PEOPLE v. MESARespondent's Request for Judicial NoticeCal.April 18, 2011 KAMALAD. HARRIS Attorney General of California DANER.GILLETTE - Chief Assistant Attorney General GARY W. SCHONS Senior Assistant Attorney General STEVE T. OETTING Supervising Deputy Attorney General MEREDITH A. STRONG Deputy Attorney General State Bar No. 255840 110 West A Street, Suite 1100 San Diego, CA 92101 | P.O. Box 85266 - San Diego, CA 92186-5266 Telephone: (619) 645-2297 Fax: (619) 645-2271 Email: Meredith.Strong@doj.ca.gov Attorneysfor Plaintiffand Respondent REME COURT SUETLED APR 18 2011 Frecierick K. Ohirich Glerk eputy Jn the Supreme Court of the State of California THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, Plaintiff and Respondent, Vv. TOMMY ANGEL MESA, Defendant and Appellant. Case No. S185688 Appellate District Division One, Case No. RIF137046 - Riverside County Superior Court, Case No. D056280 RESPONDENT'S MOTION FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE _ TO THE HONORABLECHIEF JUSTICE RONALD GEORGE AND THE ASSOCIATE JUSTICES OF THE SUPREME COURT OF CALIFORNIA: Respondent respectfully moves this Court, pursuant to Evidence Codesections 452 and 459 and California Rules of Court, rules 22 and 29.1( g), to take judicial notice of the relevant legislative history of Assembly Bill 2013 of the 1987-1988 Regular Session (also known as “The STEP Act”). These relevant documents, which are appended to this motion, include the following: A. Legislative Counsel’s Digest, Assembly Bill 2013 (1987-1988 Reg. Sess.) from March 6, 1987 (Exhibit A) B. Assembly Committee on Public Safety, Report on AssemblyBill 2013 (1987-1988 Reg. Sess.) as amended July 9, 1987 (Exhibit B) C. Assembly Committee on Public Safety, Report on Assembly Bill 2013, “A Reply Memorandum,” as amended August 30, 1988 (Exhibit C.) D. Assembly Ways and Means Committee, Republican Analysis of Assembly Bill 2013, (1987-1988 Reg. Sess.) August, 20, 1987 (Exhibit D.) E. Senate Committee on Judiciary, Analysis ofAB 2013, hearing date March 22, 1988, (Exhibit E.) Each ofthe attached exhibits is the proper subject ofjudicial notice under Evidence Codesection 452. Subdivision (c) of that provision providesthat judicial notice may be taken of “Official acts of the . legislative, executive, and judicial departments of the United States and of any state of the United States.” Pursuantto this authority, it is appropriate to take judicial notice of senate and assembly analyses such as Exhibits A and B. (People v. Snyder (2000) 22 Cal.4th 304, 309 [judicial notice of senate committee analysis]; People v. Ledesma ( 1997) 16 Cal.4th 90, 98 [judicial notice of assembly bill analysis]; Jevne v. Superior Court (2005) 35 Cal.4th 935, 948 [“In determining legislative intent, we may also consider a senate floor analysis.”’].) CONCLUSION For the reasons stated above, respondent respectfully requests that this Court take judicial notice of the documents attached in Exhibits A through E. Dated: April 15, 2011 MAS:ade $D2010702928 80488 114.doc Respectfully submitted,- KAMALA D. HARRIS Attorney Generalof California DANE R. GILLETTE Chief Assistant Attorney General GARY W. SCHONS-. Senior Assistant Attorney General STEVE T. OETTING Supervising Deputy Attorney General A. STRONG Deputy Attorney General Attorneysfor Plaintiffand Respondent AMENDEDIN ASSEMBLY MAY 26, 1987 AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY APRIL 23, 1987 CALIFORNIA LEGISLATURE---1987-88 ‘REGULAR SESSION ASSEMBLY BILL | No. 2013 Introduced by Assembly Member Moore March6, 1987 An act to add Seetien 424 te amend Sections 272 and 422 of, and to add Chapter 11 (commencing with Section 186.20) to Title 7.of Part 1 of, the Penal Code, relating to crimes, making an appropriation therefor. LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST AB 2013, as amended, Moore. Crimes. speeifieally preseribe membership in street gangs as @minal off of 1987 whieh weuld provide thet any person whebeeemes # member of er whe maintains membership in, a eriminal street sang; as defined; with knowledge that 2 or more of its | members engege in apattern oferimineal aets;as defined, and imprisonment it eounty jeil or state prison; a3 specified: ‘Fhis bill weuld impose a statefmandated leeal program by erestinge @ new erime: Under existing law, there are no provisions which specifically make the commission of criminal offenses by individuals who are members ofstreet gangs a separate and distinctly punished offense, or .which provide for the forfeiture of the proceeds ofgang-related activity. This bill would provide that any person who actively 97 70 3716-0017 AB 2013 | —4— | _ will result in death.or great bodily injury to another person, with the specific intent that the statementis tobe taken as a threat, even ifthereisno intentto actually carryit out, which, on its face and under the circumstances in which it is made is so unequivocal, unconditional, immediate, and specific as to conveyto the person threateneda gravity ofpurpose and an ‘immediate prospectof execution. This bill would make this .offense either a misdemeanorora felonypunishable either by imprisonmentin the countyjail not to exceed oneyear, or by imprisonment in the state prison, thereby imposing a state-mandatedlocal program. The. California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and schooldistricts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that réimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursementis required by this act for.a specified reason. _- ot _ Vote: majerity 7%. Appropriation: neyes. Fiscal committee: yes. State-mandated local program:yes. The.people of the State of California do enactas follows: SECTION 1. This act shell be known and may be SECTION I. Chapter 11 (commencing with Section 186.20) is addedto Title 7 ofPart 1 ofthe Penal Code, to read: | CHAPTER 11. STREET- TERRORISM ENFORCEMENT AND PREVENTION. ACT 186.20. This chapter shall be known andmaybe cited as the “California Street Terrorism Enforcement and Prevention Act.” . 186.21. The Legislature hereby .finds and declares that it is the right of every person regardless of race, color, creed, religion, national origin, sex, age, sexual orientation, or handicap to be secure andprotected from fear, intimidation, and physical harm caused by the activities of violent groups and individuals. It ts not the intent of the Legislature in enacting this chapter. toP p a e k et fk ek ee pe p e s C O N D O R W D W N H K C O M O O N O T I A O N E 97 140 3716-0028 R O O R B R S S R R R R O h o BS o M r S B U a m o e N e S S A S A R B S E S B R N S 40 —5— AB 2013 interfere with the exercise of rights protected by the United States Constitution or by the California Constitution. The Legislature recognizes the constitutional right ofevery citizen to harborand express beliefs on any lawful subject whatsoever and to lawfully associate with others who share similarbeliefs. The Legislature, however, further finds that the State of California is in a state ofcrisis which has been caused by violent street gangs whose members threaten, terrorize, and commit a multitude ofcrimes against the peaceful citizens oftheirneighborhoods. Theseactivities, both individually and collectively, threaten the very ‘foundation of civilized society and are not _ constitutionally protected: It is the intent: of the Legislature in enacting this chapter to seek the eradication of criminal activity by street gangs by ' focusing upon patterns ofcriminal gang-related activity and upon the organized nature of street gangs, which | together are the chiefsource of terror created by street gangs. The Legislature further finds that an effective means ofpunishing and deterring the criminal activities of street gangs is through forfeiture of the profits, proceeds, and instrumentalittes acquired, accumulated, - or used by street gangs. 186.22. (a) Any person whoactively participates in any criminal street gang with knowledge that its members orparticipants engage in or have engaged in a pattern ofcriminal gang activity with the specific intent to promote, further, or assist in any criminal conduct by its members or participants, shall be punishable by imprisonmentin the countyjailfor aperiod notto exceed one year, or by imprisonmentin the state prison. (b) Any person who actively participates in any criminal streetgang with knowledge that its members or participants engage in or have engaged in a pattern of criminal gang activity, and who willfully promotes, furthers, or assists in-any criminal conduct by gang membersorparticipants, is punishable by imprisonment in the state prison. (ce) Any person who is convicted of a felony or a 3716-0019 AMENDED IN ASSEMBLYJUNE3, 1987 AMENDEDIN ASSEMBLYMAY26, 1987 _ AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY APRIL 23, 1987 CALIFORNIA LEGISLATURE—1987-88 REGULAR SESSION ASSEMBLY BILL | - No. 2013 Introduced by Assembly Member Moore | March 6, 1987 \ Anact to amend Sections 272 and 422 of, and to add Chapter 11 (commencing with Section 186.20) to Title 7 of Part } of, the Penal Code,relating to crimes, making an appropriation - therefor. ‘LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST AB 2013, as amended, Moore. Crimes. Under existing law, there are no provisions which specifically make the commissionof criminal offenses by individuals who are membersof street gangs a separate and distinctly punished offense, or which provide for the | forfeiture of the proceeds of gang-related activity. This bill would provide that any person who actively participates in any criminal street gang with knowledgethat its members or participants engage in or have engaged in a pattern of criminal gangactivity, as defined, with the specific intent to promote, further, or assist in any criminal conduct by its members or participants, shall be punished by imprisonmentin the countyjail for a period not to exceed one year, or by imprisonmentin the state prison. This bill would provide that any person who actively participates in any criminal street gang with knowledge that its members or participants engage in or have engaged in a pattern of criminal gang activity, and whowillfully furthers, or assists in 3716-00626. - AB 2013 —4— state-mandated local program. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts forcertain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursementis required by this act for a specified reason.