BILL ANALYSIS Ó
------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | SB 61|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 445-6614 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
------------------------------------------------------------
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
Bill No: SB 61
Author: Pavley (D)
Amended: 8/26/11
Vote: 21
SENATE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE : 7-0, 3/22/11
AYES: Hancock, Anderson, Calderon, Harman, Liu, Price,
Steinberg
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE : 8-0, 5/26/11
AYES: Kehoe, Walters, Alquist, Lieu, Pavley, Price,
Runner, Steinberg
NO VOTE RECORDED: Emmerson
SENATE FLOOR : 39-0, 6/2/11
AYES: Alquist, Anderson, Berryhill, Blakeslee, Calderon,
Cannella, Corbett, Correa, De León, DeSaulnier, Dutton,
Emmerson, Evans, Fuller, Gaines, Hancock, Harman,
Hernandez, Huff, Kehoe, La Malfa, Leno, Lieu, Liu,
Lowenthal, Negrete McLeod, Padilla, Pavley, Price, Rubio,
Simitian, Steinberg, Strickland, Vargas, Walters, Wolk,
Wright, Wyland, Yee
NO VOTE RECORDED: Runner
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 78-0, 09/07/11 - See last page for vote
SUBJECT : Wiretapping: authorization
SOURCE : Los Angeles County District Attorney
CONTINUED
SB 61
Page
2
DIGEST : This bill extends the sunset provision on the
law that authorizes wiretaps by law enforcement under
specified circumstances from January 1, 2012 to January 1,
2015.
Assembly Amendments revise the reporting requirements to
the Legislature.
ANALYSIS : Existing law authorizes the Attorney General,
chief deputy attorney general, chief assistant attorney
general, district attorney or the district attorney's
designee to apply to the presiding judge of the superior
court for an order authorizing the interception of wire or
electronic communications under specified circumstances.
(Penal Code ÝPEN] Sections 629.50 et. seq.)
Existing law provides that the provisions governing wiretap
sunsets on January 1, 2012. (PEN Section 629.98.)
This bill extends that sunset to January 1, 2015.
Existing law requires the Attorney General to prepare and
submit an annual report to the Legislature, the Judicial
Council, and the Director of the Administrative Office of
the United States Court regarding these interceptions, as
specified. The report is required to include, among other
things, a general description of the interceptions made
under the order or extension, including the approximate
nature and frequency of incriminating communications
intercepted, the approximate nature and frequency of other
communications intercepted, the approximate number of
persons whose communications were intercepted, and the
approximate nature, amount, and cost of the manpower and
other resources used in the interceptions. (PEN Section
629.62)
This bill further revises the reporting requirement to
require the report to include, among other things, a
general description of the interceptions made under the
order or extension, including the number of persons whose
communications were intercepted, the number of
communications intercepted, the percentage of incriminating
communications intercepted and the percentage of other
communications intercepted, and the approximate nature,
CONTINUED
SB 61
Page
3
amount, and cost of the manpower and other resources used
in the interceptions.
Department of Justice's 2006 Legislative Report
The 2009 Attorney General "Annual Report on Electronic
Interceptions" indicates that the total number of
electronic interceptions decreased in California in 2009 to
601, from 622 in 2008, and 712 in 2007. The number of
murder arrests resulting from electronic interceptions,
however, significantly increased from 121 in 2008, to 207
in 2009.
Prior Legislation
SB 1428 (Pavley) - Chapter 707, Statutes of 2010
AB 569 (Portantino) - Chapter 307, Statutes of 2007
AB 74 (Washington) - Chapter 605, Statutes of 2002
Proposition 21 - approved March 7, 2000
SB 1016 (Boatwright) - Chapter 971, Statutes of 1995
SB 800 (Presley) - Chapter 548, Statutes of 1993
SB 1120 (Presley) - 1991, died in Senate Judiciary
Committee
SB 83 (Presley) - Chapter 1373, Statutes of 1988, amended
out in part and chaptered in part as SB 1499 (1988)
SB 1499 (Presley) - Chapter 111, Statutes of 1988
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes
Local: Yes
According to the Senate Appropriations Committee:
Fiscal Impact (in thousands)
Major Provisions 2011-12 2012-13
2013-14 Fund
Prison commitments Unknown; potentially
significant costs General
SUPPORT : (Verified 9/7/11)
Los Angeles County District Attorney (source)
Association for Los Angeles Deputy Sheriffs
CONTINUED
SB 61
Page
4
California District Attorneys Association
California Peace Officers' Association
California Police Chiefs Association
California State Sheriffs' Association
Riverside Sheriffs' Association
San Bernardino Sheriff
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : According to the author:
"SB 61 is needed to ensure the continuation of the
California State Wiretap Statute which includes both
telephone and electronic communication technologies. The
current program sunsets on January 1, 2012. California
and federal law enforcement agencies and multi-agency
task forces have used the law with great success since
its enactment in 1989 to solve the most serious and
difficult crimes, such as organized crime and drug
trafficking, while maintain an emphasis on the protection
of individual privacy.
"Last year, Senator Pavley updated the state's wiretap
program to include the interception of communications by
e-mail, blackberry, instant messaging by phone and other
forms of contemporaneous two-way electronic
communication. The new law recognizes the expanding use
of electronic devices in the planning of criminal
activities and modernized our state's wiretap law so that
court-approved interceptions of communication from the
latest technologies are a relevant option for law
enforcement investigations.
"SB 61 extends the operation of California's wiretap law
until 2015 and ensures re-enactment of the statute,
including the technological updates that were approved
last year.
"In Los Angeles County it is estimated that 50-75 major
narcotic division cases (usually involving large seizures
and approximately 25-40 homicide cases are affected
annually by California's wiretap statute.)"
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 78-0, 09/07/11
AYES: Achadjian, Alejo, Allen, Ammiano, Atkins, Beall,
Bill Berryhill, Block, Blumenfield, Bonilla, Bradford,
CONTINUED
SB 61
Page
5
Brownley, Buchanan, Butler, Charles Calderon, Campos,
Carter, Cedillo, Chesbro, Conway, Cook, Davis, Dickinson,
Donnelly, Eng, Feuer, Fletcher, Fong, Fuentes, Beth
Gaines, Galgiani, Garrick, Gatto, Gordon, Grove, Hagman,
Halderman, Hall, Harkey, Hayashi, Roger Hernández, Hill,
Huber, Hueso, Huffman, Jeffries, Jones, Knight, Lara,
Logue, Bonnie Lowenthal, Ma, Mansoor, Mendoza, Miller,
Mitchell, Monning, Morrell, Nestande, Nielsen, Norby,
Olsen, Pan, Perea, V. Manuel Pérez, Portantino, Silva,
Skinner, Smyth, Solorio, Swanson, Torres, Valadao,
Wagner, Wieckowski, Williams, Yamada, John A. Pérez
NO VOTE RECORDED: Furutani, Gorell
RJG:kc 9/8/11 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****
CONTINUED