11

Juvenile JusticeJuvenile JusticeLaw & Policy UpdateLaw & Policy Update

Updates on DJJ realignment, 2011 parole shift, Updates on DJJ realignment, 2011 parole shift, adult court processing, state-local program adult court processing, state-local program

funding,funding, new legislation, policy trends new legislation, policy trends

Presented by: David SteinhartPresented by: David Steinhart PJDC RoundtablePJDC Roundtable

November 6, 2010 – SacramentoNovember 6, 2010 – Sacramento

22

CA Juvenile Justice Law & Policy Update CA Juvenile Justice Law & Policy Update

COVERAGECOVERAGE Update state juvenile arrest trendUpdate state juvenile arrest trend Realignment Milestones- 1996 - 2010Realignment Milestones- 1996 - 2010 Top end realignment: Adult court filing Top end realignment: Adult court filing

trendstrends Bottom end realignment: SB 81 updateBottom end realignment: SB 81 update 2011 realignment: DJJ parole shift2011 realignment: DJJ parole shift County realignment response– funds, County realignment response– funds,

facilities, programsfacilities, programs New legislation New legislation Policy issues on tap for 2011Policy issues on tap for 2011

33

879168564082748

76104

6850363889 63993 61539 6087859871 61161

65189 6619165163

58555

0

20,000

40,000

60,000

80,000

100,000

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

Total Juv. Felony Arrests (left scale) Fel. Arrest Rate Per 100,000 (right scale)

Source: California Department of Justice

California Juvenile Felony California Juvenile Felony ArrestsArrests and andJuvenile Felony Arrest Juvenile Felony Arrest RateRate Per 100,000 Per 100,000

1995-20091995-2009

44

California Arrests for Violent CrimesCalifornia Arrests for Violent CrimesJuvenile and Adult Arrest Juvenile and Adult Arrest RateRate Per 100,000 Per 100,000

1995-20091995-2009

100

200300

400

500600

70019

95

1996

1997

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

Est

Juvenile Adult

Source: California Department of Justice

55

1996: 1996: Sliding scale feesSliding scale fees imposed for level V-VII imposed for level V-VII commitments– CYA population drops swiftly commitments– CYA population drops swiftly

2000: 2000: Proposition 21Proposition 21 opens new doors to adult court opens new doors to adult court

2000: 2000: JJCPAJJCPA provides counties with JJ program funds provides counties with JJ program funds

2004: 2004: Consent Decree in Consent Decree in FarrellFarrell case case vs. CYA– generates vs. CYA– generates program costs that are catalysts for SB 81 program costs that are catalysts for SB 81

2007: 2007: SB 81SB 81 bans future commitments of non-707 youth bans future commitments of non-707 youth

2010: 2010: DJJ parole is realignedDJJ parole is realigned to county probation to county probation

CA Juvenile Justice Realignment CA Juvenile Justice Realignment Major Milestones 1996 -2010Major Milestones 1996 -2010

CYA/DJJ POP

10,000

1,400

66

““Top end” realignment:Top end” realignment:California Transfers of Juveniles California Transfers of Juveniles

to Adult Criminal Court 2004 - 2009to Adult Criminal Court 2004 - 2009

252 318 275 335 346

283 343

724866

769

535661

929

11231201

1115

399

654

0200400600800

100012001400

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

Juvenile court remand to adult courtProsecutor direct file in adult courtTotal transferred to adult court

Source: California Department of Justice

77

Adult Court Dispositions of Juveniles – Adult Court Dispositions of Juveniles – 20092009

(N = 722 dispositions)(N = 722 dispositions)

Convicted611 (85%)

Dismissed,Acquitted orRt’d to Juv.

Ct.111 (15%)

State Prison361 (59%)

Probation13 (2%)

Probation with Jail207 (34%)

Jail10 (2 %)

Fine / Other17 (3%)

Source: California Department of Justice.

