See How LB-Area Sac'to Lawmakers Voted On Ending Mandatory Increased Prison Time (Restores A Judge's Discretion) When Someone Uses A Gun In Committing Certain Felonies And (2) Reduces From Felony To Misdemeanor Intentionally Giving Someone HIV (Virus That Causes AIDS) '

' See How LB-Area Sac'to Lawmakers Voted On Ending Mandatory Increased Prison Time (Restores A Judge's Discretion) When Someone Uses A Gun In Committing Certain Felonies And (2) Reduces From Felony To Misdemeanor Intentionally Giving Someone HIV (Virus That Causes AIDS) '

LBReport.com

News

See How LB-Area Sac'to Lawmakers Voted On (1) Ending Mandatory Increased Prison Time (Restores A Judge's Discretion) When Someone Uses A Gun In Committing Certain Felonies And (2) Reduces From Felony To Misdemeanor Intentionally Giving Someone HIV (Virus That Causes AIDS)

LBREPORT.com is reader and advertiser supported. Support independent news in LB similar to the way people support NPR and PBS stations. We're not non-profit so it's not tax deductible but $49.95 (less than an annual dollar a week) helps keep us online.

(Oct. 12, 2017) -- Should Sacramento lawmakers change CA law to no longer require additional state prison time in fixed specified amounts for those using a gun in committing certain felonies, and again give judges discretion on whether to impose additional prison time, or possibly impose none at all, in their sentences for those committing certain felonies using a gun?

Should someone who knows he/she is infected with HIV (the virus that causes AIDS) and engages in unprotected sex with someone with the specific intent to infect the other person with HIV be prosecutable for a felony or simply a misdemeanor?

[Scroll down for further.]

LBREPORT.com is "old school" about some things and we dislike news stories that lazily attribute new or changed laws to nameless "Sacramento" or the nameless "state legislature." Real elected officials with real names vote for or against Assembly or state Senate bills. "Who" is one the basic journalistic W's (who, what, when, where and why.) Accordingly, LBREPORT.com identifies who voted and how they voted on two newsworthy bills affected CA criminal laws:

Sponsor

Sponsor

SB 620 (full text here) changed a law that required judges to sentence persons who used a gun in committing certain felonies to additional prison years (a "sentence enhancement.") SB 620 lets a judge strike or dismiss a firearm enhancement that would otherwise add 3, 4 or 10 years, or 5, 6 or 10 years (depending on the firearm) or 10 years, 20 years, or 25-years-to-life to a state prison term depending on the underlying offense and manner of use. SB 620 basically returns CA to the period when judges had discretion on whether or not to add prison time in sentencing someone who used a gun in committing a felony.
On final passage, state Senator Ricardo Lara (D, LB-Huntington Park) and Assemblyman Patrick O'Donnell (LB-SP) voted "yes." State Senator Janet Nguyen (D, SE LB-West OC) voted "no." A list of all the recorded votes is here.
The final State Senate Legislative Analysis lists support and opposition as follows:
```
SUPPORT (Verified 9/12/17)
Alliance for Boys and Men of Color
American Civil Liberties Union
Anti-Recidivism Coalition
California Attorneys for Criminal Justice
California Public Defenders Association
Californians for Safety and Justice
Californians United for a Responsible Budget
Friends Committee on Legislation of California

OPPOSITION: (Verified 9/12/17)
California District Attorneys Association
California State Sheriffs' Association
Gun Owners of California
```
Sponsor
SB 239 changed criminal penalties that specified higher penalties for transmittinig HIV that for transmitting other communicable diseases. It was a felony to expose another person to HIV by engaging in unprotected sex when the infected person knows he or she is infected with HIV, hasn't disclosed his/her HIV-positive status and acted with the specific intent to infect the other person with HIV. Existing law also made it a felony for someone to donate blood, tissue, or, under specified circumstances, semen or breast milk, if he/she has AIDS or has tested reactive to HIV. SB 239 repealed those provisions and now makes it a misdemeanor to intentionally transmit HIV (like other infectious or communicable diseases) for up to 6 months in a county jail if certain circumstances apply,
For SB 239's full bill text, click here.
On final passage, state Senator Ricardo Lara (D, LB-Huntington Park) and Assemblyman Patrick O'Donnell (LB-SP) voted "yes." State Senator Janet Nguyen (D, SE LB-West OC) voted "no." A list of all the recorded votes is here.
SB 239's primary author was state Senator Scott Weiner (D, San Francisco). Sen. Weiner was also the author of SB 35 that under certain circumstances prevents the public from using CEQA and gives developers near rubberstamp approval for proposed multi-unit low rent projects.)
Sponsor

