Connect with us

Crime

State Bill Reining in Rogue Police Officers Passes; Zero-Bail Bill Paused After Tragic Murder

Senate Bill (SB) 262, a bail reform bill that would have established $0 bail for some offenders, was stopped in its tracks following a grisly murder in Northern California but Senate Bill (SB) 2 and Assembly Bill (AB) 333 have both passed significant milestones on their paths to becoming law.

Published

on

Legislation Stock Photo Courtesy of California Black Media

Over the last two weeks, it has been a mixed bag of wins and losses for bills concerned with the rights of people interacting with the criminal justice system.

A bill concerned with criminal justice reform is SB 2. The state Senate approved it on September 8 with a 28-9 vote.

It calls for barring police officers who have been fired for misconduct or charged with one of a set of specific crimes from being hired in another jurisdiction in California.

Sen. Steven Bradford (D-Gardena), one of the authors of SB 2, celebrated the bill’s passing on the Senate floor.

“This is a major victory for advocates of public safety,” Bradford said. “California, and the nation as a whole, have experienced tragedy after tragedy where consequences for egregious abuses of power went unpunished and cries for accountability went unanswered — eroding public trust in law enforcement.”

“This bill is the first of its kind in California and we finally join the 46 other states with processes for the decertification of bad officers,” continued Bradford.  “SB 2 establishes a fair and balanced way to hold officers who break the public trust accountable for their actions and not simply move to a new department. This could not have been achieved without the support of many legislators, community organizations, families, and entertainers who advocated non-stop for accountability in our policing system.”

Bradford went on to explain other benefits of SB 2 as he sees it.

“The bill will create a strong and effective method for California to remove bad officers in a fair and reasonable manner. Police have one of the most difficult jobs on the planet. A decertification system puts California back on track to restoring communities’ faith in men and women of uniform who do their job well,” Bradford continued.

Senate Bill (SB) 262, a bail reform bill that would have established $0 bail for some offenders, was stopped in its tracks following a grisly murder in Northern California but Senate Bill (SB) 2 and Assembly Bill (AB) 333 have both passed significant milestones on their paths to becoming law.

In Sacramento, Troy Davis, 51, a repeat offender released on zero bail, allegedly raped and murdered a woman before setting her house on fire, killing her dogs as well.

Yolo County District Attorney Jeff Reiseg expressed his outrage over the murder and blasted the leniency supported in bills like SB 262 that he believes is partially to blame for crimes like that.

“This horrific crime could have been avoided. He should have never been released on zero bail. Bail reform is appropriate as long as judges always have discretion to hold violent criminals in custody. When ‘reforms’ go too far, this is the nightmare. God rest her soul.” Reiseg wrote on Facebook.

Assemblymember Jim Cooper (D-Sacramento), who is a member of the California Legislative Black Caucus, also expressed his outrage.

“This is not an isolated incident,” he tweeted. “Violent felons are released daily, terrorizing our communities because of CA’s soft on crime laws. I will continue to fight this madness and all other bills that prioritize protecting criminals instead of victims.”

The zero-bail measure was implemented by California’s Judicial Council in April last year as an emergency rule, but voters overturned it as Proposition 25, a statewide ballot initiative, in last November’s general election.

SB 262 has been amended to give judges discretion based on risk assessment, similar to SB 10 in 2018, but it is still facing backlash.

Senate Majority Leader Bob Hertzberg (D-Van Nuys), author of SB 10 and SB 262, told the Associated Press that his colleagues reached out to him to express concern after the murder in Sacramento.

Hertzberg took to Twitter to address the heinous crime.

“I’m heartbroken and angered by the heinous murder of a Sacramento woman this past weekend. The parolee who did this should have never been released back to the community,” Hertzberg tweeted.

Hertzberg went on to suggest that SB 262 might have helped avoid this crime.

“The Safe and Resilient Communities Act could have prevented this crime from happening in the first place. #SB262 requires the Judicial Council to establish statewide standards for bail amounts, meaning counties will no longer be able to operate zero bail policies,” he wrote.

Hertzberg announced that he will be postponing SB 262 and hopes it will be taken up by the state Legislature next year.

“Earlier this year, the State Supreme Court ruled that California’s cash bail system is unconstitutional. SB 262 simply provided a framework for the state to implement this ruling. Don’t get me wrong: we’re not done with bail – not even close,” he tweeted.

Another criminal justice reform bill that made headlines last week was AB 333, authored by California State Senator Sydney Kamlager (D-Los Angeles).

AB 333 would reduce “the list of crimes that allow gang enhancements to be charged, prohibiting the use of the current charge as proof of a ‘pattern’ of criminal gang activity, and separating gang allegations from underlying charges at trial,” according to a press release from Kamlager’s office.

Gang enhancements are additional prison sentences prescribed to individuals who are alleged to be associated with a criminal street gang.

As of August 2019, about 92% of adults in California with gang enhancement charges in state prisons are either Black or Latino, according to California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) data.

Kamlager asserted that her bill is a law-and-order bill.

“At the heart of AB 333 is due process,” Kamlager said, “AB 333 just asks for the charges to be proven when they’re levied against someone. Right now, our system allows a shaved head, tattoos, or even the color of your grandma’s house as reason to be charged with a gang enhancement. That’s antithetical to how our judicial process should operate, and I am glad we are one step closer to a fix.”

AB 333 passed in the state Senate with a vote of 25-10 and on September 8 the Assembly approved it as well with a 41-30 vote.

Criminal justice reform is a complicated and nuanced undertaking that crisscrosses well established fault lines concerning public safety, criminal justice, racial equity, human dignity, and personal freedom. These bills are no exception.

