BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    Ó



                                                                            



           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |SENATE RULES COMMITTEE            |                        AB 184|
          |Office of Senate Floor Analyses   |                              |
          |1020 N Street, Suite 524          |                              |
          |(916) 651-1520         Fax: (916) |                              |
          |327-4478                          |                              |
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
           
                                           
                                    THIRD READING


          Bill No:  AB 184
          Author:   Gatto (D), et al.
          Amended:  9/3/13 in Senate
          Vote:     21

           
           SENATE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE  :  7-0, 6/25/13
          AYES:  Hancock, Anderson, Block, De León, Knight, Liu, Steinberg

           SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE  :  7-0, 8/30/13
          AYES:  De León, Walters, Gaines, Hill, Lara, Padilla, Steinberg

           ASSEMBLY FLOOR  :  76-0, 5/29/13 - See last page for vote


           SUBJECT  :    Statute of limitations

           SOURCE  :     Author


           DIGEST  :    This bill extends the statute of limitations for  
          fleeing the scene of an accident that caused death or permanent,  
          serious injury, to one year after the person is initially  
          identified by law enforcement as a suspect in the commission of  
          the offense, or within the existing statute of limitations,  
          whichever is later, but in no case later than six years after  
          the commission of the offense.

           ANALYSIS  :    

          Existing law:

          1.Provides that prosecution for an offense punishable by death  
                                                                CONTINUED





                                                                     AB 184
                                                                     Page  
          2

            or life without the possibility of parole, or for embezzling  
            public money, may be commenced at any time.

          2.Provides that prosecution for any offense for which the person  
            would be required to register as a sex offender shall be  
            commenced within 10 years after commission of the offense, as  
            specified.

          3.Provides that prosecution for an offense punishable by eight  
            years in prison shall be commenced within six years after the  
            commission of the offense. 

          4.Provides that prosecution for an offense involving elder or  
            dependent adult abuse, except involving theft or embezzlement,  
            shall be prosecuted within five years after the commission of  
            the offense. 

          5.Provides that prosecution for an offense involving fraud,  
            breach of fiduciary duty or official misconduct, as specified,  
            shall be prosecuted within four years after discovery of the  
            offense or completion of the offense, whichever is later.

          6.Provides that prosecution for an offense punishable by  
            imprisonment in the state prison, unless otherwise specified,  
            shall be commenced within three years of the commission of the  
            offense.

          7.Provides that prosecution for misdemeanors, except as  
            otherwise specified, shall commence within one year after  
            commission of the offense.
           
          This bill provides that whenever a person flees an accident that  
          causes death or permanent, serious injury, a criminal complaint  
          may be filed within the applicable time period or one year after  
          the person is initially identified by law enforcement as a  
          suspect in the commission of the offense, whichever is later,  
          but in no case later than six years after the commission of the  
          offense.

           Background
           
          The statute of limitations requires commencement of a  
          prosecution within a certain period of time after the commission  
          of a crime.  A prosecution is initiated by filing an indictment  

                                                                CONTINUED





                                                                     AB 184
                                                                     Page  
          3

          or information, filing a complaint, certifying a case to  
          superior court, or issuing an arrest or bench warrant.  The  
          failure of a prosecution to be commenced within the applicable  
          period of limitation is a complete defense to the charge.  The  
          statute of limitations is jurisdictional and may be raised as a  
          defense at any time, before or after judgment.  The defense may  
          only be waived under limited circumstances. 

          The Legislature enacted the current statutory scheme regarding  
          statutes of limitations for crimes in 1984 in response to a  
          report of the California Law Revision Commission:

               The Commission identified various factors to be considered  
               in drafting a limitations statute.  These factors include:   
               (a) The staleness factor.  A person accused of crime should  
               be protected from having to face charges based on possibly  
               unreliable evidence and from losing access to the  
               evidentiary means to defend.  (b) The repose factor.  This  
               reflects society's lack of a desire to prosecute for crimes  
               committed in the distant past.  (c) The motivation factor.   
               This aspect of the statute imposes a priority among crimes  
               for investigation and prosecution.  (d) The seriousness  
               factor.  The statute of limitations is a grant of amnesty  
               to a defendant; the more serious the crime, the less  
               willing society is to grant that amnesty.  (e) The  
               concealment factor.  Detection of certain concealed crimes  
               may be quite difficult and may require long investigations  
               to identify and prosecute the perpetrators.

               The Commission concluded that a felony limitations statute  
               generally should be based on the seriousness of the crime.   
               Seriousness is easily determined based on classification of  
               a crime as felony or misdemeanor and the punishment  
               specified, and a scheme based on seriousness generally will  
               accommodate the other factors as well.  Also, the  
               simplicity of a limitations period based on seriousness  
               provides predictability and promotes uniformity of  
               treatment.

          Existing law prohibits fleeing the scene of an accident.  If a  
          person flees an accident that caused death or permanent serious  
          injury, the person is guilty of a wobbler punished by two, three  
          or four years in state prison, or in county jail for 90 days to  
          one year.  The statute of limitations would be three years after  

                                                                CONTINUED





                                                                     AB 184
                                                                     Page  
          4

          the commission of the offense, unless it was charged initially  
          as a misdemeanor, in which case it would be one year.  The  
          existing three-year limitations period seems consistent with the  
          sentencing provisions applicable to this crime and with the  
          recommendations of the Law Revision Commission.  

