Existing law requires a prisoner who has a severe mental disorder to be treated by the State Department of State Hospitals as a condition of parole. Existing law specifies the criteria for this parole condition to apply, and allows a prisoner to request a hearing before the Board of Parole Hearings for the purpose of proving that the prisoner meets the criteria. Existing law allows a prisoner who disagrees with the determination of the Board of Parole Hearings to file a petition in court for a hearing on whether they met the criteria. Existing law provides that if the determination of the Board of Parole Hearings is reversed, the court is to stay the execution of the decision for 5 working days to allow for an orderly release of the prisoner.

Existing law requires that specified persons released from prison, after serving a prison term for a felony, be subject to postrelease community supervision provided by a county agency for a period not exceeding 3 years immediately following release.

This bill would instead provide that if the determination of the Board of Parole Hearings is reversed, the court shall stay the execution of the decision for up to 30 days to allow for an orderly release of the prisoner, as specified.

The bill would require that if the determination of the Board of Parole Hearings is reversed, the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, upon a determination that the individual is eligible for release pursuant to postrelease community supervision provisions, notify the probation department of the county of supervision of the pending release within 5 working days of the court order and work with the county of supervision to coordinate the orderly and safe release of the prisoner.

Existing law requires a prisoner who has a severe mental disorder to be treated by the State Department of State Hospitals as a condition of parole. Existing law specifies the criteria for this parole condition to apply, and allows a prisoner to request a hearing before the Board of Parole Hearings for the purpose of proving that the prisoner meets the criteria. Existing law allows a prisoner who disagrees with the determination of the Board of Parole Hearings to file a petition in court for a hearing on whether they met the criteria. Existing law provides that if the determination of the Board of Parole Hearings is reversed, the court is to stay the execution of the decision for 5 working days to allow for an orderly release of the prisoner.

Existing law requires that specified persons released from prison, after serving a prison term for a felony, be subject to postrelease community supervision provided by a county agency for a period not exceeding 3 years immediately following release.

This bill would instead provide that if the determination of the Board of Parole Hearings is reversed, the court shall stay the execution of the decision for up to 30 days to allow for an orderly release of the prisoner, as specified.

The bill would require that if the determination of the Board of Parole Hearings is reversed, the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, upon a determination that the individual is eligible for release pursuant to postrelease community supervision provisions, notify the probation department of the county of supervision of the pending release within 5 working days of the court order and work with the county of supervision to coordinate the orderly and safe release of the prisoner.

Existing law requires a prisoner who has a severe mental disorder to be treated by the State Department of State Hospitals as a condition of parole. Existing law specifies the criteria for this parole condition to apply, and allows a prisoner to request a hearing before the Board of Parole Hearings for the purpose of proving that the prisoner meets the criteria. Existing law allows a prisoner who disagrees with the determination of the Board of Parole Hearings to file a petition in court for a hearing on whether they met the criteria. Existing law provides that if the determination of the Board of Parole Hearings is reversed, the court is to stay the execution of the decision for 5 working days to allow for an orderly release of the prisoner.

Existing law requires that specified persons released from prison, after serving a prison term for a felony, be subject to postrelease community supervision provided by a county agency for a period not exceeding 3 years immediately following release.

This bill would instead provide that if the determination of the Board of Parole Hearings is reversed, the court shall stay the execution of the decision for up to 30 working days to allow for an orderly release of the prisoner, as specified.

The bill would require that if the determination of the Board of Parole Hearings is reversed, the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, upon a determination that the individual is eligible for release pursuant to postrelease community supervision provisions, notify the probation department of the county of supervision of the pending release within 5 working days of the court order and work with the county of supervision to coordinate the orderly and safe release of the prisoner.

Existing law requires a prisoner who has a severe mental disorder to be treated by the State Department of State Hospitals as a condition of parole. Existing law specifies the criteria for this parole condition to apply, and allows a prisoner to request a hearing before the Board of Parole Hearings for the purpose of proving that the prisoner meets the criteria. Existing law allows a prisoner who disagrees with the determination of the Board of Parole Hearings to file a petition in court for a hearing on whether they met the criteria. Existing law provides that if the determination of the Board of Parole Hearings is reversed, the court is to stay the execution of the decision for 5 working days to allow for an orderly release of the prisoner.

Existing law requires that specified persons released from prison, after serving a prison term for a felony, be subject to postrelease community supervision provided by a county agency for a period not exceeding 3 years immediately following release.

This bill would instead provide that if the determination of the Board of Parole Hearings is reversed, the court shall stay the execution of the decision for up to 30 working days to allow for an orderly release of the prisoner. prisoner, as specified.

The bill would require that if the determination of the Board of Parole Hearings is reversed, the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, upon a determination that the individual is eligible for release pursuant to postrelease community supervision provisions, notify the probation department of the county of supervision of the pending release within 5 working days of the court order and work with the county of supervision to coordinate the orderly and safe release of the prisoner.

Existing law requires a prisoner who has a severe mental disorder to be treated by the State Department of State Hospitals as a condition of parole. Existing law specifies the criteria for this parole condition to apply, and allows a prisoner to request a hearing before the Board of Parole Hearings for the purpose of proving that the prisoner meets the criteria. Existing law allows a prisoner who disagrees with the determination of the Board of Parole Hearings to file a petition in court for a hearing on whether they met the criteria. Existing law provides that if the determination of the Board of Parole Hearings is reversed, the court is to stay the execution of the decision for 5 working days to allow for an orderly release of the prisoner.

Existing law requires that specified persons released from prison, after serving a prison term for a felony, be subject to postrelease community supervision provided by a county agency for a period not exceeding 3 years immediately following release.

This bill would instead provide that if the determination of the Board of Parole Hearings is reversed, the court shall stay the execution of the decision for 30 working days to allow for an orderly release of the prisoner.

