r t c lif i r trecent california reentry legislative victories

R t C lif i R tRecent California Reentry Legislative Victories:

The Good, The Great, and The Complicated

December 12, 2013 12 pm – 1:30 pm

AgendaAgenda Introductions & Info

Court-Based Criminal Record RemediesCou ased C a eco d e ed es AB 651 (New Realignment Remedy) – Meredith Desautels SB 530 (Certificates of Rehabilitation) – Eliza Hersh People v. Parker – CT Turney 1203 4/1203 4a forms (CR 180 & CR 181) – Eliza Hersh 1203.4/1203.4a forms (CR 180 & CR 181) – Eliza Hersh

Reentry & Employment Law AB 218 (Ban the Box) – Michelle Rodriguez

SB 530 (R ti t E l ) CT T SB 530 (Reporting to Employers) – CT Turney

Other Reentry Law SB 513 (Diversion Programs and Record Sealings), AB 625 (Acceptance of Inmate

ID Cards), and AB 720 (Skinner - Inmate Healthcare Enrollment) – Jesse Stout

Q & A

Closing and CLE Information

PanelistsPanelistsTanya Koshy – EBCLC, Clean Slate Practice – [email protected]

Meredith Desautels – Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights – [email protected]

Eliza Hersh – EBCLC, Clean Slate Practice – [email protected] Hersh EBCLC, Clean Slate Practice [email protected]

CT Turney – A New Way of Life – [email protected]

Michelle Rodriguez – National Employment Law Project [email protected]

Jesse Stout – Legal Services for Prisoners With Children - [email protected]

Webinar InfoWebinar Info The material in this presentation is general information only

and does not constitute legal advice.

Please use these materials in a manner consistent with our mission: To advance the rights of people with criminal records, and to provide them with high-quality, free or low-cost reentry legal services.

CLE Credit info at conclusion of webinar. Contact [email protected]

Webinar materials will be posted at ebclc.org and nelp.org, and circulated to the California Reentry Legal Services ListservListserv

CA Reentry Legal Services InfoCA Reentry Legal Services Info

Continue the Conversation: Join the Reentry Listservsy California Reentry Legal Services Providers

Contact: [email protected]

National Employment Law Project - Criminal Records Group National Employment Law Project Criminal Records Group Contact: [email protected]

California Reentry Legal Services Referral Information: California Reentry Legal Services Referral Information: Interactive Map: ebclc.org/reentry_legal_services.php

Court-Based Criminal Record Remedies Updates

AB 651 – Meredith DesautelsSB 530 – Eliza Hersh

People v. Parker – CT TurneyCR 180 & CR 181 – Eliza Hersh

AB 651:AB 651:Realignment &

Dismissal RemediesDismissal Remedies

Meredith Desautels, Staff Attorney, [email protected], 415-543-9444, ext. 223

131 STEUART STREET, SUITE 400

SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA 94105

(415) 543-9444

WWW LCCR COMWWW.LCCR.COM

AB 651

• Authored by Assemblymember Bradford

• Co-Sponsors:Co Sponsors:▫ ACLU▫ East Bay Community Law Center▫ A New Way of Life Reentry ProjectA New Way of Life Reentry Project▫ Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights

• First introduced in 2012 (AB 2263) signed into law • First introduced in 2012 (AB 2263), signed into law on October 13, 2013

Goes into effect Jan a 1 2014 • Goes into effect January 1, 2014.

Penal Code § 1203.41In general mirrors Penal Code § 1203 4 (dismissal relief for • In general, mirrors Penal Code § 1203.4 (dismissal relief for probationers)

• Eligibility:Eligibility:▫ Applies to convictions with Realignment sentences imposed

under Penal Code § 1170(h) Felony sentences under Realignment: News laws established county jail sentences for lower level felonies to News laws established county jail sentences for lower-level felonies to

address prison overcrowding

To get a Realignment sentence: Offense must be “non-serious, non-violent, non-sex” offense, andO e se ust be o se ous, o o e t, o se o e se, a d Defendant must have no prior serious, violent or sex offense

Realignment sentencing options: (PC § 1170(h)(5)) Jail term

J il f ll d b “ d t i i ” b t P b ti D t Jail followed by “mandatory supervision” by county Probation Dept.