- Vote: %. Appropriation: yes. Fiscal committee: yes. State-mandated local program:yes. The people of the State of California do enactas follows: SECTION 1. Chapter 11 (commencing with Section 186.20) is added: to Title 7 of Part 1 of the Penal Code, to read: CHAPTER 11. STREET TERRORISM ENFORCEMENT - “AND PREVENTION ACT 186.20. This chapter shall be known and may becited as the “California Street TerrorismEnforcement and 10 Prevention Act.” ll =186.21. The Legislature hereby finds and declares 12 that it is the right of every person regardless of race, 13 color, creed, religion, national origin, sex, age, sexual 14 orientation, or handicap to be secure and protected from 15 fear, intimidation, and physical harm caused by the 16 activities of violent groups and individuals. It is not the 17 intent of the Legislature in enacting, this chapter to 18 interfere with the exercise of rights protected by the’ 19 United States Constitution or by the California 20 Constitution. The. Legislature recognizes the 21 constitutional right ofevery citizen to harbor and express 22 beliefs on any lawful subject whatsoever and to lawfully 23 associate with others who share similar beliefs. - 24 The Legislature, however, further finds that the State 25 of California is in.a state of crisis which has been caused 26 by violent street gangs whose members threaten, 27 terrorize, and commit a multitude of crimes against the 28 peaceful citizens of their neighborhoods. Theseactivities, ( © C O U O T R G D = 96 110 Mo 3716-0021 po sh per ch pe ed pe ek ee d ee d fe et pe t p e t ° R S R b 3 8 R e b s O O I D U R D O N D K O O D ® A D W I A W H E S S S A S R E S R R S B B N Y —5— | AB 2013 both individually and collectively, threaten the very foundation ofeivilized seeietypresenta clear andpresent danger to public order and safety and are not constitutionally protected. It is the intent of the Legislature in enacting this chapter to seek the eradication of criminal activity by street gangs by focusing upon patterns of criminal gang-related activity and upon the orgariized nature of street gangs, which together are the chief source of terror created by street _ gangs. The Legislature further finds that an effective means of punishing and deterring the criminal activities of street gangs is through forfeiture of the profits, ‘proceeds, and instrumentalities acquired, accumulated, or used by street gangs. 186.22. (a) Any person whoactively participates in any criminal street gang with knowledge that its membersor participants engage in orhave engaged in a pattern of criminal gang activity with the specific intent to promote,further, or assist in any criminal conduct by its members or participants, shall be punishable by imprisonmentin the countyjail for a period not to exceed one year, or by imprisonmentin thestate prison. (b) Any person whoactively participates in any ' criminal street gang with knowledge that its members or participants engage in or have engaged in a pattern of criminal gang activity, and who willfully promotes, furthers, or assists in any criminal conduct by gang ' membersor participants, is punishable by imprisonment in the countyjail for a period not to exceed oneyear, or by imprisonmentin the state prison. (c) Any person who is convicted of a felony or a misdemeanor which is committed for the benefit of, at the directionof, or in association with, any criminalstreet gang, with the specific intent to promote, further, or assist in any criminal conduct by gang members or participants, shall be punished in the following manner: (1) Any person who violates this subdivision in the commission or attempted commission of a misdemeanor, shall be punished by imprisonmentin the county jail not to exeeed one year, or by imprisonmentin the state 96 120 3716-0022 AMENDEDIN ASSEMBLYJULY9, 1987 AMENDEDIN ASSEMBLYJUNE 25, 1987. AMENDEDIN ASSEMBLYJUNE9, 1987 AMENDEDIN ASSEMBLY JUNE3, 1987 AMENDEDIN ASSEMBLY MAY26, 1987 AMENDEDIN.ASSEMBLY APRIL 23, 1987 CALIFORNIA LEGISLATURE--1987-88 REGULAR SESSION ASSEMBLYBILL _ No. 2013 Introduced by Assembly Member Moore March 6, 1987 An act to amend Seetions 272 and 422 ef and te add Chapter 11 (commencing with Section 186.20) to Title 7 of Part 1 of, the Penal Code,relating to crimes, making an appropriation therefor, and declaring the urgency thereof, to take effet immediately. . LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST AB 2013, as amended, Moore. Crimes. (1) Under existing law, there are no provisions which specifically. make the commission of criminal offenses by individuals who are membersof street gangs a separate and distinctly punished offense, or which provide for the forfeiture of the proceeds of gang-related activity. This bill would provide that any person whoactively participates in any criminal street gang, as defined, with knowledge that its members engage in or have engaged in a pattern of criminal gangactivity,as defined, and whowillfully furthers, or assists in, any felonious criminal conduct by gang members, shall be punished by imprisonmentin the county jail for a period not to exceed one year, or imprisonment in 93 40 3716-0023 AB 2013 —4— to employees engagedin concertedactivities for their.mutual aid andprotection, or theactivities oflabor organizations or their membersor agents. _ BS (4) The California Constitution requires the state -to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain-costs mandated by the state. Statutory. provisions. establish procedures for making that reimbursement.: . -:.-". .” This bill would provide that no reimbursement-is reqiired by this act for a specified reason. - Ba, (5) This bill would declare that. it is to take- effect immediately as an urgencystatute. ce Vote: %. Appropriation: yes. Fiscal committee: yes. State-mandatedlocal program:yes. . DO The people of the. State of California do-enact as: follows: . SECFION 1. Chapter 11 (commencingwith Section 186.20) is addedto Title 7 of Part-1 of the Penal Code;to read: mo es CHAPTER 11. STREET TERRORISM ENFORCEMENT| AND PREVENTION ACF) 23). 7 186.20. This chapter shall be known andmaybecited as the “California Street Terrorism’ Enforcement and Prevention Act.” 186.21. The Legislature hereby finds. and declares ‘that it is the right of every person regardless‘of race, color, creed,. religion, national .origin, sex,: age, sexual orientation, or handicap to be secure and protected from fear, intimidation, and physical harmcaused by the activities of violent groups and individuals. It is not the intent of the Legislature in enacting this chapter to interfere with the exercise ofrights protected by. the United States Constitution or by» the - California Constitution. . The Legislature: : recognizes -- the constitutional right of every citizen to harbor andexpress beliefs on any lawful subject whatsoever and, to lawfully associate with others who share’ similar beliefs, ‘to petition lawfully constituted authority ‘fora redress of -B O B S B S B O B S e e e e be e t e t e t b e t H e 0 3 B O O R M A D U R P O N H O O O H ~ 1 0 O T R 6 9 D D m e 93 110 3716-0024. - S R S R R S S E S S E A S A E S R E S c h a m d a o w e - —5— AB 2013 perceived grievances, or to participate in the electoral process. The Legislature, however, further finds that the State of California is in a state of crisis which has been caused by. violent street gangs whose members threaten, . terrorize, andcommita multitude of crimes against the peaceful citizens of their neighborhoods. Theseactivities, ‘both individually and collectively, present a clear and present danger to public order and safety and are not constitutionally protected. It is: the intent of the Legislature in enacting this chapter to seek the eradication ofcriminal activity by street’ gangs by focusing upon patterns of criminal gang-related activity and upon the organized nature of street gangs, which togetherare the chief source of terror created by street gangs. The Legislature further finds that an effeetive ef street. gangs is through forfeiture ef the profits, — er used by street gangs: there are nealy 600 criminal streetgangs operatingin California, and that the number of gang-related murders is increasing. The Legislature also finds that in Los Angeles County alone there were 328 gang-related murders in 1986, and that gang homicides in 1987 have increased 80 percent over 1986. 186.22. (a) Any person whoactively participates in - any criminal street gang with knowledge that its members engage in or have engaged in a pattern of . Criminal gang. activity, and who willfully promotes, furthers, or assists in any felonious criminal conduct by gang members,shall be punished by imprisonmentinthe county. jail for a period not to.exceed one year, or by imprisonmentin the state prison. oe (b) Any person who is convicted of a felony or a misdemeanor which is committed for the benefit of, at the directionof, or,in association with, any criminal street gang, with the specific intent to promote, further, or assist in any criminal conduct by gang members, shall be punished in the following manner: {1) Any person whoviolates this subdivision in the 93 160 nee 3716-0025 AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY AUGUST 18, 1987 AMENDEDIN ASSEMBLY JULY9, 1987° AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY JUNE 25, 11987 . AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY JUNE 9, 1987 AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY JUNE 3, 1987 AMENDEDIN ASSEMBLYMAY26, 1987 AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY APRIL 23,-1987 CALIFORNIA LEGISLATURE—1987-88 REGULAR SESSION _ ASSEMBLYBILL a No. 2013 Introduced by Assembly Member Moore | March 6, 1987 _ _ An act to add and repeal Chapter 11 (commencing with Section 186.20) to Title 7 of Part 1 of, the Penal Code,relating to crimes, making en epprepriatien therefor; and declaring the urgency thereof, to take effet effect immediately. LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST AB 2013, as amended, Moore. Crimes. . (1) Under existing law, there are no provisions which specifically make the commission of criminal offenses by individuals who are membersof street gangs a separate and distinctly punished offense, or which provide for the forfeiture of the proceeds of gang-related activity. , This bill would provide that any person who actively participates in any criminal street gang, as defined, with knowledgethat its members engage in or have engaged in a pattern of criminal gangactivity, as defined, and whowillfully furthers,or assists in, any felonious criminal conduct by gang members, shall be punished by imprisonment in the county 92 40 3716-0026 R U R B M M E E S S A E E S O S c o u s e o n e S A S R E S S S S R R N W C O N N O A R O N H O O 1 0 —3— AB 2013 The people of the State of California do enact as follows: SECTION 1. Chapter 11 (commencing with Section 186.20) is addedto Title 7 of Part 1 of the Penal Code,to read: CHAPTER ll. STREET TERRORISM ENFORCEMENT AND PREVENTION ACT 186.20. This chapter shall be known and maybecited as the “California Street Terrorism Enforcement and Prevention Act.” . 