The bill would require that if the determination of the Board of Parole Hearings is reversed, the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, upon a determination that the individual is eligible for release pursuant to postrelease community supervision provisions, notify the probation department of the county of supervision of the pending release within 5 working days of the court order and work with the county of supervision to coordinate the orderly and safe release of the prisoner.

 THIRD READING  

Bill No: AB 2475

Author: Haney (D)

Amended: 4/1/24 in Assembly

Vote: 21

SENATE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE: 5-0, 6/25/24

AYES: Wahab, Seyarto, Bradford, Skinner, Wiener

SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE: 7-0, 8/15/24

AYES: Caballero, Jones, Ashby, Becker, Bradford, Seyarto, Wahab

ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 72-0, 5/22/24 - See last page for vote

SUBJECT: Parole

SOURCE: San Francisco Mayor London Breed

DIGEST:

This bill requires a court to stay the execution of a decision determining an incarcerated person is not an offender with a mental health disorder (OMHD) for up to 30 days, instead of the current five working days, in order to allow for the person’s orderly release.

ANALYSIS:

Existing law:

1. Allows the Board of Parole Hearings (BPH), upon a showing of good cause, to order an incarcerated person to remain in custody for up to 45 days past the person’s scheduled release date for a full OMHD evaluation. (Pen. Code, § 2963, subd. (a).)
2. Requires incarcerated persons who meet the following criteria to be deemed an OMHD and be treated by the Department of State Hospitals (DSH) as a condition of parole:
3. The incarcerated person has a severe mental health disorder, as defined, that is not in remission or that cannot be kept in remission without treatment.
4. The severe mental health disorder was one of the causes of, or was an aggravating factor in, the commission of a crime for which the person was sentenced to prison.
5. The incarcerated person has been in treatment for the severe mental health disorder for 90 days or more within the year prior to the person’s parole or release.
6. The person’s severe mental health disorder indicates that the person represents a substantial danger of physical harm to others. (Pen. Code, § 2962, subd. (a)-(d).)
7. Requires an OMHD to receive inpatient treatment unless there is reasonable cause to believe that the person can be safely and effectively treated on an outpatient basis. Provides that if DSH has not placed the person on outpatient treatment within 60 days after receiving custody of the parolee, the person may request a hearing before BPH to determine whether outpatient treatment is appropriate. Provides that the burden is on DSH to establish that the person requires inpatient treatment. (Pen. Code, § 2964.)
8. Allows the incarcerated person to request a hearing before BPH for the purpose of proving that the prisoner meets the OMHD criteria. Provides that the burden of proof is on the person or agency who certified the person as an OMHD. Requires the incarcerated person to be informed at the hearing of the right to request a trial. (Pen. Code, § 2966, subd. (a).)
9. Allows the incarcerated person to challenge BPH’s OMHD determination by filing a petition for a hearing in the superior court of the county in which the person is incarcerated. Requires the court to conduct a hearing on the petition within 60 calendar days after the petition is filed, unless either time is waived by the petitioner or the petitioner’s counsel or good cause is shown. (Pen. Code, § 2966, subd. (b).)
10. Provides that the incarcerated person has the right to a jury trial and the right to be represented by an attorney. Provides that the standard of proof is beyond a reasonable doubt, and if the trial is by jury, the jury verdict must be unanimous. Requires that the trial be by jury unless waived by both the person and the district attorney. (Pen. Code, § 2966, subd. (b).)
11. Requires the court to stay the execution of the decision for five working days to allow for an orderly release of the person if the OMHD determination made by BPH is reversed by a judge or jury. (Pen. Code, § 2966, subd. (b).)
12. Requires DSH to discontinue treatment if the person’s severe mental disorder is put into remission during the parole period and can be kept in remission. (Pen. Code, § 2968.)
13. Requires the medical director of the state hospital that is treating the parolee, or the community program director in charge of the parolee’s outpatient program, or the Secretary of the CDCR to notify the district attorney not later than 180 days before the termination of parole, if the person’s severe mental disorder is not in remission or cannot be kept in remission without treatment. (Pen. Code, § 2970, subd. (a).)
14. Allows the district attorney to file a petition in the superior court for continued involuntary treatment for one year. (Pen. Code, § 2970, subd. (b).)
15. Requires the following persons released from prison be subject to parole under the supervision of CDCR:
16. A person who committed a serious felony listed in Penal Code section 1192.7, subdivision (c);
17. A person who committed a violent felony listed in Penal Code section 667.5, subdivision (c);
18. A person serving a Three-Strikes sentence;
19. A high-risk sex offender;
20. A mentally disordered offender;
21. A person required to register as a sex offender and subject to a parole term exceeding three years at the time of the commission of the offense for which he or she is being released; and,
22. A person subject to lifetime parole at the time of the commission of the offense for which he or she is being released. (Pen. Code, §§ 3000.08, subd. (a) & 3451, subd. (b).)
23. Requires all other offenders released from prison to be placed on post-release community supervision by the probation department. (Pen. Code, §§ 3000.08, subd. (b) & 3451, subd. (a).)

This bill:

1. Requires the court to stay the execution of the decision determining an incarcerated person is not an OMHD for up to 30 days, instead of five work days, in order to allow for their orderly release.
2. Provides that the court may require the parties to return to court during those 30 days to ensure that the parties involved in the release of the person have coordinated an exit plan for the incarcerated person.
3. Requires CDCR to notify the probation department of the county of supervision of the pending release within five working days of the court order.
4. Requires CDCR to work with the county of supervision to coordinate the orderly and safe return of the prisoner.
5. Makes technical, non-substantive changes.