▫ Must not be currently facing charges, serving a sentence, or on probation for any offense

Penal Code § 1203.41• Timing: (PC § 1203.41(a)(2))

▫ For “straight” jail sentences: Eligible for relief 2 years after completion of the sentence Eligible for relief 2 years after completion of the sentence

▫ For “split sentences” that include mandatory supervision: Eligible for relief 1 year after completion of the sentence

• Standard:▫ Relief is discretionary with the court, subject to the “interests of

justice” standardj▫ People v. McLernon, 174 Cal. App. 4th 569, 577 (2009)

• Retroactive:▫ Applies to any conviction before on or after January 1 2014 ▫ Applies to any conviction before, on, or after January 1, 2014

(PC 1203.41(c))

Th Di i l PThe Dismissal Process• Determining Eligibilityg g y▫ RAP Sheets▫ Court files

• Petitioning the Court▫ Judicial Council formJudicial Council form▫ Supporting documentation Petitioner’s Declaration Letters of SupportLetters of Support Other evidence of rehabilitation

▫ Filing fees or fee waiver▫ Notice to the DA Notice to the DA 15 days (PC § 1203.41(e))

▫ Hearing

I f PC § 1203 41 Di i lImpact of a PC § 1203.41 Dismissal• Same legal remedy as PC § 1203 4• Same legal remedy as PC § 1203.4▫ Plea or verdict set aside▫ Accusation dismissed, releasing petitioner from “all penalties

d di biliti ”and disabilities”

• Statutory Exceptions (1203.41(b)): May be used as a prior Must disclose in response to question regarding public office or

licensing or contracting with Lottery Commissiong g y Does not reinstate firearm rights Does not reinstate eligibility for public office

• Additional limitations similar to PC § 1203.4 will apply Ex: no impact on federal immigration consequences

Advocacy related to additional Advocacy related to additional collateral consequences

• SB 530▫ Labor Code § 432.7 prohibits employers from asking

about dismissed convictions

Li i• Licensing▫ Various statutes and regulations may give weight to

dismissals under PC § 1203.4dismissals under PC § 1203.4▫ Under EPC grounds, should be given same

consideration

SB 530 (Senator Wright) Certificates of Rehabilitation

Clean Slate - East Bay Community Law CenterEliza Hersh - [email protected]

15 East Bay Community Law Center

SB 530 (Senator Wright) ‐ Certificates of RehabilitationOVERVIEWOVERVIEW

Current law: A court may grant a Certificate of Rehabilitation (COR) after a requisite period of ( ) q prehabilitation

Mandatory rehabilitation period is 7 years, 9 years, or 10 years depending on the offense PC § 4852.03

SB 530’s change: A court can now grant a COR before the applicable period of rehabilitationthe applicable period of rehabilitation

Effective January 1, 2014

East Bay Community Law Center16

y ,

SB 530 (Senator Wright) ‐ Certificates of RehabilitationTEXTTEXT

“SEC. 2: Section 4852.22 is added to the Penal Code, to read:read:

4852.22: Except in a case requiring registration pursuant to Section 290, a trial court hearing an application for a certificate of rehabilitation before the applicable period of rehabilitation has elapsed may grant the application if the court in its discretion believes relief serves thethe court, in its discretion, believes relief serves the interests of justice.”

Full text and analysis: http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov


SB 530 (Senator Wright) ‐ Certificates of RehabilitationMORE DETAILSMORE DETAILS

Does not apply to any misdo sex offenses 10‐year waiting period is still mandatory 10 year waiting period is still mandatory

Clients who SB 530 will help: Example 1p

John was released from prison in 2009 following his conviction for Penal Code § 245, which has a statutory rehabilitation period of 7 years. John has made great strides since his release. After January 1, 2014, a judgehas made great strides since his release. After January 1, 2014, a judge may grant his COR petition if doing so serves the interests of justice.

Example 2 Laura was released from prison in 1993 following a conviction for drug

sales (7‐year rehab period). She had no contact with law enforcement until a DUI in 2010. After January 1, 2014, a judge may grant her COR petition if doing so serves the interests of justice


petition if doing so serves the interests of justice.