186.21. The Legislature hereby finds and declares that it is the right of every person regardless of race, color, creed, religion, national origin, sex, age, sexual orientation, or handicap to be secure andprotected from fear, intimidation, and physical harm caused by the activities of violent groups and individuals. It is not the intent of the Legislature in enacting this chapter to interfere with the exercise of rights protected by the United States Constitution or by the California Constitution. The Legislature recognizes the constitutional right of every citizen to harbor and express beliefs on any lawful subject whatsoever, to lawfully associate with others whosharesimilar beliefs, to petition lawfully constituted authority for a redress of perceived grievances, or to participate in the electoral process. The Legislature, however, further finds that the State of California is in a state of crisis which has been caused by violent street gangs whose members threaten, terrorize, and commit a multitude of crimes against the peaceful citizens of their neighborhoods. Theseactivities, both individually and collectively, present a clear and present danger to public order and safety and are not constitutionally protected. It is the intent of the Legislature in enacting this chapter to seek the eradication of criminal activity by street gangs by - focusing upon patterns of criminal gang-related activity and upon the organized nature of street gangs, which together are the chief source ofterror created bystreet 3716-0027 AB 2013 —4— gangs. TheLegislature further finds that there are nealy nearly 600 criminal street gangs operating in California, and that the number of gang-related murders is increasing. The Legislature also finds that in Los Angeles County alone there were 328 gang-related murders in 1986, and that gang homicidesin 1987 have increased 80 percent over 1986. . ; 186.22. (a) Any person whoactively participates in any criminal street gang with knowledge that its members engage in or have engaged in a pattern of criminal gang activity, and who willfully promotes, furthers, or assists in any felonious criminal conduct by gang members,shall be punished by imprisonmentin the county jail for a period not to exceed one year, or by imprisonmentin thestate prison. (b) Any person who is convicted of a felony or a. misdemeanor which is committed for the benefit of, at the direction of, or in association with, any criminal street gang, with the specific intent to promote, further, or assist in any criminal conduct by gang members, shall be punished in the following manner: (1) Any person who violates this subdivision in the commission or attempted commission of a misdemeanor, shall be punished by imprisonmentin the county jail not to exceed one year, or by imprisonment in thestate prison, provided that any person sentenced to imprisonment in the county jail pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 17, shall be imprisoned for a period not to exceed one year, but not less than 180 days, and shall not be eligible for release upon completion of sentence, parole, or any otherbasis, until he or she has served 180 days. If the court grants probation or suspends the execution of sentence imposed upon the defendant,it shall require as a condition thereof that the defendant serve 180 days in county jail. (2) Except as provided in paragraph (3), any person who violates this subdivision in the commission or attempted commission of a felony shall, upon conviction of that felony or attempted felony, in addition and consecutive to the punishmentprescribed for the felony oc t fe et p e a s e k ee k pe ek fe et e t e s B W W W W w W O 6 a W b h b o b o 92 110 3716-0028 AMENDEDIN SENATE AUGUST30, 1988 AMENDEDIN SENATE AUGUST5,1988 AMENDEDIN SENATE AUGUST 2, 1988 AMENDEDIN SENATE JUNE23, 1988 AMENDEDIN SENATE APRIL 4, 1988 AMENDEDIN ASSEMBLY SEPTEMBER1, 1987 AMENDEDIN ASSEMBLY AUGUST18, 1987 AMENDEDIN ASSEMBLYJULY9, 1987 AMENDEDIN ASSEMBLY JUNE 25, 1987 ~ AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY JUNE9, 1987 AMENDEDIN ASSEMBLY JUNE3, 1987 AMENDEDIN ASSEMBLY MAY26, 1987 - AMENDEDIN ASSEMBLY APRIL 23, 1987 ' ,CALIFORNIA LEGISLATURE—1987-88 REGULAR SESSION ASSEMBLY BILL No. 2013 Introduced by Assembly Member Moore (Principal coauthor: Senator Robbins) (Coauthors: Senators Cecil Green, Lockyer, Torres, and Watson) March 6, 1987 An act to add and repeal Chapter 11 (commencing with Section 186.20) to Title 7 of Part 1 of, the Penal Code, relating. to crimes, and declaring the urgencythereof, to take effect immediately. 86 40 ee 3716-0029 Date of Hearing: July 13, 1987 AB 2013 Counsel: Melissa K. Nappan — ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC SAFETY Larry Stirling, Chair AB 2013 (Moore) - As Amended: July 9, 1987 ISSUE: SHOULD THERE BE SPECIFIED CRIMINAL SANCTIONS FOR PARTICIPATION IN CRIMINAL STREET GANGS? DIGEST 1) Current law contains no provisions which specifically make commission of criminal offenses by members of criminal street gangs a separate offense from the crime actually committed. This bill would make it an alternate felony/misdemeanor, punishable by up to one year in the county jail, or 16 months, two or three years in State prison, to actively participate in a criminal street gang with ‘knowledge that its members engage in or have engaged in a pattern of criminal activity and willfully promote, further, or assist in any felonious conduct by gang members. 2) Current law contains no specific sentencing provisions for offenses committed in furtherance of gang activities. This bill would provide that: a) Any person convicted of a misdemeanor with the intent to promote the - gang activities shall be imprisoned for up to a year in the county jail or in. state priscn. b) Any person convicted of a misdemeanor with the intent to promote gang activity which has been reduced from a felony pursuant to Penal Code Section 17(b) must serve a minimum of 180 days in jail. c) A sentence enhancement of two or three years be imposed in addition to any jail time served upon the conviction of a felony which is in furtherance of gang activity. (Two years if the underlying felony ispunishable by a maximum of three years; and otherwise three years.) d) A minimum of 15 calendar years must be served before parole on any lifeprison term imposed for a gang related felony. e) The court may strike these enhancements in the interests of justice. 3716-0031. AB 2013 COMMENTS 1) DEFINITIONS. 2) a) Criminal Street Gang. The bill specifically defines a "criminal street | b) c) gang" as an association or group of three or more persons which has a common name or symbol, whose members either individually or collectively engage or have engaged in a pattern of criminal gang activity, and which has as one of its primary activities the comnission Of one or more of the criminal acts defined below (Section Ib). Pattern of Activity. A "pattern of criminal gang activity" is defined as the commission, attempted commission, or solicitation of two or more of the following offenses: | * Assault with a deadly weapon or with force likely to produce great bodily injury. * * Robbery. _* Homicide or manslaughter. * Sale, possession for sale, or manufacture of specified controlled substances. * Shooting at an inhabited dwelling or motor vehicle. * Arson. | * Intimidation of witnesses. At least one of these offenses must occur after the date this bill is Chaptered, and the last must occur within three years after that. The offenses must be committed on separate occasions or by at least two persons. No Definitions. The bill does not define what a "member" is. All tevels of gang "membership" exist ranging from hard core criminal members, to peripheral members who join for status, recognition, or the emotional need to belong. - Opponents of the bill state that only hard core members should be targeted, and that the lack of definition of these terms might allow a person who is only peripherally involved to be criminally liable for the conduct of others. PURPOSE. The sponsors state that criminal street gangs represent large scale big business and large-scale crime in California, particularly in Los Angeles. (The sponsors also note that similar problems exist in San Francisco, San Diego, Oakland, and San Jose). In the Los Angeles AB 2013 Page 2 3716-0032 3) 4) “AB 2013 area, law enforcement officials believe that there are between 40,000 and 50,000 members in about 500 gangs. They linked members of gangs to 186 homicides and over 5000 violent crimes in 1986. Prosecutors and law enforcement have increased efforts in this area, but enhanced prosecution programs have not been effective erough. Although there have been more arrests and convictions of individuals, the sponsors state that the "heart of the enterprise" has yet to be reached. The sponsors state that this bill is intended to reach that goal, and compare it to federal laws targeting organized crime. - NEED. According to the Attorney General's Gang Task Force Report, the number of gangs and gang members have steadily increased since 1979 (from 300 gangs in 1979 to 500 today).. However, the number of gang-related murders has steadily decreased (from 350 in 1980 to 186 today). The Los Angeles District Attorney's Office claims a 95% conviction rate for gang-related crime under enhanced prosecution efforts. If the conviction rate is 95% under current law, is the creation of new offenses necessary? Opponents of the bill also note that sending gang members to prison may also have a counterproductive effect. In their book, "Understanding Street Gangs," Sergeants Robert Jackson and Wesley McBride state that sending gang members to prison increases their status in the gangs. Opponents also state that correctional institutions are currently fertile recruitment groundsfor gang members. Members of the Los Angeles Public Defender's Office (Juvenile Division) also state that many juveniles join gangs for status, and rarely make much money from their activities, except those involved in drug sales. Opponents state that drug sales are adequately punished by current laws. Further, to punish juveniles who are often intimidated by other juveniles into joining the gangs under threats of extortion or beatings is poor public policy and does little to curb the gang problem. NEW OFFENSE AND SENTENCE ENHANCEMENTS. Under this bill, active participation in a criminal street gang, with knowledge of its activities and the willful promotion, assistance, or furtherance of any of the felonious criminal activities would be an alternate felony/misdemeanor. Also, a defendant who is convicted of a crime which was committed for thebenefit, or at the direction of the gang with the intent to further thecriminal activities of the gang would be subject to a variety of sentenceenhancements. Any gang member serving a life term for a felony committedin furtherance of gang activity would have to serve a minimum of 15 yearsprior to being paroled. These enhancements could be stricken by the court in appropriate cases. a) Arguments Against. