BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    



                                                                      AB 69


                                                                    Page  1


          Date of Hearing:  April 7, 2015
          Counsel:               Stella Choe



                         ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC SAFETY


                                  Bill Quirk, Chair





          AB  
                      69 (Rodriguez) - As Amended  March 16, 2015




          SUMMARY:  Requires law enforcement agencies to follow specified  
          best practices when establishing policies and procedures for  
          downloading and storing data from body-worn cameras.   
          Specifically, this bill:  


          1)States the intent of the Legislature to establish policies and  
            procedures to address issues related to the downloading and  
            storage data recorded by a body-worn camera worn by a peace  
            officer. These policies and procedures shall be based on best  
            practices.


          2)States that when establishing policies and procedures for the  
            implementation and operation of a body-worn camera system, law  
            enforcement agencies, departments, or entities shall consider  
            the following best practices regarding the downloading and  
            storage of body-worn camera data:


             a)   Designate the person responsible for downloading the  
               recorded data from the body-worn camera;








                                                                      AB 69


                                                                    Page  2




             b)   Establish when data should be downloaded;


             c)   Include specific measures to prevent data tampering,  
               deleting, and copying;


             d)   Categorize and tag body-worn camera video at the time  
               the data is downloaded and classified according to the type  
               of event or incident captured in the data;





             e)   State the length of time that recorded data shall be  
               stored;
             f)   State where the body-worn camera data will be stored;  
               and


             g)   If using a third-party vendor to manage the data storage  
               system, the following factors shall be considered to  
               protect the security and integrity of the data:


               i)     Using an experienced and reputable third-party  
                 vendor;


               ii)    Entering into contracts that govern the vendor  
                 relationship and protect the agency's data;


               iii)   Using a system that has a built in audit trail to  
                 prevent data tampering and unauthorized access;


               iv)    Using a system that has a reliable method for  
                 automatically backing up data for storage;








                                                                      AB 69


                                                                    Page  3




               v)     Consulting with internal legal counsel to ensure the  
                 method of data storage meets legal requirements for  
                 chain-of-custody concerns; and


               vi)    Using a system that includes technical assistance  
                 capabilities.


          EXISTING LAW:  


          1)Provides that it is a an alternate felony/misdemeanor for any  
            person who, by means of any machine, instrument, or  
            contrivance, or in any other manner, intentionally taps, or  
            makes any unauthorized connection, whether physically,  
            electrically, acoustically, inductively, or otherwise, with  
            any telegraph or telephone wire, line, cable, or instrument,  
            including the wire, line, cable, or instrument of any internal  
            telephonic communication system, or who willfully and without  
            the consent of all parties to the communication, or in any  
            unauthorized manner, reads, or attempts to read, or to learn  
            the contents or meaning of any message, report, or  
            communication while the same is in transit or passing over any  
            wire, line, or cable, or is being sent from, or received at  
            any place within this state; or who uses, or attempts to use,  
            in any manner, or for any purpose, or to communicate in any  
            way, any information so obtained, or who aids, agrees with,  
            employs, or conspires with any person or persons to unlawfully  
            do, or permit, or cause to be done any of the acts or things  
            mentioned above in this section, is punishable by a fine not  
            exceeding $2,500, or by imprisonment in the county jail not  
            exceeding one year, or by imprisonment in the county jail for  
            16 months, or two or three years, or by both a fine and  
            imprisonment. (Pen. Code,  631.)


          2)States that every person who, intentionally and without the  
            consent of all parties to a confidential communication, by  
            means of any electronic amplifying or recording device,  








                                                                      AB 69


                                                                    Page  4


            eavesdrops upon or records the confidential communication,  
            whether the communication is carried on among the parties in  
            the presence of one another or by means of a telegraph,  
            telephone, or other device, except a radio, shall be punished  
            by a fine not exceeding $2,500, or imprisonment in the county  
            jail not exceeding one year, or in the state prison, or by  
            both that fine and imprisonment.  (Pen. Code,  632, subd.  
            (a).)


          3)Defines "confidential communication" to include any  
            communication carried on in circumstances as may reasonably  
            indicate that any party to the communication desires it to be  
            confined to the parties thereto, but excludes a communication  
            made in a public gathering or any legislative, judicial,  
            executive or administrative proceeding open to the public, or  
            in any circumstance that the parties may reasonably expect  
            that the communication may be overheard or recorded.  (Pen.  
            Code,  632, subd. (c).)