Sponsor

The Assembly Legislative Analysis of SB 239 on final passage stated in pertinent part:
COMMENTS: According to the author, there is no evidence that laws criminalizing sexual activity on the part of people living with HIV accomplish their intended goal of improving public health. In 1988, when most California laws that made HIV transmission a felony were passed, there were no effective treatment for HIV and discrimination towards people living with HIV was extremely high. A 2017 analysis from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) "found no association between HIV or AIDS diagnosis rates and criminal exposure laws across states over time, suggesting that these laws have had no detectable HIV prevention effect." Instead, research suggests that these laws may act as a disincentive for testing and disclosure of HIV status and may create a barrier to those seeking care. According to the National Association of County and City Health Officials, "Disease-specific laws and policies that result in criminal prosecution fuel stigma and discrimination against persons living with communicable diseases… Ending the stigma and discrimination faced by people living with communicable diseases is an important step to improving individual health and protecting the public's health." The author argues that HIV criminalization laws only increase stigmatization of people living with HIV and disproportionately impact women and people of color.
The author states that, consistent with guidelines from the United States Department of Justice, this bill would maintain criminal penalties for individuals who intentionally transmit or attempt to transmit HIV, or any other serious infectious or communicable disease, to another person, and would bring parity with existing laws regarding other communicable diseases by making it a misdemeanor, rather than a felony, to transmit any disease that is determined to have significant public health implications. Furthermore, this bill also clarifies that taking practical means to prevent transmission – such as using a condom or being on treatment – is incompatible with the intention to transmit HIV or any other infectious or communicable disease. Finally, this bill would also repeal other outdated provisions of law that significantly increase penalties for sex workers living with HIV, and unnecessary laws regarding donation of blood, tissue, or, in certain circumstances, semen or breast milk, by those living with HIV. The author argues that these changes will ensure that California law reflects a science-based understanding of HIV prevention, treatment, and transmission.
According to the CDC, the risk of getting HIV varies widely depending on the type of exposure or behavior (such as sharing needles or having sex without a condom). Some exposures to HIV carry a much higher risk of transmission than other exposures. For some exposures, while transmission is biologically possible, the risk is so low that it is not possible to put a precise number on it. But CDC notes that repeated low risk exposures can add up to a high lifetime risk of HIV. CDC publishes a chart that lists the risk of transmission of HIV from an infected source per 10,000 exposures. The risk from an infected blood transfusion is 92.5%; from needle-sharing during injection drug use 0.6%; from a needle-stick 0.2%; from various specified sexual behaviors 0.04% to 1.4%; and, from biting or spitting negligible (technically possible but unlikely and not well documented).
This bill repeals the felony solicitation statute, which is the most commonly enforced of the HIV-related laws. It also repeals the other HIV-related offenses as well as the misdemeanor statute that prohibits willful exposure to any communicable disease. It creates two new crimes, one that prohibits the intentional transmission of any infectious or communicable disease including HIV, and the other that gives health officers the power to prevent conduct that poses a substantial risk of transmission of an infectious or communicable disease.
Both new crimes are misdemeanors punishable by imprisonment in a county jail for not more than six months. This bill does not change the existing law that imposes a three-year sentence enhancement if a person commits specified sex crimes while being HIV-positive.
Supporters argue that this bill updates laws that unfairly target people living with HIV for criminal prosecution based on their HIV status and ensures that California law reflects the current scientific understanding of HIV, addresses exposure to HIV in the same manner as exposure to other serious communicable diseases, and promotes public health by reducing HIV-related stigma and discrimination. Opponents argue that this bill eliminates precautions that safeguard public health and substitutes provisions that are both inadequate and unscientific, fails to provide disincentives to irresponsible willful or negligent behavior, and does not take into account scientific advances that determine the degree of HIV communicability.