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) statesthat to punish membership in a criminal street gang “creates an overbroad and vague legal stano -d which raises serious questions of AB 2013 Page 3 3716-0033 b) AB 2013 enforcement and invites selective prosecution which could be easily targeted against any association or group..it could be applied against organizations whose primary purpose was political and lawful promotions of beliefs and opinions. The fact that some individuals in the group may choose, as individuals, to engage in criminal misconduct however should not criminalize membership by any person in the group." Further, punishing members of a group for a "pattern of violence" fails to recognize that express individualized intent is necessary for a criminal conviction of any one person. Adequate sanctions exist under current law if that person has the requisite intent and activity. -The ACLU also notes that by providing sentence enhancements and minimum sentences, gang members are being punished more severely simply for their association. This is even clearer in the case of minimum time to be served prior to parole. An “ordinary” first degree murderer under current law does not have to serve 15 years before he is considered for parole. Under this bill, a kidnapper who is a gang member (and committed the crime in furtherance of gang activities) would have to serve more time than the murderer before being eligible for parole. Not only is this an illogical sentencing scheme, but it may be unconstitutional. California Attorneys for Criminal Justice (CACJ) also states that gang members who commit crimes are currently punishable by other existing ‘statutes, including aiding and abetting and conspiracy provisions. They note that language proscribing "members" or "active participation" is vague and could be used against peripheral members as well as hard core participants. Author's Response. A criminal street gang is clearly defined in the bill to require that the group or its members are engaged in a pattern of specificserious criminal activity. No group whose members are not _ engaged in the commission of such offenses is included in the definition. Further, mere membership is not punishable under the bill. The United States Supreme Court has held that mere association with a group cannot be punished unless there is proof that the defendant knows of and intends to further its illegal aims. (Scales v. United States (1961) 367 U.S. 203, 229). This bill imposes sanctions onactive participation in the gang only when the defendant knows of. felonious criminal activity and willfully promotes, furthers or assists it. The sponsors state that current law does not adequately punish this type of organized crime. Conspiracy laws require an agreement to commit a crime, and an "overt act," which cannot always be shown in the case of a gang member. For example, where a gang member is driving a car with other gang members who then shoot into a home, the driver may or may not be guilty of the shooting depending on his knowledge and AB 2013 Page 4 371€-0034 AB 2013 intent. Under this bill, he would be guilty of an alternate felony/misdemeanor regardless of his intent concerning the shooting. 5) LABOR ORGANIZATIONS. The bill contains a specific exclusion for employees engaged in activities of labor organizations. 6) SUNSET. The author proposes to amend the bill in Committee to provide a 3-year sunset provision, with a report to be submitted at the end of the second year. SOURCE: Los Angeles City Attorney Los Angeles District Attorney SUPPORT: None on file OPPOSITION: American Civil Liberties Union California Attorneys for Criminal Justice California Public Defenders Association - AB 2013 Page 5 eee 3716-0035 Date of Hearing: June 29, 1987 AB 2013 Counsel: Melissa K. Nappan oo ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC SAFETY Larry Stirling, Chair AB 2013 (Moore) - As Amended: June 25, 1987 ISSUE: I. SHOULD THERE BE SPECIFIED CRIMINAL SANCTIONS FOR PARTICIPATION IN CRIMINAL STREET GANGS? II. SHOULD THERE BE PROVISIONS FOR VICTIMS OF STREET GANGS TO PURSUE. CIVIL ACTIONS INCLUOING INJUNCTIONS AND SUITS FOR MONETARY DAMAGES? TIT. SHOULD THERE BE CIVIL FORFEITURE PROVISIONS FOR PROFITS OF GANG-RELATED ACTIVITY? IV. SHOULD IT BE AN ALTERNATE FELONY/MISDEMEANOR FOR PARENTS OF MINORS WHO VIOLATE PROVISIONS OF THIS BILL TO KNOWINGLY RECEIVE PROCEEDS FROM GANG ACTIVITY? V. SHOULD THE LAW WHICH MAKES IT A FELONY TO THREATEN A CRIME WHICH WILL RESULT IN GREAT BODILY INJURY OR DEATH BE AMENDED? DIGEST 1) 2) Current law contains no provisfons which specifically make commission of criminal offenses by members of criminal street gangs a separate offense from the crime actually committed. This bill would make it an alternate felony/misdemeanor, punishable by up to one year in the county jail, or 16 months, two or three years in state prison, to actively participate in a criminal street gang with knowledge that its members engage in or have engaged in a pattern of criminal activity and willfully promote, further, or assist in any felonious conduct by gang members. Current law contains no specific sentencing provisions for offenses committed in furtherance of gang activities. This bill would provide that: a) Any person convicted of a misdemeanor with the intent to promote the gang activities shall be imprisoned for up to a year in the county jail or fin state prison. b) Any person convicted of a misdemeanor with the intent to promote gang activity which has been reduced from a felony pursuant to Penal Code Section 17(b) must serve a minimum of 180 days in jail. 3716-8036 3) 4) 5) AB 2013 c) A sentence enhancement of three years be imposed in addition to any. . jail time served upon the conviction of a felony which is in furtherance of gang activity. d) A minimum of 15 calendar years must be served before parole on any life prison term imposed for a gang related felony. e) The court may strike these enhancements in the interests of justice. Current law provides no specific laws pertaining to the forfeiture of proceeds of gang-related activity. This bil] would: a) Provide for civil forfeiture proceedings for money or property which is derived from or used in association with a criminal street gang. b) Make it an alternate felony/misdemeanor, punishable by up to one year in the county jail or 16 months, two or. three years in state prison, for a parent of a minor in violation of these jaws to knowingly receive proceeds that the minor received as a result of the violation, if the parent did not exercise reasonable care and control over the minor and allowed him or her to violate the law. : Current Jaw does not provide a specific civil action for damages and costs sustained by a victim of a street gang. This bill would: a) Authorize civil actions against a gang for recovery of damages and costs sustained by victims. b) Authorize a prosecutor to bring an injunction against the criminal street gang or its members, c) Authorize the Attorney General to intervene or act as amicus in any civil action brought under this law. Current law makes ita felony to threaten to commit a crime which will result in death or great bodily injury, if it causes another person to fear for his or his family's safety, causes the evacuation of a building, interferes with public services, or otherwise causes serious disruption of public activities. (This law was held to be unconstitutional by the California Supreme Court [See Comment #4b.]) This bill would amend that law to make it an alternate felony/misdemeanor to threaten a crime which will result in death or great bodily injury, with the specific intent that the statement be taken as a threat even where AB 2013 Page 2 ee 3716-0037 AB 2013 there is no intent of actually carrying it out, and where the intent is specific enough to convey to the person an immediate prospect of execution. 6) This bill also establishes a Gang Violence Prevention and Education ‘Revolving Fund to be administered by the Office of Criminal Justice Planning (OCUP) to be disbursed for education and prevention activities. All fines and forfeitures received under this bill would be transferred | into this Fund. COMMENTS 1) OEFINITIONS. a) by Criminal Street Gang. The bill specifically defines a "criminal street gang" as an association or group of three or more persons which has a common name or symbol, whose members either individually or collectively engage or have engaged in a pattern of criminal gang activity, and which has as one of its primary activities the commission of criminal acts. Pattern of Activity. A “pattern of criminal gang activity" is defined as the commission, attempted commission, or solicitation of two or more of the following offenses: * Assault with a deadly weapon or with force likely to produce great bodily injury. * Robbery. * Homicide or manslaughter. * Sale, possession for sale, or manufacture of specified controlled substances. . * Shooting at an inhabited dwelling or motor vehicle. * Arson. * Intimidation of witnesses. At least one of these offenses must occur after the date this bill is chaptered, and the last must occur within three years after that. No Definitions. The bill does not define what a "member" is. Al] levels of gang "membership" exist ranging from hard core criminal members, to peripheral members who join for status, recognition, or the emotional need to belong. Opponents of the bill state that only hard core members should be targeted, and that the lack of definition of AB 2013 Page 3 2716-6636 AB_2013 these terms might allow a person who is only peripherally involved to be criminally liable for the conduct of others. 