WPC  }s"Ϡ4#{NGQP*%גN)fWb芛(Cn+k˘˵MsFSAˠ5E8U%?!o-GA*(!{^?]nVR[P)l ykbX-U+nJR>{P*T;= F0S 6D%$BA 삦DhjGQ LM;z饿fEoݠ\Y| );^`6??HR4i&ZMU҃ ,Χ1Îg b;0? -y2"W32&_Z\K/G.P4X` hp x (#>  <5T .headerheader   !        >4X` hp x (#>  P 8Body Text 3Body Text 3  W\  `*Times New RomanTTW        XXXW\  `*Times New RomanTTW  V :footnote texfootnote text  W\  `*Times New RomanTTW        XXXW\  `*Times New RomanTTW  ^ :HTML PreformHTML Preformatted  A7  #&),/25AC%2A`ArialTTC        XXXW\  `*Times New RomanTTW>4X` hp x (#>  R :Body Text 21Body Text 2  W\  `*Times New RomanTTW        XXXW\  `*Times New RomanTTW  ` :Body Text InBody Text Indent 3  W\  `*Times New RomanTTW        XXXW\  `*Times New RomanTTW  P 8Body Text 2Body Text 2  5+ 4 <DL!5W\  `*Times New RomanTTW        XXXW\  `*Times New RomanTTW>4X` hp x (#>  H 4Body TextBody Text  5+ 4 <DL!5C%2A`ArialTTC        XXXW\  `*Times New RomanTTW>4X` hp x (#>  h:Default ParaDefault Paragraph Font        H 4heading 2heading 2&    W\  `*Times New RomanTTW        XXXW\  `*Times New RomanTTW'    H 4heading 1heading 1&     4 # W\  `*Times New RomanTTW        XXXW\  `*Times New RomanTTW>4X` hp x (#>'     A Y)XXXXXX  _    !X               @    1  A                 X!    ?+ 4 <DL!X?(Y2Y$ 7L!XXXXXX      X (!$        7L!XXXXXX   XX<( ` hp x X<   XG XGXG                1   Y7       XGԀ ` WeherebyadoptandincorporatebyreferencetheStatementof  theCaseandStatementofFactscontainedintheAppellantsOpening  BriefsubmittedbyDefendantandAppellant,SeanW.XG  b 7L!XXXXXX   XX<( ` hp x X<  XG XGXG               2   P7       XGԀ ` Statutesaretobeinterpretedinaccordancewiththeirapparent  purpose8andvariousextrinsicaids,includingthehistoryofthestatute,  committeereports,andstaffbillreports(KaiserFoundationHealthPlan, ` Inc.v.Lifeguard,Inc.(1993)18Cal.App.4th1753,1762),aswellas the 8 widerhistoricalcircumstancesofitsenactment.(Wattsv.Crawford, ` supra,10Cal.4th743,atp.753.) 8 ЀXG   7L!XXXXXX   XX<( ` hp x X<  XG XGXG              ,XG  3   P7      ݀ ` Electronicallyavailableat7                    http://www.lao.ca.gov/analysis_1999/crim_justice/crim_justice_issue_toc_a  nl99.html7      . ` XG   7L!XXXXXX   XX<(  hp x X<  Q7  #&),/25 XQXG 8yXG             R,8y R  4   7      ݀  Theslidingscalerangesfrom50%ofthepercapitainstitutional  costoftheYouthAuthorityforcategory5offenses(category1beingthe  mostserious,andcategory7theleastserious);75%forcategory6offenses; ` and100%forcategory7offenses.(Id.) 8 XG   7L!XXXXXX   XXK7` !$'*-036XK  XG XGXG              ,XG  5   _7      ݀ ` Electronicallyavailableat7                    http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/9798/bill/sen/sb_2051  2100/sb_2055_cfa_19980828_125655_sen_floor.html7      .Asapointof ` reference,recentestimatesforannualcostofYouthAuthoritycommitments 8 are$80,000formalewardsand$143,000forfemales.(Reforming ` Corrections:ReportoftheCorrectionsIndependentReviewPanel(June 8 2004),Chapter9,pages208209;unpaginatedversionelectronically   availableathttp://www.report.cpr.ca.gov/indrpt/corr/index.htm.)Although   thesearenotthefiguresusedforthepercapitainstitutionalcost,counties p  willsurelybeaskedtopaysomeoftheescalatinginstitutionalcosts.XG   7L!XXXXXX   XX<( ` hp x X<  XG XGXG              ,XG  6   P7      ݀ ` WrittenmaterialspreparedfortheMay16,2000,JointSenateand  AssemblyPublicSafetyCommittee, InformationalHearingonthe  CaliforniaYouthAuthority,containedmorethantwodozennewspaper ` articlesfromlate1999toearly2000,detailingYouthAuthorityabusesand 8 problems.(Id.,sectioncaptioned NewspaperArticles.)XG  ` 7L!XXXXXX   XX<( ` hp x X<  XG XGXG              ,XG  7   P7      ݀ ` ElectronicallyavailableatXG Ԁ XG7                    http://www.senate.ca.gov/ftp/SEN/COMMITTEE/STANDING/PUBLICSA  FETY/_home/YOUTH_AUTHORITY_REPORT.HTM7      . ` Ѐ 8 Ѐ ` Ѐ 8 Ѐ   Ѐ   Ѐ p  Ѐ H   Ѐ  p  Ѐ  H  Ѐ   Ѐ   Ѐ   Ѐ X  Ѐ 0  Ѐ X Ѐ 0 Ѐ   Ѐ  Ѐ 7L!XXXXXX   XX<( ` hp x X<  XG XGXG              ,XG  8   P7      ݀ ` Additionalimpetusforlegislativeattentioncameintheformofa  civilrightscasechallengingconditionsatCYA.Thecasewasinitiallyfiled  infederalcourtbythePrisonLawOffice,Latham&Watkins,Pillsbury ` Winthrop,andDisabilityRightsAdvocates.(Stevensv.Harper(E.D.Cal.) 8 No.CIVS010675,filedJanuary24,2002.)Subsequentlythatactionwas ` terminatedandthelitigationproceedingbywayofataxpayeractioninstate 8 court.(Farrellv.Harper,No.RG03079344,SuperiorCourtfortheState   ofCalifornia,CountyofAlameda,filedJanuary16,2003.AsofNovember   24,2004,thepartieshaveenteredintoaconsentdecreeinthecase(7         p            http://www.prisonlaw.com/pdfs/farrellcd.pdf7      ),butduring2002and2003, H   frequentnewsstorieshighlightedtheseriousproblemsatCYA,and  p  legislatorswereaskedtoconsidertheDepartmentofJusticeinitialrequest  H  for$4.3milliontofightthecase.(LegislativeAnalystsOffice,Analysisof   the200304BudgetBill:DepartmentofJustice(0820);electronically   availableat         http://www.lao.ca.gov/analysis_2003/crim_justice/cj_03_0820_anl03.htm7      .) X  XG   7L!XXXXXX   XX<( ` hp x X<  XG XGXG              ,XG  9   P7      ݀ ` Electronicallyavailableathttp://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/01  02/bill/sen/sb_17511800/sb_1793_bill_20020222_introduced.html.XG  A 7L!XXXXXX   XX<( ` hp x X<  K7  #&),/25XKXG 8yXG             R,8y R  10   7      ݀SenateBill1793,section3(asamendedAugust23,2002),added  section730.1,subdivision(c),totheWelfareandInstitutionsCode,  providing,inpertinentpart,that Subjecttoanyproceduralrequirements ` imposedbythisarticle,thecourtalsoshallsetamaximumtermofphysical 8 confinementbaseduponthefactsandcircumstancesofthematteror ` matterswhichbroughtorcontinuedtheminorunderthejurisdictionofthe 8 juvenilecourt,whichshallnotexceedthemaximumperiodofadult   confinementdeterminedpursuanttoSection731.Electronicallyavailable   athttp://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/0102/bill/sen/sb_1751 p  1800/sb_1793_bill_20020823_amended_asm.html.XG  H   7     XG  < X  )2<      XG XGXG      <( ` hp x X< XGThislanguagewasintheversionultimatelypassedbytheLegislatureand  p  enrolled.(Sen.BillNo.1793(20012002Reg.Sess.)EnrolledBillText  H  (September9,2002);7                     http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/0102/bill/sen/sb_1751   1800/sb_1793_bill_20020830_enrolled.html 7      .)   XG   7L!XXXXXX   XX<( ` hp x X<  XG XGXG              ,XG  11   P7      ݀Electronicallyavailableat7                    http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/0102/bill/sen/sb_17517        1800/sb_1793_cfa_20020509_101420_sen_comm.html.XG  ( 7L!XXXXXX   XX<( ` hp x X<         12   7      ݀Electronicallyavailableathttp://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/01  02/bill/sen/sb_17511800/sb_1793_bill_20021130_history.html.  