DJJ Commitment 3 (<1%)

88

Number of fitness hearings:Number of fitness hearings: 488488o On felony charges: 387On felony charges: 387o On misdemeanors: 101On misdemeanors: 101

Total found unfit for juvenile:Total found unfit for juvenile: 346346 Total found fit for juvenile:Total found fit for juvenile: 142142

CA Juvenile Court Fitness Hearings - CA Juvenile Court Fitness Hearings - 20092009

Source: California Department of Justice

99

Adult court transfers– DJF Impact Adult court transfers– DJF Impact More prison-bound youth in DJF facilitiesMore prison-bound youth in DJF facilities

June 30June 30th th population of “E” and “M” youth in DJF population of “E” and “M” youth in DJF institutionsinstitutions

(Juveniles convicted as adults) - FY04/05 to FY 08/09(Juveniles convicted as adults) - FY04/05 to FY 08/09

79 95 90

15392 92

171144

171 187221

279297

108

131

050

100150200250300350

FY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007 FY 2008 FY 2009

Criminal Court M cases (WIC 1731.5 state prison "housing" cases)Criminal Court E cases (direct prison commits awaiting transfer age)Total state prison commitments in DJJ pop

Source: CA Dept. of Justice

1010

Adult Court Transfers:Adult Court Transfers:“Top End” JJ Realignment“Top End” JJ Realignment

Implications of dataImplications of data More and more juveniles are being tried as More and more juveniles are being tried as

adults and sentenced to state prison – twice adults and sentenced to state prison – twice as many in ’09 as in ’05as many in ’09 as in ’05

The most serious juv. offenders are being The most serious juv. offenders are being carved out of the rehabilitative systemcarved out of the rehabilitative system Category I Juv. Commitments to DJF in 2009 = 17Category I Juv. Commitments to DJF in 2009 = 17

DJF commitments from juvenile court are DJF commitments from juvenile court are shrinking, DJF population of youth waiting to shrinking, DJF population of youth waiting to go to prison is growinggo to prison is growing

1111

Downsizing CA State Youth CorrectionsDownsizing CA State Youth CorrectionsLegislative Realignment - Legislative Realignment - SB 81SB 81

Effective September 2007Effective September 2007 Banned all future DJF commitments of “non-violent” Banned all future DJF commitments of “non-violent”

youth (“non 707(b) offenders”) youth (“non 707(b) offenders”) Exception: non-707(b) sex offenders (PC 290.008 Exception: non-707(b) sex offenders (PC 290.008

registration)registration)

Phased all non-707(b) wards out of DJF institutions Phased all non-707(b) wards out of DJF institutions and off the DJF parole caseloadand off the DJF parole caseload

Established the Youthful Offender Block Grant to pay Established the Youthful Offender Block Grant to pay counties for local juvenile offender custody and carecounties for local juvenile offender custody and care

1212

California Division of Juvenile FacilitiesCalifornia Division of Juvenile FacilitiesInstitutional PopulationInstitutional Population

1996 – 2009 (as of December 31 each year) and 9/30/101996 – 2009 (as of December 31 each year) and 9/30/10

9572

85998083

766673056497

55574696

367829992647

2293173416021335

01,0002,0003,0004,0005,0006,0007,0008,0009,000

10,000

19961997199819992000200120022003200420052006200720082009 9/30/10

Source: Ca. Dept. of Corrections & Rehabilitation

SB 81

1313

CYA-DJF Institution CYA-DJF Institution Closures Since 2000Closures Since 2000

CLOSEDCLOSEDFACLITIESFACLITIES

RatedRatedCapacityCapacity

Year Year ClosedClosed

Fred Fred NellesNelles

650650 20032003

Karl Karl HoltonHolton

388388 20042004

NCRCNCRC 326326 20042004DW DW

NelsonNelson433433 20072007

Paso Paso RoblesRobles

690690 20082008

Stark Stark 12001200 20092009PrestonPreston 720720 June June

20112011TotalTotal 4,4074,407

STILLSTILLOPENOPEN

RatedRatedCapacitCapacit

yyChaderjiaChaderjia

nn600600

OH CloseOH Close 379379SCRCSCRC 350350

Ventura- Ventura- MM

381381

Ventura- FVentura- F 295295TotalTotal 2,0052,005

1414

835

532

810

90

6

641

74

6

462

92

5

397

120

5

330

171

3

341

158

20

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 FY 2010

Juvenile Court (DJF commitment)Criminal Court (sentenced to prison, housed in DJF to age 18)Criminal Court (direct DJF commitment)