SB 530 (Senator Wright) ‐ Certificates of RehabilitationCOR BACKGROUNDCOR BACKGROUND

A COR is the only court‐based reentry record remedy available for: Convictions that resulted in a state prison sentence* Certain misdemeanor sex offenses

A COR is one of two paths to a governor’s pardon A COR is one of two paths to a governor s pardon Once granted by a trial court, a COR becomes and automatic application for a pardon

The other path is a direct Pardon A COR is an end in itself

Can help people in careers requiring licensing/certificationp p p q g g/ In some cases relieve § 290 (sex offender) registration requirement

* But note: non‐prison felonies may also be eligible for a COR.


But note: non prison felonies may also be eligible for a COR.

SB 530 (Senator Wright) ‐ Certificates of RehabilitationLIMITS of CORSLIMITS of CORS

WEIGH RISKS & BENEFITS WITH CLIENT BEFORE FILING A COR does not allow your client to say “no convictions” A COR does not allow your client to say no convictions on job applications

A COR is not a pardonp A COR does not seal or expunge the record, nor remove it from public court files

A COR does not restore firearm possession rights People who lost voting rights (while in prison or on parole) are eligible to vote once off parole. No COR/pardon is required to restore voting rights

COR investigation may be invasive


COR investigation may be invasive

Client is ineligible for a COR in any case. Client is possibly eligible to petition the

Was Client sentenced to California state prison in this case?

Was Client ever convicted of any of the following: §§ 288, 288a(c), 286(c), 289(j), or 288.5?

Yes NoF Client is possibly eligible to petition the Governor directly for a pardon.¹

state prison in this case?

Was Client convicted of a wobbler felony in this case?

Have the requisite rehab period passed since Client was released from prison?²

Yes

NoYes

EClient is currently ineligible unless an early COR serves the interests of justice. See PC § 4852.22

Has Client had any negative contact with law enforcement during the rehab period?

Consider a § 17(b) felony reduction, § 1203.4 relief, and a misdemeanor COR petition.

Has this conviction been dismissed per § 1203.4/1203.4a/1203.41?

Best practice (not a statutory Have all of Client’s other eligible

Yes

Yes

Yes

NoNo Yes

NoNoLO Client is currently ineligible unless

an early COR serves the interests of justice. See PC § 4852.22

Have all of Client’s other eligible convictions been dismissed per §§1203.4/1203.4a/1203.41?

Best practice (not a statutory requirement) is to have all eligible convictions first dismissed per §§1203.4/1203.4a/1203.41.

Have all of Client s other eligible convictions been dismissed per §§1203.4/1203.4a/1203.41?

Best practice (not a statutory Has Client continuously resided in Best practice (not a statutory Has Client served any time in jail or

NoYes

No Yes

ON p ( y

requirement) is to have all eligible convictions first dismissed per §§1203.4/1203.4a/1203.41.

yCalifornia for the last 5 years?

p ( yrequirement) is to have all eligible convictions first dismissed per §§1203.4/1203.4a/1203.41.

y jprison in any case since this conviction was dismissed per §1203.4?

5 years of continuous CA residence i di t l di COR titi

Client is eligible to apply for a COR!3

Client is ineligible for a COR in this Has Client had any negative t t ith l f t d i

NoNo YesYesI

immediately preceding COR petition required. Client is currently ineligible unless an early COR serves the interests of justice. See PC § 4852.22

COR!3 case. contact with law enforcement during rehab period?

Client is currently ineligible unless an early COR serves the interests of justice.

Has Client continuously resided in California for the last 5 years?

Yes No

YesNo

ES


early COR serves the interests of justice. See PC § 4852.22

California for the last 5 years?

5 years of continuous CA residence immediately preceding COR petition required. Client is currently ineligible unless an early COR serves the interests of justice. See PC § 4852.22

Client is eligible to apply for a COR!3

NoS

THANK YOUEliza Hersh

East Bay Community Law CenterClean Slate Reentry Legal Services

[email protected]


People v. Parker217 Cal.App.4th 498 (2013)Second District

1203.4 Relief with a Suspended Felony Sentence

CT Turney – A New Way of Life Reentry [email protected]

Parker – 217 Cal.App.4th 498

Facts of the Case: Convicted of HS 11351.5 Sentenced to 5-year prison term Execution of sentence suspended, granted 3 years’ p , g y

formal probation 1203.4 relief was discretionary – unpaid restitution fine Previously denied twice Previously denied twice No reason given in the record either time


