This is a common-sense change that recognizes that diversion of youth produces better outcomes for the youth and public safety than formal juvenile justice system processing. It also recognizes that there is a slim (if any) connection between a restitution amount and a youth's likelihood of success on diversion….
"It has become well-recognized that diverting youth away from formal justice system processing for lower-level offenses leads to better, healthier, and more equitable outcomes for youth and the community, and permits diverted youth to connect to services without juvenile court involvement and extended contact with law enforcement. With the restitution threshold raised to $5,000, more youth will be able to access informal supervision and take advantage of the benefits of the program, allowing the harm caused by low-risk youth to be addressed outside of the formal juvenile justice system. The expansion of informal supervision will contribute to decreasing recidivism rates and increase the accessibility of community-based interventions. Youth who receive responses to their behavior that are restorative (rather than punitive) are healthier, less likely to recidivate, and more likely to repair harm. Research also shows that community-based strategies can increase public safety and lessen exposure to the justice system, reducing the need for the system to expend resources. As such, studies consistently recommend increasing community-based interventions like diversion, and reducing the detention of youth except when necessary for public safety.
"Moreover, allowing more youth to access informal supervision directly facilitates more equitable outcomes for youth of color, who are more likely to be criminalized for the same behavior and less likely to be given access to diversion. Specifically, Black and Latino youth who are referred to probation are more likely than white youth to have a petition filed for every category of offense. A.B. 1643 thus places an additional safeguard in place to protect youth of color from being ensnared in the juvenile justice system.
"The juvenile justice system strives to rehabilitate and support youth, and to remove them from the school-to-prison pipeline. Current law, however, reflects an outdated standard based on a disproven mentality of requiring formal system involvement for low-level offenses, and invokes a restitution metric that has no actual relation to whether a youth can be successful without formal system involvement. A.B. 1643 will help ensure that more youth are able to participate in community-based solutions." (Footnotes omitted.)
Arguments in Opposition
None on file.
FISCAL COMMENTS
According to the Assembly Appropriations Committee, "Potential cost savings of an unknown amount to the courts (Trial Court Trust Fund). To the extent this bill diverts juveniles into informal probation instead of juvenile court proceedings, courts may experience some resulting savings. Savings would depend on the number of juveniles diverted who would otherwise have their cases resolved in juvenile court."
VOTES
ASM PUBLIC SAFETY: 7-0-1
YES: Jones-Sawyer, Alanis, Bonta, Jackson, Ortega, Santiago, Zbur
ABS, ABST OR NV: Lackey
ASM APPROPRIATIONS: 12-4-0
YES: Holden, Bryan, Calderon, Wendy Carrillo, Mike Fong, Hart, Lowenthal, Papan, Pellerin, Robert Rivas, Weber, Wilson
NO: Megan Dahle, Dixon, Mathis, Sanchez
UPDATED
VERSION: March 14, 2023
CONSULTANT: Cheryl Anderson / PUB. S. / (916) 319-3744 FN: 0000303
Date of Hearing: May 3, 2023
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Chris Holden, Chair
ABPCA Bill Id:AB 1643
Author:(Bauer-Kahan) – As Amended Ver:March 14, 2023
Policy Committee: | Public Safety | Vote: | 7 - 0 |
|
| ||
|
|
Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program: No Reimbursable: No
SUMMARY:
This bill increases the amount of victim restitution that a juvenile offender may owe and still be eligible for informal probation. The bill raises this victim restitution threshold from $1,000 to $5,000.
Specifically, this bill:
- Provides that a minor is not eligible for informal probation supervision if it appears that the minor has committed an offense in which victim restitution exceeds $5,000, except where the court determines that the interests of justice would best be served by informal probation.
- Provides that if a minor is alleged to have committed an offense in which victim restitution exceeds $5,000, a probation officers is required to commence proceedings within 48 hours.
FISCAL EFFECT:
Potential cost savings of an unknown amount to the courts (Trial Court Trust Fund). To the extent this bill diverts juveniles into informal probation instead of juvenile court proceedings, courts may experience some resulting savings. Savings would depend on the number of juveniles diverted who would otherwise have their cases resolved in juvenile court.
COMMENTS:
- Author’s Statement. According to the author:
Our laws have not kept up with our world. A $1,000 theft in the 1980’s is not the same as today. One iphone in a snatched purse can be the difference between rehabilitation and jail for a misguided youth offender. Informal probation has been repeatedly shown to improve outcomes for youth, diverting them away from the system and saving them from the traps of repeat offenses. Outdated financial barriers should not stand in the way of helping youth who would otherwise be eligible for diversion from the system.