XX   7L!XXXXXX   XX<( ` hp x X<  XG XGXG              ,XG  13   P7      ݀Electronicallyavailableat7                    http://www.oig.ca.gov/pdf/Cyayopb1202.pdf7      .  XG  l 7L!XXXXXX   XX<( ` hp x X<  XG XGXG              ,XG  14   P7      ݀CaliforniaCodeofRegulations,title15,sections4951through4957.XG  k 7L!XXXXXX   XX<( ` hp x X<                      15   P7      ݀ ` Ineveryoffensecategory,averagelengthofstaywassubstantially  longerthan10yearsearlier.Forexample,in1993,wardscommittedfor  category7offenses(theleastserious,includingmisdemeanors)servedan ` average13.1months;anandin2002,anaverageof19.3months.In1993, 8 wardscommittedforcategory6offenses(thenexttoleastserious, ` includingseconddegreeburglaryandcartheft)wardsservedanaverageof 8 15months;andin2002anaverageof23.9months.(CaliforniaYouth   Authority,AverageTimeAddedofCutbyBoardCategoryByCalendar   Year(FirstReleases1993to2003),CaliforniaYouthAuthorityResearch p  Division,RudyHaapanen(April14,2004).) H   Ѐ  7L!XXXXXX   XX<( ` hp x X<  XG XGXG              ,XG  16   P7      ݀ ` Electronicallyavailableat7                    http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/0304/bill/sen/sb_0451  0500/sb_459_bill_20030220_introduced.html7      . ` XG   7L!XXXXXX   XX<( ` hp x X<  XG XGXG              ,XG  17   P7      ݀ ` SomeoftheprovisionsintheversionofS.B.459ultimatelyenacted  weremovedaroundorchangedduringthecourseofthelegislativesession,  socitationsinthissectionmaybetothebillaschaptered.Electronically ` availableat7         8           http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/0304/bill/sen/sb_0451 ` 0500/sb_459_bill_20030408_chaptered.html7      .XG   7L!XXXXXX   XX<( ` hp x X<  XG XGXG              ,XG  18   P7      ݀ ` Electronicallyavailableat7                    http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/0304/bill/sen/sb_0451  0500/sb_459_bill_20030220_introduced.html7      . ` XG   7L!XXXXXX   XX<( ` hp x X<  XG XGXG              ,XG  19   P7      ݀ ` Electronicallyavailableathttp://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/03  04/bill/sen/sb_04510500/sb_459_bill_20030408_history.html. x   XG   7L!XXXXXX   XX<( ` hp x X<  XG XGXG              ,XG  20   P7      ݀ ` Electronicallyavailableathttp://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/03  04/bill/sen/sb_04510500/sb_459_bill_20030408_chaptered.html.XG  I 7L!XXXXXX   XX<( ` hp x X<  XG XGXG       ,XG7                     21   7      ݀ ` Electronicallyavailableathttp://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/03 2 04/bill/sen/sb_04510500/sb_459_cfa_20030313_100751_sen_comm.html.XG   7L!XXXXXX   XX<( ` hp x X<  XG XGXG              ,XG  22   P7      ݀ ` Electronicallyavailableat7                    http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/0304/bill/sen/sb_0451  0500/sb_459_cfa_20030317_135832_sen_floor.html7      . ` XG   7L!XXXXXX   XX<( ` hp x X<  XG XGXG              ,XG  23   P7      ݀ ` Electronicallyavailableat7                    http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/0304/bill/sen/sb_0451  0500/sb_459_cfa_20030319_142207_asm_comm.html7      . ` XG   7L!XXXXXX   XX<( ` hp x X<  XG XGXG              ,XG  24   P7      ݀ ` Electronicallyavailableathttp://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/03  04/bill/sen/sb_04510500/sb_459_cfa_20030404_125958_sen_floor.html.XG   7L!XXXXXX   XX<( ` hp x X<  XG XGXG              ,XG  25   P7      ݀ ` Electronicallyavailableathttp://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/03  04/bill/sen/sb_04510500/sb_459_cfa_20030407_152701_asm_floor.html.XG  j 7L!XXXXXX   XX<( ` hp x X<  K7  #&),/25XKXG 8yXG             XG,8y  26   7       XGԀFurther,thedefinitionallanguageinsection726doesnotchangethis  result:  0  AsusedinthissectionandinSection731,"maximumtermof ` imprisonment"meansthelongestofthethreetimeperiodssetforth 8 inparagraph(2)ofsubdivision(a)ofSection1170ofthePenal ` Code,butwithouttheneedtofollowtheprovisionsofsubdivision 8 (b)ofSection1170ofthePenalCodeortoconsidertimeforgood   behaviororparticipationpursuanttoSections2930,2931,and   2932ofthePenalCode,plusenhancementswhichmustbeproven p  ifpled8Ifthechargedoffenseisamisdemeanororafelonynot H   includedwithinthescopeofSection1170ofthePenalCode,the  p  "maximumtermofimprisonment"isthelongesttermof  H  imprisonmentprescribedbylaw.    7        < X  )2<      XG XGXG      <( ` hp x X< XGAgain,thislanguagesimplydefines maximumtermofimprisonment.It   doesnotconflictwiththecourtspowertosetashorterterminYouth   Authoritycommitmentsbasedonthefactsandcircumstancesofthecase X  pursuanttoamendedsection731.XG (2$ 7L!XXXXXX  XXX  0  3|x (>L$XXXXXXHP LaserJet 4050 Series PCL,,,,0!A32 @Gh1:i+00U d 7L!XXXXXX  _     XX  COURTOFAPPEALOFTHESTATEOFCALIFORNIA  FIRSTAPPELLATEDISTRICT ` DIVISIONTWO `   INRESEANW.,  <      D   )   B.4 <DL!XB 4    <      D   )  CourtofAppeal p                4 APersonComingUndertheJuvenile D   )  No.A107500 H    7            H+ 4 <DL!XXH 4 CourtLaw,  <      D   )    p  ____________________________________________)  H   4    <      D   )                B.4 <DL!XBTHEPEOPLEOFTHESTATEOF_CALIFORNNIA_,  )  ContraCosta    4    <      D   )  SuperiorCourt    7             4 PlaintiffandRespondent,     D   )  No.J0401191 X  H+ 4 <DL!XXH 4    <      D   ) 0   4 vs.   <      D   ) X  4    <      D   ) 0 SEANW.,   <      D   )                4    <      D   )    7             4 DefendantandAppellant.     D   ) h ____________________________________________) @ -DL!X-  B+ 4 <DL!DXB          AMICUSCURIAEBRIEFOFYOUTHLAWCENTERINSUPPORTOF  DEFENDANTANDAPPELLANTSEANW. x ONAPPEALFROMTHEJUDGMENTOFTHESUPERIORCOURTFORTHE P CONTRACOSTACOUNTYSUPERIORCOURT, ( HONORABLELOIS_HAIGHT_,JUDGE   YOUTHLAWCENTER 8"# SusanL._Burrell_,StaffAttorney,StateBarNo.74204 #`$ 417MontgomeryStreet,Suite900 #8% SanFrancisco,CA94104 $ & (415)5433379,ext.2911 % ' AttorneyforYouthLawCenter p&!(   H'")  X   -` h X-TableofContents    0`  (#` X 0TableofAuthorities  C . #iii 8 &    34 #`  (#3          6`  %4 #6  INTRODUCTION  d d E .1  Ԉ 8 7        -`  (#X %-'    6` h %`  (#6XX & (    XX         I. ` THELEGISLATUREGAVECOURTSTHEPOWER        ` TOSETYOUTHAUTHORITYMAXIMUMCONFINEMENT  u `     ` TIMEASPARTOFACOMPREHENSIVESTRATEGYTO   8      ` GIVECOUNTIESMORECONTROLOVERYOUTH  N  `  }7    XX XXXX'(      ` AUTHORITYLENGTHOFSTAYANDTREATMENTl l E .nn:3  8     XX        0 ` 0 ` `  ` A. TheLegislatureKnewofLongstandingProblemsWith x  ConfinementTimeSetbythe_YOPB_ԀandtheDesirabilityof P  IncreasedCountyControlOver_CYA_ԀCommitmentsd d E .