California 2013-2014 Regular Session Status: In Committee

SB 366 — Traffic fines: ability to pay.

Last action — Returned to Secretary of Senate pursuant to Joint Rule 56.

  1. ✓
    Introduced
  2. 2
    In Committee
  3. 3
    Passed Senate
  4. 4
    Passed Assembly
  5. 5
    To Executive
  6. 6
    Enacted

This bill died with 2013-2014 Regular Session. It reached “In Committee” and never advanced before the session ended, so it can no longer move — a new version would have to be reintroduced in the current session.

This bill is no longer active — its legislative session has ended, so there is no live prognosis. It would have to be reintroduced in the current session to move again.

Summary

(1) Existing law requires the court to hear and determine the suitability of probation in a particular case. At the hearing, the court is required to consider any report of the probation officer, and, if the court determines that there are circumstances in mitigation of the punishment prescribed by law or that the ends of justice would be served by granting probation to the person, the court may place the person on probation. This bill would provide, for purposes of these provisions, that circumstances in mitigation include, but are not limited to, the payment of all or part of a traffic fine or a civil assessment imposed for the failure to appear in court or to pay a fine in an infraction, misdemeanor, or felony case, and participation in court ordered community service to satisfy a traffic fine or that civil assessment. (2) Existing law authorizes the court to sentence a person who has been convicted of an infraction, upon showing that payment of the total fine, as defined, would pose a hardship on the person or his or her family, to perform community service in lieu of the total fine that would otherwise be imposed. Existing law requires the hourly rate applicable to community service work by criminal defendants to be determined by dividing the total fine by the number of hours to be performed in lieu of the total fine. This bill would eliminate the hourly rate applicable to community service in this instance and instead provide a new schedule for determining the hours of community service to be imposed based on the amount of the fine. The bill would require the court to determine that paying the fine is a hardship if the defendant receives any of certain categories of public benefits, as specified. The bill would require the community service to be performed in the county in this state chosen by the defendant. (3) Existing law authorizes the court, in addition to any other penalty in an infraction, misdemeanor, or felony case, to impose a civil assessment of up to $300 against any defendant who fails, after notice and without good cause, to appear in court for any proceeding authorized by law, or who fails to pay all or any portion of a fine ordered by the court or to pay an installment of bail, as specified. Existing law provides that the assessment shall not become effective until at least 10 calendar days after the court mails a warning notice to the defendant, and requires the court, if the defendant appears within the time specified in the notice and shows good cause for the failure to appear or for the failure to pay a fine or installment of bail, to vacate the assessment. This bill would authorize the court, in its discretion, to waive or impose on a particular defendant, a civil assessment of not less than $10, and not more than $300, if that defendant fails, after notice and without good cause, to appear in court for any proceeding authorized by law, fails to pay all or any portion of a fine ordered by the court, or fails to pay an installment of bail, as specified. The bill would require the amount of the assessment to be based on the defendant's ability to pay as determined by the court. The bill would authorize the court to determine that a defendant does not have the ability to pay the assessment if the defendant demonstrates that he or she receives any of certain categories of public benefits, as specified. The bill would provide that the assessment shall not become effective until at least 30 calendar days after the court mails a warning notice to the defendant, and would require the court, if the defendant appears within the time specified in the notice, or beyond the time specified in the notice if there is evidence that the notice was not in fact received, and shows good cause for the failure to appear or for the failure to pay a fine or installment of bail, to vacate the assessment. The bill would require the court to vacate the assessment if the court determines that the notice was not received because the defendant is homeless or has no fixed address. The bill would provide that ability to post bail or to pay the fine or civil assessment is not a prerequisite to filing a request that the court vacate the assessment. The bill would require the court to provide a process for a defendant to appear to show good cause for failure to appear, and would require the court to waive a civil assessment if the defendant meets the good cause standard for vacating a civil assessment. The bill would require the court to grant a defendant's request to vacate the civil assessment for good cause for the inability to pay if the defendant demonstrates that he or she receives any of certain categories of public benefits, as specified. (4) Existing law authorizes a court to give notice to the Department of Motor Vehicles if any person has willfully failed to pay a lawfully imposed fine, or bail in installments, within the time authorized by the court, except as specified. Existing law requires the court to mail a courtesy warning notice to the defendant at least 10 days before sending a notice to the department for specified violations of the Vehicle Code. If thereafter the fine is fully paid, the court is required to issue and file with the department a certificate showing that the fine has been paid. This bill would prohibit the court from requiring the payment of bail, the fine, or a civil assessment before a person may request the court to vacate a civil assessment. The bill also would require the court to mail the courtesy warning notice to the defendant at least 30 days before sending a notice to the department for specified violations of the Vehicle Code. (5) Existing law requires the court, in any case when a person appears before a traffic referee or judge for adjudication of a Vehicle Code violation, upon request of the defendant, to consider the defendant's ability to pay. Among other things, the court is required to order the defendant to appear before a county officer to make an inquiry into the ability of the defendant to pay specified costs or the court may make this determination. Existing law defines the defendant's ability to pay as the overall capability of the defendant to reimburse the costs, or a portion of the costs, of conducting the presentence investigation, preparing the presentence report, and probation. A defendant's ability to pay includes, but is not limited to, the defendant's present financial position, reasonably discernible future financial position, and any other factors that may bear upon the defendant's financial capability to reimburse the county for costs. This bill would require the court to consider the defendant's ability to pay when a defendant appears for adjudication of any infraction. The bill would authorize the court to conclusively presume that a defendant does not have the ability to pay if the defendant demonstrates that he or she is receiving public benefits under specified programs, including, among others, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program and Medi-Cal. This bill would also require the court to advise the defendant of the right to a determination of the ability to pay at the time of rendering judgment. The bill would authorize the court to conclusively presume that a defendant does not have the ability to pay the fine if the defendant demonstrates that he or she receives any of certain categories of public benefits, as specified.