Background

An OMHD commitment, formerly known as a mentally disordered offender commitment, is a post-prison civil commitment to further detain a person with a severe mental health disorder. The OMHD Act is designed to confine a mentally ill individual who is about to be released on parole when it is deemed that that the person’s mental illness not only contributed to the commission of a violent crime, but also continues to make them dangerous to others. Rather than release the person to the community, CDCR paroles the incarcerated person to the supervision of the state hospital, and the individual remains under hospital supervision throughout the parole period.

Penal Code section 2962 lists the criteria that must be proven for an initial OMHD certification, namely, whether: the incarcerated person has a severe mental disorder; the severe mental disorder was one of the causes or an aggravating factor in the commission of the offense; the disorder is not in remission or capable of being kept in remission without treatment; the incarcerated person was treated for the disorder for at least 90 days in the year before their release; and by reason of the severe mental disorder, the person poses a substantial danger of physical harm to others. (Pen. Code, § 2962, subds. (a)-(d).)

The initial determination that the incarcerated person meets the OMHD criteria is made administratively. The person in charge of treating the incarcerated person and a practicing psychiatrist or psychologist from the DSH evaluate the incarcerated person. If it appears that the incarcerated person qualifies, the chief psychiatrist then will certify to BPH that the person meets the criteria of an OMHD.

The incarcerated person may request a hearing before BPH to require proof that they qualify as an OMHD. If the BPH determines that the person meets the criteria of an OMHD, the person may file a petition in the superior court of the county in which they are incarcerated or are being treated for a hearing on whether they, as of the date of the board hearing, meet the criteria. (Pen. Code, § 2966, subd. (a).) The person is entitled to a jury trial, which can be waived. The jury must unanimously agree that the allegations of the petition were proven beyond a reasonable doubt. If the superior court or jury reverses the BPH determination, the court is required to stay the execution of the decision for five working days to allow for an orderly release of the prisoner. (Pen. Code, § 2966, subd. (b).)

If the court determines that an individual does not meet the criteria of an OMHD and must be released, the order is stayed for five working days to allow time for the person’s orderly release. The author of this bill asserts that the current timeframe—five working days—is not a reasonable amount of time for all of the relevant agencies to coordinate the safe release of the person back into the community. This bill extends the timeframe for release from 5 working days to up to 30 days.

FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes Local: No

According to the Senate Appropriations Committee:

Workload cost pressures (General Fund) to DSH associated with discharge planning and coordination efforts with the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR). DSH notes that extending an OMD’s length of stay can impact DSH’s bed capacity given the extra days stayed by an OMD would be utilized beds that another patient awaiting admission could occupy. To the extent DSH continues to encounter bed capacity pressures, additional solutions may be needed to support the demand for services. Furthermore, DSH would bear the cost of the additional bed days beyond five, and in Fiscal Year 2022-23, the average daily cost of care per patient is approximately $940 per day. DSH estimates the General Fund costs to be in the low hundreds of thousands to low millions of dollars to the extent that the additional bed days for OMDs cannot be absorbed in existing bed capacity. DSH will need to monitor the impacts of this bill to determine if additional bed capacity is needed in the future.

SUPPORT: (Verified 8/15/24)

San Francisco Mayor London Breed (source)

California Association of Psychiatric Technicians

Chief Probation Officers of California

OPPOSITION: (Verified 8/15/24)

None received

ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 72-0, 5/22/24

AYES: Addis, Aguiar-Curry, Alanis, Alvarez, Arambula, Bains, Bauer-Kahan, Bennett, Berman, Boerner, Bonta, Bryan, Juan Carrillo, Wendy Carrillo, Chen, Connolly, Davies, Dixon, Flora, Mike Fong, Vince Fong, Gabriel, Gallagher, Garcia, Gipson, Grayson, Haney, Hart, Hoover, Irwin, Jackson, Jones-Sawyer, Kalra, Lackey, Lee, Low, Lowenthal, Maienschein, McCarty, McKinnor, Muratsuchi, Stephanie Nguyen, Ortega, Pacheco, Papan, Jim Patterson, Joe Patterson, Pellerin, Petrie-Norris, Quirk-Silva, Ramos, Rendon, Reyes, Rodriguez, Blanca Rubio, Sanchez, Santiago, Schiavo, Soria, Ta, Ting, Valencia, Villapudua, Waldron, Wallis, Ward, Weber, Wicks, Wilson, Wood, Zbur, Robert Rivas

NO VOTE RECORDED: Calderon, Cervantes, Megan Dahle, Essayli, Friedman, Holden, Mathis, Luz Rivas

Prepared by: Stephanie Jordan / PUB. S. /

8/18/24 9:19:12

**** END ****

SENATE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS

Senator Anna Caballero, Chair

2023 - 2024 Regular Session

AB 2475 (Haney) - Parole

Bill Summary:

AB 2475 extends, from five to 30 days, the amount of time that a court must stay its decision when the court orders release of an offender with a mental health disorder (OMHD) from the Department of State Hospitals (DSH).

Fiscal Impact:

Workload cost pressures (General Fund) to DSH associated with discharge planning and coordination efforts with the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR). DSH notes that extending an OMD’s length of stay can impact DSH’s bed capacity given the extra days stayed by an OMD would be utilized beds that another patient awaiting admission could occupy. To the extent DSH continues to encounter bed capacity pressures, additional solutions may be needed to support the demand for services. Furthermore, DSH would bear the cost of the additional bed days beyond five, and in Fiscal Year 2022-23, the average daily cost of care per patient is approximately $940 per day. DSH estimates the General Fund costs to be in the low hundreds of thousands to low millions of dollars to the extent that the additional bed days for OMDs cannot be absorbed in existing bed capacity. DSH will need to monitor the impacts of this bill to determine if additional bed capacity is needed in the future. (See Staff Comments)

Background:

An OMHD commitment is a post-prison civil commitment that detains a person with a severe mental health disorder who would otherwise be released on parole from the CDCR. After multiple stages of evaluation and review by the person in charge of the offender’s treatment at CDCR, a DSH psychiatrist or psychologist, DSH’s chief psychiatrist, and BPH, an offender that meets the OMHD criteria is paroled to a DSH facility under a civil commitment instead of being released to the community. The OMHD process also includes ongoing reviews by BPH to determine whether the offender still meets OMHD criteria and must remain in DSH custody. An offender is entitled to file a petition in court seeking a hearing to challenge the determination that they still meet the OMHD criteria. If, after a hearing or jury trial, the court determines that the offender no longer meets the criteria that justify their OMHD commitment, the court orders their release.