          4)Provides that nothing in the sections prohibiting  
            eavesdropping or wiretapping prohibits specified law  
            enforcement officers or their assistants or deputies acting  
            within the scope of his or her authority, from overhearing or  
            recording any communication that they could lawfully overhear  
            or record.  (Pen. Code,  633.)


          FISCAL EFFECT:  Unknown.


          COMMENTS:  


          1)Author's Statement: According to the author, "While the 2012  
            Rialto Study on body-worn cameras concluded that there is a  
            correlation between the use of body-worn cameras and the  
            reduction of excessive use of force complaints, we must not  
            lose sight that this is a developing technology and we have  
            yet to learn and fully understand how this technology is being  
            used in the field and the impact it has on police-citizen  








                                                                      AB 69


                                                                    Page  5


            behavior and on crime.  AB 69 focuses on providing guidelines  
            for downloading and storing body-worn camera data for those  
            law enforcement agencies that choose to implement a body-worn  
            camera program."


          2)Background:  A recent report released by U.S. Department of  
            Justice's Office of Community Oriented Policing Services and  
            the Police Executive Research Forum studied the use of  
            body-worn cameras by police agencies.  This research included  
            a survey of 250 police agencies, interviews with more than 40  
            police executives, a review of 20 existing body-camera  
            policies, and a national conference at which more than 200  
            police chiefs, sheriffs, federal justice representatives, and  
            other experts shared their knowledge of and experiences with  
            body-worn cameras.  The report shows that body-worn cameras  
            can help agencies demonstrate transparency and address the  
            community's questions about controversial events. Among other  
            reported benefits are that the presence of a body-worn camera  
            have helped strengthen officer professionalism and helped to  
            de-escalate contentious situations, and when questions do  
            arise following an event or encounter, police having a video  
            record helps lead to a quicker resolution. (Miller and  
            Toliver, Implementing a Body-Worn Camera Program:  
            Recommendations and Lessons Learned, Police Executive Research  
            Forum (Nov. 2014).)  The report made specified recommendations  
            related to data storage and retention policies.  These  
            recommendations include who should download the video, when  
            the video should be downloaded, where the data should be  
            stored, how long to retain the data, and measure to prevent  
            tampering, deleting and tampering.  (Id. at pp. 42-45.) 


          3)Argument in Support:  According to the California Public  
            Defenders' Association (CPDA), "CPDA supports the use of  
            body-worn cameras by law enforcement. Of equal importance to  
            the wearing of body-worn cameras are policies concerning the  
            use of these cameras and the proper storage of data collected  
            from these cameras.











                                                                      AB 69


                                                                    Page  6


          "CPDA believes that this bill is a good start in establishing  
            these policies. Once the use of body-worn cameras by law  
            enforcement becomes more common, these policies may need to be  
            revisited and updated to ensure integrity in their use and  
            integrity in the data captured by them.

          "Further, CPDA believes that the use of body-worn cameras will  
            help build trust between communities and their law enforcement  
            officers, and promote the truth finding process."

          4)Related Legislation:


             a)   AB 65 (Alejo), would redirect funds from the Driver  
               Training Penalty Assessment Fund and allocates that money  
               to the Board of State and Community Corrections to be used  
               to fund local law enforcement agencies to operate a body  
               worn camera program.  AB 65 is pending a hearing by the  
               Committee on Appropriations.


             b)   AB 66 (Weber), would state the intent of the Legislature  
               to enact legislation to require local police departments  
               that utilize police body-worn cameras to follow policies  
               and procedures that will streamline best practices to  
               better enhance the quality of the services that those  
               departments provide to Californians.  AB 66 is pending  
               hearing by this Committee.

             c)   SB 175 (Huff), would require each department or agency  
               that employs peace officers and that elects to require  
               those peace officers to wear body-worn cameras to develop a  
               policy relating to the use of body-worn cameras.  The bill  
               would require the policy to be developed in collaboration  
               with nonsupervisory officers and to include certain  
               provisions, including, among others, the duration, time,  
               and place when body-worn cameras shall be worn and  
               operational.  SB 175 is pending hearing by the Senate  
               Committee on Public Safety.

             d)   SB 195 (Anderson), would state the intent of the  
               Legislature to enact legislation that protects the privacy  








                                                                      AB 69


                                                                    Page  7


               of individuals recorded by body-worn cameras utilized by  
               law enforcement officers and the privacy of law enforcement  
               officers wearing body-worn cameras.  SB 195 is pending  
               referral by the Senate Rules Committee.


          REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:

          Support


          California Public Defenders Association


          Opposition


          None 


          Analysis Prepared  
          by:              Stella Choe / PUB. S. / (916) 319-3744