California 2017-2018 Regular Session Status: Passed Senate

SB 1025 — Probation: eligibility: crimes relating to controlled substances.

Last action — Read second time. Ordered to third reading.

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

This bill died with 2017-2018 Regular Session. It reached “Passed Senate” 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This bill is no longer active — its legislative session has ended, so there is no live prognosis.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

Existing law prohibits granting probation or suspending a sentence for persons convicted of specified crimes relating to controlled substances, including possessing or agreeing to sell or transport opiates or opium derivatives, possessing or transporting cannabis, planting or cultivating peyote, and various crimes relating to forging or altering prescriptions, among other crimes, if the person has previously been convicted of any one of specified felony offenses relating to controlled substances. Existing law also prohibits granting probation or suspending a sentence for persons convicted of specified crimes relating to controlled substances, including possessing for sale or selling 14.25 grams or more of a substance containing heroin and possessing for sale 14.25 grams or more of any salt or solution of phencyclidine or its analogs, among other crimes. This bill would delete various crimes relating to controlled substances, including, but not limited to, the crimes described above, from those prohibitions against granting probation or a suspended sentence. By making additional persons eligible for probation, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. Existing law authorizes granting probation to persons convicted of specified felonies only in an unusual case where the interests of justice would best be served. Existing law requires the court, when granting probation in such a case, to specify on the record and enter in the minutes the circumstances indicating that the interests of justice would best be served by such a disposition. This bill would repeal those provisions. The bill would also make conforming changes. By making additional persons eligible for probation, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. 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, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.

Bill Text

Action History

  1. Read second time. Ordered to third reading.

  2. From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 12. Noes 5.) (August 16).

  3. August 8 set for first hearing. Placed on APPR. suspense file.

  4. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on APPR.

  5. From committee: Do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 5. Noes 2.) (June 19).

  6. Referred to Com. on PUB. S.

  7. In Assembly. Read first time. Held at Desk.

  8. Read third time. Passed. (Ayes 28. Noes 10. Page 4447.) Ordered to the Assembly.

  9. Read second time. Ordered to third reading.

  10. From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 5. Noes 2. Page 4302.) (May 25).

  11. Set for hearing May 25.

  12. April 16 hearing: Placed on APPR. suspense file.

  13. Set for hearing April 16.

  14. From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 6. Noes 1. Page 4367.) (March 13). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.

  15. Set for hearing March 13.

  16. Referred to Com. on PUB. S.

  17. From printer. May be acted upon on or after March 10.

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

Sponsors

  • Skinner · Primary

Sponsorship breakdown

Export CSV (upgrade) →

1 sponsors · 0 co-sponsors · 121 not signed on · 6 voted No

Sponsors (1)

  • Skinner

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

Do pass.

Passed 12 Yea · 5 Nay
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 9400
Democratic 3000
Republican 0100
Total 12500
% of votes cast 71%29%0%0%
How each member voted (17)
Member Party Vote
Bigelow — Nay
Bloom — Yea
Brough — Nay
Nazarian — Yea
Quirk — Yea
Eggman — Yea
Friedman — Yea
Chau — Yea
Gonzalez Fletcher — Yea
Obernolte — Nay
Fong — Nay
Eduardo Garcia — Yea
Wendy Carrillo — Yea
Bonta, Mia Democratic Yea
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Yea
Reyes, Eloise Gómez Democratic Yea
Gallagher, James Republican Nay

Official roll call →

3rd Reading

Passed 28 Yea · 10 Nay · 1 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 24901
Democratic 4100
Total 281001
% of votes cast 72%26%0%3%
How each member voted (39)
Member Party Vote
Anderson — Yea
Beall — Yea
Bradford — Yea
Hill — Yea
Lara — Yea
Leyva — Yea
Morrell — Nay
Roth — Yea
Skinner — Yea
Vidak — Nay
Wieckowski — Yea
Fuller — Not Voting
Glazer — Yea
Allen — Yea
De León — Yea
Hertzberg — Yea
Hueso — Yea
Monning — Yea
Moorlach — Yea
Pan — Yea
Portantino — Yea
Atkins — Yea
Mitchell — Yea
Galgiani — Yea
Cannella — Nay
Hernandez — Yea
Dodd — Yea
Bates — Nay
Newman — Yea
Nielsen — Nay
Wilk — Nay
Beth Gaines — Nay
Bill Berryhill — Nay
Mark Stone — Nay
Jackson, Corey A. Democratic Yea
McGuire, Mike Democratic Yea
Nguyen, Stephanie Democratic Nay
Stern, Henry I. Democratic Yea
Wiener, Scott D. Democratic Yea

Official roll call →

Do pass

Passed 5 Yea · 2 Nay
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 4200
Democratic 1000
Total 5200
% of votes cast 71%29%0%0%
How each member voted (7)
Member Party Vote
Bates — Nay
Beall — Yea
Bradford — Yea
Lara — Yea
Nielsen — Nay
Hill — Yea
Wiener, Scott D. Democratic Yea

Official roll call →

Placed on suspense file

Passed 7 Yea · 0 Nay
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 6000
Democratic 1000
Total 7000
% of votes cast 100%0%0%0%
How each member voted (7)
Member Party Vote
Bradford — Yea
Hill — Yea
Lara — Yea
Bates — Yea
Beall — Yea
Nielsen — Yea
Wiener, Scott D. Democratic Yea

Official roll call →

Subjects

public-safety civil-rights
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 1025 do?
Existing law prohibits granting probation or suspending a sentence for persons convicted of specified crimes relating to controlled substances, including possessing or agreeing to sell or transport opiates or opium derivatives, possessing or transporting cannabis, planting or cultivating peyote, and various crimes relating to forging or altering prescriptions, among other crimes, if the person has previously been convicted of any one of specified felony offenses relating to controlled substances. Existing law also prohibits granting probation or suspending a sentence for persons convicted of specified crimes relating to controlled substances, including possessing for sale or selling 14.25 grams or more of a substance containing heroin and possessing for sale 14.25 grams or more of any salt or solution of phencyclidine or its analogs, among other crimes. This bill would delete various crimes relating to controlled substances, including, but not limited to, the crimes described above, from those prohibitions against granting probation or a suspended sentence. By making additional persons eligible for probation, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. Existing law authorizes granting probation to persons convicted of specified felonies only in an unusual case where the interests of justice would best be served. Existing law requires the court, when granting probation in such a case, to specify on the record and enter in the minutes the circumstances indicating that the interests of justice would best be served by such a disposition. This bill would repeal those provisions. The bill would also make conforming changes. By making additional persons eligible for probation, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. 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, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.
Who sponsors SB 1025?
SB 1025 is sponsored by Skinner.
What is the current status of SB 1025?
This bill died with 2017-2018 Regular Session. It reached “Passed Senate” 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 1025?
Track SB 1025 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.

Make your voice heard on SB 1025

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 1025

Last checked for changes 2 months ago · updated continuously

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

Track this bill →