Under existing law, the court must stay its release order for a period of five days to allow for the orderly release of the offender. During the period of the stay, the offender remains in DSH custody. According to proponents of this measure, five days is not enough time to adequately address an offender’s housing, medical, and mental health treatment planning needs before they are released.

Proposed Law:

This bill requires the court to stay its release order for 30 days to provide more time for CDCR, DSH, and other pertinent parties to coordinate an offender’s release from DSH.

Staff Comments: In fiscal year 2022-23, DSH reports it served 719 OMHDs with an average daily census of 350, and discharged 318 OMHDs from inpatient programs. The number of those released pursuant to a court order is unknown. Given the average daily cost of care per DSH patient is $940 if, each year, DSH must house seven or more OMHDs for an additional 25 days each due to this bill, costs to DSH will exceed this committee’s suspense threshold.

-- END --

SENATE COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC SAFETY

Senator Aisha Wahab, Chair

2023 - 2024 Regular

Bill No: AB 2475 Hearing Date: June 25, 2024

Subject: Parole

HISTORY

Source: San Francisco Mayor London Breed

Prior Legislation: AB 1065 (Holden), held in Assembly Appropriations 2014

Support: California Association of Psychiatric Technicians

Opposition: None known

Assembly Floor Vote: 72 - 0

PURPOSE

The purpose of this bill is to requires a court to stay the execution of a decision determining an incarcerated person is not an offender with a mental health disorder (OMHD) for up to 30 days, instead of the current five working days, in order to allow for the person’s orderly release.

Existing law allows the Board of Parole Hearings (BPH), upon a showing of good cause, to order an incarcerated person to remain in custody for up to 45 days past the person’s scheduled release date for a full OMHD evaluation. (Pen. Code, § 2963, subd. (a).)

Existing law requires incarcerated persons who meet the following criteria to be deemed an OMHD and be treated by the Department of State Hospitals (DSH) as a condition of parole:

• The incarcerated person has a severe mental health disorder, as defined, that is not in remission or that cannot be kept in remission without treatment.
• The severe mental health disorder was one of the causes of, or was an aggravating factor in, the commission of a crime for which the person was sentenced to prison.
• The incarcerated person has been in treatment for the severe mental health disorder for 90 days or more within the year prior to the person’s parole or release.
• The person’s severe mental health disorder indicates that the person represents a substantial danger of physical harm to others.

(Pen. Code, § 2962, subd. (a)-(d).)

Existing law requires an OMHD to receive inpatient treatment unless there is reasonable cause to believe that the person can be safely and effectively treated on an outpatient basis. Provides that if DSH has not placed the person on outpatient treatment within 60 days after receiving custody of the parolee, the person may request a hearing before BPH to determine whether outpatient treatment is appropriate. Provides that the burden is on DSH to establish that the person requires inpatient treatment. (Pen. Code, § 2964.)

Existing law allows the incarcerated person to request a hearing before BPH for the purpose of proving that the prisoner meets the OMHD criteria. Provides that the burden of proof is on the person or agency who certified the person as an OMHD. Requires the incarcerated person to be informed at the hearing of the right to request a trial. (Pen. Code, § 2966, subd. (a).)

Existing law allows the incarcerated person to challenge BPH’s OMHD determination by filing a petition for a hearing in the superior court of the county in which the person is incarcerated. Requires the court to conduct a hearing on the petition within 60 calendar days after the petition is filed, unless either time is waived by the petitioner or the petitioner’s counsel or good cause is shown. (Pen. Code, § 2966, subd. (b).)

Existing law provides that the incarcerated person has the right to a jury trial and the right to be represented by an attorney. Provides that the standard of proof is beyond a reasonable doubt, and if the trial is by jury, the jury verdict must be unanimous. Requires that the trial be by jury unless waived by both the person and the district attorney. (Pen. Code, § 2966, subd. (b).)

Existing law requires the court to stay the execution of the decision for five working days to allow for an orderly release of the person if the OMHD determination made by BPH is reversed by a judge or jury. (Pen. Code, § 2966, subd. (b).)

Existing law requires DSH to discontinue treatment if the person’s severe mental disorder is put into remission during the parole period and can be kept in remission. (Pen. Code, § 2968.)

Existing law requires the medical director of the state hospital that is treating the parolee, or the community program director in charge of the parolee’s outpatient program, or the Secretary of the CDCR to notify the district attorney not later than 180 days before the termination of parole, if the person’s severe mental disorder is not in remission or cannot be kept in remission without treatment. (Pen. Code, § 2970, subd. (a).)

Existing law allows the district attorney to file a petition in the superior court for continued involuntary treatment for one year. (Pen. Code, § 2970, subd. (b).)

Existing law requires the following persons released from prison be subject to parole under the supervision of CDCR:

• A person who committed a serious felony listed in Penal Code section 1192.7, subdivision (c);
• A person who committed a violent felony listed in Penal Code section 667.5, subdivision (c);
• A person serving a Three-Strikes sentence;
• A high-risk sex offender;
• A mentally disordered offender;
• A person required to register as a sex offender and subject to a parole term exceeding three years at the time of the commission of the offense for which he or she is being released; and,
• A person subject to lifetime parole at the time of the commission of the offense for which he or she is being released.