DJF First Commitments by Court of DJF First Commitments by Court of Commitment and admissions of state prison Commitment and admissions of state prison (“M”) housing cases Calendar Years 2004 – (“M”) housing cases Calendar Years 2004 –

2009, FY 20102009, FY 2010

Source: CA Division of Juvenile Facilities, Research Branch

1515

Reasons for declining juvenile Reasons for declining juvenile court commitments to DJFcourt commitments to DJF

Realignment of non 707s to counties (SB Realignment of non 707s to counties (SB 81)81)

Continuing declines in arrests for Continuing declines in arrests for serious/violent crimesserious/violent crimes

Adult court processing– most serious juv. Adult court processing– most serious juv. cases are going to adult court & state cases are going to adult court & state prisonprison

Some counties have avoided DJF, Some counties have avoided DJF, developed alt. dispositions for their 707sdeveloped alt. dispositions for their 707s

1616

DJJ Average Institutional Length of Stay DJJ Average Institutional Length of Stay

Juvenile Court CommitmentsJuvenile Court Commitments(ALOS in months, 1996 – 2009)(ALOS in months, 1996 – 2009)

23.4

37.3

18

23

28

33

38

43

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

FY 08/09

Length of stay in months

Source: CA Division of Juvenile Facilities, Research Branch

1717

New paroleesNew parolees as of Jan. 2011 shift to county supervision as of Jan. 2011 shift to county supervision

Committing court to hold “re-entry dispo hearing”Committing court to hold “re-entry dispo hearing” prior prior toto discharge from DJJ discharge from DJJ DJJ transports ward to the local courtDJJ transports ward to the local court

DJJ jurisdiction terminatesDJJ jurisdiction terminates on discharge to local courton discharge to local court

Local court sets conditionsLocal court sets conditions of release supervision– of release supervision– JPB release recommendations to be “incorporated” JPB release recommendations to be “incorporated” Conditions must be “consistent with Evidence Based Practices”Conditions must be “consistent with Evidence Based Practices”

State fundsState funds:: $15,000 per parolee ($115K for custody) $15,000 per parolee ($115K for custody) Funds must be spent on “evidence based” interventionsFunds must be spent on “evidence based” interventions

Caseload size?Caseload size? FY 09/10: 911 wards were released on parole, 445 were returned to DJFFY 09/10: 911 wards were released on parole, 445 were returned to DJF

2010 DJF Parole Realignment:2010 DJF Parole Realignment:Key elements (AB 1628)Key elements (AB 1628)

1818

Violations/revocations-- determined by local courtViolations/revocations-- determined by local court (for wards released after 1/19/11)(for wards released after 1/19/11) ““Modification hearing” within 15 days of detention Modification hearing” within 15 days of detention Counsel and other due process rights applyCounsel and other due process rights apply Standard of proof? Likely, preponderance of evidenceStandard of proof? Likely, preponderance of evidence

New sanctions for “serious” or “repeat” violationsNew sanctions for “serious” or “repeat” violations Commitment to juvenile facility if age appropriate (WIC 208.5)Commitment to juvenile facility if age appropriate (WIC 208.5) Up to 90 days county jail if over 18Up to 90 days county jail if over 18 Return to DJJ institution: min 90 days, max 1 yearReturn to DJJ institution: min 90 days, max 1 year

Interim ruleInterim rule– violations by youth paroled before 1/19/11– violations by youth paroled before 1/19/11 Youth already on parole remain subject to JPB revocation process Youth already on parole remain subject to JPB revocation process

and “LH” protections (707 b & sex offenders only)and “LH” protections (707 b & sex offenders only) On 9/30/10 there were 1,593 wards on the total DJF parole caseloadOn 9/30/10 there were 1,593 wards on the total DJF parole caseload

2010 DJF Parole Realignment:2010 DJF Parole Realignment:Violations & New Sanctions (AB Violations & New Sanctions (AB

1628)1628)

1919

Picture remains fragmented due to…Picture remains fragmented due to…

Lack of statewide data: Lack of statewide data: SB 81 did not require counties to SB 81 did not require counties to submit plans or report how they spent YOBG funds.submit plans or report how they spent YOBG funds.