2) PURPOSE. The sponsors state that criminal street gangs represent large scale big business and large-scale crime in California, particularly in Los Angeles. (The sponsors also note that similar problems exist in San Francisco, San Diego, Oakland, and San Jose). In the Los Angeles area, law enforcement officials believe that there are between 40,000 and 50,008 members in about 500 gangs. They linked members of gangs to 186 homicides and over 5000 violent crimes in 1986. Prosecutors and law enforcement have increased efforts in this area, but enhanced prosecution programs have not been effective enough. Although there have been more arrests and convictions of individuals, the sponsors state that the "heart of the enterprise" has yet to be reached. The sponsors state that this bill fis intended to reach that goal, and compare it to federal Jaws targeting organized crime. 3) NEEO. According to the Attorney General's Gang Task Force Report, the number of gangs and gang members have steadily increased since 1979 (from 300 gangs in 1979 to 500 today). However, the number of gang-related murders has steadily decreased (from 350 in 1980 to 186 today). The Los Angeles District Attorney's Office claims a 95% conviction rate for gang-related crime under enhanced prosecution efforts. If the conviction rate is 95% under current law, is the creation of new offenses necessary? Opponents of the bill also note that. sending gang members to prison may also have a counterproductive effect. In their book, "Understanding Street Gangs," Sergeants Robert Jackson and Wesley McBride state that sending gang members to prison increases their status in the gangs. Opponents also State that correctional institutions are currently fertile recruitment ‘grounds for gang members. Members of the Los Angeles Public Defender's Office (Juvenile Division) also state that many juveniles join gangs for Status, and rarely make much money from their activities, except those involved in drug sales. Opponents state that drug sales are adequately punished by current laws. Further, to punish juveniles who are often intimidated by other juveniles into joining the gangs under threats of extortion or beatings {1s poor public policy and does little to curb the gang problem. 4) CRIMINALPROVISIONS: a) New Offense and Sentence Enhancements. Under this bill, active participation in a criminal street gang, with knowledge of its activities and the willful promotion, assistance, or furtherance of any of the felonious criminal activities would be ‘an alternate felony/misdemeanor. AB 2013 Page 4 einent 3716-0039 AB 2013 Also, a defendant who is convicted of a crime which was committed for the benefit, or at the direction of the gang with the intent to further the criminal activities of the gang would be subject to a variety of sentence enhancements. Any gang member serving a life term for a felony committed in furtherance of gang activity would have to serve a _ minimum of 15 years prior to being paroled. These enhancements could be stricken by the court in appropriate cases. (1) Arguments Against. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) states that to punish membership in a criminal street gang “creates an overbroad and vague legal standard which raises serious questions of enforcement and invites selective prosecution which could be easily targeted against any association or group..it could be applied against organizations whose primary purpose was political and lawful promotions of beliefs and opinions. The fact that some individuals in the group may choose, as individuals, to engage in criminal misconduct however should not criminalize membership by any person in the group." | Further, punishing members of a group for a "pattern of violence" fails to recognize that express individualized intent is necessary for a criminal conviction of any one person. Adequate sanctions exist under current law if that person has the requisite intent and activity. ' The ACLU also notes that by providing sentence enhancements and minimum sentences, gang members are being punished more severely simply for their association. This is even clearer in the case of minimum time to be served prior to parole. An “ordinary" first degree murderer under current law does not have to serve 15 years before he is considered for parole. Under this bill, a kidnapper who {Ss a gang member (and committed the crime in furtherance of gang activities) would have to serve more time than the murderer before being eligible for parole. Not only is this an illogical sentencing scheme, but it may be unconstitutional. California Attorneys for Criminal Justice (CACJ) also states that gang members who commit crimes are currently punishable by other existing statutes, including aiding and abetting and conspiracy provisions. They note that language proscribing "members" or “active participation" is vague and could be used against peripheral members as well as hard core participants. (2) Author's Response. A criminal street gang is clearly defined in the bill to require that the group or its members are engaged ina pattern of specific serious criminal activity. No group whose members are not engaged in the commission of such offenses is included in the definition. Further, mere membership is not AB 2013 Page 5 AB 2013 punishable under the bil]. The United States Supreme Court has held that mere association with a group cannot be punishedunless there is proof that the defendant knows of and intends to further its illegal aims. (Scales v. United States (1961) 367 U.S. 203, 229). This bill imposes sanctions on active participation in the gang only when the defendant knows of felonious criminal activity and willfully promotes, furthers or assists it. The sponsors state that current law does not adequately punish this type of organized crime. Conspiracy laws require an agreement to commit a crime, and an "overt act," which cannot _always be shown in the case of a gang member. For example, where a gang member is driving a car with other gang members who then shoot into a home, the driver may or may not be guilty of the shooting depending on his knowledge and intent. Under this bill, he would be guilty of an alternate felony/misdemeanor regardless of his intent concerning the shooting. b) Threats of Crimes. This bill amends Penal Code Section 422, which was held unconstitutional by the California Supreme Court. The Court in People v. Miramani (1981) 30 Cal.3d 375, held that this law was unconstitutionally vague and that statutes penalizing threats must be narrowly directed at threats which truly pose a danger to society. The bill. proposes language which requires a specific intent that the Speech be taken as a threat, as well as the requirement that it be so "unequivocal, unconditional, immediate, and specific as to convey to the person threatened a gravity of purpose and an immediate prospect ofexecution." The bill also amends the crime so that it is a "wobbler" instead of a straight felony. c) Parental Liability. Under current Jaw, any parent who fails to exercise reasonable care to control a minor child and who allows that child to violate a law is guilty of a misdemeanor. This bill would make it a "wobbler" for the parent who violated that law to also knowingly receive proceeds from gang activity. The sponsors state that this section is intended to be used against parents who actually encourage their minor children to participate in gang activity. Opponents state that this section could punish the parent of a child who was unable to contro] that child, if he or she accepted money from the child for groceries, knowing that the money came. from gang activities. 5) CIVIL CAUSES OF ACTION. The bill contains specific provisions for injunctions and suits for damages caused by criminal street gangs. a) Injunctions. The bill would authorize a prosecutor to enjoin a criminal street gang or the place used for Purposes of criminal conduct AB 2013 Page 6 ae : 3716-0041 AB 2013 by a gang as a nuisance. The court could issue a temporary restraining order or injunction where the existence of a violation was shown to its satisfaction by a complaint or affidavit. b) Damages. A victim of a violation under this bill would be authorized ' to sue for damages, punitive damages, and attorney's fees. The victim could sue the person who committed the crime, any other member of the gang who had the specific intent to further or assist the criminal conduct of the gang, or the gang itself. Further, the bill allows for a civil penaity of twice the proved damages, attorney's fees, and costs, which would be deposited into the Gang Violence Prevention and Education Revolving Fund. The bill specifies which organizations may apply for funding from this Fund. * Service of Process. Service of Process could be made by delivery of a copy of the process to any three or.more gang members who could be reasonably expected to give notice to other gang members. (This determination is to be made by the court.) Service of process to three gang members arguably does not meet due process requirements for the entire gang. Further, the proposal that the court determine whether the chosen three members' "character is such that he could reasonably be expected to give notice to the other members" appears to be vague and possibly unworkable. ™* Expedited Hearing. The bill also proposes that in any civil action brought by a prosecutor under this law or a civil forfeiture action shall have precedence over al} other actions, except criminal proceedings, election contests, and hearings on injunctions. The sponsors of the bill state that this is good public policy because the property in a forfeiture action would already have been seized and the owner of the property should be entitled to a speedy determination of the case. However, there are equally good reasons to expedite many civil cases, and long waiting lists for courtrooms in many jurisdictions. This procedure raises the obvious question of whether a prosecutor shouldbe permitted to dictate to the presiding judge of a court the priority of civil cases. 