(Pen. Code, §§ 3000.08, subd. (a) & 3451, subd. (b).)

Existing law requires all other offenders released from prison to be placed on post-release community supervision by the probation department. (Pen. Code, §§ 3000.08, subd. (b) & 3451, subd. (a).)

This bill requires the court to stay the execution of the decision determining an incarcerated person is not an OMHD for up to 30 days, instead of five work days, in order to allow for their orderly release.

This bill provides that the court may require the parties to return to court during those 30 days to ensure that the parties involved in the release of the person have coordinated an exit plan for the incarcerated person.

This bill requires CDCR to notify the probation department of the county of supervision of the pending release within five working days of the court order.

This bill requires CDCR to work with the county of supervision to coordinate the orderly and safe return of the prisoner.

This bill makes technical, non-substantive changes.

COMMENTS

1. Need For This Bill

According to the author:

People who have a history of violent behavior and suffer from severe mental disorders need an effective support and transition plan to help them safely come back to the community. AB 2475 will increase the mental health treatment planning window from five days to up to thirty days, by stay of the court for these parolees. This additional time will allow the Department of State Hospitals, State Parole, and local agencies to coordinate housing, supervision, medication, and mental health services they need for their safety and the safety of the community.

These individuals often need intensive care and supervision and have complex treatment plans. They deserve adequate time and attention from state and local agencies to help plan for their success and reintegration back into the community. We know that rushed decisions can lead to tragic outcomes. The current system is setting up parolees for failure and also threatens public safety.

1. OMHD Commitment

An OMHD commitment, formerly known as a mentally disordered offender commitment, is a post-prison civil commitment to further detain a person with a severe mental health disorder. The OMHD Act is designed to confine a mentally ill individual who is about to be released on parole when it is deemed that that the person’s mental illness not only contributed to the commission of a violent crime, but also continues to make them dangerous to others. Rather than release the person to the community, CDCR paroles the incarcerated person to the supervision of the state hospital, and the individual remains under hospital supervision throughout the parole period.

Penal Code section 2962 lists the criteria that must be proven for an initial OMHD certification, namely, whether: the incarcerated person has a severe mental disorder; the severe mental disorder was one of the causes or an aggravating factor in the commission of the offense; the disorder is not in remission or capable of being kept in remission without treatment; the incarcerated person was treated for the disorder for at least 90 days in the year before their release; and by reason of the severe mental disorder, the person poses a substantial danger of physical harm to others. (Pen. Code, § 2962, subds. (a)-(d).)

The initial determination that the incarcerated person meets the OMHD criteria is made administratively. The person in charge of treating the incarcerated person and a practicing psychiatrist or psychologist from the DSH evaluate the incarcerated person. If it appears that the incarcerated person qualifies, the chief psychiatrist then will certify to BPH that the person meets the criteria of an OMHD.

The incarcerated person may request a hearing before BPH to require proof that they qualify as an OMHD. If the BPH determines that the person meets the criteria of an OMHD, the person may file a petition in the superior court of the county in which they are incarcerated or are being treated for a hearing on whether they, as of the date of the board hearing, meet the criteria. (Pen. Code, § 2966, subd. (a).) The person is entitled to a jury trial, which can be waived. The jury must unanimously agree that the allegations of the petition were proven beyond a reasonable doubt. If the superior court or jury reverses the BPH determination, the court is required to stay the execution of the decision for five working days to allow for an orderly release of the prisoner. (Pen. Code, § 2966, subd. (b).)

1. Timeframe for Notice of Release

If the court determines that an individual does not meet the criteria of an OMHD and must be released, the order is stayed for five working days to allow time for the person’s orderly release. The author of this bill asserts that the current timeframe—five working days—is not a reasonable amount of time for all of the relevant agencies to coordinate the safe release of the person back into the community. This bill extends the timeframe for release from 5 working days to up to 30 days.

1. Argument in Support

According to the California Association of Psychiatric Technicians:

As the representative body for approximately 5,000 licensed psychiatric technicians (PT) employed across various state agencies such as the CDCR and the DSH that treats offenders with mental disorders, we are keenly aware of the challenges faced when an inmate/patient is set to be released into the community. AB 2475 increases the number of planning days that a state hospital must hold a parolee who has committed a violent crime because of a severe mental disorder. Increasing preparation days from five to up to thirty days ensures that our staff have the time to develop treatment plans that can be followed upon an individual's release.

Under current law, the five-day planning time is simply not enough to coordinate all the necessary services to ensure someone with a mental disorder and a propensity for violence can be safely released into an unsuspecting community. The thirty-day time frame, as proposed in this bill, is much more realistic and gives the inmate/patient a greater chance of success as resources and supervision will be addressed in their conditional release plan.

-- END --

ASSEMBLY THIRD READING

ATR Bill Id:AB 2475

Author:(Haney)

As Amended Ver:April 1, 2024

Majority vote

SUMMARY

Requires the court to stay the execution of the decision determining an incarcerated person is not an offender with a mental health disorder (OMHD) for up to 30 days, instead of five working days, in order to allow for their orderly release.

Major Provisions

1. Requires the court to stay the execution of the decision determining an incarcerated person is not an OMHD for up to 30 days, instead of five work days, in order to allow for their orderly release.
2. Allows the parties to return to court during that time period to ensure that the parties have coordinated an exit plan for the incarcerated person.
3. Requires the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) to notify the probation department of the county of supervision of the pending release within five working days of the court order.
4. Requires CDCR to work with the county of supervision to coordinate the orderly and safe return of the prisoner.
5. Makes technical, non-substantive changes.

