BILL ANALYSIS
AB 1176
Page 1
Date of Hearing: May 9, 2007
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Mark Leno, Chair
AB 1176 (Spitzer) - As Amended: April 10, 2007
Policy Committee: Public
SafetyVote: 7-0
Health 17-0
Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program:
No Reimbursable:
SUMMARY
This bill requires petitions for release of sexual violent
predators (SVPs) to be heard in the offender's county of
domicile rather than the county of commitment. Specifically,
this bill:
1)Specifies if a petition for conditional release or discharge
is filed with the court of the county of SVP commitment and
the county of domicile has not been determined, the court of
the county of commitment shall make an initial ruling
regarding the county of domicile before proceeding with any
conditional release hearing.
2)Requires the court, if the court finds the county of
commitment is the same as the county of domicile, to proceed
with the hearing.
3)Requires the court, if the court finds the county of domicile
is not the county of commitment where the petition has been
filed, to suspend proceedings on the petition for release and
transfer the petition to the county of domicile.
4)Authorizes the county of domicile to hear the transferred
petition. If the county of domicile elects not to hear the
petition, the court shall return the petition to the court of
the county of commitment within five days and the county of
commitment shall resume proceedings on the petition.
FISCAL EFFECT
AB 1176
Page 2
Minor absorbable costs to state trial courts.
Currently there are 555 SVPs in state hospitals, with 187 trials
pending. Only a small number of cases would be affected by this
bill, as fewer than 90 persons have been released since 1996.
COMMENTS
1)Rationale . This bill reflects a recommendation of the High
Risk Sex Offender Task Force, which was created by executive
order in 2006. The author, who co-chaired the task force,
states, "If local officials and communities are to actively
participate in the community placement of Sexually Violent
Predators as they are released, then the Superior Court for
the county of domicile should have jurisdiction over any
petition filed for conditional release. AB 1176 will allow
communities who are most affected by the release of an SVP to
have a say in the placement of these individuals."
Under current law, when the court approves a petition for the
release of an SVP, that person is required to be placed in his
home county. Release petitions, however, are filed with the
court of the county of commitment. In most cases, the county
of domicile and the county of commitment are the same, but
when they are not, the court approving the petition for
release has no choice but to order the SVP released into a
county that has had no involvement in the release hearing
process.
2)Current law defines an SVP as a person who has been convicted
of a sexually violent offense against one or more victims and
who has a diagnosed mental disorder that makes the person a
danger to the health and safety of others. SVPs who are
released are placed in the home county (county of domicile) of
the offender prior to the offender's incarceration unless the
court finds that extraordinary circumstances require placement
outside the county of domicile.
Analysis Prepared by : Geoff Long / APPR. / (916) 319-2081