Mental health diversion.

Plain English Breakdown

The bill summary and digest do not provide details on the specific criteria for determining an unreasonable risk to another's physical safety beyond what is already defined in existing law.

Mental Health Diversion for Defendants

This law changes how courts can offer mental health treatment instead of prosecution to people with mental disorders, ensuring that the treatment plan meets their specific needs and aligns with the goal of helping them.

What This Bill Does

• Adds a requirement that defendants must agree the recommended treatment plan will meet their specialized needs.
• Changes the definition of 'pretrial diversion' to include ensuring the program is consistent with the purpose of mental health diversion.
• Gives courts discretion to deny pretrial diversion if they conclude that the defendant poses an unreasonable risk to another person's physical safety.

Who It Names or Affects

• People who are charged with crimes and have mental disorders
• Courts that decide on pretrial diversion cases

Terms To Know

Pretrial Diversion

A program where someone accused of a crime can get treatment for their mental health instead of going to trial, if they meet certain requirements.

Unreasonable Risk of Danger

When someone might hurt others or commit another violent crime.

Limits and Unknowns

• The bill does not specify what happens after the court decides on pretrial diversion.
• It is unclear how this will affect existing mental health treatment programs for defendants.

Official Summary Text

SB 483, as amended, Stern.
Mental health diversion.
Existing law authorizes the court to grant pretrial diversion to a defendant diagnosed with a mental disorder if the defendant satisfies certain eligibility requirements and if the court determines that the defendant is suitable for diversion. Existing law defines “pretrial diversion” as the postponement of prosecution to allow the defendant to undergo mental health treatment, subject to certain requirements, such as the court is satisfied that the recommended program will meet the specialized needs of the defendant, among others. Existing law provides that a defendant is suitable for pretrial diversion if certain criteria are met,
including,
including
that the defendant agrees to comply with the
treatment as a condition of
diversion, among others.
diversion and they will not pose an unreasonable risk of danger to public safety, among others. Existing law defines “unreasonable risk of danger to public safety” as an unreasonable risk that the defendant will commit a new violent felony, as specified.
This bill would additionally require that the defendant agree that the recommended treatment plan will meet their specialized needs and would redefine “pretrial diversion” to require that the court is also satisfied that the recommended program is consistent with the underlying purpose of mental health diversion, as described.
The bill would state that, notwithstanding the court’s determination whether a defendant may pose an unreasonable risk that the defendant will commit a new violent felony, the court retains discretion to deny pretrial diversion if it concludes that the defendant poses an
unreasonable risk to the physical safety of another.

Current Bill Text

Download Bill PDF