Trial Court: Different judge than previous denials Denied 1203.4 again Judge specifically stated in hearing that denial was g p y g

because Parker was ineligible, due to suspended prison sentence. Common misconception among judges, Common misconception among judges,

prosecutors & public defenders in Los Angeles County


Appeal Holding that suspended sentence rendered Parker

ineligible was error of law Statutory language contains no bar, speaks

generally of probation Case law focuses on retention of jurisdiction by the

court Basing denial on error of law was abuse of discretion

Attorney General filed reply brief agreeing Attorney General filed reply brief agreeing


Appellate Court Despite being a clear issue of law, court issued

published decision due to pro per nature of 1203.4 Definition of probation in § 1203. “As used in this code, ‘probation’ means the

suspension of the imposition or execution of a sentence.” PC § 1203

Provided suspended sentence is never executed, defendant remains a probationer, and court retains jurisdiction over the case. People v. Banks, 53 Cal.2d 370, 384-85 (1959)

CR 180 & 181 FORMS

East Bay Community Law Center

CR 180 & CR 181 FormsCR 180 & CR 181 Forms Statewide forms from the AOC Petition and Order for 1203 4 1203 4a 17(b) Petition and Order for 1203.4, 1203.4a, 17(b) Changes effective January 1, 2014 Forms and more info available here: www courts ca gov Forms and more info available here: www.courts.ca.gov


Practice NotesPractice Notes Write in a box for PC § 17(d) – reduce a misdemeanor to an infractionan infraction

Write in a box for PC § 1203.41 – set aside and dismissal §of sentence under PC § 1170(h) (Realignment)

§ 1203.41 relief, please!


Reentry/Employment Updates

AB 218 – Michelle RodriguezSB 30 CT TSB 530 – CT Turney

Recent California Reentry Legislative Vi t i Th G d Th G t d th Victories: The Good, The Great, and the

ComplicatedDate: Thursday, Dec. 12, 2013

Time: 12:00-1:30pm PT

Michelle Natividad [email protected]

National Employment Law Project

“Ban the Box:”Ban the Box:Restoring Hope and Opportunity to

W k i h C i iWorkers with Convictions

Benefits to worker: remove chilling geffect, decrease stigma, demonstrate qualificationsq

Benefits to employers: maximize applicant pool and can reduceapplicant pool and can reduce resource expenditure

39National Employment Law Project

www.nelp.org

State Coverage & Inquiry Other Protections

California (2013) Public Employment

Colorado (2012) Public Employment/Licensing

Cannot consider arrest that did not lead to conviction, limits consideration of expunged offenses.

Connecticut (2010) Public Employment Written statement of reasons for rejection.Connecticut (2010) Public Employment Written statement of reasons for rejection.Hawaii (1998) Private and Public

EmploymentEmployers may not consider felonies over 10 years (excluding incarceration)

Illinois (2013—executive order)

Public Employmentorder)Maryland (2013) Public Employment

Massachusetts(2010)

Private and Public Employment

Employers may not consider felonies over 10 years and misdemeanors over 5 years

Minnesota (2009) and (2013)

Private and Public Employment

Cannot consider arrest that did not lead to conviction, expunged offenses and misdemeanors not involving jail time.

New Mexico (2010) Public Employment Cannot consider arrest that did not lead to conviction, and misdemeanors not involving moral turpitude.

Rhode Island (2013) Private and Public Employment

By request, denied applicants may be provided reasons for denial.


