An act to amend Section 3046 of the Penal Code, relating to parole.
Summary
AB 622 would amend Penal Code Section 3046, which governs when people serving life sentences become eligible for parole. Under current law, a person sentenced to life with the possibility of parole generally must serve at least seven years or any longer minimum term set by law before parole eligibility. This bill would require the Secretary of the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation to apply all applicable constitutional credits for good behavior, rehabilitation, or educational achievements to reduce the minimum term or minimum period of confinement for people serving one or more life sentences.
The bill would also expand what the Board of Parole Hearings must review when considering parole. In addition to statements and recommendations from the judge, district attorney, and sheriff, the board would have to consider any reports filed by the probation officer. The bill does not change the board’s ultimate authority to grant or deny parole, but it changes the information that must be part of the record and considered in the decision-making process.
Impact
AB 622 would change how minimum eligible dates are calculated for inmates serving life sentences by directing CDCR to apply all applicable credits authorized by the California Constitution. That could move some parole eligibility dates earlier than under current law, particularly for people who earn rehabilitative, educational, or good-behavior credits. It would also broaden the mandatory materials the Board of Parole Hearings must consider by adding probation officer reports to the list of required inputs, affecting parole review procedures for life-sentenced inmates.
Sentiment
The available vote history suggests the bill had some support in committee but also meaningful opposition. It passed the April 8 committee vote unanimously among those voting, but the later April 23 vote was 10-4, indicating a more divided view as the bill advanced. No committee transcript is available here, so the record shows support for the bill’s general approach but also enough concern to produce dissent in committee.
Contention
The main point of contention is likely the bill’s effect on parole timing for people serving life sentences. Supporters would view the measure as recognizing earned credits and rehabilitation, while opponents may see it as shortening minimum confinement periods for serious offenders, including people convicted of crimes such as murder or rape. Another possible point of debate is the added requirement that probation officer reports be considered by the parole board, which could be viewed either as improving the completeness of parole review or as adding another layer of potentially adverse information for the inmate.
AN ACT to amend and reenact sections 12-59-15 and 12.1-01-04, subdivision b of subsection 3 of section 12.1-22-01, and sections 12.1-32-07, 12.1-32-08, and 29-07-01.1 of the North Dakota Century Code, relating to parole and probation violations and court fees; to provide for a legislative management study; and to provide a penalty.
To amend sections 2929.15, 2929.16, 2929.25, 2967.131, and 2967.15 and to enact section 2903.217 of the Revised Code to enact the Adult Parole Authority Enhancement Act.
An Act to amend and reenact §§ 53.1-136, 53.1-154, 53.1-154.1, and 53.1-155 of the Code of Virginia and to amend the Code of Virginia by adding a section numbered 53.1-151.1, relating to discretionary parole criteria guidelines.
An Act to amend and reenact §§ 53.1-134, 53.1-136, 53.1-154, and 53.1-165.1 of the Code of Virginia and to amend the Code of Virginia by adding a section numbered 53.1-154.2, relating to Virginia Parole Board; powers and duties; juvenile offenders; parole procedures and considerations.
Labor: fair employment practices; penalty for wage and fringe benefit payment violations with the intent to defraud; increase. Amends sec. 15 of 1978 PA 390 (MCL 408.485).