NCJ Number
28512
Journal
Southwestern University Law Review Volume: 7 Issue: 2 Dated: (SUMMER 1975) Pages: 418-450
Date Published
1975
Length
33 pages
Annotation
INTERPRETATIONS GIVEN TO THE DIVERSION STATUTE BY CALIFORNIA COURTS, CHANGES IN THE STATUTE ENVISIONED BY A STATE SENATE BILL, AND SUGGESTED IMPROVEMENTS FOR A FUTURE DIVERSION STATUTE.
Abstract
CALIFORNIA'S DIVERSION STATUTE WAS PASSED TO PROVIDE AN ALTERNATIVE TO COURT PROCESSING FOR FIRST-TIME DRUG OFFENDERS. SINCE ITS ENACTMENT IN 1972, THE DIVERSION STATUTE HAS BEEN USED EXTENSIVELY AND, WERE VOLUME THE SOLE CRITERION, HAS BEEN A SUCCESS. THE IMPLEMENTATION OF DIVERSION UNDER THE STATUTE HAS NOT BEEN WITHOUT PROBLEMS, HOWEVER, PARTICULARLY WHEN JUDICIAL SCRUTINY WAS APPLIED TO THE STATUTE. DECISIONS INTERPRETING THE DIVERSION LAW ARE ANALYZED. THREE BASIC ISSUES ARE THE FOCUS OF THIS ANALYSIS: 1) THE ROLE OF THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY IN THE DIVERSION PROCESS, PARTICULARLY HIS POWER TO MAKE THE INITIAL DETERMINATION OF ELIGIBILITY AND HIS POWER IN THE ULTIMATE DECISION TO DIVERT; 2) THE NATURE OF DIVERSION PROCEEDINGS AND THE STAGE IN THE CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS AT WHICH THE DECISION TO DIVERT MUST BE MADE; AND 3) THE CRITERIA FOR DETERMINING THE ELIGIBILITY OF A PARTICULAR DEFENDANT FOR DIVERSION. CHANGES IN DIVERSION PROCEDURE WHICH WERE CONTEMPLATED BY THE CALIFORNIA SENATE IN 1973 - 1974 ARE NEXT EXPLORED. FINALLY, SEVERAL SUGGESTIONS ARE OFFERED TO PROMOTE A MORE UNIFORM APPLICATION OF DIVERSION AND TO PROTECT THE RIGHTS OF DIVERTED DEFENDANTS. THESE INCLUDE THE CLASSIFICATION OF DIVERTIBLE OFFENSES, PROCEDURE, TERMINATION, AND PRIVILEGE.