Sponsor

The final State Senate Legislative Analysis lists support and opposition to SB 239 as follows:
```
SUPPORT

American Civil Liberties Union of California (co-source)
APLA Health (co-source)
Black Aids Institute (co-source)
Equality California (co-source)
Lambda Legal (co-source)
Positive Women’s Network – USA (co-source)
A New Way of Life Re-Entry Project
A New Path
ACCESS Women’s Health Justice
ACT for Women and Girls
Adolescent Counseling Services
Adult Performer Advocacy Committee
AIDS Legal Referral Panel
AIDS Project of the East Bay
Alliance for Boys and Men of Color
Asian Americans Advancing Justice
Asian Law Alliance
Asian Pacific Environmental Network
Bay Area Lawyers for Individual Freedom
Being Alive
Billy DeFrank LGBTQ Community Center
Black Women for Wellness
Brown Boi Project
California Attorneys for Criminal Justice
California Communities United Institute
California Immigrant Policy Center
California Immigrant Youth Justice Alliance
California In-Home Supportive Services Consumer Alliance
California Latinas for Reproductive Justice
California Pan-Ethnic Health Network
California Partnership
California Public Defenders Association
California Women’s Law Center
Californians for Safety and Justice
Center for Health Justice, Inc.
Center for HIV Law and Policy
Center for LGBTQ and Gender Studies in Religion
Center of Excellence for Transgender Health
Centro Legal de la Raza
Citizens for Choice
Courage Campaign
Consumer Attorneys of California
Desert AIDS Project
Drug Policy Alliance
East Bay Community Law Center
East Los Angeles Women’s Center
Equal Justice Society
Equality Federation
Fellowship of Affirming Ministries
Forward Together
Free Speech Coalition
Friends Committee on Legislation of California
Friends of Project 10 Inc.
Gender & Sexualities Alliance Network
Gender Health Center
GLMA: Health Professionals Advancing LGBT Equality
GroundSpark
Harm Reduction Coalition
HIV Medical Association
HIV Modernization Movement – Indiana
HIVE
Holman United Methodist Church
Human Rights Watch
If/When/How: Immigration Equality Action Fund
Imperial Valley LGBT Resource Center
Justice NOW
Latino Equality Alliance
Lawyering for Reproductive Justice
Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights of the San Francisco Bay Area
Life Group LA
Legal Services for Prisoners with Children
LGBTQ Center of Long Beach
LGBT Center of Orange County
Los Angeles HIV Law & Policy Project
Los Angeles LGBT Center
MALDEF
NARAL Pro-Choice California
National Alliance of State & Territorial AIDS Directors
National Black Justice Coalition
National Compadres Network
National Council of Jewish Women, CA
National Day Laborer Organizing Network
National Health Law Project
National Immigration Law Center
Our Family Coalition
Pacific Pride Foundation
Pangea Legal Services
Planned Parenthood Affiliates of California
PolicyLink
Project Inform
Public Interest Law Project
Queer Life Space
Root & Rebound
SCOPE LA
St. John’s Well Child & Family Center
Sacramento LGBT Community Center
San Diego LGBT Community Center
San Francisco AIDS Foundation
SERO Project
Sex Workers Outreach Project of Los Angeles
Spahr Center
Stonewall Democratic Club
Tarzana Treatment Centers, Inc.
Transgender Gender Variant Intersex Justice Project
Trans Student Educational Resources
Transgender Law Center
Trans Latin@ Coalition
Trevor Project
Voices for Progress Education Fund
Western Center on Law and Poverty
Western Regional Advocacy Project
Women’s Foundation of California
19 private individuals

OPPOSITION: (Verified 9/8/17)

California Right to Life Committe
```