www.nelp.org

Over 50 U.S. Cities and Counties

1. Alameda County, CA2 A l i Ci NJ

18. Cumberland County, NC19 D i MI

36. Norfolk, VA37 N i h CT2. Atlantic City, NJ

3. Atlanta, GA4. Austin, TX5. Baltimore, MD6 B k l CA

19. Detroit, MI20. Durham City, NC21. Durham County, NC22. East Palo Alto, CA23 H f d CT

37. Norwich, CT38. Oakland, CA39. Philadelphia, PA40. Pittsburgh, PA41 Portsmouth VA6. Berkeley, CA

7. Boston, MA8. Bridgeport, CT9. Buffalo, NY10 C b id MA

23. Hartford, CT24. Jacksonville, FL25. Kalamazoo, MI26. Kansas City, MO27 M hi TN

41. Portsmouth, VA42. Providence, RI43. Richmond, CA44. Richmond, VA45 San Francisco CA10. Cambridge, MA

11. Canton, OH12. Carrboro, NC13. Carson, CA14 Chi IL

27. Memphis, TN28. Minneapolis, MN29. Multnomah County, OR30. Muskegon County, MI32 N H CT

45. San Francisco, CA46. Santa Clara County, CA47. Seattle, WA48. Spring Lake, NC49. St. Paul, MN14. Chicago, IL

15. Cincinnati, OH16. Cleveland, OH17. Compton, CA

32. New Haven, CT33. New York, NY34. Newark, NJ35. Newport News, VA

49. St. Paul, MN50. Tampa, FL51. Travis County, TX52. Washington, DC53. Wilmington, DEp ,

41

g54. Worcester, MA

National Employment Law Projectwww.nelp.org

AB 218AB 218Ban the BoxBan the Box


www.nelp.org

AB 218 Added Cal Labor Code Sec. 432.9

(a) A state or local agency shall not ask an applicant for employment to disclose, orally or in writing, information concerning the conviction history of the applicant, including any inquiry about conviction history on any

l t li ti til th hemployment application, until the agency has determined the applicant meets the minimum employment qualifications as stated in anyemployment qualifications, as stated in any notice issued for the position.


www.nelp.org

AB 218 Exceptions

(b) This section shall not apply to a position for which a state or local agency is otherwise g yrequired by law to conduct a conviction history background check, to any position within a criminal justice agency, as that term is defined in Section 13101 of the Penal Code, or to any individual working on a temporary or permanent basis for a criminal justice agency

t t b i l f thon a contract basis or on loan from another governmental entity.


www.nelp.org

Who and When

(d) As used in this section, “state agency” means any state office, officer, department, y , , p ,division, bureau, board, commission, or agency.(e) As used in this section, “local agency” means any county, city, city and county,means any county, city, city and county, including a charter city or county, or any special district.p(g) This section shall become operative on July 1, 2014.July 1, 2014.


www.nelp.org

Take Action!Take Action!Using AB 218 as a Using AB 218 as a

starting pointstarting point

4646

National Employment Law Projectwww.nelp.org

AB 218 implementation

1) NELP and LSPC are preparing1) NELP and LSPC are preparing resources.

2) Contact your city county special2) Contact your city, county, special districts.

t3) After July 1st, has it been implemented?4) Question removed? Inquiry delayed?) q y y5) No change? Inform and enforce.


www.nelp.org

Opportunity for more…1) Contact NELP and All of Us or None. 2) U d t d t li i2) Understand current policies.3) Identify community and unlikely allies.) y y y4) People directly affected leading. 5) C lti t h i i th it t5) Cultivate champions in the city or county.6) What is the best vehicle? Administrative,

resolution, ordinance. 7) What components?7) What components?


www.nelp.org

Components of Components of Model Ban the Box Model Ban the Box

PoliciesPolicies


www.nelp.org

Maximizing Effectiveness of Ban the Box Evaluate hiring policies & adopt Evaluate hiring policies & adopt

federal Title VII standards. (Chicago) Limit background checks. Limit background checks.

(Richmond, Boston) Inquiry after conditional offer.

(Worcester) Include notice on job application

that conviction will not barthat conviction will not bar consideration. (Jacksonville—“encouraged to apply”)


www.nelp.org

Provide applicant copy of background report.Provide applicant copy of background report. (Memphis—highlight conviction)

Allow applicant time to correct information. pp(Longest example was “at least 10 business days” (Cincinnati))O l id j b l t d i ti Only consider job-related convictions. (Hartford, CT—direct, specific negative bearing)

Consider other factors: time passed Consider other factors: time passed, rehabilitation, public policy to hire people with convictions. (New Haven, CT)

If conviction is job-related, allow for appeal. (Bridgeport)


www.nelp.org

Confidentiality. (Baltimore—discards criminal history information)history information)

Enforcement: complaints, auditing, data collection. (Worcester Richmond)collection. (Worcester, Richmond)

Extend policies to vendors. (Boston, Cambridge, Detroit, Worcester, New Haven, Hartford, Richmond)

Extend policies to private employers. (Philadelphia Seattle Buffalo Newark)(Philadelphia, Seattle, Buffalo, Newark)