||G3(x   0 `  ` `  7    XX XXXX    *`  X %*0 ` 0 ` `  ` B.  XXTheSlidingScalePaymentSchemePromptedLegislative ( ProposalsOfferingMoreCountyControlOverLengthofStay @   4  *`  X *0 ` 0 ` `  `                -` h X -0 ` 0 ` `  ` C. WidelyPublicizedReportsofAbusiveConditionsat_CYA_Ԁ 8 EncouragedLegislativeEffortstoGiveCountiesMore ` ControlOverCommitmentsd d E .**168  0 `  ` `  7            *`  X *0 ` 0 ` `  ` D. LegislativeAntecedentstoSenateBill459WouldHave  ProvidedEvenMoreDramaticChangestoJuvenileCourt p Powersd d E .448H  -` h X -0 `  ` `  0 ` 0 ` `  ` E. The2002InspectorGeneralsReporttoSenatorBurton H ConfirmedOngoing_YOPB_ԀOverreachingandtheNeedfor   IncreasedLocalControlOverConfinementTimeD .``F10  0 `  ` `              0 ` 0 ` `  ` F. SenateBill459ProvidedCountyControlOverYouth X ! AuthorityLengthofStayWithouttheHeavyFiscal0!"  0 `  Impact h D .hh#11"X#` `  0 `  ` `  !`             0 ` 0 ` `  ` G. TheLanguageConferringPowersintheJuvenileCourttoSet #% MaximumConfinementTimein_CYA_ԀCommitmentsWas $& SpecificallyConsideredbyMultipleCommitteesinEach h% ' HouseandLegislativeFloorAnalysesD .=13@&!(  0 `  ` `  0 ` 0 ` ` 0  1.  TheSenateCommitteeonPublicSafetyAnalysisD .L14'@#*   0 ` 0 ` `    -` h!X -0 ` 0 ` ` 0  2.  TheSenateRulesCommitteeFloorAnalysis @ 16)$,   0 ` 0 ` ` 0  3.  TheAssemblyCommitteeonPublicSafetyAnalysis @ 16*4&.   0 ` 0 ` ` 0  4.  TheSenateRulesCommitteeSecondFloorAnalysis @ 17(,x'0   0 ` 0 ` ` 0  5.  ThePublished2003BillSummary @ 18l-(2   _-4 hX!-0 4 0 4 4  4 II. ARGUMENTSTHATTHEFAILURETOCHANGE  WELFAREANDINSTITUTIONSCODESECTION726  NEGATESTHECHANGETOSECTION731,ORTHAT ` ACCEPTINGTHECHANGEWOULDSOMEHOWUNDO 8 INDETERMNINATESENTENCINGFORJUVENILES,ARE ` WITHOUTMERIT @| 198  3` h 4 X3            0 `  ` `  + -              N7  #&),/25X NXG 8yXG      `.`  !!$'*-036  )2`R8y RCONCLUSION  p   ` 21    , -        B X  `  !!$'*3B      H    'D X 'TABLEOFAUTHORITIES    &    -4 #< -             Cases 0 `  0 -        - < 4 #-'`0    ?( ` hp x < ?XX $D X$ XXFarrellv.Harper,No.RG03079344, P $ `  < $ ` SuperiorCourtfortheStateofCalifornia,CountyofAlameda, (  ` filedJanuary16,2003d d E .*8   'D `  'InreEricJ.(1979)25Cal.3d522D .120 `  InreJamesA.(1980)101CalApp.3d332D .ll720  `  Johnstonv.SonomaCountyAgriculturalPreservation&   FF .@..OpenSpaceDist.(2002)100Cal.App.4th973@..19   KaiserFoundationHealthPlan,Inc.v.Lifeguard,Inc.(1993) H  $ `  < $ ` 18Cal.App.4th17d d E .ZZ%2  p  'D `  'Manduleyv.SuperiorCourt(2002)27Cal.4th537D .?21   Stevensv.Harper(E.D.Cal.)No.CIVS010675,  & .@..filedJanuary24,2002@..8 X Watttsv.Crawford(1995)10Cal.4th743C .812 X &                ?( ` hp x < ?  BillsandBillHistories 8  7 -        '8    ! `  X!SenateBill459zz@ .< < passim h SenateBill459(20032004Reg.Sess.) h asintroducedFebruary20,2003.@ .**/11,13 @ SenateBill459(20032004Reg.Sess.)Enrolled!BillText    ` (April7,2003)@ .vv#12,14 x ! SenateBill459(20032004Reg.Sess.)Chaptered!BillText ("x#  ` (April8,2003),1.)D .,12 #P$ SenateBill459(20032004Reg.Sess.)SenateBill! $ &  ` History!CompleteBillHistoryD .213 % '   XG XGXG       XGSenateBill1793zz@ . passim 8'") SenateBill1793(20012002Reg.Sess.)asintroducedFeb.22,2002d d E .``R8 (8$+ ЀSenateBill1793(20012002Reg.Sess)asamendedAugust23,2002d d E .Q9 *%- SenateBill1793(20012002Reg.Sess)EnrolledBillText H,'/  ` (September9,2002)d d E .HH'9  -p(0  -H)1 SenateBill1793,CompleteBillHistory(20012002Reg.Sess.)D .M10    ̀SessionLaws ` < -              XG XGXG       XGStats1996,c.6,(S.B.681),4and5,amendingWelf.&InstCode `  ` 912and912.5d d E .<<$5 8 Stats1996,c.6,(S.B.681),4,amendingWelf.&InstCode912d d E .R5   Stats.1998,c.632(S.B.2055),1,addingWelf.&Inst.Code912.1.d d E .22W5 H   Stats.2003,c.4(S.B.459),1,amendingWelf.&Inst.Code731d d E .S1  H   Stats.2003,c.4(S.B.459,16,20,eff.April8,2003,operativeJan.1,   2004,amendingWelf.&Inst.Code1719,1723.)D .B20   `@               XG XGXG         XGStatutesandRegulations X   CaliforniaCodeofRegulations,title15,sections4951through4957D ...S10  WelfareandInstitutionsCode h  ` Section726= .b b 1,19,20 @  ` section726,subdivision(c)VVB .01,19 h  ` section730.1d d E . !8 @  ` section730.1,subdivision(c)B .VV28,9   ` section731zz@ .> > passim   ` section731,subdivision(b)zz@ .0passim x  ` section779D .> > 12 P  ` section912d d E .> > 5 (x  ` section1717D . 11 P XG  `  XGsection1719,subdivision(d)D .,,112 ( XG  `  XGsection1720D . 12   XG  `  XG  OtherLegislativeAuthorities $'   AssemblyCommitteeonPublicSafety,analysisofSen.BillNo.459(2003 N&!) 2004Reg.Sess.)asamendedMarch17,2003A .rr91617 &'v"* JointSenateandAssemblyCommitteesonPublicSafety, Informational (&$, HearingontheCaliforniaYouthAuthority(May16,2000)d d E .PPH6 )$- JointSenateandAssemblyCommitteesonPublicSafety,JointOversight ^+&/ HearingoftheSenateandAssemblyCommitteesonPublicSafetyonthe 6,'0 DepartmentoftheYouthAuthority(May16,2000):Report, Executive -^(1 Summary(June15,2000)d d E .""'7 -6)2 ЇLegislativeAnalystsOffice,Analysisofthe199900BudgetBill,  DepartmentoftheYouthAuthority(5460)d d E .ll74  LegislativeAnalystsOffice,Analysisofthe200304BudgetBill: 8 DepartmentofJustice(0820)d d E .+8 ` LegislativeAnalystsOffice, ChallengesandStrategiesforReformofthe   YouthAuthority,(inmaterialsforMay16,2000JointPublicSafety   Committeehearing)C . !67 p  SenateCommitteeonPublicSafety,AnalysisofSen.BillNo.459(2003  p  2004Reg.Sess.)asamendedMarch12,2003A .rr91416  H  SenateCommitteeonPublicSafety,3dreadinganalysisofSen.BillNo.   459(20032004Reg.Sess.),asamendedApril3,2003,p.2.D .ppJ18   SenateCommitteeonPublicSafety,AnalysisofSen.BillNo.1793(2001 0  2002Reg.Session)asamendedApril25,2002d d E .;9 X SenateCommitteeonPublicSafety,2003BillSummary:MeasuresSigned  andVetoed(October2003)D .*18  SenateRulesCommittee,OfficeofSenateFloorAnalyses, @ 3dreadinganalysisofSen.BillNo.459(.20032004Reg.Sess), h asamendedMarch17,2003D .(16 @ SenateRulesCommittee,OfficeofSenateFloorAnalyses,analysisofSen.  BillNo.459(Reg.Sess..20032004),asamendedApril3,2003A .M1718 x SenateRulesCommittee,OfficeofSenateFloorAnalyses,Rep.onSen. (x BillNo.2055(199798Reg.Sess.)asamendedAugust28,1998d d E .L5 P   Constitutions     CaliforniaConstitution,articleIV,section16D .XX>21 `!" UnitedStatesConstitution,FourteenthAmendmentD .bb?21 #`$   OtherAuthorities $ &   BoardofCorrections,InstitutionsOperationalQualityAssuranceProject p&!( fortheCaliforniaYouthAuthority,RecommendationDevelopment H'") Worksheets!TechnicalAssistancePlan,AppendixF(October2000)C .