COMMENTS

1. The OMHD Act (Penal Code Section 2960 et seq.): An OMHD commitment, formerly known as a mentally disordered offender commitment, is a post-prison civil commitment to further detain a person with a severe mental health disorder. The OMHD Act is designed to confine as mentally ill an inmate who is about to be released on parole when it is deemed that that their mental illness not only contributed to the commission of a violent crime, but also continues to make them dangerous to others. Rather than release the person to the community, CDCR paroles the incarcerated person to the supervision of the state hospital, and the individual remains under hospital supervision throughout the parole period.

Penal Code Section 2962 lists several criteria that must be proven for an initial OMHD certification, namely, whether: the incarcerated person has a severe mental disorder; the severe mental disorder was one of the causes or an aggravating factor in the commission of the offense; the disorder is not in remission or capable of being kept in remission without treatment; the incarcerated person was treated for the disorder for at least 90 days in the year before their release; and (6) by reason of the severe mental disorder, the person poses a substantial danger of physical harm to others. (Penal Code, Section 2962, subds. (a)-(d); People v. Cobb, supra, 48 Cal.4th at pp. 251-252.)

The incarcerated person may request a hearing before the BPH to require proof that they qualify as an OMHD. If the BPH determines that the person meets the criteria of an OMHD, the person may file a petition in the superior court of the county in which they are incarcerated or are being treated for a hearing on whether they, as of the date of the board hearing, meet the criteria. The person is entitled to a jury trial, which can be waived. The jury must unanimously agree that the allegations of the petition were proven beyond a reasonable doubt. If the superior court or jury reverses the determination of the BPH, the court is required to stay the execution of the decision for five working days to allow for an orderly release of the prisoner. (Penal Code, Section 2966, subd. (b).)

1. Timeframe for Notice of Release: According to background information provided by the author, "Right now, there is an unrealistic expectation that all agencies involved have the resources and bandwidth to safely place a parolee back to the community within five days. However, it is nearly impossible for this to happen given the level of coordination involved in getting the person situated with their medication, housing, and mental health treatment plan. This short timeframe creates safety concerns for the patient as well as for the community in which they are placed."

This bill would extend the timeframe for release from five working days to up to 30 days maximum.

According to the Author

"People who have a history of violent behavior and suffer from severe mental disorders need an effective support and transition plan to help them safely come back to the community. AB 2475 will increase the mental health treatment planning window from five days to up to 30 days, by stay of the court for these parolees. This additional time will allow the Department of State Hospitals, State Parole, and local agencies to coordinate housing, supervision, medication, and mental health services they need for their safety and the safety of the community.

"These individuals often need intensive care and supervision and have complex treatment plans. They deserve adequate time and attention from state and local agencies to help plan for their success and reintegration back into the community. We know that rushed decisions can lead to tragic outcomes. The current system is setting up parolees for failure and also threatens public safety."

Arguments in Support

According to the California Association of Psychiatric Technicians, "As the representative body for approximately 5,000 licensed psychiatric technicians (PT) employed across various state agencies such as the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) and the Department of State Hospitals (DSH) that treats offenders with mental disorders, we are keenly aware of the challenges faced when an inmate/patient is set to be released into the community. AB 2475 increases the number of planning days that a state hospital must hold a parolee who has committed a violent crime because of a severe mental disorder. Increasing preparation days from five to up to 30 days ensures that our staff have the time to develop treatment plans that can be followed upon an individual's release.

"Under current law, the five-day planning time is simply not enough to coordinate all the necessary services to ensure someone with a mental disorder and a propensity for violence can be safely released into an unsuspecting community. The 30-day time frame, as proposed in this bill, is much more realistic and gives the inmate/patient a greater chance of success as resources and supervision will be addressed in their conditional release plan."

Arguments in Opposition

None Submitted.

FISCAL COMMENTS

According to the Assembly Appropriations Committee, "Costs to DSH (General Fund) to house OMHDs for additional time as required by this bill, possibly in the hundreds of thousands of dollars annually. In fiscal year (FY) 2022-23, DSH reports it served 719 OMHDs with an average daily census of 350, and discharged 318 OMHDs from inpatient programs. The number of those offenders released pursuant to a court order is unknown. For FY 2022-23, the average daily cost of care per DSH patient was $940. If, each year, DSH must house seven or more OMHDs for an additional 25 days each due to this bill, costs to DSH will exceed this committee's suspense threshold. DSH notes that extending an OMHD's length of stay can impact DSH's overall bed capacity by reducing the number of beds that would otherwise be available. To the extent this bill exacerbates DSH's existing bed capacity pressures, the department may also seek additional funding.

According to the Legislative Analyst's Office, the General Fund faces a structural deficit in the tens of billions of dollars over the next several fiscal years."

VOTES

ASM PUBLIC SAFETY: 8-0-0

YES: McCarty, Alanis, Lackey, Stephanie Nguyen, Reyes, Ting, Wilson, Zbur

ASM APPROPRIATIONS: 15-0-0

YES: Wicks, Sanchez, Arambula, Bryan, Calderon, Wendy Carrillo, Dixon, Mike Fong, Grayson, Haney, Hart, Jim Patterson, Pellerin, Ta, Villapudua

UPDATED

VERSION: April 01, 2024

CONSULTANT: Sandy Uribe / PUB. S. / (916) 319-3744 FN: 0003148

Date of Hearing: April 17, 2024

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS

Buffy Wicks, Chair

ABPCA Bill Id:AB 2475

Author:(Haney) – As Amended Ver:April 1, 2024

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

SUMMARY:

This bill extends, from five to 30 days, the amount of time that a court must stay its decision when the court orders release of an offender with a mental health disorder (OMHD) from the Department of State Hospitals (DSH).

