California Governor Jerry Brown signed Senate Bill (SB) 439 into law in September 2018. The law took effect in January 2019 to protect delinquents or young offenders younger than 12 years from early involvement in the juvenile delinquency system, shifting attention from prosecution to rehabilitative measures based on age. The goal is to protect children from the adverse effects of the formal court system, protect their well-being, and reduce resources used in the juvenile court system. However, the law does not protect delinquents involved in offenses like murder, forcible oral copulation, rape, and forcible sodomy.

If your child faces criminal charges under the juvenile system, they could be eligible for protection under SB 439. Nevertheless, you require an attorney to analyze the case and advise on the options you can explore to safeguard your child from the adverse effects of the formal court process. At Monterey Criminal Attorney, we have explained SB 439 to understand how it affects your child’s delinquency case.

Overview of the Juvenile Court System

California has two courts that handle juvenile cases: the juvenile dependency and juvenile delinquency justice system. The delinquency court handles criminal-related offenses involving minors, while the dependency court handles cases of minors who have been neglected, abused, or abandoned.

Your minor can only be categorized in one of these systems. They cannot appear in the two justice systems simultaneously. Nevertheless, minors can have dual status, meaning they are under the jurisdiction of two justice systems. The DA attempts to keep children out of the juvenile delinquency system to focus on rehabilitation rather than punishment.

Juvenile delinquency courts generally handle age 12 to 17 cases, and under‑12 violent felonies. In rare cases, the court deals with severe offenses committed by offenders younger than 12. The juvenile court is a civil court, where a judge adjudicates petitions, while the DA and the minor’s attorney are participants. The petition against the young offender remains confidential, and no jury is involved.

However, after SB 439 took effect in January 2019, the juvenile delinquency system experienced many changes. The most prominent change in the bill was requiring juvenile delinquency cases to take jurisdiction over delinquency petitions involving minors younger than twelve, but under exceptional circumstances.

Understanding SB 439

When SB 439 became operative in 2019, it prevented the adjudication of delinquent cases involving minors younger than 12 under the juvenile delinquency court, except if they are accused of murder, rape, forcible oral copulation, sexual penetration, or sodomy. he court retains jurisdiction only if alleged crimes involve force, violence, duress, or menace of physical harm, or violence.

SB 439 brought significant changes to the juvenile delinquency justice system. Previously, the juvenile court had the jurisdiction to handle all delinquency petitions filed against children under 18, including those aged twelve or younger. No minimum age of a delinquent barred the court from adjudicating over a petition.

Currently, SB 439 gives the juvenile court jurisdiction over offenders aged between 12 and 17 who violate municipal ordinances, state, or federal statutes. The bill did not remove the juvenile court's mandate to handle cases of delinquents younger than twelve. Per the bill, the court retains jurisdiction over violations by offenders below 12 if they are accused of using the following to commit rape, oral copulation, sexual penetration, or sodomy:

  • Fear

  • Duress

  • Threat of physical injuries

  • Menace

  • Force

In other cases involving offenders younger than 12 that do not consist of these circumstances, SB 439 requires counties to develop alternative justice systems that are less stringent or restrictive. The law does not make anyone responsible for devising these alternative justice systems. Nevertheless, it mentions that responsible parties like schools, health organizations, or community organizations can be involved in crafting these less stringent delinquent rehabilitation programs for offenders under 12, whose petitions are not eligible to be heard and determined by the juvenile delinquency court.

When your minor faces a petition in the current juvenile court, a judge presides over the case, and no jury is involved. When the case concludes and the facts are against the minor, the court does not consider them guilty. Instead, it sustains the petition against the minor. Several dispositions are available after a sustained petition, including informal probation where the court sets aside the petition once the juvenile completes the probationary term. For severe violations, the delinquent can be sent to a Division for Juvenile Justice (DJJ), formerly the California Youth Authority (CYA), a jail for young offenders.

