At the beginning of this month, supervisors from Contra Costa County said that they intend to change the county’s juvenile justice system for the better. During a meeting which lasted nearly 12 hours and featured presentations from multiple agencies, supervisors said that they expect county officials to collaborate and decide whether to close either Juvenile Hall in Martinez or the Orin Allen Youth Rehabilitation Facility near Byron.

While officials remain divided on the path to resolution, they all agree that achieving the best outcomes for young people in Contra Costa County is their top priority, according to Bay City News. They say that their decision will be part of a larger dialogue seeking to reimagine youth justice in the area. Several of the supervisors stated that they expect Chief Probation Officer Esa Ehmen-Krause and District Attorney Diana Becton to work with others on a task force regarding this issue.

Alternatives to Juvenile Hall

Many members of the public have raised the idea of redirecting law enforcement funds to non-police mental health crisis response. Contra Costa supervisors praised this program, although they have not yet stated whether they intend to allocate funds from the sheriff’s budget to this end.

“The task force is more than about Juvenile Hall,” said Supervisor John Gioia. “It’s about the system.” Elected officials cite increased demand to redirect funding from law enforcement to instead support affordable housing, mental health, homeless outreach, and youth support services.

“I have stood for years and watched families wither in the face of the juvenile justice system,” stated Deputy Public Defender Nicole Eiland. “We want to keep our children out of trauma-inducing facilities like Juvenile Hall.”

California: Juvenile Hall by the Numbers

Over the past ten years, the number of children behind bars has decreased dramatically from the record high of the 1990s. This is partially due to a dismantling of the punitive approach to youth offenses. Instead, efforts have recently shifted to prevention in the form of social programming, early intervention, and outreach.

In Contra Costa County, the juvenile detention population has steadily decreased since 2002. This is a welcome deviation from the predicted “crime wave” officials threatened in the 1990s, a scare tactic which ultimately resulted in:

• $750 million allocated to the construction of new juvenile facilities
• California’s three-strikes law, which could send a person with three felonies away for life, and
• A 2000 ballot initiative that made it easier for children to be tried as adults with harsher minimum sentences.

Fortunately, this crime wave never materialized. In fact, juvenile crime has decreased steadily since the mid ‘90s – a trend which seems poised to continue. Felonies, infractions, and misdemeanors fall year over year. Today, officials intend to allocate these heavy punitive budgets towards preventative efforts, including providing first-time youth offenders with anger management, substance abuse treatment, and connection with social services.

This is an important change, because evidence shows that sustained juvenile detention can have a negative impact on a child’s future, mental health, and quality of life.

The Effects of Youth Confinement

According to federal guidelines, “the purpose of juvenile detention is to confine only those youth who are serious, violent, or chronic offenders… pending legal action. Based on these criteria, it is not considered appropriate for status offenders and youth that commit technical violations of probation.” In spite of this, nearly 4,000 youth are held in juvenile detention centers for low-level offenses. National leaders in the field of juvenile justice support the prohibition of juvenile detention as a dispositional option.

Research shows that adult-style prisons – which many youth facilities are modeled after – lack the essentials required for healthy adolescent development. Young people require engaged adults focused on their development, a peer group which models prosocial behavior, activities which foster positive decision-making, and opportunities for academic success. They also may be exposed to further trauma as a result of incarceration, which can serve to reinforce poor choices and impulsive behavior. Experts say that instead of helping kids to get back on track, youth incarceration may result in the exacerbation of the negative behaviors which brought these children to the attention of the courts in the first place.

With change on the horizon for Contra Costa County, it is hoped that other California systems will seek to begin further juvenile justice reform efforts.

Orange County Juvenile Defense Attorney

If your child is facing legal difficulties, please contact the Law Offices of Katie Walsh. Attorney Walsh utilizes her years of experience as a former prosecutor to advocate for your child and achieve the best possible outcome.

Last year, we took time to cover a controversial piece of legislation relevant to Californians—Senate Bill 1391. The multifaceted bill is meant to shift the focus away from incarceration and to reduce overcrowding in the criminal justice system. Moreover, SB 1391 addresses the “cradle to prison pipeline:” Opponents of the measure claim that it puts the needs of criminals over public safety.