||P78  (p#* D                          CaliforniaYouthAuthority,AverageTimeAddedofCutbyBoard ) %, CategoryByCalendarYear(FirstReleases1993to2003)D .F11 *%- CaliforniaYouthAuthorityResearchDivision,RudyHaapanen(April14, X,'/ 2004)D .l l 11 0-(0  X               XG XGXG       XG .X)1 DeMuro,etal,TheCaliforniaYouthAuthorityReport:PartThree  ReformingtheCYA(1988)CommonwealResearchInstituted d E .FFE4  OfficeoftheInspectorGeneral,"ReviewoftheProcessUsedbythe 8 CaliforniaYouthAuthorityandtheYouthfulOffenderParoleBoardto ` EstablishWardProgramRequirements"(December2002),Executive 8 SummaryA .F F 1011   ReformingCorrections:ReportoftheCorrectionsIndependentReview p  Panel(June2004),Chapter9d d E .+5 H   Z               p  ?( ` hp x `  ? INTRODUCTION          1          XG XGXG       `  XGThiscasepresentsthequestionwhetherSenateBill459( S.B.459) ` changedthelawtogivejuvenilecourtsincreasedpowertosetmaximum  confinementtimeincasesinvolvingYouthAuthoritycommitments.(Stats. 8 2003,c.4(S.B.459),1,eff.April8,2003,operativeJan.1,2004.) , |  ` PriorcaselawhasconstruedWelfareandInstitutionsCodesection p   726asrequiringjuvenilecourtstoimposethemaximumconfinementtime    anadultcouldreceiveforthesameoffense.S.B.459changedWelfareand  H  InstitutionsCodesection731,subdivision(b),theCodesectionthat <  specificallyaddressesYouthAuthoritycommitments,asfollows:    ` 0 ` AminorcommittedtotheDepartmentoftheYouthAuthorityalso   maynotbeheldinphysicalconfinementforaperiodoftimein t excessofthemaximumtermofphysicalconfinementsetbythe L courtbaseduponthefactsandcircumstancesofthematterormatters $t whichbroughtorcontinuedtheminorunderthejurisdictionofthe L juvenilecourt,whichmaynotexceedthemaximumperiodofadult $ confinementasdeterminedpursuanttothissection.(Id.)` `  0 `  ` `  `             ` Theamendmentdoestwothings.First,itcontinuesthelongstanding \ policythatjuvenilesmaynotbeheldinphysicalconfinementforlonger  thanthemaximumtermanadultcouldreceiveforthesameoffense.(Welf. 4! &Inst.Code726,subd.(c).)Andsecond,itprovidesthatinYouth (x# Authoritycommitments,the maximumtermofphysicalconfinement[is] l% setbythecourtbaseduponthefactsandcircumstancesinvolved.(Welf. ' &Inst.Code731,subd.(b),bracketedmaterialadded.)  D)  ` Theadditionofthewordsprovidingforthecourttosetatermbased 8"+ onthefactsandcircumstances,representa materialalterationofthe |#- statute,andsignalsalegislativeintenttochangethemeaning.(Wattsv. $ / Crawford(1995)10Cal.4th743,753.)Thewordsofthestatuteareclear. &T!1 Thejuvenilecourtsetsamaximumtermofconfinementbasedonthefacts H'"3 andcircumstancesofthematter(s)beforethecourt. (#5 ЀProvidingincreasedlocalpoweroverconfinementtimewasjustonepiece ) %7 ofacomprehensivelegislativepackagedesignedtogivecountiesmore  controlovertheirYouthAuthoritycommitments,andaddressinappropriate D practicesoftheYouthfulOffenderParoleBoardinsettingconfinement 8 time.Thus,S.B.459soughttoreduceunnecessaryconfinementtimeby | creatinganewYouthAuthorityBoarddesignedtobeinmuchclosertouch   withwardtreatmentneedsandinstitutionaloperations.ItcalledforYouth  T  Authoritytodevelopastandardizedsystemfordisciplinarysanctions.The H   legislationalsoincreasedaccountabilityfortimelyprovisionofservicesby   requiringYouthAuthoritytoprovidecountieswithcasetreatmentplansfor   eachward;anestimatedtimeframeforcompletionofthetreatment;and d  annualreviews.Itfurtherclarifiedthejuvenilecourtsabilitytoremove X  wardsfromYouthAuthorityiftheminordoesnotreceivethetreatmentthat   justifiedcommitment. 0 ЀTheclearwordsoftheamendment,itslegislativebackground,andthe $t historicalcontextinwhichitwasenacted,allindicatethattheLegislature h intendedtochangethejuvenilecourtsdispositionalpowersinYouth  Authoritycommitments.           2      @  Ѐ 4" Ӏ x$ 0 `  I. ` THELEGISLATUREGAVECOURTSTHEPOWERTOSET P% YOUTHAUTHORITYMAXIMUMCONFINEMENTTIME (x& ASPARTOFACOMPREHENSIVESTRATEGYTOGIVE P' COUNTIESMORECONTROLOVERYOUTHAUTHORITY (( LENGTHOFSTAYANDTREATMENT)` `  ?+ 4` hp x X?0 4  4 4              B( ` hp x , XB ` SenateBill459representstheculminationofseveralyearsof `!+ legislativeconcernsoverproblemsattheCaliforniaYouthAuthority "- ( CYA)anddiscussionsovercountiesneedforincreasedcontrolover #8/ lengthofstay.Intheperiodbeforethebill,therewasmountingevidence ,%| 1 thattheYouthfulOffenderParoleBoard( YOPB)wasescalatinglength p&!3 ofconfinementforimproperreasons,andthatthisworkedagainstthe  rehabilitativegoalsofthesystem.Inaddition,theLegislaturerecognized D countiesinterestinhavingmorepowertocontrollengthofstayintheface 8 ofincreasedfinancialresponsibilityforCYAcommitments.Further,a | growingawarenessofseriousproblemsintheCYAsystemprovided   impetusforstatutorychangesthatincreasedcountycontrolover  T  confinementtime.TheamendmentstoWelfareandInstitutionsCode H   section731,subdivision(b),werepartofadeliberate,comprehensive   legislativestrategytorespondtotheseconcerns.   Ӏ d  0 ` 0 ` `  ` A. LegislatureKnewofLongstandingProblemsWith <  ConfinementTimeSetbytheYOPBandtheDesirability   ofIncreasedCountyControlOverCYACommitments   <(  hp x X<0    u            B( ` hp x  XB ` LongbeforeS.B.459,theYouthfulOffender ParoleBoarddrew L criticismforitsroleinlengtheningconfinementtimeforYouthAuthority  wards.ThroughacombinationofrepeatedlyrevisingtheBoardsparole ' guidelinesinanupwarddirection;settingparoleconsiderationdateswell k abovetheBoardsownguidelines;andaddingtimeostensiblyforadditional _ treatmentordisciplinaryreasons,YOPBdramaticallyincreasedlengthof ! CYAcommitmentsoverthepastseveraldecades.Unfortunately,many 7#  timeaddswerebasedonvagueorflimsyevidence,andwardswereoften +{% orderedtostaylongertoreceiveprogrammingthateitherdidnotfittheir o' needsorwasnotavailable.(DeMuro,etal,TheCaliforniaYouthAuthority ) Report:PartThreeReformingtheCYA(1988)CommonwealResearch  G+ Institute,pp.2326.)StaffatCYAreportedthatwardsfeltincreasingly ;"- demoralized,andthatthiscontributedtomoredisciplinaryproblemswith #/ resultant maxingoutbecauseyouthhadnoincentivetotrytodowell. $ 1 (Id.,atp.28.)Asearlyas1988,policyadvocatescalledfortheabolishment &W!3 ofYOPB.(Id.,atp.14.) K'"5  ` Bythedawnofthenewcentury,theLegislaturewasawareofthese (#7 issuesandtheneedforlegislationtoaddressthem.TheLegislative )#%9 AnalystsOfficeAnalysisofthe199900BudgetBill,notedthattheYOPB +g&; washoldinglessseriousoffendersfortwiceaslongastheywouldbeheld [,'= atthecountylevel.(LegislativeAnalystsOffice,Analysisofthe199900 -(? BudgetBill,DepartmentoftheYouthAuthority(5460), CountiesShould  HaveInputIntoLengthofStayDecisions.)           3     TheAnalysisalsonotedthe D countiesinterestincontrollinglengthofstay,sincetheslidingscale 8 paymentsystemmeansthatcountiesmustnowpay50%to100%ofthecost | forlessseriousoffenders.TheLegislativeAnalystsOfficeurgedthat   counties 8haveagreatersayinthelengthofstayofwardsthattheysend  T  totheYouthAuthority.(Id.) H   0 ` 0 ` `  ` XX  B.  