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
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
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 9/4/13)
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
AB 184
Page
5
Peace Officers Research Association of California
Riverside Sheriffs' Association
San Bernardino County Sheriff's Department
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.
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
AB 184
Page
6
NO VOTE RECORDED: Chesbro, Holden, Linder, Vacancy
JG:nl 9/4/13 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****