As we reported, Governor Brown signed SB 1391 in the twilight of his gubernatorial tenure. In justifying the decision to endorse the bill, Governor Brown wrote: “There is a fundamental principle at stake here: whether we want a society which at least attempts to reform the youngest offenders before consigning them to adult prisons where their likelihood of becoming a lifelong criminal is so much higher.”

The controversial bill expands on the mandate of another piece of legislation, Proposition 57, passed in 2016. Under SB 1391 a district attorney can no longer 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.”

SB 1391 Under Fire

Despite the passing and signing of SB 1391, opponents continue to attack the bill, including local prosecutors. They argue that the legislation conflicts with what the voters approved when they decided to support Prop 57.

“Our position then, as now, is that 1391 is unconstitutional but (the legislature) passed it regardless,” said Yolo County District Attorney Jeff Reisig.

Even though prosecutors across the state continue to voice opposition to SB 1391’s mandate, more than 100 legal scholars from California universities signed a February white paper calling for SB 1391 to be upheld, according to The Sacramento Bee. The law experts hail from the University of Pacific McGeorge School of Law in Sacramento, University of California, San Francisco’s Hastings College of the Law, and Stanford and UC Berkeley’s law schools. In the letter, the scholars assert that “opponents of S.B. 1391 mischaracterize the law to manufacture a controversy that does not really exist.”

“I support reform. I’m OK with the science that juveniles’ brains aren’t fully formed and that they shouldn’t necessarily be sent to prison,” said Reisig. “But when you look at terrible, violent offenses – if somebody 15 years old can be released at 25, it makes no sense to me from the standpoint of public safety.”

Since January 1, 2019, Sacramento judges have had to consider at least four SB 1391 cases, according to the article. The same is true for judges in Kern, Riverside, Solano, and Yolo counties. The juvenile justice argument surrounding SB 1391 is sure to continue even as lawmakers propose even more reforms.

Assemblywoman Buffy Wicks, D-Oakland is proposing AB 1423. The bill, if passed, would allow minors whose felony cases were tried in adult court, then reduced to misdemeanors or dismissed, to file a petition to have their cases sent back to juvenile court.

California Juvenile Law Attorney

Attorney Katie Walsh has the experience to advocate for any family, no matter the crime, whose son or daughter is facing legal challenges. Please contact The Law Offices of Katie Walsh today to learn how she can mount a rigorous, committed legal defense for your loved one.

Published research tells us that the brains of young people are not fully developed. Meaning, partially, youths are at risk of making life-changing decisions without fully grasping what can result. Many criminal and juvenile justice advocates claim that the current method of handling teenagers who break the law is woefully inappropriate. Moreover, many voters in California tend to agree.

In recent years, spanning back to the early 2000s, juvenile justice in the Golden State has been undergoing several shake-ups. Laws have been passed to shift away from punitive measures and embrace rehabilitation for most infractions. Just over a decade ago there were 11 state-run juvenile justice detention facilities; today, there are only four centers housing only young people with the most severe charges, the Los Angeles Times reports. All other youth offenders are either on probation or housed in county juvenile halls.

In 2017, then Governor Jerry Brown signed Proposition 57 which, among other things, prohibits prosecutors from charging youths in adult court without a judge’s consent. What’s more, Brown signed legislation to lighten punishments; the goal is to get young people off a path to adult prison. In 2019, with a new Governor at the helm of California legislation, more juvenile justice reforms are on the horizon.

HHS Could Take Control of California’s Juvenile Justice Division

Health and human services providers could soon take over control of overseeing California’s nearly 700 young offenders, if Governor Gavin Newsom’s plan comes to fruition, according to the article. These juveniles and young adults have remarkable legal records; and, many of them contend with severe mental and medical health needs. The majority of the more than 660 offenders are confined to detention camps in Pine Grove, Stockton, and Camarillo.

“This is about setting a new mark,” said Gov. Newsom. “We are committed about ending the juvenile justice system as we know it once and for all.”