XXSlidingScalePaymentSchemePromptedLegislative   ProposalsOfferingMoreCountyControlOverLengthof d  Stay<   <(  hp x X<0      Q7  #&),/25 XQXG 8yXG      R8y R  CountieswereincreasinglyconcernedwithCYAlengthofstayfor <  purelyfiscalreasons.In1996,theLegislaturehadenactedaslidingscale 0  paymentschemerequiringcountiestopaymonthlyfeesthatwere t determinedbythewardscommitmentoffense!thelessseriousthe  categoryoftheoffense,themorethecountyhadtopay.(Stats1996,c.6, L (S.B.681),4and5,amendingWelf.&InstCode912and912.5.)։wer        B X  )2B @                4       Q7` !$'*-036 XQ ` Beforethislegislation,countiespaidtheStateonly$25amonth,for G  eachoffendersenttoCYA.(WestsCaliforniaJuvenileLawsandCourt " Rules(1996),Welf.&InstCode912.)Theslidingscalelegislation $ increasedthebasicfeeto$150peroffenderpermonth,andaddedthe c& slidingscalepaymentsforlessseriousoffenders.Thistranslatedintoan W( annualfeeof$1,800forthemostseriousoffenders.(Stats1996,c.6,(S.B. * 681),4,amendingWelf.&InstCode912.)Butfortheleastserious  /, category,theslidingscalesystemnowrequiredcountiestopay100%ofthe #"s. institutionalcost,withthe199697levelcappedbylegislation(Stats.1998, g#0 c.632(S.B.2055),1,addingWelf.&Inst.Code912.1.)Thecostat $2 thattimewasabout$32,000!almost18timesasmuchasthebasicfeefor  moreseriousoffenses.(Sen.RulesCom.,Off.ofSen.FloorAnalyses, D Rep.onSen.BillNo.2055(199798Reg.Sess.)asamendedAugust28, 8 1998.)           5     󀀀 |  ` Notsurprisingly,theslidingscalelegislationdramaticallyheightened   countyawarenessofCYAlengthofstay.Itprompteddiscussionwith  T  legislatorsaboutwhatcouldbedonetoshortenlengthofstayforyouthin H   thelessseriousoffensecategories,andwhatcouldbedonetogivecounties   morecontrolovertheyouththeycommitted.   l7 !$'*-036 ` !*3l            Z( ` hp x  !*3Z0 ` 0 ` `  ` C. WidelyPublicizedReportsofAbusiveConditionsatCYA <  EncouragedLegislativeEffortstoGiveCountiesMore   ControlOverCommitments   <(  hp x X<0    Öwer            B( ` hp x  XB ` InadditiontothegrowingconcernsovertheYOPBandthecounties L desiretohavemorecontroloverlengthofstayforfiscalreasons,theperiod  justbeforeS.B.459wasfilledwithfrontpagenewsofabusiveconditions $ andpracticesintheYouthAuthoritysystem.            6     InMay2000,theLegislature h heldafulldayhearingonproblemsinthesystem.(JointSenateand \ AssemblyCommitteesonPublicSafety, InformationalHearingonthe ! CaliforniaYouthAuthority,May16,2000.)Severalofthewitnesses 4# presentedmaterialsrelatingtotheYOPBsroleinescalatinglengthofstay, (x% andthedesirabilityofincreasedcountycontroloverconfinementtime. l' (Id.) )  S ` Atthehearing,theLegislativeAnalystsOfficepresentedachecklist  ofissuestobeconsidered,includingtheneedtoreexaminetheroleofthe D YOPB.TheOfficespecificallyrecommendedtolegislatorsthat, Counties 8 willneedgreatersayinlengthofstayforwardsinYouthAuthority, | especiallygivenhigherfeeschargedtocounties,andtypesofservices   wardsreceive.(LegislativeAnalystsOffice, ChallengesandStrategies  T  forReformoftheYouthAuthority,(May16,2000),p.3),includedin H   materialsfortheJointSenateandAssemblyCommitteesonPublicSafety,    InformationalHearingontheCaliforniaYouthAuthority,May16,2000.)   The ExecutiveSummaryoftheReportpublishedaftertheJointPublic d  Safetyhearing,stated: X    XX XXXX      0 ` RXX RIftheCYAisonlytoprovidecorrectionalprogramsforjuvenile ? courtcommitmentsthereisnouseforaYouthfulOffenderParole  Board.Minimumlengthsofstaycouldbebetterestablishedbythe  committingcourtandthereleaseandrevocationdecisionswithin w thatdictatecouldthenbemadebyprogrampersons.Thisisthe O modelthatisfollowedbyamajorityofstatesinthenation.(Joint 'w SenateandAssemblyCommitteesonPublicSafety,JointOversight O HearingoftheSenateandAssemblyCommitteesonPublicSafetyon ' theDepartmentoftheYouthAuthority(May16,2000):Report,   ExecutiveSummary(June15,2000),p.2.)eAn        ` `             !    7     XX     R8S `  XXAsaresultoftheJointPublicSafetyCommitteehearing,theYouth  andAdultCorrectionalAgencywasrequestedtoimplementseriesoffollow D upactionstoaddresssystemicproblemsattheYouthAuthority.Amongthe 8 actionswasaQualityAssuranceprocess,convenedbytheBoardof | Corrections.Thatprocessresultedinanumberofrecommendations,   includingoneto Developlegislationthat,incooperationwiththe  T  department[CYA]givesjuvenilecourtscompleteauthorityforsetting H   wardslengthofstayanddeterminingtheirreadinessforparole,thereby   eliminatingtheneedfortheYouthfulOffenderParoleBoard(YOPB).   (BoardofCorrections,InstitutionsOperationalQualityAssuranceProject d  fortheCaliforniaYouthAuthority,RecommendationDevelopment X  Worksheets!TechnicalAssistancePlan,AppendixF(October2000),   Recommendation31,p.34,materialinbracketsadded.)       "@    8      0 0 ` 0 ` `  ` D. LegislativeAntecedentstoSenateBill459WouldHave $t ProvidedEvenMoreDramaticChangestoJuvenileCourt L Powers$  <(  hp x X<0    B( ` hp x  XB ` InFebruary2002,SenatorJohnBurtonintroducedSenateBill1793  ( S.B.1793),the YouthAuthorityAccountabilityReformActof2002.   ThebillcalledforeliminationoftheYOPB,andplacedthepowertoset  \" paroledatesinthesuperiorcourtofthecommittingcounties.(Sen.BillNo. P$ 1793(20012002Reg.Sess.)asintroducedFebruary22,2002.)       #    9     In  addition,thebillshiftedparoleandparolerevocationfunctionstolocal D probationandjuvenilecourts.Thebillwentthroughseveralamendments, 8 andasamendedAugust23,2002,containedthelanguageatissueinthis | case,amendingWelfareandInstitutionsCodesection730.1,subdivision   (c),togivecourtsthepowertosetmaximumconfinementtimebasedonthe  T  factsandcircumstancesofthematter(s)thatbroughttheminorbeforethe H   court.       $@    10     TheSenateCommitteeonPublicSafetyAnalysisoftheBillforthe   May7,2002hearingstatedthatapurposeoftheBillwasto Increase   accountabilityfortheYouthAuthoritybygivingmorecontrolin d  establishingthetermsofstayandcustodialtreatmentforyouthful X  offenders.(Sen.Com.onPub.Safety,AnalysisofSen.BillNo.1793   (20012002Reg.Session)asamendedApril25,2002,p.K.)       %    11     Theanalysis 0 notedthatjuvenilecourtsarefarbettersuitedfortheresponsibilityof $t determininghowlongwardsstayatCYAbecausetheyheardirectlyfrom h probation,prosecutors,thejuvenilevictimsastheyconsiderhoweachcase  shallbehandled.(Id.,atp.L.) @   ` Whileprobationandthejudgeslikedtheideaofmorecontrolover 4" CYAcommitments,theS.B.1793discussionstookplaceamidsta  deepeningfiscalcrisisforthecounties,andsomeeventuallybalkedatthe D potentialcostsofthetotalshiftinresponsibility.Evenwiththeseconcerns, 8 thelegislationpassedinbothlegislativehouseswiththesection730.1, | subdivision(c)languageaspartofthepackage.However,GovernorDavis   vetoedtheBillonSeptember30,2002.