Federal Judge Favors Juvenile Parolees in Due Process Suit

By Linda Rapattoni
Daily Journal Staff Writer

SACRAMENTO - A federal judge ruled Wednesday the state's parole revocation system for juveniles unconstitutionally denies them their due process rights, and he ordered the state to come up with a new plan within 30 days.
U.S. District Judge Lawrence Karlton granted a partial summary judgment motion in a class action filed on behalf of approximately 2,775 juvenile parolees in the state who have been held up to 60 days on allegations they violated the terms of their parole. L.H. v. Schwarzenegger, S062042 LKK/GGH.
Sue Burrell, a lawyer with the Youth Law Center of San Francisco who represents one of the plaintiffs, said Karlton appears to have relied on the same reasoning he used in a case involving adult parolees, Valdivia v. Davis, 94-0671LKK (2002).
Until now, adult parolees had more due process rights than juveniles, said Michael W. Bien, of Rosen, Bien & Asaro, who litigated the Valdivia case and also argued the juvenile parolee case.
"What happens now is a ward will be arrested, incarcerated, not given proper notice of the charges or a hearing, is removed from his family, community, job for extended periods of time before an officer is assigned to his case," Bien said. "That delay, without a hearing, violates the Constitution. The Constitution says when someone is arrested even someone on parole has rights."
The state attorney general's office, which represented the state, could not be reached for immediate comment on the ruling.
Karlton rejected the plaintiffs' request for an injunction that would have required the state to provide probable cause hearings for juvenile parolees within 10 days of their arrest, just as was ordered for adult parolees, saying it was premature.
"Although the due process failures that occur for juvenile parolees are similar to those the court identified in Valdivia, that does not necessarily require identical remedies," Karlton wrote.
In a footnote, he gave the defendants 30 days to offer a plan to address the due process issues.
Although the plaintiffs won a major part of their case, they still plan to pursue other issues at trial, including requiring the state to provide lawyers to represent the youths who have allegedly violated their parole, Bien said.
From 2004 to 2006, one in four parole revocations resulted from technical violations.
"Because of Judge Karlton's prior rulings in Valdivia, we expect the state will rapidly bring the juvenile justice system in compliance with the standard they already are applying to adults," Bien said. "The juveniles are younger, more vulnerable, less able to provide for themselves and yet the state provides them with less due process."
One of the lead plaintiffs, identified only as L.H., served time for robbery and assault and was threatened with having his parole revoked for drinking alcohol at a substance abuse treatment center where he was living, according to court papers.
He was working in an office, was married, but was detained on parole and held more than a month without a preliminary hearing, Burrell said. Because of a file mix-up, the matter was postponed for another three weeks and when the hearing came up, L.H. was forced to represent himself and was sentenced to several more months in custody.
Burrell said that was too harsh, given the progress he had shown.

**********
© 2007 Daily Journal Corporation. All rights reserved.

Drive to Give Youths Time

Advocates say an extra year in foster care could help disabled teens stay off streets.

By Jocelyn Wiener - Bee Staff Writer
Published 12:00 am PDT Sunday, September 23, 2007

HERE IS THE LINK....
http://www.sacbee.com/101/story/394179.html

This article is about the lawsuit, Leonard v. Warner, that alleges that state officials violate the Americans with Disabilities Act and state anti-disability laws by refusing to allow foster children with disabilities to stay in foster care past their 18th birthday. The case was filed by the Publid Interest Law Project of Oakland, the Youth Law Center in San Francisco, and the Western Center on Law and Poverty in Los Angeles.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

2007 KIDS COUNT Data Book Now Available (www.aecf.org/kidscount)

The Annie E. Casey Foundation’s 18th annual KIDS COUNT Data Book is now available. The annual Data Book is a national and state-by-state profile of the well-being of America’s children that seeks to enrich discussions concerning ways to secure better futures for all kids. The Data Book ranks states on 10 key measures and provides data on the economic, health, education, and social conditions of America’s children and families. This year, the KIDS COUNT Data Book essay, “Lifelong Family Connections: Supporting Permanence for Children in Foster Care,” looks at the more than 700,000 children in the United States who spend time in foster care each year, and what can be done to build and strengthen the family relationships that these young people need.

