Bill Text: CA AB604 | 2013-2014 | Regular Session | Amended

NOTE: There are more recent revisions of this legislation. Read Latest Draft

---

Bill Title: Medical cannabis: state regulation and enforcement.

Spectrum: Partisan Bill (Democrat 3-0)

Status: (Engrossed - Dead) 2013-09-11 - Senate Rule 29.3(b) suspended. (Ayes 25. Noes 5. Page 2341.) From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to committee. Read second time, amended, and re-referred to Com. on PUB. S. [AB604 Detail]

Download: California-2013-AB604-Amended.html

---

BILL NUMBER: AB 604	AMENDED
	BILL TEXT

	AMENDED IN SENATE  AUGUST 13, 2013
	AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY  APRIL 29, 2013

INTRODUCED BY   Assembly Member Ammiano

                        FEBRUARY 20, 2013

   An act to add Section 806 to the Evidence Code, and to add
Sections 686.3 and 1127i to the Penal Code, relating to criminal
investigations.



	LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST


   AB 604, as amended, Ammiano. Criminal investigations: eyewitness
identification.
   Existing law allows opinion testimony from expert witnesses to be
admitted at trial upon specified showings.
   This bill would allow expert testimony regarding the reliability
of an eyewitness identification to be admitted at trial if the
proponent of the evidence establishes relevancy and proper
qualifications of the witness.
   Existing law generally regulates the collection and admissibility
of evidence for purposes of criminal prosecutions.
   This bill would authorize any law enforcement agency to adopt
regulations for conducting photo and live lineups with eyewitnesses,
and provides that specified procedures should be considered when
adopting the regulations, including sequentially presenting photos
used in an identification procedure and separating all witnesses when
viewing an identification procedure.
   Existing law provides that in any criminal case which is being
tried before the court with a jury, all requests for instructions on
points of law must be made to the court before commencement of
argument.
   This bill would require the court in a criminal trial or
proceeding in which a witness testifies to an identification made
before trial, as specified,  and where the local law enforcement
agency in that jurisdiction has adopted recommended live and photo
eyewitness identification procedures,  to give specified
instructions to the jury, including an instruction that they may
consider evidence that law enforcement officers did or did not follow
specified procedures during identification procedures when
determining the reliability of the eyewitness identification. 
The bill would authorize the court to provide the same instructions
in a jurisdiction that has not adopted the recommended live and photo
eyewitness identification procedures. 
   Vote: majority. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: no.
State-mandated local program: no.


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

  SECTION 1.  The Legislature finds and declares the following:
   (a) The goal of a law enforcement criminal investigation is to
find and apprehend the person or persons responsible for committing a
crime.
   (b) Eyewitness identification procedure studies indicate that the
criminal justice system can significantly decrease the rate of
erroneous eyewitness identifications by implementing changes to
identification procedures.
   (c) A decrease in the number of erroneous eyewitness
identifications will increase public trust in the criminal justice
system, which, in turn, will increase the ability of law enforcement
and prosecutors to convict the guilty and protect our communities.
   (d) New policies and procedures, such as those recommended by the
National Institute of Justice, are readily available and have proven
effective in other jurisdictions. States, including New Jersey and
Oregon, have recognized and adopted the importance of tested
eyewitness identification procedures that are shown to increase
reliability. Several local jurisdictions in California have also
adopted tested eyewitness identification procedures with great
success and significant cost savings.
  SEC. 2.  Section 806 is added to the Evidence Code, to read:
   806.  Expert testimony may be admitted regarding factors that
affect the reliability of eyewitness identification, including the
identification procedure, if the proponent of the evidence
establishes relevancy and proper qualifications of the witness.
  SEC. 3.  Section 686.3 is added to the Penal Code, to read:
   686.3.  (a) Any local law enforcement agency, including, but not
limited to, police departments, sheriffs, and prosecutors, may adopt
regulations for conducting photo and live lineups with eyewitnesses.
In adopting the regulations, those agencies are encouraged to
consider all of the following procedures:
   (1) Prior to conducting the identification procedure, and as close
in time to the incident as possible, have the eyewitness complete a
standardized form describing the perpetrator of the offense.
   (2) If practicable, have the investigator conducting the
identification procedure be a person who is not aware of which person
in the identification procedure is suspected as the perpetrator of
the offense.
   (3) Present photos used in an identification procedure
sequentially, and not simultaneously.
   (4) Prior to any identification procedure, instruct an eyewitness
of all the following:
   (A) The perpetrator may not be among the persons in the
identification procedure.
   (B) The eyewitness should not feel compelled to make an
identification.
   (C) An identification or failure to make an identification will
not end the investigation.
   (5) If the identification procedure is being done sequentially,
instruct an eyewitness of all of the following prior to the
identification procedure:
   (A) Each photograph or person shall be viewed one at a time.
   (B) The photographs or persons shall be displayed in random order.

