BILL ANALYSIS AB 558 Page 1 Date of Hearing: January 12, 2010 Counsel: Kimberly A. Horiuchi ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC SAFETY Tom Ammiano, Chair AB 558 (Portantino) - As Amended: October 26, 2009 SUMMARY : Requires that, by July 1 of each year, each local law enforcement agency responsible for taking or processing rape kit evidence shall report various information related to the collection and testing of rape kits. Specifically, this bill : 1)Requires each local law enforcement agency responsible for taking or processing rape kit evidence shall report, by July 1 of each year, the following information to the Department of Justice (DOJ): a) The total number of rape kits received during the preceding calendar year and, of that total, the number of rape kits for which the identity of the assailant is unknown and the number of rape kits for which the identity of the assailant is contested. b) The total number of rape kits tested during the preceding calendar year and, of that total, the number of rape kits for which the identity of the assailant is unknown and the number of rape kits for which the identity of the assailant is contested. c) The total number of rape kits that law enforcement has requested be tested and, of that total, the number of rape kits for which the identity of the assailant is unknown and the number of rape kits for which the identity of the assailant is contested. d) The number of rape kits that law enforcement has requested be tested that remain untested and, of that number, the number of rape kits for which the identity of the assailant is unknown and the number of rape kits for which the identity of the assailant is contested. AB 558 Page 2 e) The total number of untested rape kits in its possession as of January 1 of the reporting year. f) The total number of rape kits destroyed during the preceding calendar year. The initial report to the DOJ pursuant to this bill shall be made by July 1, 2012. 2)States the reports received pursuant to bill are subject to inspection under the California Public Records Act, as specified. 3)Provides that this bill will remain operative only until July 1, 2016 and shall sunset on January 1, 2017, unless later enacted. EXISTING LAW : 1)States that upon the request of a sexual assault victim the law enforcement agency investigating a violation of specified violent sex offenses, may inform the victim of the status of the DNA testing of the rape kit evidence or other crime scene evidence from the victim's case. The law enforcement agency may, at its discretion, require that the victim's request be in writing. The law enforcement agency may respond to the victim's request with either an oral or written communication, or by electronic mail, if an electronic mail address is available. Nothing in this subdivision requires that the law enforcement agency communicate with the victim or the victim's designee regarding the status of DNA testing absent a specific request from the victim or the victim's designee. [Penal Code Section 680(c)(1).] 2)Provides that subject to the commitment of sufficient resources to respond to requests for information, sexual assault victims have the following rights: the right to be informed whether or not a DNA profile of the assailant was obtained from the testing of the rape kit evidence or other crime scene evidence from their case; the right to be informed whether or not the DNA profile of the assailant developed from the rape kit evidence or other crime scene evidence has been entered into the DOJ Data Bank of case evidence; and, the right to be informed whether or not there is a match between the DNA profile of the assailant developed from the rape kit evidence or other crime scene evidence and a DNA profile contained in the DOJ Convicted Offender DNA Data Base, AB 558 Page 3 provided that disclosure would not impede or compromise an ongoing investigation. [Penal Code Section 680(c)(2)(A) to (C).] 3)States this law is intended to encourage law enforcement agencies to notify victims of information which is in their possession. It is not intended to affect the manner of or frequency with which the DOJ provides this information to law enforcement agencies. [Penal Code Section 680(c)(3).] 4)Mandates that if the law enforcement agency elects not to analyze DNA evidence within the time limits established by provisions of law related to the statute of limitations, a victim of a sexual assault offense, as specified, where the identity of the perpetrator is in issue, must be informed, either orally or in writing, of that fact by the law enforcement agency. [Penal Code Section 680(d).] 5)States legislative intent that a law enforcement agency responsible for providing information, as specified, does so in a timely manner and, upon request of the victim or the victim's designee, advises the victim or the victim's designee of any significant changes in the information of which the law enforcement agency is aware. In order to be entitled to receive notice under this section, the victim or the victim's designee shall keep appropriate authorities informed of the name, address, telephone number, and electronic mail address of the person to whom the information should be provided, and any changes of the name, address, telephone number, and electronic mail address, if an electronic mailing address is available. [Penal Code Section 680(h).] 6)Provides notwithstanding any other limitation of time described in this chapter, a criminal complaint may be filed within one year of the date on which the identity of the suspect is conclusively established by DNA testing if both of the following conditions are met: a) The crime is one that is described in the sex offense registration statute; and, b) The offense was committed prior to January 1, 2001 and biological evidence collected in connection with the offense is analyzed for DNA type no later than January 1, 2004; or the offense was committed on or after January 1, AB 558 Page 4 2001 and biological evidence collected in connection with the offense is analyzed for DNA type no later than two years from the date of the offense. [Penal Code Section 803(g)(1)(A)(B).] 