The Logic Behind SB 439

Those advocating for the current SB 439 do so for several reasons. These are:

  • Scientific studies show that delinquents who are introduced to the formal juvenile justice system are more likely to become chronic offenders.

  • The early interaction adversely impacts the minor’s education and development

  • The laws under SB 439 correspond with scientific studies on brain development, which show the reasoning of a minor is different from that of an adult and that a child’s brain needs more time to develop into adulthood.

Apart from California, twelve other states adopt a minimum age for juvenile court entry, ranging from six to twelve years. Massachusetts was the first state to adopt the age restriction in 2018, shortly followed by California. The passage of SB 439 in California made changes to the Welfare and Institutions Code (WIC) 601 and 602.

SB 439 was passed with the following objectives:

  • Halt the decriminalization of offenders younger than 12 by setting a minimum age of 12 for the prosecution of minors in the formal juvenile justice system.

  • Crafting alternative rehabilitation pathways for delinquent offenders under twelve whose delinquency primarily stems from unfulfilled psychological or emotional needs.

  • Capitalizing on new and existing funding initiatives to support age-appropriate interventions and rehabilitation programs for young offenders.

  • Ensuring that counties have proper measures that create alternatives to the formal juvenile prosecution of delinquents under 12.

Before SB 439 became effective in 2019, California lacked a minimum age limit for young offenders under 18. Anyone below 18 who commits a violation would face the juvenile delinquency system. This happened regardless of the scientific studies that have sufficiently proven that early interaction with the formal juvenile court system hurts children. The brains of minors are not fully developed; hence, they might not benefit from or understand this court system. Putting delinquent offenders through the system caused more harm than good.

Before the enactment of SB 439, many minors aged eleven years were prosecuted in the juvenile court. Some offenses that led to adjudication of the petitions against them in the juvenile delinquency system were minor violations, like shoplifting and school fights. The system was deemed unfair or biased because the children whose petitions were adjudicated in these cases were mainly Latinos and Blacks.

Initially, the system was not designed for young offenders, and the infrastructure did not facilitate the rehabilitation needs of delinquents. So, the goal of SB 439 was to stop the unjust treatment of delinquents under 12 by introducing measures that would be more beneficial to the minor’s rehabilitation.

The bill introduced learning facilities, mental health, and child welfare organizations tailored to rehabilitate young offenders. It provides delinquents under 12 with family support and the right treatment instead of prosecution, which evidence shows causes more harm than good.

SB 439 Justifications

There are several justifications for SB 439 adoption. First, court rulings, scientific studies, and experiences reveal that minors are developmentally different from adults. Therefore, they should not be tried or prosecuted as adults because they are vulnerable and their brains are not fully developed. The assumption is that they do not comprehend the gravity of their actions. However, they are more malleable, versatile, and capable of change than adults. Therefore, there is a need for more leniency and protection when dealing with young offenders. Minors do not require extreme force or punishment to change their behavior like adults.

Similarly, the slightest interaction with the juvenile court can significantly harm a young offender and adversely impact their future.

Also, processing or interacting with delinquents early in the juvenile court does not improve their chances of becoming responsible adults and staying away from crime. Instead, it increases the chances of the minor becoming a chronic offender in the future because they interact with other young offenders who have committed more severe offenses and could transfer the behavior.

The California juvenile court portrays a noticeable racial disparity when it comes to referral, arrest, and adjudication of delinquents. This is an indication that youth criminalization and overdependence on the justice system create inequality and structural racism.

Additionally, with the high rate of petition dismissal and low level of resolution of petitions involving minors under 12, prosecution of minors within this age bracket is senseless. Offenses committed by delinquents younger than 12 are minor and do not warrant a formal prosecution in the juvenile court.

Formal processing in the juvenile court and interaction of minors under 12 with law enforcers are unnecessary and cause adverse effects on the young offenders in the short term and long term.

Finally, adjudicating cases involving minors is expensive because of the police service costs, probation supervision expenses, attorney fees, and court fines. Yet, most of the delinquent acts by minors younger than 12 do not require prosecution.