(Sen.BillNo.1793,CompleteBill  T  History(20012002Reg.Sess.).)       &    12      H   0 ` 0 ` `  ` E. The2002InspectorGeneralsReporttoSenatorBurton   ConfirmedOngoingYOPBOverreachingandtheNeed d  forIncreasedLocalControlOverConfinementTime<   <(  hp x X<0    B( ` hp x  XB ` InMarch,2002,asS.B.1793wasmakingitswaythroughthe <  Legislature,SenatorBurton,thenChairmanoftheSenateRulesCommittee, 0  askedtheOfficeoftheInspectorGeneraltoreviewYOPBandCYA t practices.(OfficeoftheInspectorGeneral,"ReviewoftheProcessUsedby  theCaliforniaYouthAuthorityandtheYouthfulOffenderParoleBoardto L EstablishWardProgramRequirements"(December2002),Executive @ Summary,p.3.)       '    13     TheInspectorGeneralfoundthathavingtheYOPB  conductinitialhearingsaddedlittlevaluetotheprocessandfrequently   resultedinparoleconsiderationdatesthatexceededregulatoryguidelines.  \" (Id.,atp.11.) P$  ` TheInspectorGeneralfoundthattheYOPBparticularlyexceeded & paroleconsiderationdatesbeyondTitle15,CaliforniaCodeofRegulations (( guidelinesforlessseriousoffenders.       (^    14     Arecordsreviewfoundthat70%of  l* wardscommittedintheleastseriouscategoriesofoffensereceivedparole `!, considerationdatesthatexceededTitle15guidelines,byanaverageof5.47 ". monthsperward.(Id.,atp.12.)Bycomparison,in1993only17%of #80 wardsinthesecategoriesreceivedparoleconsiderationdatesthatexceeded ,%| 2 guidelines.TheInspectorGeneralsreportalsofoundthattheYOPB p&!4 frequentlydisregardedtherecommendationsofYouthAuthoritystaffwith  respecttotimeaddsandtimecuts.(Id.,atp.13.) D  ` Thisreportconfirmedconcernsaboutlengthofconfinementin 8 CYA,andtheYOPBsroleinincreasinglengthofstay.       )    15     Thedepthof | theseproblemsandnearsuccessofS.B.1793convincedSenatorBurtonto   continuehiseffortswithrespecttoincreasedcountycontroloverYouth  T  Authoritylengthofstayandtreatmentneeds. H               0 ` 0 ` `  ` F. SenateBill459ProvidedCountyControlOverYouth   AuthorityLengthofStayWithouttheHeavyFiscal d  Impact<   0 `  ` `                ` JustmonthsaftertheInspectorGeneralsreport,SenatorBurton <  introducedthemeasureatissueinthiscase,S.B.459.(SenBillNo.459 0  (20032004Reg.Sess.)asintroducedFebruary20,2003.)       *     16     Thislegislation t gavethecountiesmorecontroloverCaliforniaYouthAuthority  commitments,withoutplacingfullparoleresponsibilityinthesuperior L court.ItstilleliminatedtheYOPB,butplacedparoledutiesinanewentity, @ theYouthAuthorityBoard.ThatBoardwastobeheadedbytheDirectorof  theYouthAuthority,andwasdesignedtobemuchmorecloselytiedtothe   CYAsystem.(Id.,11.)  \"  ` Thus,byamendingWelfareandInstitutionsCodesection1717to P$ imposebackgroundexperiencerequirements,andbyrequiringtrainingof & Boardmembers,thelegislationsoughttoreducepastproblemswithBoard (( orderedrequirementsforprogramsthatwereinappropriateorunavailable.  (SenBillNo.459(20032004Reg.Sess.)Enrolled!BillText(April7, D 2003),14.)       +    17     ByamendingWelfareandInstitutionsCodesection1719, 8 subdivision(d),torequireCYAtodevelopandimplementasystemof | graduatedsanctionsforaddressingwarddisciplinarymatters,thebillalso   providedawaytostandardizeandpotentiallylimittimeadds.(Id.,16.)  T   ` LikeS.B.1793,thislegislationwentfarbeyondtheparoleboard H   issuestoenhancecountycontroloverCYAconfinement.Itdidsoin   severalways.ByamendingWelfareandInstitutionsCodesection731,the   billallowedthecourttosetthemaximumconfinementtimebasedonthe d  factsandcircumstancesofthecase,thusgivinglocalcourtsincreased X  powertocontrollengthofstay.(SenBillNo.459(20032004Reg.Sess.)   Chaptered!BillText(April8,2003),1.)ByamendingWelfareand 0 InstitutionsCodesection1720,torequireYouthAuthoritytoprovide $t countieswithtreatmentplans;estimatedtimeframesforcompletionof h treatment;andannualcaseprogressreviews,thebillincreasedYouth  Authorityaccountabilityfortreatment,andgavecountiesamechanismfor @  receivingongoingfeedbackaboutwhatisactuallyhappeningtotheiryouth. 4" (Id.,17.)AndbyamendingWelfareandInstitutionsCodesection779to x$ clarifytheabilityofcourtstosetasideormodifycommitments,thebill  & gavecourtsincreasedpowerovercaseswheretheyouthdoesnotreceived P( thebenefitsthatinitiallyjustifiedcommitment.(Id.,2.) D*  ` TheLegislativeCounselsDigestatthetimethebillwasintroduced,  , statedthatamongotherthings, Thebillwouldalsoprovidethataminor !. maynotbeheldinphysicalconfinementforaperiodoftimeinexcessof #`0 themaximumtermofphysicalconfinementsetbythecourt,asspecified. T$2  (Sen.BillNo.459(20032004Reg.Sess.)asintroducedFebruary20, % 4 2003.)       ,    18     Thebilldidthisbyamendingsection731,subdivision(b),   specificallyprovidingforthecourttosetthemaximumtermofconfinement D baseduponthefactsandcircumstances,foraperiodnottoexceedthe 8 maximumtimeanadultcouldreceivefortheoffense(s): | 0 ` AminorcommittedtotheYouthAuthorityalsomaynotbeheldin   physicalconfinementforaperiodoftimeinexcessofthemaximum    termofconfinementsetbythecourtbaseduponthefactsand p   circumstancesofthematterormatterswhichbroughtorcontinued H   theminorunderthejurisdictionofthejuvenilecourt,whichmaynot  p  exceedthemaximumperiodofadultconfinementasdetermined  H  pursuanttothissection.(Id.) ` `   0 ` 0 ` `  `   ` G. TheLanguageConferringPowersintheJuvenileCourtto   SetMaximumConfinementTimeinCYACommitments X  WasSpecificallyConsideredbyMultipleCommitteesin 0  EachHouseandLegislativeFloorAnalysesX  0 `  ` `   ` ThebillwasthoroughlyconsideredbytheLegislature.Itwasheard  beforetheSenateCommitteeonPublicSafety,theSenateCommitteeon L Appropriations,theAssemblyCommitteeonPublicSafety,andthe @ AssemblyCommitteeonAppropriations.Moreover,thebillwasamended  fourtimes.(March10,2003;March12,2004;March17,2004;andApril3,  2004;Sen.BillNo.459(20032004Reg.Sess.)SenateBillHistory  \ CompleteBillHistory.)       -    19     󀀀Whilesignificantchangesweremadeto P! languageinotherpartsofthebill,theproposedsection731language # remainedthesamethroughout.Followingthisconsiderabledeliberation, (% thebillpassedbothhousesonApril7,2003,withoutasingle Novote.  l' TheGovernorsignedS.B.459intolawtheverysameday.(Id.) `!)  ` Eachamendedversionandthebillultimatelyenrolledandchaptered "+ containedpreciselythesamelanguageamendingsection731,subdivision #8- (b),thatappearedinthebillatthetimeitwasintroduced.Eachamended ,%| / versionandthebillultimatelyenrolledandchapteredreferredtothis p&!1 languageintheLegislativeCounselsDigest: Thebillwouldalsoprovide  thataminormaynotbeheldinphysicalconfinementforaperiodoftimein D excessofthemaximumtermofphysicalconfinementsetbythecourt,as 8 specified.(Sen.BillNo.459(20032004Reg.Sess.)Enrolled!BillText | (April7,2003).)       .    