Bill Text: CA AB1848 | 2015-2016 | Regular Session | Amended

---

Bill Title: DNA evidence.

Spectrum: Moderate Partisan Bill (Democrat 9-2)

Status: (Failed) 2016-11-30 - From Senate committee without further action. [AB1848 Detail]

Download: California-2015-AB1848-Amended.html

---

BILL NUMBER: AB 1848	AMENDED
	BILL TEXT

	AMENDED IN SENATE  AUGUST 1, 2016
	AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY  MAY 9, 2016
	AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY  MARCH 15, 2016

INTRODUCED BY   Assembly Members Chiu and Quirk
   (Principal coauthor: Assembly Member Burke)
   (Coauthors: Assembly Members Cooper, Cristina Garcia, and Weber)
   (  Coauthor:   Senator  
Glazer   Coauthors:   Senators  
Anderson,   Glazer,   Hancock,   Leno,
  and Stone  )

                        FEBRUARY 9, 2016

   An act to add Section 680.1 to the Penal Code, relating to DNA
evidence.



	LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST


   AB 1848, as amended, Chiu. DNA evidence.
   Existing law establishes the "Sexual Assault Victims' DNA Bill of
Rights," which, among other things, encourages a law enforcement
agency assigned to investigate specified sexual assault offenses to
perform DNA testing of rape kit evidence or other crime scene
evidence in a timely manner to assure the longest possible statute of
limitations. Existing law also requires a law enforcement agency to
inform victims of certain unsolved sexual assault offenses if the law
enforcement agency elects not to analyze DNA evidence within certain
time limits.
   This bill would require law enforcement agencies to report
information regarding rape kit evidence to the department through a
database established by the department. The bill would require that
information to include, among other things, the number of kits
collected, the number of kits from which one or more biological
evidence samples were submitted to a DNA laboratory for analysis, and
the number of kits from which a probative DNA profile was generated.
The bill would additionally require a public DNA laboratory, or a
law enforcement agency contracting with a private laboratory, to
provide a reason for not testing a sample every 120 days the sample
is untested, except as specified. By imposing additional duties on
local law enforcement, this bill would create a state-mandated local
program.
    This bill would require the department to file a report to the
Legislature on an annual basis summarizing the information in its
database. The bill would prohibit law enforcement agencies or
laboratories from being compelled to provide any contents of the
database in a civil or criminal case, except as required by a law
enforcement agency's duty to produce exculpatory evidence to a
defendant in a criminal case.
   Existing constitutional provisions require that a statute that
limits the right of access to the meetings of public bodies or the
writings of public officials and agencies be adopted with findings
demonstrating the interest protected by the limitation and the need
for protecting that interest.
   This bill would make legislative findings to that effect.
   The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local
agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the
state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that
reimbursement.
   This bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates
determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state,
reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to these
statutory provisions.
   Vote: majority. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: yes.
State-mandated local program: yes.


THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS:

  SECTION 1.  Section 680.1 is added to the Penal Code, to read:
   680.1.  (a) The Legislature finds and declares the following:
   (1) There is a significant public interest in knowing what
percentage of rape  kit biological samples  
kits  are analyzed for the perpetrator's DNA profile, as well as
why any untested rape  kit samples   kits 
are not analyzed. Currently, there is no mandatory statewide
tracking mechanism in place to collect and report these metrics. It
is the intent of the Legislature in enacting this section, pursuant
to recommendations by the California State Auditor to the Joint
Legislative Audit Committee, to correct that.
   (2) In 2015, the Department of Justice created the Sexual Assault
Forensic Evidence Tracking (SAFE-T) database to track the status of
all sexual assault evidence kits collected in the state based on
voluntary data input from law enforcement agencies. It is the intent
of the Legislature by enacting this section to require participation
in that database.
   (b) On a schedule set forth by the Department of Justice, each law
enforcement agency that has investigated a case involving the
collection of sexual assault kit evidence during the relevant period
of time, as determined by the department, shall report to the
department, through the SAFE-T database, the data required by the
department in its communications to law enforcement. The data shall
include, but are not limited to, the following:
   (1) The number of kits collected during the period.
   (2) The number of kits from which one or more biological evidence
samples were submitted to a DNA laboratory for analysis.
   (3) The number of kits from which a probative DNA profile was
generated.
   (4) The reason or reasons for not submitting evidence from a given
rape kit to a DNA laboratory for processing.
   (c) After 120 days following submission of rape kit biological
evidence for processing, if a public DNA laboratory has not conducted
DNA testing, that laboratory shall provide the reasons for the
status in the appropriate SAFE-T data field. If the investigating law
enforcement agency has contracted with a private laboratory to
conduct DNA testing on rape kit evidence, the submitting law
enforcement agency shall provide the 120-day update in SAFE-T. The
process described in this subdivision shall take place every 120 days
until DNA testing occurs, except as provided in subdivision (d).
   (d) Upon expiration of a sexual assault case's statute of
limitations set forth in Section 803, or if a law enforcement agency
elects not to analyze the DNA or intends to destroy or dispose of the
crime scene evidence pursuant to subdivision (f) of Section 680, the
investigating law enforcement agency shall state in writing the
reason the kit collected as part of that case's investigation was not
analyzed. This written statement relieves the investigating law
enforcement agency or public laboratory of any further duty to report
information related to that kit pursuant to this section.
   (e) The SAFE-T database shall not contain any identifying
information about a victim or a suspect, shall not contain any DNA
profiles, and shall not contain any information that would impair a
pending criminal investigation.
   (f) On an annual basis, the Department of Justice shall file a
report to the Legislature in compliance with Section 9795 of the
Government Code summarizing data entered into the SAFE-T database
during that year. The report shall not reference individual victims,
suspects, investigations, or prosecutions. The report shall be made
public by the department.
   (g) Except as provided in subdivision (f), in order to protect the
confidentiality of the SAFE-T database information, SAFE-T database
contents shall be confidential and a participating law enforcement
agency or laboratory shall not be compelled in a criminal or civil
proceeding, except as required by  a law enforcement agency's
duty to produce exculpatory evidence to a criminal defendant,
  Brady v. Maryland (1963) 373 U.S. 83,  to provide
any SAFE-T database contents to any person or party seeking those
records or information.
  SEC. 2.  The Legislature finds and declares that Section 1 of this
act, which adds Section 680.1 to the Penal Code, imposes a limitation
on the public's right of access to the meetings of public bodies or
the writings of public officials and agencies within the meaning of
Section 3 of Article I of the California Constitution. Pursuant to
that constitutional provision, the Legislature makes the following
findings to demonstrate the interest protected by this limitation and
the need for protecting that interest:
   In order to protect the privacy of victims of crime, it is
necessary to keep the information in the SAFE-T database
confidential.
  SEC. 3.  If the Commission on State Mandates determines that this
act contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement to local
agencies and school districts for those costs shall be made pursuant
to Part 7 (commencing with Section 17500) of Division 4 of Title 2 of
the Government Code.