In May, we wrote about the First District Court of Appeal in San Francisco rejecting Solano County’s challenge to Senate Bill 1391. At the time, we pointed out that California counties would likely continue to take issue with this controversial piece of legislation.

For those who don’t know, SB 1391 bars prosecutors from trying 14- and 15-year-olds as adults. The bill is part of a broad effort across the state to place a greater emphasis on rehabilitation for young people on the wrong side of the law.

Last week, advocates of SB 1391 received another victory when a state appeals court in Sacramento ruled the law is constitutional, The Sacramento Bee reports. The bill is meant to serve as an extension of the reforms laid out in 2016’s Proposition 57.

Naturally, many prosecutors across the state are unhappy with last Wednesday’s ruling. District attorneys and victim families are some of SB 1391’s staunchest opponents.

Next Stop, The California Supreme Court

“Senate Bill 1391 does not conflict with Proposition 57, but advances its stated intent and purpose to reduce the number of youths to be tried in adult court, reduce the number of incarcerated persons in state prisons, and emphasize rehabilitation for juveniles,” the appellate court wrote.

The decisions, in San Francisco last month and in Sacramento a week ago, to support the new legislation all but guarantees that the California Supreme Court will take up the matter. Much is at stake for both young defendants and the families who would like to see justice for their loved ones.

“We have received the Court of Appeal’s decision and we are considering the option of further appellate relief,” said Sacramento County Assistant Chief Deputy District Attorney Rod Norgaard.

Before Prop. 57, prosecutors were permitted to charge 14- and 15-year-olds as adults in severe cases. Being tried in adult criminal court and being found guilty carries much longer sentences than what is handed down in juvenile court. SB 1391 prevents moving youths under 16 to adult court.

At the Law Offices of Katie Walsh, we will continue to follow this remarkable story as it develops.

Southern California Juvenile Defense Attorney

Attorney Katie Walsh’s experience, both as a former prosecutor and juvenile defense attorney, makes her uniquely equipped to advocate for your loved one. Please contact us today for a free consultation and to learn more about how we can help your family. (714) 351-0178.

At The Law Offices of Katie Walsh, we are following Senate Bill 1391 developments closely. Some of our readers may remember that SB 1391 bars prosecutors from filing motions to transfer youths under 16 to adult court. In a previous post, we wrote about how some district attorneys believe the legislation is unconstitutional.

Solano County prosecutors, for instance, challenged the new law signed by former Gov. Jerry Brown. They argued that SB 1391 violated a 2016 ballot measure permitting juvenile-court judges to send youths’ cases to adult criminal court, according to the San Francisco Chronicle. Solano County isn’t alone; several other counties are challenging the new law as well.

This month, the First District Court of Appeal in San Francisco rejected Solano County’s challenge, upholding the law, the article reports. The decision is a victory for juvenile justice advocates, but the issue is far from settled. It is likely that the California Supreme Court will have the final say in the matter ultimately.

Boiling Down SB 1391

In 2000, a ballot measure was passed allowing district attorneys to bring charges against 14-year-olds in adult criminal court for “serious” crimes. DAs had full discretionary power in deciding which youths got transferred. They did not require permission from judges.

Proposition 57 repealed the ballot measure in 2016, according to the article. The change meant that DAs wishing to transfer youths to adult court had to seek a transfer from a juvenile court judge first. Judges would then weigh several factors before deciding to allow or deny a transfer.

SB1391 put a stop to all attempts to move youths under 16 to adult court. The bill prohibits the transfer of 14- and 15-year-old offenders to adult criminal court in nearly all circumstances. The First District Court of Appeal in San Francisco decided that SB 1391 does not conflict with Prop. 57. Moreover, Justice Alison Tucher said that SB1391 “is consistent with and furthers Proposition 57’s goal of emphasizing rehabilitation.”

The appeals court ruling was unanimous, 3-0. Justice Turner writes:

“SB 1391 takes Proposition 57’s goal of promoting juvenile rehabilitation one step further by ensuring that almost all who commit crimes at the age of 14 or 15 will be processed through the juvenile system.”

The district attorney’s office could appeal the decision to the state Supreme Court. We will continue to monitor SB 1391 in the coming months.

Orange County, CA Juvenile Criminal Attorney

Please contact The Law Offices of Katie Walsh to learn how we can help your son or daughter. Attorney Walsh has the experience to advocate for your family and help bring about the best possible outcome. We understand that choosing the right firm to defend your child is not a simple task, but it is vital that families opt for one that is seasoned in juvenile court.

Katie Walsh is a former district attorney and a juvenile defense specialist. She is uniquely equipped to help young people overcome legal troubles. Please reach out to us today for a free consultation. (714) 351-0178.

In April, we discussed Senate Bill 1391. If signed into law, SB 1391 would amend Proposition 57, repealing the authority of a district attorney to make a motion to transfer a minor from juvenile court to a court of criminal jurisdiction in a case in which a minor is alleged to have committed a specified serious offense when he or she was 14 or 15 years of age.

While some juvenile justice advocates are in favor of legislation that prevents cognitively undeveloped people from standing trial in the adult criminal courts, the loved ones of victims of senseless crimes are not happy that killers may get out of jail one day and lead “normal” lives. To say SB 1391 is controversial may be an understatement; and, juvenile law experts contend that they can sympathize with arguments for and against the legislation, CBS Sacramento reports. Now, the fate of the bill falls on California Gov. Jerry Brown.