- Background. Juvenile criminal offenses are generally adjudicated in juvenile court after a district attorney files a petition that commences a juvenile delinquency action. However, a juvenile that commits a lesser offense may be eligible for informal probation (also known as diversion) before the district attorney files a petition. If a probation officer determines that a minor is or will soon be within the juvenile court’s jurisdiction, the officer can supervise the minor on informal probation for up to six months to try to mitigate the situation that led them to commit the offense. Informal probation may also be offered at the court’s discretion. Informal supervision is a voluntary contract between the probation officer, the minor, and the parents or guardians, with the goal of diverting the minor away from the juvenile justice system. Additionally, a probation officer is required to refer certain cases to a prosecutor within 48 hours, including cases where it appears that the minor has committed an offense in which the restitution owed to the victim exceeds $1,000.
Under current law, absent court intervention, a minor is ineligible for informal probation when they owe victim restitution of more than $1,000. The amount of victim restitution owed is determined by the amount of economic loss the victim suffered as a result of the juvenile’s offense. For example, if a minor steals a $500 television, their victim restitution may be set at $500. The current $1,000 victim restitution threshold was established in 1989, and has not been updated since. This bill raises the victim restitution threshold to $5,000. As a result, juveniles who would be ineligible for informal probation under current law may be diverted into informal probation rather than face more serious consequences in the formal legal system.
Analysis Prepared by: Annika Carlson / APPR. / (916) 319-2081
Date of Hearing:
Counsel: Cheryl Anderson
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC SAFETY
Reginald Byron Jones-Sawyer, Sr., Chair
ABPCA Bill Id:AB 1643
Author:(Bauer-Kahan) – As Amended Ver:March 14, 2023
SUMMARY:
Increases the threshold amount of victim restitution which makes a minor presumptively ineligible for a program of informal supervision from $1,000 to $5,000. Specifically, this bill:
- Provides that a minor is not eligible for a program of informal supervision, except where the interests of justice would best be served and the court specifies on the record the reasons for its decision, if it appears that the minor has committed an offense in which victim restitution exceeds $5,000, instead of $1,000.
- Raises the amount which requires the probation officer to commence proceedings within 48 hours if the minor is alleged to have committed an offense in which victim restitution is owed, from exceeding $1,000 to exceeding $5,000.
EXISTING LAW:
- Subjects a minor between 12 and 17 years of age, inclusive, who violates any federal, state, or local law or ordinance, and a minor under 12 years of age who is alleged to have committed murder or a specified serious sex offense, to the jurisdiction of the juvenile court, which may adjudge the minor to be a ward of the court. (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 602.)
- States that, in a case where the probation officer concludes that a minor is within the jurisdiction of the juvenile court or will probably soon be within that jurisdiction, they may delineate a specific program of informal supervision for the minor instead of filing a petition to declare the minor a ward of the court, if the minor and the minor's parent or guardian consent. Restricts a program of informal supervision to six months. (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 654, subd. (a).)
- Provides that if a petition has been filed by the prosecuting attorney to declare a minor a ward of the court, the court may, without adjudging the minor a ward of the court and with the consent of the minor and the minor’s parents or guardian, continue any hearing on a petition for six months and order the minor to participate in a program of informal supervision. (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 654.2, subd. (a).)
- Excludes minors alleged to have committed certain offenses from participating in a program of informal supervision, except where the interest of justice would best be served and the court gives reasons on the record for its decision. Among minors presumptively excluded are those alleged to have committed an offense in which victim restitution exceeds $1,000. (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 654.3.)
- Prohibits a court from using a minor’s inability to pay restitution due to indigence as grounds for finding them ineligible for the program of supervision or a finding that the minor has failed to comply with the terms of the program of supervision. (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 654.3, subd. (a)(5)(A).)
- Requires the probation officer to refer specified cases to the prosecutor within 48 hours, including cases in which it appears to the probation officer that the minor has committed an offense in which the restitution owed to the victim exceeds $1,000. (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 653.5, subd. (c)(7).)
- Provides that, in order to preserve and protect a victim’s rights to justice and due process, a victim shall be entitled specified rights, including among others, restitution. (Cal. Const., art. I, § 28, subd. (b)(13).)
- States that it is the unequivocal intention of the People of the State of California that all persons who suffer losses as a result of criminal activity shall have the right to seek and secure restitution from the persons convicted of the crimes causing the losses they suffer. Cal. Const., art. I, § 28, subd. (b)(13)(A).)
- Provides that restitution shall be ordered from the convicted wrongdoer in every case, regardless of the sentence or disposition imposed, in which a crime victim suffers a loss. (Cal. Const., art. I, § 28, subd. (b)(13)(B).)
