Bill Text: CA AB2310 | 2023-2024 | Regular Session | Amended
Bill Title: Parole hearings: language access.
Spectrum: Partisan Bill (Democrat 1-0)
Status: (Engrossed) 2024-05-22 - In Senate. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment. [AB2310 Detail]
Download: California-2023-AB2310-Amended.html
|
Amended
IN
Assembly
May 16, 2024 |
|
Amended
IN
Assembly
April 01, 2024 |
CALIFORNIA LEGISLATURE—
2023–2024 REGULAR SESSION
Assembly Bill
No. 2310
| Introduced by Assembly Member Hart |
February 12, 2024 |
An act to add Section 3041.8 to the Penal Code, relating to parole.
LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST
AB 2310, as amended, Hart.
Parole hearings: language access.
Existing law imposes specified requirements on all hearings conducted by the Board of Parole Hearings for the purpose of reviewing a prisoner’s parole suitability, or the setting, postponing, or rescinding of parole dates, including, among other things, that the incarcerated person be permitted to be present, to ask and answer questions, and to speak on their own behalf.
This bill would require the board to take all reasonable steps to provide limited-English-proficient (LEP) parole candidates with meaningful access to, and equal and full participation in, parole hearing proceedings and activities conducted by the board. The
This
bill would require the board to translate specified documents into the 15 most commonly spoken languages in California, as specified, no later than one year after the effective date of the act, and into all other languages no later than 2 years after the effective date of the act, and to provide timely and language-accessible notice to parole candidates of language access services and an opportunity to request an interpreter prior to specified proceedings or activities and the process for filing a complaint or grievance or for requesting a rehearing due to a failure to provide adequate language access. The bill would require a parole hearing to be recorded upon request and provided to the parole candidate’s attorney or representative, as specified. The bill would require a parole hearing to be postponed or continued if a qualified interpreter is not provided or cannot effectively assist the LEP parole candidate, as specified.
The bill would require the
board to develop and publish bilingual glossaries of parole hearing terminology and to provide them to language access service providers, as specified. The bill would require the board to, no later than July 1, 2026, promulgate regulations that establish, among other things, a requirement for the board to provide interpreters for specified proceedings, standards for interpreters provided for indigent parole candidates during attorney visits, and procedures for verifying the identity, credentials, and qualifications of interpreters. The bill would require the board to at least annually collect, review, update, and publish on its internet website specified information, including, among other things, the board’s language access services and policies and summary information regarding hearings with an interpreter, as specified.
The bill would require the board to submit a report to the Legislature that details the steps needed to ensure the board is able to provide sufficient certified and qualified interpreters for parole proceedings and activities, as specified. The bill would require the board to at least annually collect, review, update, and publish on its internet website specified information, including the board’s language access services and policies, the provision and utilization of interpretation in parole proceedings, attorney visits, and comprehensive risk assessment interviews, and parole hearing outcomes for parole candidates who have used interpreters.
The bill would make related findings and declarations.
Digest Key
Vote: MAJORITY Appropriation: NO Fiscal Committee: YES Local Program: NOBill Text
The people of the State of California do enact as follows:
SECTION 1.
(a) Language access is critical to due process. California law creates a liberty interest in parole, which is further protected by the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. That liberty interest is protected through due process. Relevant here, competent language access services must be provided to limited-English-proficient (LEP) parole candidates in all critical aspects of the parole hearing process to guarantee they receive full and fair notice and opportunity to be heard. The failure to provide language access represents a violation of due process and a hindrance to justice.(b) Federal law guarantees language access under the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Executive Order No. 13166 of 2000, which clarified that denying LEP individuals language access to federal programs is considered discrimination based on national origin and violates Title VI of the federal Civil Rights Act. The provision of language access is, therefore, a civil right. Administrators at local, state, and federal levels of government are charged with delivering language support services to LEP people in their jurisdiction.
(c) California law also prohibits government programs and activities from engaging in discrimination on the basis of ancestry, national origin, and ethnic group identification. Denying LEP parole candidates full access to parole hearing materials in their preferred language means that those candidates have been unlawfully
denied full and equal access to the benefits of . . . [a] program or activity that is conducted, operated, or administered by the state or by any state agency, ...” (Section 11135 of the Government Code). In addition, the Dymally-Alatorre Bilingual Services Act (Chapter 17.5 (commencing with Section 7290) of Division 7 of Title 1 of the Government Code) requires government agencies that serve a substantial number of people (considered to be 5 percent or more of the population the agency serves) who are LEP to provide qualified bilingual staff and translated materials.