San Francisco Chronicle Editorial Regarding Leonard v. Wagner

The incompletion rule

Thursday, August 2, 2007

JOSHUA LEONARD, executive director of an East Bay nonprofit agency that serves foster children, has filed a lawsuit alleging that California discriminates against foster children with disabilities. The current "completion rule" states that foster children who have not completed high school by the age of 18, but have a strong possibility of doing so by the age of 19, may continue receiving foster-care benefits until they are 19. But children who school administrators do not believe have a strong possibility of graduating by the age of 19 - and this includes many, if not most, children who suffer from mental disabilities and are receiving special education - do not benefit from the completion rule. They lose their benefits, including their housing, at age 18.

Leonard's agency works with foster children ages 15-19 who live in group homes. All of the children his agency serves have mental disabilities. His agency was spending lots of time trying to help these children prepare for life on their own - and noticing how difficult it was for them. It's difficult for all foster children who emancipate at the age of 18 to find housing and a means of supporting themselves, but it's even more difficult for those who have mental disabilities - and no clear way to finish their education, even their education from high school.

It seems clear to us that the state should honor federal disability laws and allow these young people to receive foster-care benefits until the age of 19. There is a strong possibility that the lawsuit will succeed - in a previous case, Fry vs. Saenz, a California appeals court held that the school completion rule in another state social service program violated federal law. But it's a crying shame that child advocates have to go to court over this at all. What's really needed is a change that would allow foster children to receive services - housing assistance, at the very least - until they are at least 21.

California already has such a law, sort of. According to law, the court may retain jurisdiction over a foster child until she reaches the age of 21 - the problem is, there's no funding for these special circumstances. Children remain wards of the court with no support.

Our Legislature needs to respond to this ridiculous discrepancy with funding. Our courts need to ensure that the state isn't discriminating against mentally disabled children in the meantime.

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/08/02/EDC3RB8A61.DTL

This article appeared on page B - 6 of the San Francisco Chronicle

San Francisco Chronicle Sections DatebookCommentary96HoursSportsNewsBay AreaBusiness

Suit Demands California Stop Forcing Children with Disabilities Out of Foster Care at Age 18

Legal action taken against the California Department of Social Services by three nonprofit advocacy groups.

(San Francisco, CA – July 25, 2007) – A lawsuit filed in state court today in San Francisco charges state officials with violating the Americans with Disabilities Act and state anti-disability laws by refusing to allow foster children with disabilities to stay in foster care past their 18th birthday.

In California, foster youth are permitted to remain in foster care up until the age of 19, but only if the youth’s school or education program certifies that he or she is expected to graduate by his or her 19th birthday. This is known as the “completion rule.” Any youth who is not expected to graduate by the age of 19 loses his or her foster care funding at the age of 18. These youth are often turned out of foster care with no place to live, and thus are denied the opportunity to continue to pursue their educations.

The suit, Leonard v. Wagner, charges that the state’s policy of cutting off foster care funding to children with disabilities under the completion rule violates state and federal disability laws. The case was filed by the Public Interest Law Project of Oakland, the Youth Law Center in San Francisco, and the Western Center on Law and Poverty in Los Angeles.

“The completion rule deprives foster children with disabilities, who often are behind in school because of their disabilities, the same opportunity that their non-disabled peers in foster care have to stay in care one more year,” said Angie Schwartz, Staff Attorney at the Public Interest Law Project. “Study after study demonstrates the problems children face when they age out of foster care, and the results are even worse for youth with disabilities.”

“The cruel result of the completion rule is that the youth with disabilities – who are the most vulnerable of all kids in foster care, and arguably the most in need of an extra year of stability and services – have to leave their foster homes and group homes on their 18th birthdays and are effectively made homeless,” said Corene Kendrick, Staff Attorney at the Youth Law Center. “At least seven other states, including New York, Illinois, and Vermont, extend foster care benefits past the age of 18 for this group of youth.”