Consider targeted hiring. (Partnership for Working Families: Oakland Army Base)Families: Oakland Army Base)


www.nelp.org

ResourcesResources


www.nelp.org

NELP Resources 65 Million Need Not Apply: The Case For Reforming Criminal Background Checks

for Employment; http://www.nelp.org/page/-/SCLP/2011/65 Million Need Not Apply.pdf?nocdn=1_ _ _ _ pp y p

AB 218 Key Endorsers; http://www.nelp.org/page/-/SCLP/2013/AB_218_Key_Endorsers.pdf

Ban the Box: Major U.S. Cities and Counties Adopt Fair Hiring Policies to Remove Unfair Barriers to Employment of People with Criminal Records; http://www.nelp.org/page/‐/SCLP/CityandCountyHiringInitiatives.pdf?nocdn=1

States Adopt Fair Hiring Standards Reducing Barriers to Employment of People with Criminal Records; http //nelp 3cdn net/3c0ae798a3c30d354e jgm6beq1q pdfhttp://nelp.3cdn.net/3c0ae798a3c30d354e_jgm6beq1q.pdf

Contact: Michelle Natividad Rodriguez, [email protected]


www.nelp.org

SB 530 EMPLOYMENTC T T U R N E Y - A N E W W A Y O F L I F E R E E N T R Y P R O J E C T

C @ O O G

SB 530 – EMPLOYMENTC T T U R N E Y @ A N E W W A Y O F L I F E . O R G

SB 530 – EMPLOYMENTGENERAL OVERVIEW

• Amends Cal Labor Code 432 7• Amends Cal. Labor Code 432.7• Increases protections for people with expunged

convictions• Public & private employers no longer allowed to ask for or

utilize information regarding judicially dismissed convictions (“including but not limited to”):( g )• 1203.4• 1203.4a• 1203 45 (dismissing & sealing expunged juvenile • 1203.45 (dismissing & sealing expunged juvenile

misdemeanor criminal convictions)• 1210.1 (the old Prop 36)E ti f iti i l i t t t t i ti • Exceptions for positions involving statutory restrictions on hiring notwithstanding dismissal

SB 530 – EMPLOYMENTPROTECTIONS PRIOR TO SB 530

• Labor Code § 432 7 contained no protection for • Labor Code § 432.7 contained no protection for “expunged” (judicially dismissed) convictions

• 2 CCR § 7287.4(d)(1)(B) bars employers from § ( )( )( ) p yinquiring about misdemeanors dismissed under 1203.4Gaps:• Gaps:• 2 CCR 7287.4 did not bar utilization - self-disclosure negates

protection• No clear protection for expunged felonies• Both sections contained prohibitions against inquiry &

utilization of arrests not leading to conviction – possible argument that this is what remains post-expungement

SB 530 – EMPLOYMENTLANGUAGE AFTER SB 530

• Language barring inquiry:• Language barring inquiry:• No employer, whether a public agency or private

individual or corporation, shall ask an applicant p ppfor employment to disclose, through any written form or verbally, information . . . concerning a conviction that has been judicially dismissed or conviction that has been judicially dismissed or ordered sealed pursuant to law, including, but not limited to, Sections 1203.4, 1203.4a, 1203.45, and 1210 1 f th P l C d1210.1 of the Penal Code

SB 530 – EMPLOYMENTLANGUAGE AFTER SB 530

• Language barring utilization:• Language barring utilization:• . . . nor shall any employer seek from any source

whatsoever, or utilize, as a factor in determining gany condition of employment including hiring, promotion, termination, or any apprenticeship training program or any other training program training program or any other training program leading to employment, any record . . . concerning a conviction that has been judicially di i d d d l d t t l dismissed or ordered sealed pursuant to law, including, but not limited to, Sections 1203.4, 1203.4a, 1203.45, and 1210.1 of the Penal Code.