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Activism

Oakland Post: Week of April 17 – 23, 2024

The printed Weekly Edition of the Oakland Post: Week of April 17 – 23, 2024

Published

on

To enlarge your view of this issue, use the slider, magnifying glass icon or full page icon in the lower right corner of the browser window.

Continue Reading

California Black Media

Commentary: Finding the Right Balance — Addressing Organized Retail Theft While Upholding Civil Liberties

Organized retail theft is a significant issue that impacts both consumers and businesses. While it is crucial to address theft and protect businesses from losses, we should also be mindful of safeguarding individuals’ constitutional rights, particularly the right to due process. AB 1990 by Assemblymember Wendy Carrillo, also known as the STOP Act, raises concerns about the balance between addressing theft effectively and ensuring civil liberties are upheld.

Published

on

Assemblymember Tina McKinnor (D-Inglewood)
Assemblymember Tina McKinnor (D-Inglewood)

By Assemblymember Tina McKinnor | Special to California Black Media Partners

Organized retail theft is a significant issue that impacts both consumers and businesses. While it is crucial to address theft and protect businesses from losses, we should also be mindful of safeguarding individuals’ constitutional rights, particularly the right to due process.

AB 1990 by Assemblymember Wendy Carrillo, also known as the STOP Act, raises concerns about the balance between addressing theft effectively and ensuring civil liberties are upheld. This bill allows law enforcement officers to make warrantless arrests for shoplifting offenses not witnessed by the officer, as long as there is reasonable cause to believe the individual committed the crime. This bill has a dangerous potential for overreach and infringes on civil liberties, particularly the right to due process.

While the stated intention behind the STOP Act is to combat organized retail theft and protect businesses, there are valid concerns that this bill is an overreach and that existing law works, if properly enforced by our partners in law enforcement. A petty theft involving property stolen valued at $950 or less may be charged as a felony or misdemeanor (called a wobbler) if the offender has the following prior convictions:  1) at least on prior petty or theft-related conviction for which a term of imprisonment was served, and 2) a prior conviction for a serious or violent offense, for any registerable sex offense, or for embezzlement from a dependent adult or anyone over the age of 65.  A misdemeanor can result in a sentence of up to one year in jail, whereas a felon can mean incarceration for 16 months, two years or three years.  Let’s look at shoplifting in California.  It occurs when a suspect enters a store, while that establishment is open, intending to steal property worth less than $950.  The crime is considered a misdemeanor, punishable by up to six months in the county jail.

Granting officers the authority to arrest individuals based on reasonable cause, without witnessing the crime firsthand, can lead to negative consequences and possible violations of individual rights. Probable cause is the legal standard by which police authorities have reason to obtain a warrant for the arrest of a suspected criminal and for the courts to issue a search warrant. A grand jury uses the probable cause standard to determine whether or not to issue a criminal indictment.  The principle behind the probable cause standard is to limit the power of authorities to conduct unlawful search and seizure of a person or its property, and to promote formal, forensic procedures for gathering lawful evidence for the prosecution of the arrested criminal.  Reasonable cause does not require any of this due process and only requires that an officer reasonably believes that a crime has been committed. It is essential to find a middle ground that effectively addresses organized retail theft without compromising the fundamental rights of individuals.

California’s current laws, including the use of witness statements and surveillance evidence are sufficient for addressing suspected shoplifting and organized retail theft. California Attorney General Rob Bonta recently prosecuted Michelle Mack, a suspected organized smash and grab ringleader who paid twelve women to travel around California and commit over $8 million in retail theft at 21 different stores. AG Bonta used California’s current laws to have the suspect arrested and brought to justice.

The State of California is also making significant investments to address retail theft. Just this past year California invested an additional $267 million to combat organized retail theft. It has been less than a year and our law enforcement partners should have the opportunity to address this recent spike in retail theft crime.

Los Angeles County recently applied for and received a grant for the State of California for $15.6 million dollars to address retail theft enforcement.  LA District Attorney George Gascon also recently formed an organized retail task force that partners with LA County Sheriff’s Department, Glendale, Beverly Hills, Burbank, Torrance and Santa Monica Police Departments to integrate their response to retail theft across the region. These collaborative efforts, such as those seen in initiatives like the organized retail task force in LA County, demonstrate the importance of a united approach to tackling theft while maintaining a balance between enforcement and civil liberties.

As we move forward, it is essential for policymakers, law enforcement agencies, businesses and communities to work together in finding solutions that effectively address organized retail theft without encroaching on individual rights. Ongoing evaluation and a commitment to thoughtful consideration will be crucial in navigating this challenge and fostering a safe and prosperous environment for all. Balancing the scales of justice to protect businesses while upholding civil liberties demands a comprehensive and conscientious approach from all stakeholders involved.

I am confident we can find that balance.

About the Author 

Assemblymember Tina McKinnor (D-Inglewood) represents the 61st District in Los Angeles County, which includes parts of the South Bay, Inglewood, Hawthorne and Lawndale.

Continue Reading

Activism

Oakland Post: Week of April 10 – 16, 2024

The printed Weekly Edition of the Oakland Post: Week of April 10 – 16, 2024

Published

on

To enlarge your view of this issue, use the slider, magnifying glass icon or full page icon in the lower right corner of the browser window.

Continue Reading

Subscribe to receive news and updates from the Oakland Post

* indicates required

CHECK OUT THE LATEST ISSUE OF THE OAKLAND POST

ADVERTISEMENT

WORK FROM HOME

Home-based business with potential monthly income of $10K+ per month. A proven training system and website provided to maximize business effectiveness. Perfect job to earn side and primary income. Contact Lynne for more details: Lynne4npusa@gmail.com 800-334-0540

Facebook

Trending

Copyright ©2021 Post News Group, Inc. All Rights Reserved.