- Permits the juvenile court to, as appropriate, direct a minor under its jurisdiction to pay restitution to the victim or victims, and make a contribution to the victim restitution fund after all victim restitution orders and fines have been satisfied, in order to hold them accountable or restore the victim or community. (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 202, subd. (f).)
- States the intent of the Legislature that a victim who incurs an economic loss because of a minor’s conduct shall receive restitution directly from that minor. (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 730.6, subd. (a)(1).)
- Requires the court to order the minor to pay, in addition to any other penalty provided or imposed under the law, restitution to the victim or victims in the amount of losses, as determined. (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 730.6, subds. (a)(2)(B) & (h)(1).)
- Requires the court to order full restitution unless it finds compelling and extraordinary reasons for not doing so, and states them on the record. A minor’s inability to pay shall not be considered a compelling or extraordinary reason not to impose a restitution order, nor shall inability to pay be a consideration in determining the amount of the restitution order. (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 730.6, subd. (h)(1).)
FISCAL EFFECT:
Unknown
COMMENTS:
- Author's Statement: According to the author, “Our laws have not kept up with our world. A $1,000 theft in the 1980’s is not the same as today. One iphone in a snatched purse can be the difference between rehabilitation and jail for a misguided youth offender. Informal probation has been repeatedly shown to improve outcomes for youth, diverting them away from the system and saving them from the traps of repeat offenses. Outdated financial barriers should not stand in the way of helping youth who would otherwise be eligible for diversion from the system.”
- Informal Supervision (A Pre-Adjudication Diversion Program) Rather Than Wardship: Juvenile delinquency actions are begun by the filing of a petition under Welfare and Institutions Code section 602. The petition alleges criminal offenses and is brought by the district attorney.
But, the Welfare and Institutions Code provides an opportunity for pre-petition informal supervision, also known as diversion. (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 654.) If the probation officer concludes that the minor is within the juvenile court's jurisdiction, or likely soon will be, the officer can delineate a specific program of supervision for the minor for up to six months to try to adjust the situation that brings the minor within the juvenile court’s jurisdiction. (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 654; In re Adam R. (1997) 57 Cal.App.4th 348.) After the filing of a petition, the court may also offer informal supervision. (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 654.2.)
Informal supervision is a voluntary contract between the probation officer, the minor, and the parents or guardians. If the juvenile successfully completes this program, the case is then closed. If the juvenile is unsuccessful at any time during the six-month period, the probation department may make a referral to the district attorney's office for a formal petition to the juvenile court. (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 654.) Importantly, the court cannot require a minor to admit the truth of the petition before granting informal supervision. (In re Ricky J. (2005) 128 Cal.App.4th 783.)
Under current law, a number of circumstances render a minor presumptively ineligible for informal supervision. As relevant here, a minor presumptively ineligible for informal supervision where the petition alleges that the minor has committed an offense in which victim restitution exceeds $1,000. (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 654.3, subd. (a)(5).)
Further, probation is required to refer certain types of cases to the prosecutor within 48 hours. These include cases in which it appears to the probation officer that the minor has committed an offense in which the restitution owed to the victim exceeds $1,000. (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 653.5, subd. (b)(7).)
These dollar limits were established in 1989 – AB 332 (Nolan), Chapter 930, Statutes of 1989 and SB 1275 (Presley), Chapter 1117, Statutes of 1989. They have not been updated since.
This bill would increase the thresholds to $5,000. This reflects the effects of inflation and also recognizes that diversion of youth produces better outcomes for both the youth and public safety than formal processing through the juvenile justice system.
- Diverting Youth Away from the Juvenile Justice System: A “meta-analysis was conducted to shed some light on whether diversion reduces recidivism at a greater rate than traditional justice system processing and to explore aspects of diversion programs associated with greater reductions in recidivism . . .The results indicated that diversion is more effective in reducing recidivism than conventional judicial interventions.” (https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0093854812451089.)
Additionally, according to the National Center for Youth Law: “In 2016, more than 40,000 California youth were arrested or cited by law enforcement officers for misdemeanor and status offenses. A disproportionate number were children of color, children from lower socio-economic backgrounds, children with disabilities, girls, youth who identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, or queer, and foster children.