6) Forfeiture Provisions. The bill provides that any property interest used in the course of, derived from, which were proceeds of, or received in exchange for proceeds of a pattern of criminal activity would be subject to civil forfeiture. The prosecutor may file a civil petition in conjunction with any civil or criminal proceeding. The prosecutor would then have the burden of proof that the property was acquired by the offender when he was a member of a street gang, and that the property was acquired by proceeds of acrime. The property could be seized initially by means of a search warrant, unless exigent circumstances existed, or the search was incident to a lawful arrest. AB 2013 SOURCE: Los Angeles City Attorney Los Angeles District Attorney SUPPORT: None on file OPPOSITION: American Civil Liberties Union California Attorneys for Criminal Justice California Public Defenders Association AB 2013 Page 8 Se | 3716-0043 Date of Hearing: June 8, 1987 AB 2013 Counsel: Melissa K. Nappan ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC SAFETY Larry Stirling, Chair AB 2013 (Moore) - As Proposed to be Amended In Committee ISSUE: I. II. Il. IV. VI. DIGEST SHOULD THERE BE SPECIFIED CRIMINAL SANCTIONS FOR PARTICIPATION IN CRIMINAL STREET GANGS? SHOULD THERE BE PROVISIONS FOR VICTIMS OF STREET GANGS TO PURSUE CIVIL ACTIONS INCLUDING INJUNCTIONS AND SUITS FOR MONETARY DAMAGES? SHOULD THERE BE CIVIL FORFEITURE PROVISIONS FOR PROFITS OF GANG-RELATED ACTIVITY? SHOULD THE PROSECUTOR BE PERMITTED TO ISSUE INVESTIGATORY SUBPOENAS IN CONNECTION WITH PROSECUTIONS UNDER THIS BILL? SHOULD IT BE AN ALTERNATE FELONY/MISDEMEANOR FOR PARENTS OF MINORS WHO VIOLATE PROVISIONS OF THIS BILL TO KNOWINGLY RECEIVE PROCEEDS FROM GANG ACTIVITY? SHOULD THE LAW WHICH MAKES IT A FELONY TO THREATEN A CRIME WHICH WILL RESULT IN GREAT BODILY INJURY OR DEATH BE AMENDED? 1) Current law contains no provisions which Specifically make commission of 2) criminal offenses by members of criminal street gangs a separate offense from the crime actually committed. This bill would make it an alternate felony/misdemeanor, punishable by up to one year in the county jail, or 16 months, two or three years in state prison, to either : a) Actively participate in a criminal street gang with knowledge that its members engage in or have engaged in a pattern of criminal gang activity with the specific intent to promote, further, or assist its criminal conduct, or b) Willfully promote, further, or Subject to Gann Limit: Yes pH. Vote: 2/3 (Urgency & Appropriation) Summary: Enacts a comprehensive law to i participation in a criminal street ga © things the bill would 1) Specifies certain mihiy specified gang related activities; 2) B a two-yearor three-year sentence enhancement felonie#done in furtherance of gang activities; 3) Requires 15 years imprisonment actually be served by any person sentenced to life imprisonment for criminal street gang activities; and 4) gives the court discretion to strike these enhancementsin the interests of justice. 5) Requires the LA District Attorney to submit a report to the Legislature by 1/1/90, on the impact this bill had on the control of criminal street gang activity. Fiscal effect: Unknown additional General Fund costs as a result of additional state prison commitments. LA County has indicated that they will absorb the cost of preparing and submitting a report. Supported by L.A. District Attorney (source); L.A. City Attorney (source) Opposed by ACLU, CA Attorneys for Criminal Justice, CA Public Defenders Assoc. Governor's position: None on file Comments: This bill is designed to give law enforcement legal tools to pursue criminal street gang members ~~ especially the leaders of criminal street gangs. It is similar in concept to the federal Racketeering and Corrupt Organizations Act, which has been used effectively to jail leaders of the Mafia. . The main benefit of this approach is that it would allow law enforcement to go after the leaders of criminal street gangs. These leaders often use other members to commit the drug dealing, extortion, murder, and other gang activities. Yet jailing of the leaders would be the most effective way to reduce the power of the street gangs. Assembly Republican Committee Vote Public Safety -~ 7/13/87 (4-1) Ayes; All Republicans Noes: 7 N.V.: Abs.: - Consultants: Bill Gausewitz/Jeanne Cain 3716-0095 AB 2013 (M ) -- STREET GANG troloore 7/" GAM: ye AB 2013 (Moore) 7/12/87 Kap? L)CANS ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE REPUBLICAN ANALYSIS Lasrtthsee Asbr u#S{LfYC Br Version: Tate? SVS, bead-Repubttean:>Pauleliner ecommendation: Support Vote: 2/3 (Urgency & Appropriation) Summary: Enacts a comprehensive law to impose penalties on participation in a criminal street gang. Among other things the bill would 1) Specifies certain minimum sentences for specified gang related activities; 2) Provides a two-year or three-year sentence enhancement felonies done in furtherance of gang activities; 3) Requires 15 years imprisonment actually be served by any person sentenced to life imprisonment for criminal street gang activities; and 4) gives the court discretion to strike these Sacereel the interests ofjustice. Fiscal effect: Unknown >) Re eo +e,“Acietag ko solomr @ report tothe eqslatuce by fi]40, ono monet qhes bil nod onVeO gnvot rumenoHeet | yy actabny { Supported by L.A. District Attorney (source); L.A. City Attorney (source) Opposed by ACLU, CA Attorneys for Criminal Justice, CA Public Defenders Assoc. Governor's position: None on file - Comments: This bill is designed to give law enforcement legal tools to pursue criminal street gang members -- especially the leaders of criminal street gangs. It is similar in concept to the federal Racketeering and Corrupt Organizations Act, which has been used effectively to jail leaders of the Mafia. The main benefit of this approach is that it would allow law enforcement to go after the leaders of criminal street gangs. These leaders often use other members to commit the drug dealing, extortion, murder, and other gang activities. Yet jailing of the leaders would be the most effective way to reduce the power of the street gangs. Assembly Republican Committee. Vote Public Safety -- 7/13/87 QO wy Ayes: Qe KRpuhttters Noes: Consultant: Bill Ceusewite(Marre Chun. 2716-0096 Legisfative Analyst August 22, 1987 ANALYSIS OF ASSEMBLY BILL NO. 2013 (Moore) As Amended in Assembly August 18, 1987 1987-88 session Fiscal Effect: Cost: 1. Estimated General Fund costs of up to $115,000 in 1987-88, $155,000 in 1988-89, and $78,000 in 1989-90 to prepare a specified report. (2 8/ 8T /8 “w y) E1 02 av 2. Unknown General Fund costs resulting from additional commitments to state prison. Revenue: None. Analysis: This bill, an urgency measure, creates new crimes related to criminal street gangs, and requires the Attorney General to prepare a specified report. Specifically, this bil] establishes criminal penalties for willfully promoting or assisting in any felonious criminal conduct of a street gang, as defined. The measure further provides for sentence enhancements that would result in an additional county jail or state prison term for persons committing crimes in order to promote or assist street gang members. The bill specifies that punishments for the crimes and enhancements established by the measure would range from imprisonment in the county jail for a period not to exceed one year, up to a maximum of 15 years in the state prison. 3716-0097 AB 2013--contd ~2- In addition, the bill requires the Attorney General to report to the Legislature, on or before January 1, 1990, on the impact of this measure on the -control of criminal street gang activity in the state. Specifically, the bill requires the Attorney General to report the number of arrests, prosecutions, trials, convictions and sentence enhancements resulting from this measure. The provisions of this measure would sunset on January 1, 1990. Effect The Attorney General’s office would incur additional General Fund costs to prepare the specified report. The Department of Justice estimates that these costs would be up to $115,000 in 1987-88, $155,000 in 1988-89, and $78,000 in 1989-90. This bill also would increase General Fund costs by an unknown amount, to the extent that additional persons are committed to state prison as a result of its provisions. The Department of Corrections has no estimate of these costs. Mandated Local Program. This measure would result in unknown additional local law enforcement and incarceration costs. The bill contains a crimes and infractions disclaimer. 