(d) Language access is a key priority in California’s judicial system. In 2015, the Judicial Council of California adopted the Strategic Plan for Language Access in the California Courts and has been implementing it ever since. A core component of the strategic plan includes
guaranteeing access to a certified interpreter in criminal and civil proceedings to ensure accuracy and fairness in the judicial system. This basic protection is also necessary for parole hearings, which represent a vital aspect of our legal and justice system and function as quasi-judicial proceedings.
SEC. 2.
Section 3041.8 is added to the Penal Code, to read:3041.8.
(a) This section shall be known, and may be cited, as the “Parole Hearing Language Accessibility Act.”(b)The board shall take all reasonable steps to provide limited-English-proficient (LEP) parole candidates with meaningful access to, and equal and full participation in, parole hearing proceedings and activities conducted by the board as provided in this act.
(c)
(b) (1) The board shall translate all of the following documents:
(A) Notice and Request for Assistance at Parole Proceedings (BPH 1073).
(B) Notice of Confidential Disclosure.
(C) Hearing Rights Form (BPH 1003).
(D) Board of Parole Hearings Consultation Decision (BPH 1001).
(E) Notices or memoranda regarding confidential information.
(F) Forms or written materials pertaining to individual rights, services, or benefits, including those pertaining to victims and their next of kin.
(G) Notices pertaining to the denial, reduction, modification, or termination of services and benefits, and the right to file a grievance or appeal.
(H) Notices informing LEP parole candidates of language assistance services and forms for requesting language assistance services.
(I) Letters or written material from the board that require a response from the LEP parole candidate.
(J) Consent and complaint forms.
(K) Beginning January 1, 2027, both of the following:
(i) Parole hearing transcripts.
(ii) Comprehensive risk assessment reports.
(2) The board shall translate the documents listed in paragraph (1) on a rolling basis as follows:
(A) Notices of rights including, but not limited to, BPH form 1003, BPH form 1073, and notices of LEP assistance shall be translated within 60 days of the effective date of this act.
(B) All other standard documents that are not case specific shall be translated no later than 365 days after the effective date of this act
for the 15 most commonly spoken languages in California, based on department and board demographic data, and no later than 730 days after the effective date of this act for all remaining languages.
(C) Parole hearing transcripts and comprehensive risk assessment reports created after January 1, 2027, shall be translated within 30 days of the creation of the document.
(3) The board shall adopt a process to ensure that the translation of forms and notices of rights are updated each time the original document is revised.
(4) To ensure the accuracy of the translation, the board shall do all of the following:
(A) Hire qualified translators.
(B) Provide translators with a bilingual glossary of standardized legal and parole hearing-specific terminology in each language. for the five most commonly spoken languages within the population of the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation.
(C) Limit the use of automated translation technology to assist a qualified human translator.
(d)
(c) (1) If a parole candidate has requested language access assistance for a parole hearing, reconsideration hearing, rescission hearing, or medical parole hearing, an audio recording shall be rendered that clearly captures both English and non-English testimony.
(2) The board shall provide the audio recording rendered pursuant to paragraph (1) to the parole candidate’s attorney or representative and to the public upon request no later than 30 days from the date of the hearing at no cost to the candidate.
(e)A
(d) Unless a parole candidate waives their right to a qualified interpreter on the record and requests to proceed with the hearing, a parole hearing, reconsideration hearing, rescission hearing, or medical parole hearing shall be postponed or continued if any of the following occur:
(1) No qualified interpreter is provided for a parole candidate who requested language assistance.
(2) The parole candidate or their attorney object to proceeding with the interpreter provided due to a lack of competency or adherence to ethical or professional codes of
conduct.
(3) The board determines that the interpreter cannot effectively assist the parole candidate.
(f)
(e) The board shall provide timely and language-accessible notice to all parole candidates of all available language access services and an opportunity to request an interpreter prior to each proceeding or activity in which an LEP parole candidate has the right to access an interpreter. The board shall also provide timely and language-accessible notice of the process for filing a complaint or grievance or for requesting a
rehearing due to a failure to provide adequate language access. If the department or the board are aware of the LEP parole candidate’s preferred language, the board shall provide all information in the preferred language.