Bill Text

Action History

  1. Returned to Secretary of Senate pursuant to Joint Rule 56.

  2. Held in committee and under submission.

  3. Set for hearing January 23.

  4. From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on APPR.

  5. Held in committee and under submission.

  6. Set for hearing May 23.

  7. Placed on APPR. suspense file.

  8. From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on APPR.

  9. Set for hearing May 20.

  10. Set, first hearing. Hearing canceled at the request of author.

  11. Set for hearing May 13.

  12. From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 7. Noes 0. Page 666.) (April 23). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.

  13. From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on PUB. S.

  14. Set for hearing April 23.

  15. Hearing postponed by committee.

  16. Set for hearing April 9.

  17. Referred to Com. on PUB. S.

  18. From printer. May be acted upon on or after March 23.

  19. Introduced. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment. To print.

Sponsors

  • Wright · Primary

Sponsorship breakdown

Export CSV (upgrade) →

1 sponsors · 0 co-sponsors · 121 not signed on

Sponsors (1)

  • Wright

Co-sponsors (0)

None.

Not signed on (121)

121 members have not signed on to this bill.

Show all 121 →

"Not signed on" means a member has not sponsored or co-sponsored this bill — it does not imply opposition. Members flagged Voted No have a recorded No vote on this bill.

Whip count is in markup. Polling the chamber and every recorded vote this session. Only the first open is slow. It’s instant for you after this. Calling the roll · Tallying · Engrossing

Votes

Subjects

public-safety civil-rights labor
Cross-referencing the record. Reading this bill against every other bill in the corpus by meaning, not keywords. Only the first open is slow. It’s instant for you after this. Matching · Ranking · Engrossing