SB 439 explores alternative rehabilitative options for offenders younger than 12. These alternative measures are pocket-friendly and effectively promote public safety and the offender’s well-being.

Adverse Impact of Early Interaction with the Juvenile Delinquency Court System

Minors below 12 years exposed to the juvenile court early are likely to experience:

  • Mental health problems stemming from anger, stress, depression, or constant fear of separation from loved ones or deportation if the offender is an alien.

  • Lack of access to education and employment. Juveniles with a criminal record have difficulties securing college admission or meaningful employment.

  • Negative labeling, internalization, and stigmatization, which hurt their self-esteem, as the confidence of a minor hinges on how society views them

  • Exposure to criminal gangs and dealings that they could have avoided were it not for the contact with law enforcement of the juvenile delinquency system.

Many delinquents, particularly those under 12, commit crimes because of a lack of parental support, guidance and love. Many are victims of maltreatment from a tender age. Others develop trauma because of their environment or trouble with education. Therefore, exposing the minor to a formal prosecution, even if it is in the juvenile court and not criminal adult court, will escalate their trauma.

However, when the child undergoes a rehabilitation program tailored to meet their needs, like community service and education or health initiatives tailored to address their mental health, they heal holistically. Apart from rehabilitation, these children spend time with their families and the community, helping address some of the traumas that pushed them into crime in the first place. Locking them in juvenile detention centers escalates or worsens their traumas.

In some instances, separating children and their family would be beneficial and not a trauma escalation, particularly if the minor’s environment is contributing to their delinquency or they portray signs of psychiatric ailment that necessitate treatment away from home. Besides, when a minor has been neglected or requires immediate medical care, separating them from the family is necessary. Again, the delinquent will be separated from the family if their physical environment threatens their health and well-being.

SB 439 Implementation Guidelines

WIC 602.1 outlines the implementation guidelines for SB 439. Per the guidelines, delinquents must undergo counseling before reintegrating with society to ensure they do not pose a threat to themselves and others or threaten public safety.

After counseling, the delinquent must undergo less stringent rehabilitation alternatives through health, education, and community initiatives.

Any alternative measures adopted should be appropriate and geared towards safeguarding and serving the delinquent and must only be pursued on a necessary basis.

Rights of Minors Tried Under the Juvenile Court After SB 439

The rights of a minor interacting with the juvenile system differ from those of an adult offender in a criminal court. The 602 or juvenile proceedings are formal, giving your young offender rights. The rights of a delinquent in these proceedings have remained unchanged even with the adoption of SB 439. These rights are:

Probable Cause is Mandatory During an Arrest

Law enforcement must have probable cause to arrest your minor. First, they must reasonably believe that the juvenile is engaging in a violation to search. After the search, they need probable cause that an offense has been committed to arrest the delinquent. However, a public officer with a quasi-parental relationship with the young offender, like a school employee, does not require probable cause to detain the offender. They only need reasonable suspicion of a violation to search and detain the juvenile.

The Young Offender is Entitled to a Single Phone Call

Like an adult offender, a young offender is entitled to a single phone call after detention. Typically, your minor will call you or their guardian. After receiving the phone call, you should contact an experienced juvenile delinquency attorney immediately. By demanding to make a call, the minor invokes their Miranda right, and if it is denied, any evidence collected thereafter becomes unlawful and inadmissible in court.

The Right to Legal Representation

The delinquent is entitled to legal representation during the 602 proceedings. The court appoints a public defender if you cannot afford a private defender.

The Right to Obtain Charge Notices

A charge against a minor in the juvenile court is called a petition. So, once arrested, the minor should be notified of the petition filed against them. However, there is no bail in these courts, so the child cannot obtain a pretrial release. The case goes straight to the detention proceeding, where the court decides if the minor should remain in juvenile detention or be allowed to reunite with family pending fitness and adjudication proceedings. Hiring an attorney immediately ensures that the delinquent has someone to convince the probation officer and the judge that the minor is better off with the parents or family than in juvenile detention.