Under the proposed plan, the California Health and Human Services Agency (HHS) are tasked with better preparing young people for release through a combination of educational, mental health, and social services, the article reports. With Legislature approval, Gov. Newsom hopes to make the handover from corrections officials to the HHS as early as July. The move to HHS from the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation would put California closer in line with most others states.

California is currently one of the ten states whose juvenile justice division falls under a state corrections agency; 40 states operate like what Gov. Newsom is proposing. California Surgeon General Dr. Nadine Burke Harris says the new model will help address early childhood trauma and prevent young people from having run-ins with the law.

“Really looking at what we can do for our young folks who are most vulnerable is really critical,” said Dr. Harris.

Orange County Juvenile Defense Attorney

At the Law Offices of Katie Walsh, we will continue to follow this story as it develops in the coming months. Juvenile defense attorney Katie Walsh is committed to helping young people, and their loved ones overcome legal trouble. Please contact us today to learn more about how Attorney Walsh can advocate for your family.

We covered an essential story about new juvenile justice legislation signed into law last month. In the 11th hour of Governor Jerry Brown’s fourth term he signed Senate Bill 439 and Senate Bill 1391 into law, both measures will go into effect across the state next year. SB 439 establishes 12 years as the minimum age for prosecution in juvenile court, but a dispensation will be made for offenses such as murder or rape. SB 1391 makes it unlawful to try youths under the age of 16 as an adult.

While the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors is busy coming up with a plan for serving children under age 12 who find themselves in trouble, the committee is hopeful that they can take an even more progressive step. Board members are considering banning many 12- and 13-year-old youths from juvenile delinquency court, The Chronicle for Social Change reports. The proposal is welcome news by juvenile justice advocates.

“L.A. County can lead the state of California further to ensure that children aren’t negatively impacted by the effects of arrest and incarceration on youth,” said Maria Brenes, executive director of the Boyle Heights-based nonprofit Inner City Struggle. “The impact of system involvement are dismal for our children. Youth are 39 percentage points less likely to finish public school than their peers after experiencing incarceration or detention.”

Implementing Juvenile Justice Reforms

A board motion, titled Setting a Minimum Age for Los Angeles County’s Juvenile Justice System, points out that there were just over 100 12-year olds and just over 350 13 year-olds arrested in the County last year. Supervisors Hilda L. Solis and Mark Ridley-Thomas write that SB 439 sets a floor, and they MOVE that the Board of Supervisors direct the Office of Diversion and Reentry’s (ODR’s) division on Youth Diversion and Development to report back in writing in 60 days with a status report and in 120 days with a comprehensive plan (Plan) to divert younger youth from juvenile court jurisdiction and detention by:

A. Authorizing the Director of ODR, or his designee, to hire a consultant with relevant expertise to support ODR in the development of the Plan.

B. Ensuring the Plan does the following:

1. Build on the County’s current youth diversion and development efforts;
2. At a minimum, comply with the recently passed Senate Bill 439;
3. Include as a first priority a specific plan for the pending or active cases, over which the Juvenile Court is expected to lose jurisdiction in January 2019;
4. Identify holistic programming and services for youth and families based on best practices, focused on positive youth development, that may be appropriate for younger youth;
5. Consistent with the County’s current youth diversion plan, utilize “counsel and release” as the default in the vast majority of these cases and graduated responses thereafter, with Dependency Court jurisdiction to be a last resort; and
6. Include recommendations regarding the minimum age for arrest and confinement of youth for Los Angeles County, including expanding on the requirements set by SB 439, based on a review of best practices, and relevant research.

The supervisors argue that, “the County has an opportunity, based on best practices and the efforts on youth development and diversion, along with the dual-status work it has already begun, to provide leadership to other counties across the State, and to reduce disparities in outcomes for young people based on geographical location, and racial and ethnic identity.”

Orange County Juvenile Defense Attorney

At The Law Offices of Katie Walsh, we specialize in advocating for the families whose children find themselves facing legal difficulty. What sets Attorney Walsh apart from other juvenile justice lawyers is the fact that she is familiar with both sides of the courtroom, having dealt with thousands of criminal and juvenile cases as a former prosecutor. She will use her experience to serve your family and help bring about the best possible outcome; please contact us today for a free consultation if your son or daughter requires assistance.