Bill Text: CA SB1064 | 2019-2020 | Regular Session | Amended

California Senate Bill 1064 (Prior Session Legislation)

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

Bill Title: Prisons: confidential informants.

Spectrum: Partisan Bill (Democrat 1-0)

Status: (Vetoed) 2020-09-30 - In Senate. Consideration of Governor's veto pending. [SB1064 Detail]

Download: California-2019-SB1064-Amended.html

Amended IN Assembly August 24, 2020

Amended IN Senate June 18, 2020

CALIFORNIA LEGISLATURE— 2019–2020 REGULAR SESSION

Senate Bill

No. 1064

Introduced by Senator Skinner

February 18, 2020

An act to add Section 5016 to the Penal Code, relating to prisons.

LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST

SB 1064, as amended, Skinner. Prisons: confidential informants.

Existing law establishes the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, and grants the department authority over state prison facilities. Existing law authorizes the department to prescribe and amend rules and regulations for the administration of the prisons. Existing law establishes the Board of Parole Hearings, and authorizes the board to conduct parole consideration hearings.

This bill would prohibit an employee of, or private entity under contract with, the department from finding any state prisoner guilty of a rules violation if that finding or decision is based on, or relies on, in whole or in part, any uncorroborated information from an in-custody confidential informant, as specified. The bill would prohibit a decision using information from a confidential source from being considered, unless other documentation corroborates information from the source and other circumstantial evidence surrounding the event clearly indicates reliability. The bill would additionally prohibit an employee of, or private entity under contract with, the board from making a finding or decision about any state prisoner that is based on, or relies on, in whole or in part, allegations that have not been found true following a disciplinary hearing at which the subject was provided notice, an opportunity to confront nonconfidential witnesses before an impartial hearing body, a written statement of the evidence relied upon, a written statement of the reasons for the decision, and an opportunity for appeal.

Vote: MAJORITY Appropriation: NO Fiscal Committee: YES Local Program: NO

The people of the State of California do enact as follows:

SECTION 1.

Section 5016 is added to the Penal Code, to read:

5016.

(a) An employee of, or private entity under contract with, the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation shall not find any state prisoner to be guilty of a rules violation, if the finding or decision is based on, or relies on, in whole or in part, any uncorroborated information from an in-custody confidential informant. A decision using information from a confidential source shall not be considered, unless other documentation corroborates information from the source and other circumstantial evidence surrounding the event clearly indicates reliability.

(b) An employee of, or private entity under contract with, the Board of Parole Hearings shall not make a finding or decision about any state prisoner that is based on, or relies on, in whole or in part, allegations that have not been found true following a disciplinary hearing at which the subject was provided notice, an opportunity to confront nonconfidential witnesses before an impartial hearing body, a written statement of the evidence relied upon, a written statement of the reasons for the decision, and an opportunity for appeal.

(c) At least 10 days prior to any proceeding in which a decision described in subdivision (a) or (b) is made or considered, including any interview on which a risk rating is based, the subject prisoner, and the prisoner’s attorney, if the prisoner is represented by an attorney, shall receive a summary notice of any information provided by an in-custody confidential informant that may be used in the decision. The summary notice shall include all of the following:

(1) A detailed description of the information provided by the confidential informant.

(2) The actual or approximate date the information was provided to the department.

(3) The date of the events or actions referred to in the informant’s report.

~~(4)The location where the information was provided by the informant.~~
~~(5)The name of the officer who obtained and recorded the informant’s report.~~
~~(6)The source and nature of the informant’s personal knowledge of the events or actions.~~
(4) The names of any receiving officers or other department officials who obtained and authored the informant’s report.
~~(7)The~~

(5) A brief overview of investigative steps taken by the receiving officer or other department official to confirm the facts reported and the informant’s personal knowledge.

~~(8)The informant’s previous record of confidential information, including instances of information not meeting standards of reliability.~~
(6) Numerical data on the confidential informant’s history of providing information, including the number of times the information provided did not meet reliability standards.
~~(9)~~

(7) The evidence used to corroborate the information. If the information is corroborated by another in-custody confidential informant, a summary notice pursuant to this subdivision shall also be provided with respect to the corroborating informant. If corroboration is provided by a nonconfidential informant, or by physical evidence, that information shall be fully disclosed in the notice.

~~(10)~~

(8) A signed statement by the decisionmaker that the decisionmaker has made the determination required by paragraph (2) of subdivision (d).

(d) As used in this section, the following definitions apply:

(1) A “state prisoner” is any person under the jurisdiction of the department who is not on parole.

(2) Confidential information is “corroborated” if information about the same person, act, time, and place has been separately and independently provided by another confidential informant, nonconfidential informant, or physical evidence. Information is provided independently if the decisionmaker determines there has been no contact or communication between the in-custody confidential informant and the corroborating source, and there has been no prior knowledge of any supporting physical evidence. Confidential information must be corroborated through investigation or through physical evidence. In addition to an investigation or evidence, two or more of the following may establish reliability for the confidential informant:

(A) The information provided by the confidential source is self-incriminating.
(B) The information provided is from nonconfidential sources.
(C) The confidential source is the victim.
(D) The source successfully completed a polygraph examination.
(E) The sources and nature of the informant’s personal knowledge of the events or actions.

(3) An “in-custody confidential informant” means a person in custody in any local, state, or federal jail, penal institution, or correctional institution, whose name and full statement has not been disclosed to the prisoner who is the subject of the decision by the department or board.