If your child is being tried under this system, you have rights as the parent or guardian. The judge retains the discretion on whether you have parental rights.

Before adjudication, the prosecutor must demonstrate beyond doubt that the charges in question are valid if the disposition for the petition involves incarceration. However, where no confinement is engaged, the evidentiary standard is preponderance of the evidence, which is a lower standard and easier for the prosecutor to prove.

Possible Dispositions in a Juvenile Petition

When a minor breaks the law and is arrested, the probation officer or prosecutor lodges a petition, depending on the case’s facts. The petition seeks to involve the juvenile court in the proceedings. In the petition, the prosecutor states that they reasonably believe the minor violated the law. The judge listens to the opposing sides and evaluates evidence to issue a disposition. The kind of disposition or sentence the minor faces hinges on the case’s facts, whether the victim suffered injuries, the status of the victim, and the delinquent’s criminal record.

SB 439 offers relief to offenders by setting an age limit for delinquents to be prosecuted in the juvenile court. However, the law does not change the disposition options for young offenders whose petitions are sustained by this court. The common dispositions include:

  • Deferred entry judgment (DEJ)

  • Diversion

  • DJJ commitment

  • Informal probation under WIC 654 and 725

Under DEJ, the minor admits to the accusations and the adjudication and disposition are postponed until they complete twelve to thirty-six months of probation. The sentencing is available for delinquents who face less severe offenses.

Before the prosecutor files a formal petition, your minor’s lawyer can negotiate a diversion program with the PO or prosecutor. The PO crafts a diversion plan tailored to the offender’s needs, like community service and six months of treatment and education. After completing the diversion, the petition is dropped.

Depending on the case's circumstances, the minor can also be placed under formal or informal probation. A delinquent is placed under formal probation if the judge declares them court wards. The probation is served at home, a group home, a juvenile camp, or a home of the minor’s relative. Conversely, informal probation is available for young offenders accused of minor violations like vandalism. Here, the PO designs a program that aims to educate or treat the offender for no more than six months. The prosecutor files a petition if the minor does not change their behavior within the period. Also, the minor does not agree to the charges. They only agree to abide by the probationary terms. After successful completion, the petition is dismissed.

The most restrictive disposition is commitment to DJJ. However, this option is for minors accused of severe crimes like sex crimes.

The Juvenile Court Problems Even After SB 439 Became Effective

Many problems bedevil the California juvenile delinquency system even after the enactment of SB 439. The bill had excellent objectives, but these have not prevented the criticism of the system. The DJJ or CYA faces most criticism because:

  • It locks delinquents in cages for long hours, forcing some to study in these harsh conditions

  • The authority uses excessive force on children who are already restrained

  • DJJ generally prohibits youth confinement for more than 4 hours, except brief safety holds

  • Facilities use psychotic medicine to manage juveniles

  • While in these facilities, minors are denied sufficient physical and mental health care

  • The culture of severe gang violence remains in many of the DJJ facilities

Even with the criticism, DJJ committed to improving the conditions in these facilities, but little has changed. SB 439 was adopted to protect young offenders under 12 from the harsh conditions in these facilities, which escalate their trauma or turn them into chronic offenders instead of rehabilitating them. Therefore, if your child faces a petition, discuss the case with an experienced attorney to determine if they qualify for protection under SB 439.

Find a Competent Juvenile Delinquency Attorney Near Me

Minors make mistakes in the growth process but should not be judged harshly, particularly under 12 years, because they can easily change their behavior. Besides, the juvenile has many problems that could adversely impact the child instead of benefiting them. SB 439 protects minors younger than 12 from the adverse effects of formal 602 proceedings. If your minor faces a petition, call Monterey Criminal Attorney at 831-574-1791 to understand SB 439 and whether your child can enjoy protection under the law.