Frequently asked questions

What does SB 366 do?
(1) Existing law requires the court to hear and determine the suitability of probation in a particular case. At the hearing, the court is required to consider any report of the probation officer, and, if the court determines that there are circumstances in mitigation of the punishment prescribed by law or that the ends of justice would be served by granting probation to the person, the court may place the person on probation. This bill would provide, for purposes of these provisions, that circumstances in mitigation include, but are not limited to, the payment of all or part of a traffic fine or a civil assessment imposed for the failure to appear in court or to pay a fine in an infraction, misdemeanor, or felony case, and participation in court ordered community service to satisfy a traffic fine or that civil assessment. (2) Existing law authorizes the court to sentence a person who has been convicted of an infraction, upon showing that payment of the total fine, as defined, would pose a hardship on the person or his or her family, to perform community service in lieu of the total fine that would otherwise be imposed. Existing law requires the hourly rate applicable to community service work by criminal defendants to be determined by dividing the total fine by the number of hours to be performed in lieu of the total fine. This bill would eliminate the hourly rate applicable to community service in this instance and instead provide a new schedule for determining the hours of community service to be imposed based on the amount of the fine. The bill would require the court to determine that paying the fine is a hardship if the defendant receives any of certain categories of public benefits, as specified. The bill would require the community service to be performed in the county in this state chosen by the defendant. (3) Existing law authorizes the court, in addition to any other penalty in an infraction, misdemeanor, or felony case, to impose a civil assessment of up to $300 against any defendant who fails, after notice and without good cause, to appear in court for any proceeding authorized by law, or who fails to pay all or any portion of a fine ordered by the court or to pay an installment of bail, as specified. Existing law provides that the assessment shall not become effective until at least 10 calendar days after the court mails a warning notice to the defendant, and requires the court, if the defendant appears within the time specified in the notice and shows good cause for the failure to appear or for the failure to pay a fine or installment of bail, to vacate the assessment. This bill would authorize the court, in its discretion, to waive or impose on a particular defendant, a civil assessment of not less than $10, and not more than $300, if that defendant fails, after notice and without good cause, to appear in court for any proceeding authorized by law, fails to pay all or any portion of a fine ordered by the court, or fails to pay an installment of bail, as specified. The bill would require the amount of the assessment to be based on the defendant's ability to pay as determined by the court. The bill would authorize the court to determine that a defendant does not have the ability to pay the assessment if the defendant demonstrates that he or she receives any of certain categories of public benefits, as specified. The bill would provide that the assessment shall not become effective until at least 30 calendar days after the court mails a warning notice to the defendant, and would require the court, if the defendant appears within the time specified in the notice, or beyond the time specified in the notice if there is evidence that the notice was not in fact received, and shows good cause for the failure to appear or for the failure to pay a fine or installment of bail, to vacate the assessment. The bill would require the court to vacate the assessment if the court determines that the notice was not received because the defendant is homeless or has no fixed address. The bill would provide that ability to post bail or to pay the fine or civil assessment is not a prerequisite to filing a request that the court vacate the assessment. The bill would require the court to provide a process for a defendant to appear to show good cause for failure to appear, and would require the court to waive a civil assessment if the defendant meets the good cause standard for vacating a civil assessment. The bill would require the court to grant a defendant's request to vacate the civil assessment for good cause for the inability to pay if the defendant demonstrates that he or she receives any of certain categories of public benefits, as specified. (4) Existing law authorizes a court to give notice to the Department of Motor Vehicles if any person has willfully failed to pay a lawfully imposed fine, or bail in installments, within the time authorized by the court, except as specified. Existing law requires the court to mail a courtesy warning notice to the defendant at least 10 days before sending a notice to the department for specified violations of the Vehicle Code. If thereafter the fine is fully paid, the court is required to issue and file with the department a certificate showing that the fine has been paid. This bill would prohibit the court from requiring the payment of bail, the fine, or a civil assessment before a person may request the court to vacate a civil assessment. The bill also would require the court to mail the courtesy warning notice to the defendant at least 30 days before sending a notice to the department for specified violations of the Vehicle Code. (5) Existing law requires the court, in any case when a person appears before a traffic referee or judge for adjudication of a Vehicle Code violation, upon request of the defendant, to consider the defendant's ability to pay. Among other things, the court is required to order the defendant to appear before a county officer to make an inquiry into the ability of the defendant to pay specified costs or the court may make this determination. Existing law defines the defendant's ability to pay as the overall capability of the defendant to reimburse the costs, or a portion of the costs, of conducting the presentence investigation, preparing the presentence report, and probation. A defendant's ability to pay includes, but is not limited to, the defendant's present financial position, reasonably discernible future financial position, and any other factors that may bear upon the defendant's financial capability to reimburse the county for costs. This bill would require the court to consider the defendant's ability to pay when a defendant appears for adjudication of any infraction. The bill would authorize the court to conclusively presume that a defendant does not have the ability to pay if the defendant demonstrates that he or she is receiving public benefits under specified programs, including, among others, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program and Medi-Cal. This bill would also require the court to advise the defendant of the right to a determination of the ability to pay at the time of rendering judgment. The bill would authorize the court to conclusively presume that a defendant does not have the ability to pay the fine if the defendant demonstrates that he or she receives any of certain categories of public benefits, as specified.
Who sponsors SB 366?
SB 366 is sponsored by Wright.
What is the current status of SB 366?
This bill died with 2013-2014 Regular Session. It reached “In Committee” and never advanced before the session ended, so it can no longer move — a new version would have to be reintroduced in the current session.
Where can I track SB 366?
Track SB 366 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.

Make your voice heard on SB 366

Find the representatives who decide this bill and tell them where you stand — for yourself, or mobilize your whole list in one click with One Click Politics advocacy software.

Find my representatives → Run a campaign

Stay ahead of SB 366

Last checked for changes 2 months ago · updated continuously

One Click Politics tracks every bill in Congress and all 50 states.

Track this bill →