(g)
(f) (1) The board shall develop, periodically update, and publish bilingual glossaries of parole hearing terminology.
(2) The board shall provide bilingual glossaries to language access service providers, including interpreters and translators, parole candidates who have requested language
assistance, and attorneys representing parole candidates who have requested language assistance.
(h)
(g) No later than July 1, 2026, the board shall promulgate regulations that establish all of the following:
(1) A requirement that the board shall make every effort to provide interpreters certified by the Judicial Council for parole hearing proceedings and comprehensive risk assessment interviews, including by limiting the use of foreign language contracts to agencies with appropriate expertise and hiring practices, rates,
and standards necessary to provide certified interpreters for legal proceedings.
(2) Standards for interpreters provided for indigent parole candidates during attorney visits.
(3) The specific selection and recruitment procedures that must be exhausted to demonstrate that an interpreter certified by the Judicial Council is not available before a noncertified interpreter can be provisionally qualified.
(4) The standards and procedures for provisionally qualifying a noncertified interpreter, including voir dire.
(5) Procedures for routinely verifying the identity, credentials, and qualifications of interpreters.
(6) (A) The definition of a “qualified interpreter,” including specific educational, training, ethical, and competency-based standards.
(B) At a minimum, an interpreter shall not be deemed to be qualified as defined pursuant to subparagraph (A) to provide interpretation in a parole hearing unless the interpreter has demonstrated, through training and testing, fluency in both English and the target language, oral interpretation skills, knowledge of interpreter ethics and professional codes of conduct, knowledge of interpretation standards and techniques, and specialized knowledge of parole hearing terminology, concepts, and protocol.
(i)No later than January 1, 2027, the board shall submit a report to the Legislature detailing the steps needed to ensure there are sufficient certified and qualified interpreters for parole proceedings and activities, including recommendations for providing interpreter training, credentialing, or both training and credentialing specific to parole proceedings, revising hiring and contracting practices and terms to ensure recruitment of certified interpreters, and other recommendations for improving language access for parole candidates, victims, and family members participating in parole proceedings.
(j)
(h) At least annually, the board shall collect, review, update, and publish on its internet website all of the following information:
(1) Information about the board’s language access services and policies.
(2)A list of all languages in which language assistance was requested by a parole candidate for a parole hearing and the number of people requesting assistance in each language.
(3)Information about translators utilized, including about their certification and credentials.
(4)Information about the provision and utilization of interpretation in parole proceedings, attorney visits, and comprehensive risk assessment interviews, including all of the following:
(A)The name of each interpreter utilized, the contracting agency, if relevant, whether the interpreter is certified or registered, and the language interpreted.
(B)The number of people who requested assistance in each language.
(C)The number of people who received interpretation in each language.
(5)Parole hearing outcomes for parole candidates who used interpreters, categorized by language spoken.
(2) Summary information regarding hearings with an interpreter, including parole hearing outcomes, the number of hearings in each language, and the number of hearings with a certified interpreter.
(3) Summary information regarding the credentials and certification of translators and interpreters utilized, including the number of certified interpreters provided and the number of noncertified interpreters provided.
(k)
(i) For the purposes of this section, the following terms have the following meanings:
(1) “Certified interpreter” means an interpreter who is certified by the Judicial Council to interpret a language designated by the Judicial Council pursuant to Article 4 (commencing with Section 68560) of Chapter 2 of Title 8 of the Government Code, an
interpreter registered by the Judicial Council to interpret in a nondesignated language and qualified by the court under the qualification procedures and guidelines adopted by the Judicial Council pursuant to Article 4 (commencing with Section 68560) of Chapter 2 of Title 8 of the Government Code, or an interpreter from another state who is granted reciprocity by the Judicial Council’s Court Interpreters Program.
(2) “Qualified translator” means a translator who is certified by the Judicial Council.
(l)(1)The requirement for submitting a report imposed under subdivision (i) is inoperative on January 1, 2029, pursuant to Section 10231.5 of the Government Code.
(2) A report to be submitted pursuant to subdivision (i) shall be submitted in compliance with Section 9795 of the Government Code.
