BILL ANALYSIS
AB 1509
Page 1
Date of Hearing: May 9, 2007
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Mark Leno, Chair
AB 1509 (Spitzer) - As Introduced: February 23, 2007
Policy Committee: Public
SafetyVote: 7-0
Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program:
No Reimbursable:
SUMMARY
This bill:
1)Authorizes the California Department of Corrections and
Rehabilitation (CDCR), in cases where a parolee may not return
to the county of last legal residence due to the proximity of
the victim, to place another parolee in that county, provided
proper notice is given.
2)Specifies that sexually violent predators (SVPs) may not be
released to a location within 35 miles of a victim or witness'
residence when the victim or witness has made the request and
the Department of Mental Health (DMH) finds there is need to
protect the victim or witness.
3)Authorizes DMH, in cases where an SVP may not return to the
county of last legal residence due to the proximity of victim,
to place another SVP in that county, provided that proper
notice is given.
4)Adds victims of continuous sexual abuse of a child to the list
of offenders subject to 35-mile placement restrictions from
the residence of a victim or witness.
FISCAL EFFECT
Absorbable costs to CDCR and DMH, as this bill is consistent
with current CDCR practice and DMH intent for the few SVPs
released each year.
COMMENTS
AB 1509
Page 2
1)Rationale . This bill reflects recommendations 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, "The Task Force recommended that legislation be
introduced to require that the victims identified in the CDCR
adjudication process and/or the district attorney in a SVP
trial have the right and opportunity to challenge the
placement of the SVPs. This is similar to the process that is
done by CDCR in the placement of parolees pursuant to Penal
Code 3003(f). This bill amends Penal Code 3003 so that SVP
victims have the right to insist that parolees not be placed
with 35 miles of the actual residence of the victim.
"In addition, the Task Force noted that Penal Code 3003
provides which victims have the right to insist that parolees
not be placed within 35 miles of the actual residence of the
victim. That provision applies to any victim of a violent
felony specified in paragraphs (1) to (7) of Penal Code
Section 667.5(c) and to any victim of a felony in which the
defendant inflicted great bodily injury upon a person. The
crime of continuous sexual abuse of a child, contained in
Penal Code Section 288.5 is not referenced in these
provisions. The Task Force believed this to be a legislative
oversight corrected by this bill.
2)Current law requires that, subject to specified exceptions, an
inmate released on parole shall be returned to the county that
was the last legal residence of the inmate prior to his or her
incarceration. Current law also specifies that an SVP, who is
conditionally released, shall be placed in the county where
the SVP lived prior to incarceration, unless the court finds
extraordinary circumstances require placement outside the
county of domicile.
Current law also requires that when recommending a specific
placement for community outpatient treatment, DMH must
consider concerns and proximity of the victim or the victim's
next of kin, and age and profile of the victim or victims in
the sexually violent offense committed by the person subject
to placement.
Analysis Prepared by : Geoff Long / APPR. / (916) 319-2081