20     Inaddition,aseriesofcommitteeanalysesclearly   informedlegislatorsthatS.B.459intendedachangeinjuvenilecourt  T  dispositionalpowerswithrespecttoconfinementtimeforYouthAuthority H   commitments.   &    *4 #X*          0 ` 0 ` ` 0   1.  TheSenateCommitteeonPublicSafetyAnalysis               * X4 #*'    <( ` hp x X<0 ` 0 ` ` XX     `  XXTheinitialanalysis,preparedfortheMarch13,2003hearingofthe p  SenateCommitteeonPublicSafety,includedthechangeinitslistingof    KeyIssuesinthebill: H 0 ` Shouldjuvenilecourtsbeauthorizedtosetamaximumconfinement < intheCYAbaseduponthefactsandcircumstancesofthematteror d matterswhichbroughtorcontinuedtheminorunderthejurisdiction < ofthejuvenilecourt?(Sen.Com.onPublicSafety,AnalysisofSen.  BillNo.459(20032004Reg.Sess.)asamendedMarch12,2003,p.  B).       /@    21     t` `  0 `  ` `  TheSenateCommitteeonPublicSafetyanalysishighlightedthechangeby $t includingthethenexistinglanguageofsection731,ascontrastedwiththe h! proposedlanguage.(Id.,atp.E.)Itthenunderlinedthechangedlanguage, # specificallyinforminglegislatorsthat: @% 0 ` Thisbillwouldauthorizethecourttoadditionallysetmaximum  \( termsofphysicalconfinementintheCYAbaseduponthefactsand  4) circumstancesofthematterormatterswhichbroughtorcontinued ! * theminorunderthejurisdictionofthejuvenilecourt.Thisnew "+ provisionwouldprovideforcourtconsiderationoffactorsaboutthe l#, offenseandtheoffendershistorywhichwouldbecomparableto D$- thosenowemployedforthetriadsentencingofadults,andhave %l . thoseconsiderationsreflectedintheCYAconfinement󀀀term %D!/ orderedbythecourt.(Id.,atp.I,emphasisadded.)&"0` `  0 `  ` `  Theanalysiswentontoexplainthatexpertsandadvocateshadexpressed |(#2 seriousconcernsabouttheYOPBformanyyears,andthatthe2000  TechnicalAssistanceplanadministeredbytheBoardofCorrections D recommendedtheeliminationofYOPB.(Id.,atp.J.)Theanalysisalso 8 referencedtheInspectorGeneralsfindingsthat,whiletheinitialparole | considerationdatesgiventowardsin2001was17.8months,theaverage   lengthofstaywasactually28.3months,largelybecauseofYOPBtime  T  addsfordisciplinaryreasonsorforfailuretocompleteBoardordered H   programs.(Id.)TheInspectorGeneralhadfoundthatmanyofthesetime   addsoccurredbecausetheYOPBunreasonablyimposedprogramorders,   andthatBoardmemberslackedexpertiseintreatmentneeds.(Id.) d   ` Theanalysisfinallynotedthat, Statepolicieshaveincreasingly X  recognizedtheneedtostrengthenthelocaljuvenilejusticesystemandits   arrayofalternativesandgraduatedsanctionsforjuvenileoffenders.It 0 specificallyspokeofthisneedinthecontextoftheslidingscalefee $t legislationenactedin1996,whichimposedmuchgreaterfinancial h responsibilityoncountiessendinglessseriousoffenderstoYouth  Authority.(Id.,atp.L.) @   `  2.  TheSenateRulesCommitteeFloorAnalysis  4"  ` Similarly,theflooranalysespreparedforlegislatorsaddressedthe x$ changeinsentencingpowers.TheSenateRulesCommitteeAnalysisfor  & theMarch17,2003,ThirdReading,includedamongthereforms,thatthe P( bill Authorizesthecourttosetamaximumtermthatisnotnecessarilythe D* adulttermmaximum.(Sen.RulesCom,OfficeofSenateFloorAnalyses,  , 3dreadinganalysisofSen.BillNo.459(.20032004Reg.Sess),as !. amendedMarch17,2003,p.3.)       0    22     LiketheSenateCommitteeonPublic #`0 SafetyAnalysis,theflooranalysisbytheSenateRulesCommitteesetout T$2 thethenexistinglanguageofsection731andthentheproposedlanguage. % 4 (Id.,atpgs.34.)Theanalysisalsoincluded,almostverbatim,theSenate &,"6 CommitteeonPublicSafetydiscussionofthepolicyneedtoremovepower  (p#8 fromtheYOPBandtostrengthenthelocaljuvenilejusticesystemandits  arrayofalternativesandgraduatedsanctions.(Id.,atpgs.56.) D  `  3.  TheAssemblyCommitteeonPublicSafetyAnalysis  8  ` The SummaryintheanalysisofS.B.459fortheAssembly | CommitteeonPublicSafetyfortheMarch20,2003hearingstatedthatthe   bill, ProvidesthataminorcommittedtoCYAmaynotbeheldinphysical  T  confinementforaperiodoftimeinexcessofthemaximumtermof H   confinementsetbythecourtbaseduponthefactsandcircumstancesofthe   matterormatterswhichbroughtorcontinuedtheminorunderthe   jurisdictionofthejuvenilecourt.(Ass.Com.onPublicSafety,analysisof d  Sen.BillNo.459(20032004Reg.Sess.)asamendedMarch17,2003,p. X  3.)       1    23     Inthesectiononwhatthebilldoes,theanalysisrepeatedtheSenate   PublicSafetylanguage: 0   K7  #&),/25XKXG 8yXG      T" `    )2T0 ` R8y RThisbillauthorizesthecourtadditionallytosetmaximumtermsof $t physicalconfinementintheCYAbaseduponthefactsand L circumstancesofthematterormatterswhichbroughtorcontinued $ theminorunderthejurisdictionofthejuvenilecourt.Thisnew  provisionwouldprovideforcourtconsiderationoffactorsaboutthe  offenseandtheoffendershistory(whichwouldbecomparableto \ thosenowemployedforthetriadsentencingofadults),andhave 4  thoseconsiderationsreflectedintheCYAconfinement󀀀term  \! orderedbythecourt.(Id.,atp.6,emphasisadded.)XG Ԁ4"` `  0 `  #` `  ]7 !$'*-036`  ] XGLiketheearlieranalyses,theAssemblyCommitteeonPublicSafety b$ analysispresenteddataoncriticismsoftheYOPB,particularlyinimposing & extendedlengthofstay,andtheneedforincreasedcountycontrol.(Id.,at :( pgs.67.) .!~* 1onP        < X !*3<    <( ` hp x X< `  4.  TheSenateRulesCommitteeSecondFloorAnalysis  r",  ` WhenS.B.459returnedtotheSenateafterbeingpassedoutofthe #. Assembly,theflooranalysisremainedclearandconsistentwithrespectto $J 0 thechangeinjuvenilecourtdispositionalpowers.TheSenateRules >&!2 CommitteeflooranalysisforthebillasamendedApril3,2003againstated '"4 thatthebill Authorizesthecourttosetamaximumtermthatisnot ($6 necessarilytheadulttermmaximum.(Sen.RulesCom,OfficeofSenate  FloorAnalyses,analysisofSen.BillNo.459(Reg.Sess.20032004),as D amendedApril3,2003,p.4.)       2    24     Again,theanalysisfortheSenateRules 8 Committeesetoutthethenexistinglanguageofsection731,ascontrasted | withtheproposedlanguage.(Id.)Andagain,theanalysisincluded,almost   verbatim,theCommitteeonPublicSafetydiscussionofthepolicyneedto  T  removepowerfromYOPBandtostrengthenthelocaljuvenilejustice H   systemanditsarrayofalternativesandgraduatedsanctions.(Id.,atp.6.)   Moreover,thisanalysiscontainedstatementsfromtheLeagueofWomen   Votersstating,amongotherthings,thatthey supporttheproposalto d  involvethecountyjuvenilejusticesystemsindeterminingthetreatment X  programsandlengthofstayofyoungpeopletheycommittoCYA.The   juvenilecourtjudgesandprobationofficersknowthewardsandunderstand 0 whatrehabilitationeffortsareneededbeforetheyoungpeoplecanreturnto $t theircommunities.(Id.,atp.9.) h  ` The SummaryofS.B.459asamendedApril3,2003,forthe  SenateThirdReadingagaincontainedamongthechanges,thatthebill @   ProvidesthataminorcommittedtoCYAmaynotbeheldinphysical 4" confinementforaperiodoftimeinexcessofthemaximumtermof x$ confinementsetbythecourtbaseduponthefactsandcircumstancesofthe  & matterwhichbroughtorcontinuedtheminorbeforethejuvenilecourt. P( (Sen.Com.OnPublicSafety,3dreadinganalysisofSen.BillNo.459 D* (20032004Reg.Sess.),asamendedApril3,2003,p.2.)       