In 2002, the Western Center on Law and Poverty and other legal services programs won the case of Fry v. Saenz, when the state Court of Appeal held that the identical completion rule in the CalWORKs program violated federal disability laws, said Nu Usaha, Staff Attorney at WCLP. “Yet the State of California refuses to apply the Fry protections to children in foster care, despite repeated requests from advocates.”

Attorneys from the Youth Law Center working on the case are Alice Bussiere and Corene Kendrick.

CALIFORNIA JUVENILE JUSTICE REENTRY PARTNERSHIP AIMS TO IMPROVE OUTCOMES FOR YOUTH

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
May 21, 2007
Contact: Laurie Kappe
i.e. communications, LLC
(415) 616-3930

Privately funded $780,000 initiative for policy and practice reform

San Francisco (CA) – The California Juvenile Justice Reentry Partnership (CJJRP), a collaborative effort to improve outcomes for youth released from juvenile justice facilities, was formally announced today. The Partnership includes some of the most highly regarded advocacy, legal and research organizations in the juvenile justice field-- Commonweal, Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice (CJCJ), National Council on Crime and Delinquency (NCCD), and Youth Law Center (YLC). Haigh-Scatena Foundation is providing $780,000 to fund the initiative, the final grant of the foundation’s 40 year history in promoting social change strategies for disadvantaged children, youth and families.

"Most kids released from confinement fall into a void back home,” said David Steinhart, director of Commonweal’s Juvenile Justice Program. “Schools don’t want them, families can’t control them, and probation officers can’t offer much help. The juvenile justice system is not doing its job at this critical stage. Our partnership will promote a restructuring of aftercare for these high risk and often vulnerable youth.”

While juvenile crime rates in California remain at historic lows, youth returning home from confinement in state and local facilities have high recidivism (re-arrest) rates. According to the state Division of Juvenile Justice (DJJ), 70 percent of youth paroled from its institutions are rearrested within two years, many for serious crimes. DJJ also documents extremely high rates of mental health disorders (approximately 70%) and substance abuse histories (exceeding 80%) for its release populations.

“When youth exit the system, most return to the environments where they first got in trouble,” said Dan Macallair, executive director of CJCJ. “Aftercare has been an afterthought and without proper pre-release planning and services, youth leaving the system are at very, very high risk of re-offending.”

While the vast majority of youth in both the state and county systems are male, females are a growing percentage and make up 16% of youth released from county probation supervision and 6% of youth released from state facilities. “It is imperative that we address the specific needs of girls in the juvenile system, which to date have been largely ignored,” said Barry Krisberg, president of the National Council on Crime and Delinquency.

Currently in California, about 130,000 youth are released annually from state and county juvenile justice facilities. “Connecting these youth with their families, faith leaders and resources both before and after they leave the system will help make this profound transition more successful,” said Carole Shauffer, executive director of YLC. “There is hope that we can stop this revolving door back into the system.”

The Haigh-Scatena Foundation is a private grantmaker based in Davis, CA. Improving California’s juvenile justice system has been a central focus for almost forty years. “We have learned that achieving social change requires leadership, expertise, and cooperation. We get all three with this grant,” said Ron Clement, CEO of the Foundation.

Commonweal is a nonprofit health and environmental research and policy organization headquartered in Bolinas, California. The Commonweal Juvenile Justice Program has been a leading voice for innovation and change in California’s juvenile justice system since 1980. Commonweal will coordinate the partnership and will advise policymakers on statewide re-entry program development. For more information, visit www.commonweal.org.

Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice (CJCJ) is a nonprofit organization established in 1985 with headquarters in San Francisco, California. The organizational mission is to reduce society’s use of incarceration as a solution to social problems. CJCJ will test a wraparound aftercare model at the county level and will host a website dedicated to youth reentry issues. For more information, visit www.cjcj.org.

