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