45/s4 3716-0098 Honorable Gwen Moore DEPARTMENT AUTHOR BILL NUMBER Member of the Assembly - Finance Moore AB 2013 State Capitol, Room 2117 Sacramento, CA 95814 SPONSORED BY RELATED BILLS AMENDMENT DATE SB 1555 August 18, 1987 BILL SUMMARY AB 2013 would enact the Street Terrorism Enforcement and Prevention Act. The intent of this act is to eradicate the criminal activities of street gangs by specifying sentencing terms for criminal activities of gang members. This bill is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute. SUMMARY O© CHANGES This bill has not been analyzed previously. - SUMMARY OF COMMENTS “This act would provide additional tools necessary for law enforcement to control the increasing criminal activities and warfare of street gangs. FISCAL SUMMARY--STATE LEVEL SO (Fiscal Impact by Fiscal Year) Code/Department LA (Dollars in. Thousands) Agency or Revenue co Code Type RV FC 1987-88 FC 1988-89 FC 1989-90 Fund 0820/dJustice so oc $155 C $155 oC $155 001/GF 5240/Corrections so. oC $88 oC $88 C $88 001/GF 5460/Youth Authority SQ C _ $138 = =C $138 86C $138 00O1/GF Impact on State Appropriations Limit--No ANALYSIS A. Specific Findings Current law does not make the commission of a crime by members of street gangs a separate and distinctly punishable offense. This bill would specify the punishment for specified criminal activities of street gangs. This bill would also require the Attorney General to submit a report by January 1, 1990 to the Legislature on the impact of this act on the control of criminal street gang activity in the State. This act would remain in effect only until January 3}, 1991. POSITION: Department Director Date Neutral, if amended. Principal Analyst Date Program Budget Manager Date Governor's Office (211) D. Alonzo Mal lis L. red Position noted , a Sr Position approved[nse hog 5 Ufa A)ples A 7: Position disapproved by: date: BILL ANALYSIS Form DF-43 (Rev 07/87 Buff) CJ:0090A/1335C 3716-0099 (2) BILL ANALYSIS/ENROLLED BILL REPORT-~-(Continued) Form DF-43 AUTHOR AMENDMENT DATE BILL NUMBER Moore August 18, 1987 AB 2013 ANALYSIS A. Specific Findings (Continued? Finance staff recommends that the statistical reporting provisions for the Attorney General be deleted because the individual local agencies could gather the requested information. The Local Cost Estimate indicates that the crimes and infractions disclaimer is appropriate. B. Fiscal Analysis The Department of Justice indicated that the cost to complete the specified report would be $155,000 to fund four positions (1 Criminal Intelligence Specialist, 1 Program Technician, 2 Statistical Clerk, and 1 Research Analyst). Finance staff believes that the specified reporting requirement could be absorbed within existing resources, and do not necessarily concur with the cost estimate. Actual cost would be reviewed as part of the regular budget preparation process. This bill would result in additional state prison and Youth Authorthy incarcerations. A cost estimate is indeterminable because the number of additional incarcerations can not be estimated. However, if 10 persons were sent to prison as a result of this bill, it would cost approximately $88,000 per year. If 10 persons were incarcerated in the Youth Authority, the estimated cost would be about $138,000 per year. CJ:MW2 /0090A/1335C ae 3716-0100 PROPOSED AMENDMENTS FOR AB 2013 As amended August 18, 1987 ~On page 6, delete jines 35-40. On page 7, delete lines 1-9. CJ:MW3/0090A/1335C a a 3716-0101 NO. ISSUE DATE BILL NUMBER "AUG 2 4 1987 Local Cost 1 AB 2013 ESTIMATE AUTHOR DATE LAST AMENDED Department of Finance Moore August 18, 1987 1. SUMMARY OF LOCAL . IMPACT: Enacts the "Street Terrorism Enforcement And Prevention Act" wnich makes it a crime to knowingly participate in criminal street gang activity. Urgency measure. II. FISCAL SUMMARY--LOCAL LEVEL 1987-88 1988-89 1989-90 (Dollars 3n Thousands) Reimbursable Expenditures: -- -- -- Non-Reimbursable Expenditures: “+ -- -- Revenues: -- -- -- ITI. ANALYSIS: Current law does not distinguish between crimes committed by individuals and those committed by members of criminal street gangs. This measure would enact the Street Terrorism Enforcement And Prevention Act. It would provide that any member of a criminal street gang who promotes or assists in tne commission of a misdemeanor may be punished by imprisonment in the State prison or county jail for at least 180 days, and up to one year. If tne offense is a felony then imprisonment could be up to three years in the State prison. If the offense is punishably by life imprisonment, the person could not be paroled until he or she has served at least 15 years in prison. These provisions would sunset on January 1, 1991, unless they are extended. by subsequent legislation. To the extent that additional persons are imprisoned, or persons are imprisoned for lengthier periods, State and local prison costs would increase. While the magnitude of this increase is unknown the Department of Corrections estimates that it costs approximately $17,500 annually to house an inmate in the State prison. Local jail costs are estimated to be approximately $16,500 per prisoner, per year. Under Section 6(b) of Article XIII B of the California Constitution, any costs to a unit of local government which result from legislation defining a new crime or changing an existing definition of a crime are not "state mandated costs" and therefore are not reimbursable by the State. In addition, Section 17556(a)7 of the Government Code prohibits tne Commission on State Mandates from considering any claims for reimbursement of costs from a local entity based on such legislation or on legislation which eliminated a crime or changed tne penalty for a crime. It should be noted, however, that Section 2246.2 of the Revenue and Taxation Code requires that funding be included in the Governor's Budget to reimburse local entities for one-half of any additional detention and probation costs in excess of 1 percent of such costs in the preceding year incurred as tne result of a bill which increased the penalty for a crime. Any local entity which believes that this bil] falls within the purview of these provisions may, as provided by Jaw, file a written request for these funds with the Department of Finance. Tne "crimes and infractions" disclaimer in tne bill is appropriate. PREPARED te* REVIEWED Date *APPROVED . Date (534) Jag, Sabotss * «Sime ; rales LR:1444L GQ ofuitm * 3 ( 3 7 1 €=- 182 _ -_ ecko}one oe PeeeReONE SENATE COMMITTEE ON JUDICIARY Bill Lockyer, Chairman 1987-88 Regular Session AB 2013 (Moore) z As amended September 1: Hearing date: March 22, 1988 2 Penal Code 0 PAW { 3 STREET TERRORISM ENFORCEMENT AND PREVENTION ACT y»» HISTORY | Source: Los Angeles City Attorney; Los Angeles District Attorney Prior Legislation: None . Support: Los Angeles City Council; City of Compton, Crime Committee; Southern Christian Leadership Conference; Neighborhood Action Group, Hollywood Opposition: American Civil Liberties Union; California Attorneys for Criminal Justice; California Public Defenders Association (THIS ANALYSIS REFLECTS AUTHOR'S AMENDMENTS TO BE OFFERED IN COMMITTEE. ) KEY ISSUES SHOULD A PERSON WHO ACTIVELY PARTICIPATES IN ANY CRIMINAL STREET GANG WITH KNOWLEDGE THAT ITS MEMBERS OR PARTICIPANTS-—ENGAGE IN OR HAVE ENGAGED IN A PATTERN OF SERIOUS CRIMINAL ACTIVITY, AND WHO WILLFULSY PROMOTES, FURTHERS, OR ASSISTS IN ANY FELONIOUS CRIMINAL CONDUCT BY MEMBERS OF THE GANG, BE GUILTY OF A "WOBBLER"? SHOULD A PERSON WHO IS CONVICTED OF A FELONY OR A MISDEMEANOR WHICH 2S COMMITTED FOR THE BENEFIT OF, AT THE DIRECTION OF, OR IN ASSOCIATION WITH, ANY CRIMINAL STREET GANG, WITH THE SPECIFIC INTENT TO PROMOTE OR ASSIST IN ANY CRIMINAL CONDUCT BY THE GANG MEMBERS BE SUBJECT TO ADDITIONAL TWO OR THREE YEAR ENHANCEMENTS? (More) pM one 3716-0114 AB 2013 (Moore) Page 2 PURPOSE Existing law contains no provisions which specifically make the commission of criminal offenses by individuals who are members of street gangs separate and distinctly punished offenses, nor are there provisions which authorize the forfeiture of the proceeds of gang-related activity. This bill would establish the "California Street Terrorism Enforcement and Prevention Act." It would enact the following provisions: 1) any person who actively participated in any criminal street 2) 3) 4) gang with knowledge that its members or participants engage in or have engaged in a pattern of criminal activity, and whe willfully promotes, furthers, or assists in any criminal conduct by gang members or participants would be guilty of a "wobbler", — : any person who was convicted of a Felony or a misdemeanor which was committed for the benefit’of, at the direction of, or in association with any criminal street gang, With the specific intent to promote, further} or assist in any criminal conduct by gang members or participants, would be guilty of a crime ard subject toa variety of enhancements, depending on the seriousness of the underlying offenses. notwithstanding any other provision of law, the court would be permitted to strike the additional punishment in an unusual case where the interests of justice would best be served, if the court specified on the record and entered inte the minutes the circumstances indicating that the interests of justice would best be served by that disposition. “pattern of criminal activity" would be defined as the commission, attempted commission, or solicitation of two or more of the following offenses, provided that at least one of the offenses occurred after the effective date of this bill and the last of those offenses occurred within three years after a prior offense, and the offenses are. committed on Separate occasions, or by two or more persons: assault with a deadly weapon or by meansof fore Likely to produce great bodily injury; robbery; unlawful homicide or manslaughter; the sale, possession for sale, or offer to manufacture controlled substances, as defined; shooting at an inhabited dwelling or occupied motor vehicle; arson; or the intimidation of witnesses and victims. (More) 3716-0115 AB 2013 (Moore) Page 3 This bill would not apply to employees engaged in concerted activities for their mutual aid and protection, or the activities of labor organizations or their members or agents. The District Attorney of the County of Los Angeles would be required to submit a report to the Legislature on or before January 1, 1991, on the impact this bill had on the control of criminal street gang activity in Los Angeles County. The bill would be repealed on January 1, 1992. . The purpose of this bill is to provide law enforcement officials with the legal tools to "put the growing number of murdering, drug-pushing youth street gang members behind bars." COMMENT 1. Need for legislation According to the author, this bill would enact the California Street Terrorism Enforcement and Prevention Act which would rrovide for the criminal prosecution of gang members involved in criminal activity. . Proponents claim that scores of studies in recent years have determined that as many as 50,000 youths have joined one of the. nearly 800 street gangs identified in California. “Youth gangs represent both big business and big-time crime in California." In the LSS Angeles area, officials have linked members of the 450 criminal street gangs to 187 homicides in 1986. — “Clearly, we must take a more aggressive approach to bat*ling these gangs and AB 2013 will provide the legislative support needed by the police department's line officers, prosecutors and jucyes." 