Close

What’s the Step Down Program for Gang Members?

In the past, the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) placed many inmates in segregation for long periods of time simply because they were validated gang members or associates. However, CDCR rules now forbid placing inmates in the SHU (Security Housing Unit) based only a Security Threat Group (STG) validation, regardless of whether they are gang members or associates or in prison gangs (STG-I’s) or street gangs (STG-II’s). 15 C.C.R. §§ 3335, 3341.3 and 3378.2(b).
In other words, inmates who are validated STG as affiliates can be placed in segregation only for the same reasons that apply to other inmates. However, in some circumstances, an inmate who commits a SHU-eligible rule violation that has a nexus to an STG may be kept in a SHU for an additional two years in a Step Down Program (SDP) after serving any determinate SHU term. 15 C.C.R §§ 3341.8(b), (e), 3378.4(b).
To be placed in the SDP, an inmate must meet the following criteria:
  1. An STG-I (prison gang) member, associate or “drop out” may be housed in a SHU and assigned to the SDP if they have been found guilty or a serious rule violation that is both STG-related and SHU-eligible with the prior two years. 15 C.C.R. §§ 3341.3(c)(3)(A) 1; 3378.2(b), (d)(3), (e)(1); 15 C.C.R. § 3378.4(b); or
  2. An STG-II (street gang) member, associate or “drop out” may be housed in a SHU and assigned to the SDP if they have been found guilty of two serious rule violations that are both STG-related and SHU-eligible within the prior four years. 15 C.C.R. §§ 3341.3(c)(3)(A)2; 3378.2(b), (d)(4), (c)(2); 15 C.C.R. 3378.4(b).
Please note that an inmate does not have to be validated as an STG affiliate for a rule violation that has an STG nexus. Moreover, an inmate does not need to have been validated as an STG-affiliate before they commit the SHU-eligible rule violation.
The SDP is a multi-step program in the SHU. Placement in the SDP is for 24 months, normally with four steps of six months each. 15 C.C.R. §§ 3000, 3378.3(a). Inmates receive more privileges as they work their way through the SDP steps.
Inmates who are assigned to the SDP and who require mental health treatment at the EOP level of care are housed in a Psychiatric Service Unit (PSU). 15 C.C.R. § 3341(a)(1).
Inmates who are removed from the SDP for in-patient medical or mental health care will be considered for return to the SDP after they complete their health care treatment and should receive credit toward completion of the SDP for the time they were receiving in-patient care. 15 C.C.R. § 3341(e).
The Institution Classification Committee (ICC) will review an inmate’s progress in SDP Steps 1 through 3 after 180 days and progress in Step 4 every 90 days. 15 C.C.R. 3378.3(a)(1). In some circumstances, the ICC can keep an inmate in a step of the SDP past the regular time period, put the person back on some other type of SHU status, or transfer the inmate to a special type of general population unit called a Restricted Custody General Population Unit (RCGP).
If an inmate refuses to participate in or complete SDP programming, the ICC at the end of Step 3 can keep the inmate in Step 3 for an additional six months. If the inmate then completes the SDP through Step 4, the ICC will refer the person to a Classification Staff Representative (CSR) for transfer to a general population facility based on the inmate’s case factors and classification score. 15 C.C.R. § 3378.3(b).
An inmate who commits a new SHU-eligible rule violation while in the SDP may be removed from the SDP to serve a new determinate disciplinary SHU term, then placed back in the SDP. What happens after the person completes the determinate SHU term (or when the SHU term is suspended) depends on whether the SHU-eligible rule violation was STG-related and whether the inmate is validated as an STG-I affiliate or STG-II affiliate. The possibilities are:
  1. If the rule violation was not STG-related, the inmate will return to the same STP step from which he or she was removed; the inmate will not serve more than a total of six months for that step; or
  2. If the rule violation was STG-related, an STG-1 affiliate will be returned to the SDP at Step 1 or another step as determined by the ICC and the six-month step limit for completing the SDP will start again; or
  3. If the rule violation was STG-related, an STG-II affiliate who has committed only one SHU eligible rule violation since placement in the SDP will be returned to the same step from which they were removed, but will not serve more than six months in that step; or
  4. If the rule violation was STG-related, an STG-II affiliate who has committed two SHU-eligible rule violations since placement in the SDP will be returned to the SDP at Step 1 or another step as determined by the ICC and the six-month per step time limit for completing the SDP will start again. 15 C.C.R. § 3378.3(b)(3)(B); or
  5. An inmate in the SDP who commits three serious rule violations, five administrative rule violations, or a total of five serious and administrative rule violations while in the SDP will be reviewed by the ICC at the end of Steps 3 and 4. The ICC will keep a person in Step 3 for an additional six months in Step 3 and then refer the inmate to the CSR recommending placement in a RCGP. The ICC will refer an inmate in Step 4 to the CSR recommending placement in an RCGP.
In extreme cases, an inmate in the SDP who has had multiple SHU terms or who poses a very serious threat to safety or security may be placed in Administrative SHU for an indeterminate length of time.
This article would not be possible without reference to the excellent treatise, “California Prison and Parole Law Handbook” authored by The Prison Law Group in Folsom, California.
Contact us.
Client Reviews
★★★★★
"Thank you so much for putting so much effort in this case. We really appreciate it and we are happy that all turned out well." S.A., Torrance
★★★★★
"Greg Hill did an outstanding job on every level. He was efficient, thorough, knowledgeable, courteous, responsive & brilliant. He welcomed my input and my concerns. . . from the first conversation to the last - I always felt 'it mattered' to him." S.C., Rolling Hills Estates
★★★★★
"Thanks again for your hard work. We want you to know that we are very appreciative of all that you have done [on our son's] behalf. With warmest regards." L.H., Torrance
★★★★★
"Dear Greg, Thank you again for all your help. Your professionalism and thoroughness is greatly admired. I will definitely recommend you to my friends if they ever need legal help." V.L., Carson
★★★★★
"Thanks for investing in my case. I talked to other attorneys out there and they had an arms-length of attitude, but not you. Your intensity and interest helped a lot." C.R., Pomona
Contact Us