           FISCAL EFFECT  :    Appropriation:  No   Fiscal Com.:  Yes    
          Local:  No

          According to the Senate Appropriations Committee:

           Unknown; potential increase in state prison commitments and  
            costs potentially in excess of several hundreds of thousands  
            of dollars (General Fund).  CDCR data indicates, on average,  
            65 new commitments to state prison each year over the past  
            three years (2010-2012) under Vehicle Code Section  
            20001(b)(2). A five percent increase in convictions would  
            result in annual state incarceration costs of $180,000  
            (General Fund), potentially compounding to $360,000 for  
            overlapping sentences based on serving a mid-term sentence of  
            two years and full sentence credits.

           Potential moderate increase in state trial court workload to  
            the extent the provisions of this bill result in additional  
            prosecutions that otherwise would not have occurred under the  
            existing statute of limitations.  Three additional trials per  
            year (based on the five percent increase in convictions noted  
            above), would result in $60,000 (General Fund*) in additional  
            court-related costs.

          *Trial Court Trust Fund

           SUPPORT  :   (Verified  8/29/13)

          Association for Los Angeles Deputy Sheriffs 
          California Bicycle Coalition 
          California District Attorneys Association 
          California State Sheriffs' Association 
          California Walks 
          Crime Victims Action Alliance 
          Del Norte County Board of Supervisors 
          Los Angeles County District Attorney 
          Los Angeles Police Protective League 
          NoHitandRuns.org 

                                                                CONTINUED





                                                                     AB 184
                                                                     Page  
          5

          Peace Officers Research Association of California 
          Riverside Sheriffs' Association 
          San Bernardino County Sheriff's Department

           OPPOSITION  :    (Verified  8/29/13)

          American Civil Liberties Union

           ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT  :    According to the author:

               Current law sets the statute of limitations for a  
               hit-and-run at three years after commission of the offense.  
                This has provided a perverse incentive for some to flee  
               the scene of an accident rather than take responsibility  
               for their actions.  These culprits can essentially run out  
               the clock on the statute of limitations by remaining  
               unidentified after one of these incidents. 

               Hit-and-run accidents have received little attention over  
               the years, but they have run rampant in cities like Los  
               Angeles.  A recent investigation by L.A. Weekly found that  
               nearly 20,000 hit-and-run crashes - everything from fender  
               benders to multiple fatalities - are recorded annually by  
               the Los Angeles Police Department.  These incidents made up  
               an astonishing 48 percent of all vehicle crashes in 2009,  
               compared to an average rate of just 11 percent nationwide.   
               Data collected by the state shows 4,000 hit-and-run  
               incidents a year in Los Angeles city limits lead to injury  
               or death. 

               Unfortunately, many of these incidents are never  
               prosecuted, in part because of the statute of limitations  
               running out.

           ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION  :    The ACLU writes in part:

               This bill specifies that any prosecution for leaving the  
               scene of an accident resulting in death or serious injury  
               may commence one year after the alleged suspect is  
               identified.  In practical terms, prosecutors could allege a  
               person left the scene of an accident ten years prior, but  
               where the charged person was only identified six months  
               before.  This makes it virtually impossible for a person to  
               mount a competent defense given that he or she may not even  

                                                                CONTINUED





                                                                     AB 184
                                                                     Page  
          6

               remember the circumstances.  This presents a fundamental  
               unfairness to the defendant and may result in erroneous  
               convictions.  

               Moreover, statutory exceptions to the general three year  
               felony rule only exist where DNA evidence may reveal a  
               suspect long after the crime is committed.  However, in the  
               case of leaving the scene of an accident, DNA is not likely  
               to play a significant factor in identifying a suspect.   
               These types of cases are usually solved by questioning  
               witnesses at the scene, reviewing any available traffic  
               cameras, and using accident reconstruction to re-creating  
               the event.  Hence, no exception seems warranted in this  
               case, particularly given the legal precedent favoring short  
               statutes of limitation.  
           
          ASSEMBLY FLOOR  :  76-0, 5/29/13
          AYES:  Achadjian, Alejo, Allen, Ammiano, Atkins, Bigelow, Bloom,  
            Blumenfield, Bocanegra, Bonilla, Bonta, Bradford, Brown,  
            Buchanan, Ian Calderon, Campos, Chau, Chávez, Conway, Cooley,  
            Dahle, Daly, Dickinson, Donnelly, Eggman, Fong, Fox, Frazier,  
            Beth Gaines, Garcia, Gatto, Gomez, Gonzalez, Gordon, Gorell,  
            Gray, Grove, Hagman, Hall, Harkey, Roger Hernández, Jones,  
            Jones-Sawyer, Levine, Logue, Lowenthal, Maienschein, Mansoor,  
            Medina, Melendez, Mitchell, Morrell, Mullin, Muratsuchi,  
            Nazarian, Nestande, Olsen, Pan, Patterson, Perea, V. Manuel  
            Pérez, Quirk, Quirk-Silva, Rendon, Salas, Skinner, Stone,  
            Ting, Wagner, Waldron, Weber, Wieckowski, Wilk, Williams,  
            Yamada, John A. Pérez
          NO VOTE RECORDED:  Chesbro, Holden, Linder, Vacancy


          JG:nl  8/31/13   Senate Floor Analyses 

                           SUPPORT/OPPOSITION:  SEE ABOVE

                                   ****  END  ****








                                                                CONTINUED