FISCAL EFFECT:

Costs to DSH (General Fund) to house OMHDs for additional time as required by this bill, possibly in the hundreds of thousands of dollars annually. In fiscal year (FY) 2022-23, DSH reports it served 719 OMHDs with an average daily census of 350, and discharged 318 OMHDs from inpatient programs. The number of those offenders released pursuant to a court order is unknown. For FY 2022-23, the average daily cost of care per DSH patient was $940. If, each year, DSH must house seven or more OMHDs for an additional 25 days each due to this bill, costs to DSH will exceed this committee’s suspense threshold. DSH notes that extending an OMHD’s length of stay can impact DSH’s overall bed capacity by reducing the number of beds that would otherwise be available. To the extent this bill exacerbates DSH’s existing bed capacity pressures, the department may also seek additional funding.

According to the Legislative Analyst’s Office, the General Fund faces a structural deficit in the tens of billions of dollars over the next several fiscal years. 

COMMENTS:

1. Purpose. According to the author:

People who have a history of violent behavior and suffer from severe mental disorders need an effective support and transition plan to help them safely come back to the community. AB 2475 will increase the mental health treatment planning window from five days to up to thirty days, by stay of the court for these parolees. This additional time will allow the Department of State Hospitals, State Parole, and local agencies to coordinate housing, supervision, medication, and mental health services they need for their safety and the safety of the community.

These individuals often need intensive care and supervision and have complex treatment plans. They deserve adequate time and attention from state and local agencies to help plan for their success and reintegration back into the community.

1. Background. An OMHD commitment is a post-prison civil commitment that detains a person with a severe mental health disorder who would otherwise be released on parole from the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR). After multiple stages of evaluation and review by the person in charge of the offender’s treatment at CDCR, a DSH psychiatrist or psychologist, DSH’s chief psychiatrist, and BPH, an offender that meets the OMHD criteria is paroled to a DSH facility under a civil commitment instead of being released to the community. The OMHD process also includes ongoing reviews by BPH to determine whether the offender still meets OMHD criteria and must remain in DSH custody. An offender is entitled to file a petition in court seeking a hearing to challenge the determination that they still meet the OMHD criteria. If, after a hearing or jury trial, the court determines that the offender no longer meets the criteria that justify their OMHD commitment, the court orders their release.

Under existing law, the court must stay its release order for a period of five days to allow for the orderly release of the offender. During the period of the stay, the offender remains in DSH custody. According to proponents of this measure, five days is not enough time to adequately address an offender’s housing, medical, and mental health treatment planning needs before they are released. This bill requires the court to instead stay its release order for 30 days to provide more time for BPH, DSH, and other pertinent parties to coordinate an offender’s release from DSH.

Analysis Prepared by: Annika Carlson / APPR. / (916) 319-2081

Date of Hearing:

Chief Counsel: Sandy Uribe

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC SAFETY

Kevin McCarty, Chair

ABPCA Bill Id:AB 2475

Author:(Haney) – As Amended Ver:March 13, 2024

As Proposed to be Amended in Committee

SUMMARY:

Requires the court to stay the execution of the decision determining an incarcerated person is not an offender with a mental health disorder (OMHD) for up to 30 days, instead of five working days, in order to allow for their orderly release. Specifically, this bill:

1. Requires the court to stay the execution of the decision determining an incarcerated person is not an OMHD for up to 30 days, instead of five work days, in order to allow for their orderly release.
   
2. Allows the parties to return to court during that time period to ensure that the parties have coordinated an exit plan for the incarcerated person.
   
3. Requires the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) to notify the probation department of the county of supervision of the pending release within five working days of the court order.
   
4. Requires CDCR to work with the county of supervision to coordinate the orderly and safe return of the prisoner.
   
5. Makes technical, non-substantive changes.

EXISTING LAW:

1. Allows the Board of Parole Hearings (BPH), upon a showing of good cause, to order an incarcerated person to remain in custody for up to 45 days past the scheduled release date for a full OMHD evaluation. (Pen. Code, § 2963, subd. (a).)
   
2. Requires incarcerated persons who meet the following criteria to be deemed an OMHD and be treated by the Department of State Hospitals (DSH) as a condition of parole:
   
   1. The incarcerated person has a severe mental disorder, as defined, that is not in remission or cannot be kept in remission without treatment;
      
   2. The severe mental disorder was one of the causes or an aggravating factor in the commission of the offense;
      
   3. The person was treated for the disorder for at least 90 days in the year before their release; and,
      
   4. By reason of the severe mental disorder, the person poses a substantial danger of physical harm to others. (Pen. Code, § 2962.)
      
3. Requires an OMHD to receive inpatient treatment unless there is reasonable cause to believe that the person can be safely and effectively treated on an outpatient basis. If the hospital does not place the person on outpatient treatment within 60 days of receiving custody of the parolee, they may request to hearing to determine whether outpatient treatment is appropriate. (Pen. Code, § 2964.)
   
4. Allows the incarcerated person to challenge the OMHD determination both administratively (at a hearing before the BPH) and judicially (via a superior court jury trial). (Pen. Code, § 2966.)
   
5. Provides that if the OMHD determination made by BPH is reversed by a judge or jury, the court shall stay the execution of the decision for five working days to allow for an orderly release of the person. (Pen. Code, § 2966, subd. (b).)
   
6. Specifies that if the person’s severe mental disorder is put into remission during the parole period and can be kept that way, the director of DSH shall notify the BPH and shall discontinue treatment. (Pen. Code, § 2968.)
   
7. Provides that not later than 180 days before the termination of parole, if the person’s severe mental disorder is not in remission or cannot be kept that way without treatment, the director of DSH, or the program director in charge of the person’s outpatient treatment, or the CDCR Secretary shall notify the district attorney. (Pen. Code, § 2970, subd. (a).)
   
8. Allows the district attorney to file a petition in the superior court seeking a one-year extension of the OMHD commitment. (Pen. Code, § 2970, subd. (b).)
   