“It’s a symptom of the modern trend to believe that kids that are that young, of the age of 14 and 15 are probably not capable of really the kind of sophistication that would expect to be tried in criminal court,” said John Myers, professor, McGeorge School of Law. Myers adds that “There are some very sophisticated 14- and 15-year-old gangbangers out there that are cold-blooded killers, so I understand that if your child or loved one is killed by a gang member who happens to be 15 why you think it’s wrong, it’s a sympathetic argument.”

Trying 15-Year-Olds As Adults

SB 1391 was introduced in April by state Sens. Ricardo Lara (D-Bell Gardens) and Holly Mitchell (D-Los Angeles). The bill is one of several new laws focused on rehabilitation over incarceration, and to reduce the overburdened criminal justice system.

“Research has debunked the myth that children are hardened criminals at age 14 and 15 and deserve punishment in the adult system,” Lara said in a news release. “In fact, 14- and 15-year-olds are far from being adults and Senate Bill 1391 keeps them in the juvenile justice system and guarantees they receive counseling and education, so they are less likely to commit crimes in the future.”

The bill is either a second chance for young offenders or a law that puts rehabilitation over public safety, and it is what Gov. Brown will have to wrestle with before the September 30th deadline. Please take a moment to watch a short video here.

If passed, it purportedly would apply retroactively to certain cases involving minors tried as adults. We will continue to follow this important story as it develops.

Orange County Juvenile Justice Attorney

Please contact Attorney Katie Walsh if you need an experienced juvenile defense lawyer in California. Juvenile defense attorney Walsh can help you obtain the best possible outcome for your son or daughter’s case.

With November 8, 2016, seemingly long behind us, it is time for California defenders, prosecutors and judges to change their ways with regard to juveniles. California voters supported putting an end to what is known as “direct file,” a law that gave prosecutors the authority to dictate which juveniles would be tried in adult criminal court.

Concerns over direct file had been voiced for years, since the majority of teens being tried in adult court were minorities. Prosecutors in a number of California counties had been quick to direct file minorities, glaringly disproportionate to the instances of young Caucasians being direct filed. With the passing of Proposition 57, which gives judges the power to decide which minors are tried in adult court. The decision grants every juvenile the right to a hearing before a judge can make the decision to transfer a suspect to adult court, The Juvenile Justice Information Exchange (JJIE) reports. With regard to Prop. 57:

“It allows a more deliberative approach, a more thoughtful approach and that’s the way it should work. It shouldn’t be a quick decision, made sometimes in as little as 48 hours, often with scant information,” said Daniel Macallair, executive director of the Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice.

Naturally, there is a lot of work that needs to be done by everyone working in the field of juvenile justice, in order to ensure that the law works the way that is was designed. What’s more, Prop. 57 will lead to a number of adolescents, who would have historically been subject to direct file, staying within the juvenile courts, meaning the juvenile system will need to be prepared to offer services to significantly more teens, according to the article. Additionally, nobody is sure yet how Prop. 57 will apply to the thousands of teens who have already been transferred to the adult courts and are potentially serving time behind bars in adult jails and prisons.

The new law gives California judges a new criterion for deciding which juveniles should be sent up to adult court, the article reports. Judges will now take into consideration a juvenile defendant’s “ongoing development and potential to change” before making a decision that could forever change the course of one’s life.

“The things that a court will look at are much more helpful to teenagers than the previous criteria were. They’re much more developmentally appropriate,” said Sue Burrell, policy and training director for the Pacific Juvenile Defender Center.

Katie Walsh is an attorney in Orange County, California. Attorney Walsh concentrates her law practice on juvenile defense, criminal defense, and victim’s rights.

Contact the Law Offices of Katie Walsh online or at (714) 351-0178.

Over the summer, we wrote about what is known as “direct file,” where states prosecutors have discretionary power about which court system to try a minor: juvenile or adult criminal court. California is one of 15 states that allows prosecutors to dictate the severity of an offense, deciding which court a juvenile case should be tried.

We pointed out that, direct file is used more commonly in certain California counties and that minorities are disproportionately affected by the process. The Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice found that black youth were 11.3 times more likely to be direct filed, compared to white minors. It should go without saying that being tried in the juvenile system is preferred over the adult-court, and the decision could seriously impact the future of a defendant.

California voters will decide on changing direct file, as part of Proposition 57, on November 8, 2016, KALW reports. Prop 57 seeks to reduce the prison population, save taxpayers millions and requires judges instead of prosecutors to decide whether minors should be prosecuted as adults, emphasizing rehabilitation for minors in the juvenile system.

“The race of the child and the county in which he or she commit this crime will determine whether or not he’ll be direct filed, not the severity of the crime,” says Frankie Guzman from the National Center of Youth Law “and that is not what we should be basing these decisions on.”

Teenagers who find themselves caught in the adult criminal system are at a severe disadvantage when it comes to rehabilitation. Prop 57 aims to give people a chance to turn their life around, rather than possibly condemn them to a life in the system.

“Not only are we denying the benefit of rehabilitation, we are ensuring all the negatives that the adult system carries,” Guzman says. “And so we often see young kids who really quickly have to grow and develop in a prison environment that is extremely violent.”

Instead of prosecutors deciding the fate of young people, minors would have a fitness hearing in juvenile court, the article reports. A judge will take a look at all the factors before deciding if a young defendant should be tried as an adult.

Katie Walsh is an attorney in Orange County, California. Attorney Walsh concentrates her law practice on juvenile defense, criminal defense, and victim’s rights.

Contact the Law Offices of Katie Walsh online or at (714) 351-0178.