This changed in 2009– This changed in 2009– legislation now requires annual legislation now requires annual county YOBG plans and spending reports to go to CSAcounty YOBG plans and spending reports to go to CSA

Where is the shifted (non 707b) caseload Where is the shifted (non 707b) caseload going?going? Juvenile hall commitments are increasing, with longer staysJuvenile hall commitments are increasing, with longer stays Dedicated camp programs -- e.g. Challenger camp in L.A.Dedicated camp programs -- e.g. Challenger camp in L.A. Older parolees may be banked on adult probationOlder parolees may be banked on adult probation Based on May 2010 plans filed @ CSA, a wide range of Based on May 2010 plans filed @ CSA, a wide range of

assessments and services are being deployed to SB 81 assessments and services are being deployed to SB 81 youthyouth

SB 81 realignment: SB 81 realignment: County responses & program County responses & program

developmentdevelopment

2020

Youthful Offender Block GrantYouthful Offender Block GrantCounty Allocations County Allocations

10 largest for FY 09/10 (in $ millions)10 largest for FY 09/10 (in $ millions)

$26.4

$2.6

$3.1

$3.1

$3.1

$4.4

$5.8

$6.9

$7.7

$8.2

$22.0

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27

All others

Fresno

S. Clara

Kern

Alameda

Sac'mento

Riverside

Orange

S. Diego

S. B'do

L.A.

$ Millions FY 09-10

2121

SB 81: County FY 10/11 Plans Submitted to SB 81: County FY 10/11 Plans Submitted to CSA CSA

All Proposed YOBG Expenditures By Major All Proposed YOBG Expenditures By Major CategoryCategory

(Direct Service, Placements, Capacity Building)(Direct Service, Placements, Capacity Building)

DIRECT SERVICE- 62 %(Assessments, Supervision,Counseling, Aftercare, etc)

PLACEMENTS- 19%(Juvenile Hall, Camps,

Group care, etc.)

62%

19%

20%

CAPACITY BUILDING 20 %(Administration, salaries,Equipment, training, etc.)

Source: Corrections Standards Authority

2222

DJF & realignment policy changes DJF & realignment policy changes on the front burner for 2011on the front burner for 2011

DJJ “time adds”– Almost gone in 2010, issue wont go DJJ “time adds”– Almost gone in 2010, issue wont go awayaway

DJJ/JPB plan to revise PCDs (sentences assigned at DJJ/JPB plan to revise PCDs (sentences assigned at intake) and DJJ release criteriaintake) and DJJ release criteria

o YASI scores will determine assigned PCD, release decisionYASI scores will determine assigned PCD, release decision

Full shut down of DJJ? Not likely anytime soonFull shut down of DJJ? Not likely anytime soon

State-local JJ funds (JJCPA, JPCF, YOBG) up for grabs in State-local JJ funds (JJCPA, JPCF, YOBG) up for grabs in 20112011

o Legislature must re-fund next year: VLF tax extension?Legislature must re-fund next year: VLF tax extension?o Evidence based program requirements?Evidence based program requirements?

The New Governor and the Politics of AppointmentThe New Governor and the Politics of Appointment

2323

What can we expect?What can we expect?

Bottom line: No leftie on crime, but likely to support cost-reduction proposals for prison downsizing, parole reform

As candidate- tough-on-crime talk

But calls for downsizing state prisons, more services and success on parole

As AG generally tough-on-gangs & crime

As Oakland Mayor opened charter school –military bootcamp for kids

As Gov. (1978)– no big supporter of juvenile justice reform– praised the Singapore “spanking” model of youth discipline

Death penalty- doesn’t favor it, vows to enforce it

2424

New 2010 Legislation of New 2010 Legislation of interestinterest

Signed into lawSigned into lawAB 12 (Beall)- Foster & kinship care benefits AB 12 (Beall)- Foster & kinship care benefits

extended to age 21 for “nonminor extended to age 21 for “nonminor dependents”dependents”

AB 2212 (Fuentes)- New procedures for AB 2212 (Fuentes)- New procedures for incompetent minors in delinquency courtincompetent minors in delinquency court

Vetoed by the GovernorVetoed by the GovernorSB 1091 (Hancock)- Medi-Cal benefits for SB 1091 (Hancock)- Medi-Cal benefits for

incarcerated juvenilesincarcerated juveniles

See Commonweal Handout for expanded review of 2010 bills