Newsom signs law limiting mental health diversion for defendants

from Nigel DuaraCalMatters

This story was originally published by CalMatters. Sign up for their newsletters.

Gov. Gavin Newsom signed into law a change in criminal sentencing practices that gives judges more leeway in determining whether someone accused of a crime deserves a mental health diversion.

The bill passed both houses of the legislature this year by large majorities.

In early 2018, the state of California required judges to grant a mental health variance for most felonies if a qualified mental health diagnosis was a significant factor in the commission of the crime and the defendant “does not pose an unreasonable risk of danger to public safety.” Diversion programs allow people to avoid prison if they get treatment.

This bill changes this standard. Judges must now consider whether allowing the person to receive treatment in the community would “endanger public safety,” which the new law defines as increasing the likelihood of physical harm or serious danger to others.

“California believes that treatment and accountability go hand in hand. We are proud to preserve mental health diversion for people who can benefit from it, while ensuring that judges have the discretion they need to protect victims, protect communities and make decisions based on the full picture before them,” Newsom said in a written statement.

Supporters of the bill, including state police unions and law enforcement groups, argued that the old system essentially forced judges to make decisions they weren’t comfortable with. They pointed to cases in which a person released on diversion was detained for another serious crime.

“Even if a judge thinks a deviation is not appropriate, he can still be compelled to grant it,” the bill’s author said Stephanie NguyenDemocrat from Elk Grove, in public statements in favor of the bill. “It’s not justice. It’s not fair to the victims and it’s not fair to the communities that expect the courts to keep them safe.”

Opponents of the bill say the measure is a sign of a conservative justice system that relies on extreme examples to deny a wide range of eligible defendants the mental health treatment they need.

“Eliminating the option is a step backwards for California, eliminating much-needed flexibility and discretion,” the Ella Baker Center for Human Rights said in a letter opposing the bill.

Opponents also said that diversion programs generally countered overpolicing and disproportionate incarceration rates for people of color by erasing convictions from their records, freeing people to seek housing, education and work unencumbered by long criminal histories.

Mental health and other diversion programs are not available to people charged with murder and certain sex crimes.

This article was originally published on CalMatters and is republished under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-No Derivatives license.