3@    25       , &    *4 #X*          0 ` 0 ` ` 0   5.  ThePublished2003BillSummary a !.   to        * X4 #*'&    <( ` hp x X<XX  `  XXThedescriptionofS.B.459intheSenateCommitteeonPublic l#0 Safety2003BillSummary,statedthatthebillmakeschangesinjuvenile $ 2 courtlaw,including authorizingthejuvenilecourttosetamaximumterm %D!4 ofconfinementthatisnotnecessarilytheadulttermmaximum.(Senate 8'"6 CommitteeonPublicSafety,2003BillSummary:MeasuresSignedand |(#8 Vetoed(October2003),p.55.)Theintentiontograntjuvenilecourtsthe  powertosetamaximumconfinementtimethatwaslessthantheadult D maximumtermwasclearinthelanguageoftheenactmentandinthe 8 consistentlegislativeanalysesthataccompanieditthroughtheLegislature, | andthepublisheddesciptionoftheenactment.TheLegislatorsknewthey   werevotingtochangesection731toallowthecourttosetatermthatwas  T  lessthanthemaximumadultterm. H   ?+ ` hp x X?0   II.  ARGUMENTSTHATTHEFAILURETOCHANGEWELFARE   ANDINSTITUTIONSCODESECTION726NEGATESTHE d  CHANGETOSECTION731;THATACCEPTINGTHE <  CHANGEWOULDSOMEHOWUNDOINDETERMNINATE d  SENTENCINGFORJUVENILES;ORTHATTHECHANGE <  CREATESANEQUALPROTECTIONPROBLEM,ARE   WITHOUTMERIT    E+ 4` hp x ` XE0 4  4 4  B( ` hp x , XB ` Weareawarethat,despitetheclearlanguagechangingsection731, L subdivision(b),andtheabundantanduncontrovertedevidenceof  legislativeintentiontomakethechange,therearegrumblingsthatthe $ failuretoalsochangeWelfareandInstitutionsCodesection726negatesthe h change.Respondentarguesthatrecognizingthechangeinsection731 \ wouldsomehowundoCaliforniasindeterminatesentencingschemefor   juveniles(RespondentsBrief,pp.1421),orthatthechangewouldcreate 4" anequalprotectionproblem.(RespondentsBrief,pp.2224.)We (x$ disagree. l&  ` ThechangestoSection731,subdivision(b)donotconflictwiththe ( generalsentencingschemesetoutinsection726.S.B.459simplycarves  D* outanexceptioninthecaseofYouthAuthoritycommitmentsbasedonthe 8", Legislaturesdesiretoprovideamechanismtolimitconfinementtime |#. basedonthe factsandcircumstancesofthematter.Thetwosectionsare $ 0 inperfectharmony.(Johnstonv.SonomaCountyAgriculturalPreservation &T!2 &OpenSpaceDist.(2002)100Cal.App.4th973,986.)Welfareand H'"4 InstitutionsCodesection726,subdivision(c)provides: (#6   K7  #&),/25XKXG 8yXG      T" `    )2T0 ` R8y RIftheminorisremovedfromthephysicalcustodyofhisorher ) %8 parentorguardianastheresultofanorderofwardshipmade *%9 pursuanttoSection602,theordershallspecifythattheminormay +&: notbeheldinphysicalconfinementforaperiodinexcessofthe X,'; maximumtermofimprisonmentwhichcouldbeimposeduponan 0-(< adultconvictedoftheoffenseoroffenseswhichbroughtor .X)= continuedtheminorunderthejurisdictionofthejuvenilecourt.` `  0 `  ` `  ]7 !$'*-036`  ]Thislanguageisincompleteharmonywithamendedsection731,which ` providesthatthecourt,insettingatermbasedonthefactsand  circumstances,cannotexceedthemaximumadultterm.(to        < X !*3< 8            4    26     ThecasescitedbyRespondentwithrespecttomaximumconfinement , | time(e.g.,InreEricJ.(1979)25Cal.3d522,pp.531532;InreJamesA. p   (1980)101CalApp.3d332,337;RespondentsBrief,p.18),arestillgood    lawwithrespecttoconfinementinsettingsotherthanYouthAuthority.But  H  forgoodpolicyreasons,theLegislaturehasactedtogivecourtsmorepower <  inYouthAuthoritycases.    ` NordoesS.B.459undotheindeterminate sentencingschemefor   juveniles.(RespondentsBrief,pp.1722.)Underthebill,thenewly X createdYouthAuthorityBoardstilldeterminesactuallengthofstay.(Stats. L 2003,c.4(S.B.459,16,20,eff.April8,2003,operativeJan.1,2004,  amendingWelf.&Inst.Code1719,1723.)Thechangestosection731 $ allowthejuvenilecourttosetadifferentoutsidelimittothatindeterminate h period,butthebasicsystemforparolebasedonthedecisionofaparole \  boardremainsintact. "  ` Finally,theargumentthatallowingthecourttosetmaximum 4$ confinementtimeinYouthAuthoritycommitmentsraisesequalprotection (x& concerns(U.S.Const.,14thAmend.,Cal.Const.,art.IV.16),issimilarly  withoutmerit.Manduleyv.SuperiorCourt(2002)27Cal.4th537,thecase D referencedbyRespondentforthisproposition(RespondentsBrief,p.24) 8 actuallyresultedinaSupremeCourtfindingthatprosecutorialdiscretionin | decidingwhichcasestofileinadultcourtdidnotresultinanequal   protectionviolation.(Manduley,27Cal.4thatp.573.)Butmore  T  importantly,theamendmenttosection731requiresthecourttodetermine H   maximumconfinementtimebasedon thefactsandcircumstancesofthe   individualcase.Thisgivesthecourttheabilitytotailormaximumtimeto   theoffenseandoffender,asopposedtothepreS.B.459systemwhich d  treatedmisdemeanantsandmurderersalikeforpurposesofYouthAuthority X  maximumconfinementtime.Thereislesschanceofarbitraryordisparate   treatmentthanunderpreviouslaw,andRespondentpointstonoevidence 0 thatsuchtreatmenthasoccurred. $t  ` ThhebillachievesexactlywhattheLegislaturewanted!awayfor h countiestolimitconfinementtime,whenthecourtsochoosesbasedupon  thefactsandcircumstancesofthecase.Whilecourtsmaystillelectto @  imposethemaximumterm,theamendmenttosection731providesamuch 4" neededmechanismtocontrolconfinementtime,particularlyforlessserious x$ offenders.  &  CONCLUSION  D* <( ` hp x X< ` Escalatingcoststothecountiesanduncheckedconfinementtimeat  , YouthAuthoritydemandedtheLegislaturesattention.S.B.459represents !. aremarkableexampleoflegislativeresponsetoapublicneed.Thepaper #`0 trailforS.B.459isunequivocalindemonstratingthattheLegislatures T$2 intentwastoempowerthecourttosetamaximumtermofconfinementin % 4 YouthAuthoritycasesthatisnotnecessarilytheadulttermmaximum. &,"6  `          ` Datedthis10thdayofJanuary,2005,atSanFrancisco,California. d)$: >to        0 ` 0 ` ` 0  h Respectfullysubmitted,+d&<   0 ` 0 ` ` 0  h YOUTHLAWCENTER,(>   0 ` 0 ` ` 0  h SusanL.Burrell,StaffAttorney-(?   0 ` 0 ` ` 0 0h   h h  0 ` 0 ` ` 0 0h     h h  0 ` 0 ` ` 0  h ____________________________________8   0 ` 0 ` ` 0 0h  SUSANL.BURRELL,StateBarNo.74204`h h  0 ` 0 ` ` 0 0h   h h  0 ` 0 ` : ` : 0 : : 0h: : AttorneyforAmicusCuriaeYouthLaw   CenteronBehalfofDefendantandAppellant,   SeanW.p h: h:  0 ` 0 ` ` 0 0h   h h  0 ` 0 ` ` 0 0h   h h  XX Ԁ  H      XX        0 `  ` `   eEto    XX XXXX      K7  #&),/25XKXGXX8yXG      XG8y8yXGԀ   Fto    XX8yXXXX< X  )2<    <( ` hp x X<0 ` 0 ` `  `  XX    0 ` 0 ` `  `                 0 `  ` `   Ito              XG XGXG      ! `  X! XGJto              N7  #&),/25`  NXG 8yXG      `.`  !!$'*-036  )2`R8y R Lto        B `   `  !!$'*3B    -` h `  -0 `  ` `              0 `     h  ` `  Nto            XX   B+ 4 <DL!X B XX        @..