SB 530 – EMPLOYMENTSTATUTORY EXCEPTIONS

• Exceptions existing prior to SB 530 remain• Exceptions existing prior to SB 530 remain• Subs. (b) & (e) – Peace officers• (f) Health facilities –

• PC 290-related arrests for positions with regular access to patients• HS 11590-related arrests for positions with access to medication

• (k) & (l) – concessionaires with government

• New exception relating to convictions – sub. (m)• Employer required by law to obtain conviction informationEmployer required by law to obtain conviction information• Applicant required to possess/use firearm in employment• Conviction bars applicant from holding position,

notwithstanding dismissalnotwithstanding dismissal• Employer prohibited from employing applicant with

conviction

SB 530 – EMPLOYMENTPRIVATE EMPLOYMENT

• Creates fairly straightforward protections for the • Creates fairly straightforward protections for the vast majority of private employment

• Shores up restrictions on consumer reporting agencies against reporting dismissed convictions

SB 530 – EMPLOYMENTPUBLIC EMPLOYMENT

• SB 530 does NOT impact the information transmitted • SB 530 does NOT impact the information transmitted from the DOJ to employers via LiveScan• Statutorily determined in Penal Code § 11105• PC § 11105 does state that Labor Code § 432.7 must be

followed

• Creates difficult situation for applicants• Public agency cannot legally ask or utilize, applicant has

l l i ht t t di llegal right to not disclose• Public agency will see expunged convictions

• Believe applicant lied?• Use convictions anyway?

SB 530 – EMPLOYMENTPUBLIC EMPLOYER “BEST PRACTICES”

• Approach at All of Us or None LA/A New Way of Life• Approach at All of Us or None-LA/A New Way of Life• Leverage opportunity presented by AB 218 to reform hiring

practices & applications• When an agency does ask the question, clearly state that

applicants need not disclose protected records• Revise hiring policies to clearly eliminate consideration of

protected records• Implement internal procedures to prevent dissemination

of protected records• Train hiring personnel on new protections

• Prepare for post-denial advocacy• Utilize employment denials as opportunities to engageUtilize employment denials as opportunities to engage• Litigation

SB 530 – EMPLOYMENTCLIENT “BEST PRACTICES”

• Approach at All of Us or None LA/A New Way of Life• Approach at All of Us or None-LA/A New Way of Life• Explain protections & potential setbacks to clients• Allow them to make their own decision regarding disclosure• Arm them with knowledge about their rights• Offer advocacy down the road if they need it

• Applicants who choose to disclose may face less grief re: “they lied,” but ultimately, insisting on

li ill b th l t hi compliance will be the only way to achieve compliance.

Other Reentry Law Updates

SB 513, AB 625, AB 720 – Jesse Stout

AB 625 AB 720 SB 513AB 625, AB 720, SB 513

J SJesse StoutPolicy Director

Legal Services for Prisoners with Childrenprisonerswithchildren.orgprisonerswithchildren.org

AB 625 (Quirk) Civil Code 1185AB 625 (Quirk) Civil Code 1185

• Prisoner‘s ID (prisoner identification card) isPrisoner s ID (prisoner identification card) is now valid ID for a notary to formalize legal documentsdocuments

http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient xhtml?bill id=201320140AB625ent.xhtml?bill_id=201320140AB625

AB 720 (Skinner)AB 720 (Skinner)

• Prevents current Medi‐Cal enrollees from losingPrevents current Medi Cal enrollees from losing their eligibility based solely on their detention, and authorizes counties to obtain Medi‐Cal on behalf of hospitalized inmates. WIC 14011.10

• Allows counties to enroll eligible inmates into theAllows counties to enroll eligible inmates into the Medi‐Cal program before the inmate is released. PC 4011.11

http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill id=201320140AB720_

SB 513 (Hancock) PC 851.87SB 513 (Hancock) PC 851.87

• May petition to seal arrest records two yearsMay petition to seal arrest records two years after successful completion of pretrial diversiondiversion

http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient xhtml?bill id=201320140SB513ent.xhtml?bill_id=201320140SB513

Info and Q & A

INFO - CLE & ListservsINFO CLE & Listservs To receive CLE credit: Send an email to [email protected] with

Y b b d Your bar number, and Length of time you participated in webinar

You will receive a CLE certificate and evaluation form CLE for this webinar does not cover legal ethics elimination of bias or CLE for this webinar does not cover legal ethics, elimination of bias, or

prevention, detection, and treatment of substance abuse or mental abuse that impairs professional competence.

To Join the Reentry Legal Services Listservs: California Reentry Legal Services Providers

C t t h h@ b l Contact: [email protected] National Employment Law Project - Criminal Records Group

Contact: [email protected]

THANK YOU

r t c lif i r trecent california reentry legislative victories

Documents