“This is troubling because system-involved youth suffer from abuse, abandonment, neglect, trauma and developmental disabilities that influence their behaviors. Rather than receive supports and services to address their needs, they are instead funneled into the justice system where they experience further harms, increasing their chances of re-incarceration.” (https://youthlaw.org/news/california-commits-nearly-60-million-divert-youth-away-jails-toward-supports.) - Argument in Support: According to Pacific Juvenile Defender Center, the sponsor of this bill, “The $1,000 threshold for minors to be informally supervised by probation or allowed to participate in informal supervision by the juvenile court has not been adjusted since first codified in 1989. Most obviously, the figure has not been adjusted for inflation. But even more importantly, the figure does not account for technological change: In 1989, smartphones — perhaps the most commonly-stolen technology item — had not yet been invented, let alone reached total ubiquity as today. Under the current statutory scheme, if a youth steals or damages an iPhone, even if the youth has no record and is doing well in all other aspects of their life, two decisions must follow. First, the youth must be referred to the DA’s Office for filing of charges and is not eligible for pre-filing diversion. Second, once charges are filed, the youth is presumptively ineligible for informal probation.
“A.B. 1643 will increase the presumptive disqualifying dollar threshold for informal supervision to $5,000. This is a common-sense change that recognizes that diversion of youth produces better outcomes for the youth and public safety than formal juvenile justice system processing. It also recognizes that there is a slim (if any) connection between a restitution amount and a youth’s likelihood of success on diversion….
“It has become well-recognized that diverting youth away from formal justice system processing for lower-level offenses leads to better, healthier, and more equitable outcomes for youth and the community, and permits diverted youth to connect to services without juvenile court involvement and extended contact with law enforcement. With the restitution threshold raised to $5,000, more youth will be able to access informal supervision and take advantage of the benefits of the program, allowing the harm caused by low-risk youth to be addressed outside of the formal juvenile justice system. The expansion of informal supervision will contribute to decreasing recidivism rates and increase the accessibility of community-based interventions. Youth who receive responses to their behavior that are restorative (rather than punitive) are healthier, less likely to recidivate, and more likely to repair harm. Research also shows that community-based strategies can increase public safety and lessen exposure to the justice system, reducing the need for the system to expend resources. As such, studies consistently recommend increasing community-based interventions like diversion, and reducing the detention of youth except when necessary for public safety.
“Moreover, allowing more youth to access informal supervision directly facilitates more equitable outcomes for youth of color, who are more likely to be criminalized for the same behavior and less likely to be given access to diversion. Specifically, Black and Latino youth who are referred to probation are more likely than white youth to have a petition filed for every category of offense. A.B. 1643 thus places an additional safeguard in place to protect youth of color from being ensnared in the juvenile justice system.
“The juvenile justice system strives to rehabilitate and support youth, and to remove them from the school-to-prison pipeline. Current law, however, reflects an outdated standard based on a disproven mentality of requiring formal system involvement for low-level offenses, and invokes a restitution metric that has no actual relation to whether a youth can be successful without formal system involvement. A.B. 1643 will help ensure that more youth are able to participate in community-based solutions.” (Footnotes omitted.) - Argument in Opposition: None on file.
- Related Legislation: AB 1186 (Bonta), would remove the ability of the court to require a minor to pay victim restitution. AB 1186 is the Assembly Appropriations Committee.
- Prior Legislation:
- SB 383 (Cortese), Chapter 603, Statutes of 2021, as relevant here, prohibited finding a minor ineligible for informal supervision or finding the minor has failed to comply with the terms of informal supervision where they are unable to pay victim restitution due to indigency.
- AB 901 (Gipson), Chapter 323, Statutes of 2020, as relevant here, removed the requirement that the probation officer refer to the prosecutor within 48 hours, cases in which the minor has previously been placed on informal probation.
- AB 901 (Gipson), Chapter 323, Statutes of 2020, as relevant here, removed the requirement that the probation officer refer to the prosecutor within 48 hours, cases in which the minor has previously been placed on informal probation.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:
Support
Pacific Juvenile Defender Center (Sponsor)
Anti Recidivism Coalition
California Public Defenders Association (CPDA)
Ceres Policy Research
Children's Defense Fund - CA
Communities United for Restorative Youth Justice (CURYJ)
Fresno Barrios Unidos
Haywood Burns Institute
Kids in Common
National Center for Youth Law
San Francisco Public Defender
Santa Clara County Juvenile Justice Commission
Santa Cruz Barrios Unidos INC.
The Young Women's Freedom Center
1 Private Individual
Opposition
None on file
Analysis Prepared by:
Cheryl Anderson / PUB. S. / (916) 319-3744
Discussed in Hearing
2MIN
Senate Floor
7MIN
Senate Standing Committee on Public Safety
1MIN
Assembly Floor
10MIN
Assembly Standing Committee on Public Safety
Bill Author
Bill Co-Author(s):
