BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 165
Page 1
Date of Hearing: April 15, 2015
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Jimmy Gomez, Chair
AB
165 (Gomez) - As Amended April 6, 2015
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Policy |N/A |Vote:|N/A |
|Committee: | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
|-------------+-------------------------------+-----+-------------|
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
|-------------+-------------------------------+-----+-------------|
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Urgency: YesState Mandated Local Program: NoReimbursable: No
SUMMARY:
This bill, one of two annual state claims bills introduced
pursuant to California Victim Compensation and Government Claims
Board (board) determinations and carried by the Appropriations
Committee chairs, appropriates $504,744 to pay 110 claims
against the state as approved by the board, and $968,400 to pay
the costs of three erroneous conviction cases.
AB 165
Page 2
FISCAL EFFECT:
1)Appropriates $504,744 ($227,309 GF; $277,435 special funds) to
the board for payment of 110 claims, all of which are
stale-dated warrants ranging from $16 to $274,118.
2)Appropriates $968,400 (GF) for payment of board-approved
claims for three erroneous conviction cases.
COMMENTS:
1)Rationale. The Government Code Section 13928 requires the
board to ensure that all claims approved by the board, for
which no legally available appropriation exists, are submitted
for legislative approval at least twice during each calendar
year. In general, the board approves claims in November and
February.
The re-issuance of stale-dated warrants (expired checks) is
the most prevalent claim approved by the board. For
stale-dated warrants, the Controller must confirm the check
was not cashed and that more than three years has passed since
the check was issued and the monies have reverted to the
General Fund or to the relevant special fund. For these
warrants an appropriation is needed to reissue the payment.
In addition to stale-dated warrants, Penal Code Section 4900
et seq. authorizes a person convicted and imprisoned for a
felony to submit a claim to the board for pecuniary injury
sustained as a result of erroneous conviction and
imprisonment. Pursuant to SB 618 (Leno) Statutes of 2013, if a
person has secured a declaration of factual innocence from the
court after having his or her conviction set aside, the
finding is grounds for payment of a claim against the state
and upon application by the petitioner, the board shall,
AB 165
Page 3
without a hearing, recommend to the Legislature an
appropriation to cover the claim. Likewise, if the court finds
the petitioner has proven his or her innocence by a
preponderance of the evidence, or the court grants a writ of
habeas corpus concerning a person who is unlawfully
imprisoned, or when the court vacates a judgment for a person
on the basis of new evidence concerning a person who is no
longer unlawfully imprisoned, and the court finds the evidence
points unerringly to innocence, the board shall, upon
application by the claimant, without a hearing, recommend to
the Legislature an appropriation to cover the petitioner's
claim.
Otherwise, a claimant is required to introduce evidence in
support of his or her claim at a hearing before the board, and
the Attorney General may introduce evidence in opposition. The
claimant must prove, by a preponderance of the evidence: (a)
the crime was not committed at all, or, if committed, was not
committed by the claimant; (b) the claimant did not contribute
to the arrest or conviction for the crime; and (c) the
claimant sustained pecuniary injury though the erroneous
conviction and imprisonment.
If a claimant meets the burden of proof, the board shall
recommend to the Legislature an appropriation of $100 per day
of incarceration served in a state prison subsequent to the
claimant's conviction.
2)Support. This bill, supported by the board, the Department of
Finance, and the administration, has no opposition.
3)Erroneous Conviction Claims.
a) Ronald Ross, binding finding of factual innocence,
$229,300. Mr. Ross was convicted of premeditated attempted
murder and assault with a firearm in 2006. In February
2012, more than five years after his conviction, Mr. Ross
AB 165
Page 4
filed a habeas corpus petition. Based new testimony, the
Alameda County District Attoney's Office believed that
false evidence was used against Mr. Ross and supported the
petition. On February 20, 2013, the court granted the
writ.
b) Susan Mellen, binding finding of factual innocence,
$597,200. In 1998, Ms. Mellen was convicted of first
degree murder, and the jury found true to special
circumstances allegation that she tortured the victim. On
September 18, 2014, Innocence Matters filed a habeas corpus
petition asserting Ms. Mellen was factually innocent. On
October 10, 2014 the Los Angeles District Attorney's Office
conceded the merits of the petition and on November 21,
2014, the court granted the petition and reversed the
conviction.
c) Brian Banks, binding finding of factual innocence,
$142,200. On January 22, 2003, sixteen-year-old old Brian
Banks was charged with forcible rape, forcible sodomy, and
kidnapping. On August 20, 2003, Mr. Banks pled no contest
to the charge of forcible rape and was sentenced to six
years in prison. In 2006, Mr. Banks filed a habeas corpus
petition, but it was denied based on vagueness, failure to
state a claim, and failure to raise issues on direct
appeal. On August 15, 2011, Mr. Banks filed a habeas
corpus petition and the court granted the petition on May
24, 2012, reversing the rape conviction and all charges
were dismissed.
4)Prior Legislation . The two 2014 claims bills, AB 1617 (Gatto),
appropriated $2.2 million and passed this house 76-0 and
passed the Senate 35-0; and SB 1031 (De Leon), appropriated
$1.1 million and passed this house 61-15 and the Senate 27-3.
AB 165
Page 5
Analysis Prepared
by: Pedro R. Reyes/APPR./(916) 319-2081