National Council on Crime and Delinquency (NCCD), founded in 1907, is a nonprofit organization headquartered in Oakland, California, which promotes effective, humane, fair and economically sound solutions to family, community and justice problems. NCCD will develop new aftercare models for girls in the juvenile justice system. For more information, visit www.nccd-crc.org.

Youth Law Center (YLC) is a nonprofit legal advocacy group based in San Francisco, California, protecting the rights of children across the county in the nation’s child welfare and juvenile justice systems since 1978, with a particular focus on children in California. YLC will address legal and other barriers to employment, education and health care for reentry youth, and will also sponsor a faith-based citizen support network for juvenile offenders. For more information, visit www.ylc.org.

The media, policymakers, and juvenile justice professionals will be able to access a fact sheet about CJJRP at www.cjcj.org/juvenilejusticereentry.html.

Sue Burrell Honored by the San Francisco Public Defender's Office

At the San Francisco Public Defender's 4th Annual Juvenile Justice Summit, "Youth Justice: School, Gangs & Leadership", Sue Burrell received an award for her steadfast commitment and advocacy of youth within the juvenile justice system. Books Not Bars were also honored for for their advocacy for youth and families.

Unprecedented Collaborative Effort Provides Data on County and State Programs

The Juvenile Justice Data Project (JJDP) today released the results of the first ever statewide survey of California’s juvenile justice system, providing a snapshot of 100,000 youth under the jurisdiction of both county probation departments and the state Division of Juvenile Justice (DJJ).

“Investing in an effective juvenile justice system is an important step toward breaking the cycle of adult crime, which has led to the present prison overcrowding crisis,” said Bernard Warner, Chief Deputy Director, Division of Juvenile Justice, California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation. “This data will lead to a greater, stronger partnership between local and state juvenile justice practitioners.”

Data was collected on youth in county probation departments, community intervention programs, county camps and confinement facilities, juvenile halls, and state facilities. The survey was conducted by researchers from the University of Southern California for the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation in cooperation with the Chief Probation Officers of California and Youth Law Center.

The survey is in response to the need for data on services currently provided in order to inform decision makers and target reform efforts. The survey found that of the 100,000 youth in California’s juvenile justice system, the vast majority is under local supervision either in community placements (81%) or county juvenile halls, camps, or ranches (10%). A small percentage is in state facilities or on parole (5%).

Survey results show that counties are making significant headway in their rehabilitation efforts, but still require additional tools such as risk assessment instruments and mechanisms to monitor outcomes for youth after they leave placements in order to prevent re-entry.

"County Probation Departments statewide were pleased to work together with the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation and the Youth Law Center in gathering data on the Juvenile Justice system as a whole," said Kim Barrett, President of the Chief Probation Officers of California. "It is my hope state and county decision makers will use this data to improve California's juvenile justice system for the youth we serve."

Participation in the voluntary survey was overwhelming - 55 out of 58 counties provided data as well as the DJJ. Karen Hennigan, PhD, and a team of researchers from the Center for Research on Crime, University of Southern California, compiled and analyzed the results covering every level of response, from early intervention services to confinement in DJJ facilities. A second report will provide recommendations for use by local and state policymakers to assist juvenile justice system reform efforts.

“The collaboration and commitment from the counties, state, and advocates has been very encouraging. We all know that the system needs help and this survey is an important step to spur action to fix the system,” said Carole Shauffer, Executive Director of the Youth Law Center, which secured funding for the project.

The JJDP originated in 2004 from a working group created by Governor Schwarzenegger to identify best practices and programs to improve outcomes for youth in the juvenile justice system. This unprecedented partnership includes representatives from law enforcement, probation, corrections, county government, state agencies, advocacy groups, service providers, data analysts, and policymakers.

The California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation is responsible for California’s state prison system and parole. Chief Probation Officers of California is an association of fifty-nine Chief Probation Officers in the state. Youth Law Center is a California based legal advocacy organization working on behalf of children and families in the nation’s juvenile justice and child welfare systems.

Click to view the report, JJDP Phase 1: Survey of Interventions and Programs, the appendix to the report, County by County Appendix or the summary report, Summary Report.