1)Provides that a criminal complaint may be filed within one year after a report to a law enforcement agency that a person was the victim of a sexual offense while under the age of 18 years. To file such a complaint, the applicable limitation period must have expired and the alleged crime must have involved substantial sexual conduct corroborated by evidence, as specified. [Penal Code Section 803 (g)(1) and (h)(1).] FISCAL EFFECT : Unknown COMMENTS : 1)Author's Statement : According to the author, "Last year it was discovered that the City and County of Los Angeles had over 10,000 unopened rape kits in their evidence lockers. Of these, the City of Los Angeles alone had 403 unopened rape kits that were the result of stranger rapes. It is na?ve to believe that the Los Angeles area is the only community in the state that is not testing its rape kits. AB 558 will require all law enforcement agencies to report to the California Department of Justice their statistics on the numbers of rape kits that they collect and test and the numbers of these kits that are stranger rapes or where the identity of the assailant is contested. Because the first report is not due until July 1, 2012, local law enforcement will be able to tabulate rape kits as they are collected, keeping related costs at a minimum. Legislative fiscal committees have estimated that these costs will not meet levels requiring reimbursement as a local mandate. "Most local governments currently use the Department of Justice criminal lab to test their rape kits. Although not ultimately adopted, the Legislative Analysts Office and several of the recent budget bills proposed requiring the DOJ crime lab to start billing local government for services such as testing rape kits. Such a practice would create a tremendous financial disincentive to test rape kits. Enacting AB 558 will allow us to track the testing of rape kits by our local law enforcement agencies. While not all rape kits need to tested, the report to the DOJ will identify kits that are collected as the result AB 558 Page 5 of stranger rapes and identity contested rapes. These are the kits that should almost always be tested. It is my intent that the mandated report to DOJ only includes the kits that are collected after the effective date of the legislation. By reporting kits that are collected after enactment of AB 558, the cost to local law enforcement agencies will be minimal. Law enforcement can categorize kits as they are collected as part of their normal evidence collection procedures. It is not my intent that local law enforcement be required to go to their evidence lockers and count kits collected prior to January 1, 2011." 2)Timeframe for Testing DNA : Existing law requires DNA collected in sex assault cases to be tested in a certain period of time in order to preserve the statute of limitations for the crime. When an offense is committed before January 1, 2001 but tested by January 1, 2004 or if the offense is committed after January 1, 2001 and tested within two years of collection, the statute of limitation remains stayed and a prosecution must commence within one year of conclusively identifying a suspect. AB 383 (Lieu), pending hearing by Senate Public Safety Committee, and AB 718 (Fuller), of the 2007-08 Legislative Session both sought to remove the requirement a sample be tested in a specific period of time as the DNA backlog was so significant DOJ and local law enforcement are not able to test in time to preserve the statute of limitations. According to the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department, "One of the biggest problems facing the criminal justice system today is the substantial backlog of unanalyzed DNA samples and biological evidence from crime scenes, especially in sexual assault cases. Too often, crime scene samples wait unanalyzed in law enforcement or crime lab storage facilities. Timely analysis of these samples and placement into DNA database can avert tragic results. Currently, there are over 10,000 sexual assault rape kits awaiting DNA processing in Los Angeles County alone. A recent Los Angeles City Auditor report found there are thousands of rape kits awaiting DNA processing in LAPD evidence lockers. At the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department, we have nearly 5,000 rape kits awaiting DNA processing in our evidence lockers." 3)Veto Message of AB 1017 (Portantino) : AB 1017 was identical to this bill and vetoed. In his veto message, Governor Schwarzenegger stated, AB 558 Page 6 "This measure would require law enforcement agencies to annually report to the Department of Justice (DOJ) information pertaining to the total number of rape kits received and tested during the preceding calendar year, the total number of untested kits in its possession as of January 1 of the reporting year, and the number of rape kits that law enforcement has requested to be tested that remain untested. I strongly support efforts to ensure that rape kits are analyzed and processed in a timely manner in order to identify and prosecute sex offenders. However, requiring law enforcement agencies to provide backlog statistics to the DOJ would place significant cost burdens on these agencies and would divert scarce resources away from processing these kits. In addition, this measure does not require the DOJ to do anything with the reports received. Assuming that the DOJ would have to administer, collect, and manage these records, this could impose additional costs pressures on the DOJ. Since this measure would create additional state costs that cannot be accommodated in a time of fiscal crisis, I am returning this bill without my signature." 4)Arguments in Opposition : According to the California State Sheriffs' Association , "AB 558 would require law enforcement agencies to annually report to the Department of Justice (DOJ) information pertaining to the total number of rape kits received and tested during the preceding calendar year, the total number of untested rape kits in its possession as of January 1 of the reporting year, and the number of rape kits that law enforcement has requested be tested that remain untested. We recognize and share your intent to ensure that rape kits are analyzed and processed in a timely manner in order to identify and convict offenders of these heinous crimes. However, doing so by requiring law enforcement agencies to provide backlog statistics to DOJ would place significant cost burdens on these agencies in terms of resources and personnel and consequently, would inadvertently hamper our ability to process these kits. It is for these reasons the Governor vetoed AB 1017, a similar version of this bill last month on these grounds. Local law enforcement agencies are grappling with significant budget cuts over the last several years while trying to maintain critical services. Adding an additional reporting requirement would divert limited resources away from providing current services. The AB 558 Page 7 additional costs associated with this new reporting requirement would be detrimental to the provision of critical services we currently provide." 5)Related Legislation : a) AB 1017 (Portantino) was, in its final version, identical to this bill and vetoed. b) AB 383 (Lieu) extends the limitation on the time period for testing DNA in specified sex crimes cases committed after January 1, 2001, as specified, from two to five years. AB 383 is pending hearing by the Senate Committee on Public Safety. REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION : Support None Opposition California State Sheriffs' Association California Law Enforcement Association of Records Supervisors (CLEAR) Analysis Prepared by : Kimberly Horiuchi / PUB. S. / (916) 319-3744