San Francisco Supervisor Hillary Ronen is introducing legislation Tuesday that would require all juveniles to have legal representation when they are interrogated by police, and allow their parents access to them in custody.

The proposed city ordinance would expand on a state law that took effect this year that requires youths 15 years or younger to consult with legal counsel when law enforcement takes them into custody. Ronen wants San Francisco to be the first city in California to push that age up to 17.

“I want to make sure we are doing everything we can, and we are fully protecting the due process and civil rights of children when they are in contact with police,” Ronen said in an interview Monday. “It’s the right thing to do and we need to do it.”

The proposal she plans to introduce at the Board of Supervisors meeting comes as states and cities nationwide are rethinking the way minors are questioned by police, following high-profile incidents in which suspects have falsely confessed to crimes.

Some studies have shown that more than a quarter of people wrongfully convicted but later exonerated by DNA evidence made a false confession or incriminating statement, according to the Innocence Project, a nonprofit legal organization focused on exonerating the wrongly convicted.

What’s more, a widely cited 2014 study by University of Michigan professor Samuel Gross and others found that of the 340 people exonerated for crimes between 1989 and 2012, juveniles were three times as likely to falsely confess as adults: 42 percent of juveniles, compared with 13 percent of the wrongfully convicted adults.

The issue of false confessions by juveniles has received increasing attention following high-profile cases like 16-year-old Brendan Dassey’s controversial confession in the Netflix documentary series “Making a Murderer.”

A judge in 2016 ruled Dassey’s confession was coerced, and overturned his first-degree murder conviction. But last year, the conviction was upheld by the U.S. Court of Appeals.

Law enforcement officers in the United States are required by law to advise anyone arrested of their Miranda rights, including the right to remain silent and to have an attorney present when they are interrogated.

But some reform advocates have argued that youths don’t have the experience or judgment to recognize and avoid choices that could be detrimental to them.

“They’re often very frightened. They have no idea what’s happening. They’re isolated and scared,” said Patricia Lee, manager of the San Francisco public defender’s juvenile unit. “When police read the Miranda rights, they read it very quickly, often in an official tone. For many youths it’s just a garble of words. They have no idea what it means.”

Lawmakers in Sacramento passed SB 395 in September 2017, requiring attorney consultations for anyone 15 or younger; the youths cannot decline the consultation.

Since the law went into effect in January, the San Francisco public defender’s office has met with 78 juveniles. Because they only consult on Miranda issues, and don’t discuss the case at hand, the public defender’s office said it can avoid potential legal conflicts and handle all the additional cases.

An earlier version of the state law incorporated protections for those 17 and younger but failed to pass over objections by some law enforcement groups. The law as it stands will sunset after five years to allow a committee to study the impact.

“I totally support the legislation to expand the law to youth 17 and younger,” Lee said of Ronen’s effort. “Based on all the years of my practice, the teenage brain is not that different at the age of 17 than at the age of 15.”

Beyond explaining what is taking place, Lee said the attorneys act as intermediaries between those in custody, their parents and others in inherently intense situations.

“That provides a huge level of comfort,” she said.

The legislation would still allow police to interrogate juveniles in certain exigent circumstances like when the information sought could protect a life from an imminent threat.

Ronen was moved to change the city’s law after hearing from parents of students police questioned after a gun discharged at Balboa High School in August.

Three students were detained for questioning and Mirandized at Ingleside Station. Some parents said they were not allowed to see their children for over an hour.

San Francisco police Cmdr. David Lazar said at a November hearing that the students chose not to speak with police and were eventually released and not arrested. Another teen was later arrested on suspicion of several firearms charges and held at San Francisco’s Juvenile Justice Center.

But Roberto Peña, whose 17-year-old son was detained at gunpoint in the incident and later released, said he wasn’t allowed to see his son for nearly three hours after the teen was read his rights.

“My son went through a very traumatic experience,” he said. “He had never had police contact before. For me as a parent, it’s important my child’s rights be respected and honored.”

Evan Sernoffsky is a San Francisco Chronicle staff writer. Email: esernoffsky@

sfchronicle.com Twitter: @EvanSernoffsky