2. Criminal gang activity -- new offense Under this bill, active participation in any criminal street gang would be an offense, if the activity met a number of conditions: . (a) Any person who actively participated in any criminal Street gang with knowledge that its members or participants engage in or have engaged in a pattern of criminal gang activity, and who willfully promoted, furthered, or assisted in any felonious conduct by the gang members or participants, would be punished by (More) ae me 3716-0116 AB 2013 (Moore) Page 4 (b) imprisonment in the county jail for a period not to exceed one year, or by imprisonment in the state prison. Under this provision, an individual who actively participated in a gang which had established a pattern of criminal gang activity, as defined, and who willfully promoted felonious conduct by that gang would be subject to “wobbler” penalties, whether or not he or she had participated in the crimes. Opponents contend that individuals who. have not committed crimes would be guilty of the crimes of others due to tneir involvement with these gangs. Proponents of this bil. claim that this bill would not criminalize mere membership in a gang. Courts have repeatedly held that mere association with a grouphaving both illegal and legal aims cannot be punished unless there is proof that the defendant knows of, and either Shares in or “specifically intends" to further the illegal aims. Scales *. United States (1961) 367 U.S. 203, 229. any person who was convicted of a felony or a misdemeanor which was committed for the benefit of, at the direction of, or in association with any criminal street gang, with the specific inten:z to promote, Further, or assist in any ‘criminal conduct by garg members or participants would be given an enhancement based on the seriousness of the offense. The bill would allow she court to strike the additional punishment in an unusual case where the interests of justice would best be served, In order to seek enhancements under this provision, the Prosecutor would bt? required to prove that the underlying offense was committed for the benefit of, or in association with, the gang. The sponsors believe that the "nexus" requirement established by this biil would be very difficult to prove except in the most egregious cases where a pattern of Ccrimina. gang activity was clearly shown. OpponéAts Claim that it would not be difficult to Prove gang association if the individual wore identifying clothing during the commission of the offense; they further state that the enhancements for felonies established by this bill are extremely severe and would not allow courts to di€ferentiate between felonies, i.e., the enhancement for (More) = ; 3716-0117 AB 2013 (Moore) Page 5 kidnapping would be the same as the enhancement for first degree murder. 3. Definitions (a) Pattecn of crimina: gang activity-- would mean the commission, attempred commission, or solicitation, of two or more of the following offenses, provided at least) one of those offenses occurred after the effective date of this Act, and the last of those offenses occurred within three years after the effective date of this Act after a prior offense, and the offenses are committed on separate occasions, or by two or- more persons: (1) assault with a deadly weapon'or by means of force likely to produce great bodily injury: . pe (2) robbery; (3) unlawful homicide or manslaughter; (4) the sale possession for sale, transportation, manufacture, offer for sale, or offer to manu€acture controlled substances, as defined; (5) shooting at an inhabited dwelling or occupied motor vehicle; “(6) arson; (7) the intimidation of witnesses and victims. The sponsors of this bill chose these crimes because they considered them to be serious crimes; in addition, they Claim that these crimes are crimes which are typical of street gangs. Once a prosecutor established that any member of a gang had committed at least two of these crimes, the thresho:d for a pattern of criminaTactivity would be met. Any crime committed by any member in addition to this threshold would be punished more severely. (b) Criminal street gang-- would mean any association or group of three or more persons, whether formal or informal, having as one of its Primacy activities the commission of one or more of the criminal acts enumerated above, which had a common name or common identifying sign (More) 3716-0118 AB 2013 (Moore) Page 6 oc symbol, whose members or participants individually or collectively engage in or have engaged in a pattern of criminal gang activity. (c) Prosecutor-- would be defined to include city attorneys. Enhancements Under this bill, any person who was convicted of a felony or a misdemeanor which was committed for the benefit of, at the direction of, or in association with, any criminal street gang, with the specific intent to promote, further, or assist in any criminal conduct by gang members, would be punished as follows: : 4) b) c) 4) if the criminal act which was committed or attempted was a misdemeanor, a person convicted would be imprisoned in the county jail for a period not to exceed one year, but not less than 180 days, and would not be eligible for release upon completion of sentence, parole, or any other basis, until he or she had served 180 days. any person who violated the provisions of this bill in the commission or attempted commission of a felony would, upon conviction, in addition and consecutive to the punishment for the felony or attempted felony, be punished by an additional term of two years if the underlying felony wa: punishable by a maximum term of -three years, or by an additional term of three years if the underlying Felony was punishable by a maximum term exceeding thre? years, any person who violated this biil in the commission of a felony punishabie by imprisonment in the state prison for life, would not be paroled until a minimum of 15 calendar years had been served. the court would be permitted to strike the additional punishment for the enhancements in an unusual case wherethe interests of justice would Lest be served, if the court specified on,the record ard entered into the minutesthe circumstances indicating that the interests of justicewould best be served by that disposition. (More) 3716-0119 AB 2013 (Moore) Page 7 , 5. Opponent's arguments (a) (b) Rep Freedom of association According to the ACLU, both California law and the U.S. Constitution in the First Amendment recognize fundamental rights of freedom of association. “This bill purports to addressthe problem of youth violence. It in fact cteates an overbroad and vague legal standard which raises serious questions of enforcement and invites selective prosecution which could be easily targeted against almost any association or group." The fact that some individuals in the group may choose, as individuals, to engage in criminal misconduct however should not criminalize membership by any person in the group. Patterns of violence already covered by existing law E€forts to attribute "patterns of violence" to a group or organization, also known as criminal syndicalism, fail to recognize that express individualized intent is necessary to predicate criminal activity on behalf of any single person. Where such patterns of conduct or concerted action may be determined, the criminal law provides adequate sanctions under conspiracy and other laws concerning common crffinal conduct. Ort to Legislature Thi s bill would require the Los Angeles District Attorney to submit a report to the Legislature on the impact of this bill on Ang fol a) b) Cc). the control of criminal street gang activity in the Los eles County. The ceport would include all of the lowing statistics: the number of arrests made under this bill; the mumber of prosecutions under this bill; the number of trials which have resulted from prosecutions under this bill and the number of pleas which have ‘resulted; dq) e) the number of convictions under this bill; the number and type of sentence enhancements which have been sought under this bill, and the number and kind of sentence enhancements which have been ordered by the courts. (More) 3716-0120 AB 2013 (Moore) Page 8 7. Sunset provision This bill would remain in effect only until January 1, 1992, and as of that date would be repealed, unless a later enacted “statute, which would be chaptered on or before that date, deleted or extended that date. Urgency provision This bill contains an urgency clause and would go into immediate effect if signed by the Governor. The reason for the urgency is to provide the tools necessary for law enforcement to stem the tide of illegal gang warfare without infringing upon the constitutional rights of any individual, at the earliest possible time. RURKKRKAAKR DECLARATION OF SERVICE BY U.S. MAIL & ELECTRONIC SERVICE Case Name: The People v. Tommy Angel Mesa No.: §185688 I declare: I am employed in the Office of the Attorney General, which is the office of a memberofthe California State Bar, at which member's direction this service is made. I am 18 yearsof age or older and not a party to this matter. I am familiar with the business practice at the Office of the Attorney Generalfor collection and processing of correspondence for mailing with the United States Postal Service. In accordance with that practice, correspondenceplaced in the internal mailcollection system at the Office of the Attorney General is deposited with the United States Postal Service that same day in the ordinary course of business. On April 15, 2011, I served the attached RESPONDENT’S MOTION FOR JUDICIAL NOTICEbyplacinga true copy thereof enclosed in a sealed envelope with postage thereon fully prepaid, in the internal mail collection system at the Office of the Attorney General at 110 West A Street, Suite 1100, P.O. Box 85266, San Diego, CA 92186-5266, addressed as follows: The Honorable Helios J. Hernandez The Honorable Paul E. Zellerbach Riverside County Superior Court District Attorney Riverside Hall of Justice Riverside County District Attorney's Office 4100 Main Street 3960 OrangeStreet Department 63 Riverside, CA 92501 _ Riverside, CA 92501 Fourth Appellate District Division One Court of Appeal of the State of California 750 B Street, Suite 300 San Diego, CA 92101 and I furthermore declare, I electronically served a copy of the above document from Office of the Attorney General's electronic notification address ADIEService@doj.ca.gov on April 15, 2011 to Richard DeLa Sota electronic notification address elasota45003@gmail.com to Appellate Defenders, Inc.'s electronic notification address eservice-criminal@adi-sandiego.com. I declare under penalty ofperjury under the lawsofthe State of California the foregoingis true and correct and that this declaration was executed on April 15, 2011, at San Diego, California. Declarant Signature $D2010702928 80489273 .doc