9. Requires the following persons released from prison be subject to parole under the supervision of CDCR:
   
   1. A person who committed a serious felony listed in Penal Code section 1192.7, subdivision (c);
      
   2. A person who committed a violent felony listed in Penal Code section 667.5, subdivision (c);
      
   3. A person serving a Three-Strikes sentence;
      
   4. A high-risk sex offender;
      
   5. A mentally disordered offender;
      
   6. A person required to register as a sex offender and subject to a parole term exceeding three years at the time of the commission of the offense for which he or she is being released; and,
      
   7. A person subject to lifetime parole at the time of the commission of the offense for which he or she is being released. (Pen. Code, §§ 3000.08, subd. (a) & 3451, subd. (b).)
      
10. Requires all other offenders released from prison to be placed on post-release community supervision by the probation department. (Pen. Code, §§ 3000.08, subd. (b) & 3451, subd. (a).)

FISCAL EFFECT:

Unknown

COMMENTS:

1. Author's Statement: According to the author, “People who have a history of violent behavior and suffer from severe mental disorders need an effective support and transition plan to help them safely come back to the community. AB 2475 will increase the mental health treatment planning window from five days to up to thirty days, by stay of the court for these parolees. This additional time will allow the Department of State Hospitals, State Parole, and local agencies to coordinate housing, supervision, medication, and mental health services they need for their safety and the safety of the community.

“These individuals often need intensive care and supervision and have complex treatment plans. They deserve adequate time and attention from state and local agencies to help plan for their success and reintegration back into the community. We know that rushed decisions can lead to tragic outcomes. The current system is setting up parolees for failure and also threatens public safety.”

1. The OMHD Act (Penal Code Section 2960 et seq.): An OMHD commitment, formerly known as a mentally disordered offender commitment, is a post-prison civil commitment to further detain a person with a severe mental health disorder. The OMHD Act is designed to confine as mentally ill an inmate who is about to be released on parole when it is deemed that that their mental illness not only contributed to the commission of a violent crime, but also continues to make them dangerous to others. Rather than release the person to the community, CDCR paroles the incarcerated person to the supervision of the state hospital, and the individual remains under hospital supervision throughout the parole period.

Penal Code section 2962 lists several criteria that must be proven for an initial OMHD certification, namely, whether: the incarcerated person has a severe mental disorder; the severe mental disorder was one of the causes or an aggravating factor in the commission of the offense; the disorder is not in remission or capable of being kept in remission without treatment; the incarcerated person was treated for the disorder for at least 90 days in the year before their release; and (6) by reason of the severe mental disorder, the person poses a substantial danger of physical harm to others. (Pen. Code, § 2962, subds. (a)-(d); People v. Cobb, supra, 48 Cal.4th at pp. 251-252.)

The initial determination that the incarcerated person meets the OMHD criteria is made administratively. The person in charge of treating the incarcerated person and a practicing psychiatrist or psychologist from the DSH will evaluate the inmate. If it appears that the incarcerated person qualifies, the chief psychiatrist then will certify to the BPH that they meet the criteria of an OMHD. (https://www.cdcr.ca.gov/bph/divisions/severe-mental-health-disorder/)

The incarcerated person may request a hearing before the BPH to require proof that they qualify as an OMHD. If the BPH determines that the person meets the criteria of an OMHD, the person may file a petition in the superior court of the county in which they are incarcerated or are being treated for a hearing on whether they, as of the date of the board hearing, meet the criteria. The person is entitled to a jury trial, which can be waived. The jury must unanimously agree that the allegations of the petition were proven beyond a reasonable doubt. If the superior court or jury reverses the determination of the BPH, the court is required to stay the execution of the decision for five working days to allow for an orderly release of the prisoner. (Pen. Code, § 2966, subd. (b).)

1. Timeframe for Notice of Release: As noted above, if the court determines that an individual no longer meets the criteria of an OMHD and must be released, the order is stayed for five working days to give time for the person’s orderly release.
   
   According to background information provided by the author, “Right now, there is an unrealistic expectation that all agencies involved have the resources and bandwidth to safely place a parolee back to the community within 5 days. However, it is nearly impossible for this to happen given the level of coordination involved in getting the person situated with their medication, housing, and mental health treatment plan. This short timeframe creates safety concerns for the patient as well as for the community in which they are placed.”
   
   This bill would extend the timeframe for release from 5 working days to up to 30 days maximum.
   
2. Argument in Support: According to the California Association of Psychiatric Technicians, “As the representative body for approximately 5,000 licensed psychiatric technicians (PT) employed across various state agencies such as the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) and the Department of State Hospitals (DSH) that treats offenders with mental disorders, we are keenly aware of the challenges faced when an inmate/patient is set to be released into the community. AB 2475 increases the number of planning days that a state hospital must hold a parolee who has committed a violent crime because of a severe mental disorder. Increasing preparation days from five to up to thirty days ensures that our staff have the time to develop treatment plans that can be followed upon an individual's release.
   
   “Under current law, the five-day planning time is simply not enough to coordinate all the necessary services to ensure someone with a mental disorder and a propensity for violence can be safely released into an unsuspecting community. The thirty-day time frame, as proposed in this bill, is much more realistic and gives the inmate/patient a greater chance of success as resources and supervision will be addressed in their conditional release plan.”
   
3. Argument in Opposition: None submitted.
   
4. Prior Legislation: AB 1065 (Holden), of the 2013-2014 Legislative Session, was substantially similar to this bill. AB 1065 was held in the Assembly Appropriations Committee.
   

REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:

Support

California Association of Psychiatric Technicians

Union of American Physicians and Dentists

Opposition

None submitted

Analysis Prepared by:

Sandy Uribe / PUB. S. / (916) 319-3744