   (C) The eyewitness should take as much time as needed in making a
decision about each photograph or person before moving to the next
one.
   (D) All photographs or persons will be shown to the eyewitness,
even if an identification is made before all photographs or persons
have been viewed.
   (6) Compose an identification procedure so that the fillers
generally fit the description of the person suspected as the
perpetrator, and in the case of a photo lineup, the photograph of the
person suspected as the perpetrator resemble his or her appearance
at the time of the offense and does not unduly stand out.
   (7) If the eyewitness has previously viewed an identification
procedure in connection with the identification of another person
suspected of involvement in the offense, have the fillers in the
lineup in which the person suspected as the perpetrator participates
be different from the fillers used in any prior lineups.
   (8) In a live lineup, have any identification actions, such as
speaking or making gestures or other movements, be performed by all
lineup participants.
   (9) All live lineup participants shall be out of the view of the
eyewitness prior to the beginning of the identification procedure.
   (10) Have only one suspected perpetrator included in any
identification procedure.
   (11) Have all witnesses separated when viewing an identification
procedure.
   (12) If the eyewitness identifies a person he or she believes to
be the perpetrator, then have all of the following apply:
   (A) The investigator shall immediately inquire as to the
eyewitness's confidence level in the accuracy of the identification.
   (B) No information concerning the identified person shall be given
to the eyewitness prior to obtaining the eyewitness's statement of
confidence level.
   (13) Have a written record of the identification procedure be made
that includes, at a minimum, all of the following:
   (A) All identification and nonidentification results obtained
during the identification procedure and signed by the eyewitness.
   (B) A statement of the eyewitness' own words regarding how certain
he or she is regarding the accuracy of his or her identification and
signed by him or her.
   (C) The names of all persons present at the identification
procedure.
   (D) The date, time, and location of the identification procedure.
   (E) If the identification procedure was conducted sequentially,
the order in which the photographs or persons were displayed to the
eyewitness.
   (F) Color copies of all photographs used in a photo lineup.
   (G) Identification information and the sources of all photographs
used in a photo lineup.
   (H) Identification information for all individuals used in a live
lineup and a video recording of the lineup.
   (b) For purposes of this section, the following terms have the
following meanings:
   (1) "Eyewitness" means a person whose identification of another
person may be relevant in a criminal investigation.
   (2) "Filler" means either a person or a photograph of a person who
is not suspected of an offense and is included in an identification
procedure.
   (3) "Identification procedure" means either a photo lineup or a
live lineup.
   (4) "Investigator" means the person conducting the live or photo
lineup.
   (5) "Live lineup" means a procedure in which a group of persons,
including the person suspected as the perpetrator of an offense and
other persons not suspected of the offense, is displayed to an
eyewitness for the purpose of determining whether the eyewitness is
able to identify the suspect as the perpetrator.
   (6) "Photo lineup" means a procedure in which an array of
photographs, including a photograph of the person suspected as the
perpetrator of an offense and additional photographs of other persons
not suspected of the offense, is displayed to an eyewitness for the
purpose of determining whether the eyewitness is able to identify the
suspect as the perpetrator.
  SEC. 4.  Section 1127i is added to the Penal Code, to read:
   1127i.   (a)    In any criminal trial or
proceeding in which a witness testifies to an identification made
before trial, either by viewing photographs or  in person
  in   -person  lineups,  and where
the local law enforcement   agency in that jurisdiction has
adopted the recommended live and photo eyewitness identification
procedures listed in Section 686.3,  the court shall instruct
the jury as  follows:   follows or admonish the
jury with a subst   antially similar instruction: 

   (a) 
    (1)  The procedures listed in Section  683.3 of
the Penal Code   686.3  are designed to decrease
the likelihood of misidentification when the police conduct an
identification procedure, such as a lineup. As jurors, you may
consider evidence that police officers did or did not follow those
procedures when you decide whether a witness in this case was correct
or mistaken in identifying the defendant as the perpetrator of the
crime. 
   (b) 
    (2)  Use of these procedures alone does not mean that
the witness is correct or is credible, but only that police followed
procedures that are designed to decrease the likelihood that the
witness will make a mistake during the lineup or other identification
procedure. 
   (c) 
    (3)  If police officers did not follow the procedures
recommended in Section  683.3 of the Penal Code, 
 686.3,  consider the eyewitness identification with caution
and close scrutiny. This does not mean that you may arbitrarily
disregard his or her testimony, but you should give it the weight you
think it deserves in the light of all the evidence in the case. 

   (b) In any criminal proceeding or trial in which a witness
testifies to an identification made before trial in a jurisdiction
that has not adopted the recommended live and photo eyewitness
identification procedures listed in Section 686.3, the court may, but
is not required to, provide the jury with the instruction in
subdivision (a) or admonish the jury with a substantially similar
instruction.  
   (c) In addition to the jury instruction required under subdivision
(a) and authorized under subdivision (b), the court may, but is not
required to, provide the jury with any additional instructions the
court may deem necessary.