BILL ANALYSIS Ó
SENATE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Senator Ricardo Lara, Chair
2015 - 2016 Regular Session
AB 165 (Gomez) - State claims
-----------------------------------------------------------------
| |
| |
| |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|--------------------------------+--------------------------------|
| | |
|Version: April 6, 2015 |Policy Vote: None |
| | |
|--------------------------------+--------------------------------|
| | |
|Urgency: Yes |Mandate: No |
| | |
|--------------------------------+--------------------------------|
| | |
|Hearing Date: May 26, 2015 |Consultant: Mark McKenzie |
| | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
This bill does not meet the criteria for referral to the
Suspense File. Pursuant to the Committee's rules, the Suspense
File rule does not apply to this bill as claims are considered
valid obligations of the state. Additionally, claims may have
time sensitivity.
Bill
Summary: AB 165, an urgency measure, would appropriate
$504,743.99 from specified funds to the California Victim
Compensation and Government Claims Board (board) for the payment
of 110 state claims. The bill would also appropriate $968,400
from the General Fund to the board for the payment of three
erroneous conviction claims.
Fiscal
Impact:
Stale-dated warrants : General Fund appropriations in the
amount of $227,308.96 to pay 105 claims, and special fund
appropriations in the amount of $277,435.03 to pay 5 claims.
All of these claims are for reissuance of stale-dated warrants
(expired checks). The individual claim amounts range from $16
AB 165 (Gomez) Page 1 of
?
to $274,117.66.
Erroneous convictions :
1) General Fund appropriation in the amount of $597,200 to pay
the claim of Susan Mellen, approved by the board on January
15, 2015.
2) General Fund appropriation in the amount of $229,000 to pay
the claim of Ronald Ross, approved by the board on September
18, 2014.
3) General Fund appropriation in the amount of $142,200 to pay
the claim of Brian Banks, approved by the board on March 19,
2015.
Background: The State Board of Control was established in 1945. It was
revised and renamed the Victim Compensation and Government
Claims Board by Chapter 1016/2000 (AB 2491, Jackson).
Government Code 13928 requires the board to ensure that all
claims that have been approved by the board, and for which no
legally available appropriation exists, are submitted for
legislative approval at least twice during each calendar year.
In general, the board will approve claims in November and
February. Those claims are reported to the chairs of the
Appropriations Committees who introduce bills appropriating
General Funds and special funds to pay the claims. These bills
may appropriate funds in amounts to the penny for tens to
hundreds of claims. Government Code 906 provides for the
payment of interest on claims approved by the board for which an
appropriation has been made beginning 30 days after the
effective date of the law by which the appropriation is enacted.
The re-issuance of stale-dated warrants is the most prevalent
claim approved by the board. For stale-dated warrants, the
Controller must confirm that (1) the check was not cashed and
has not been issued and (2) more than three years have elapsed
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.
This category also may include state treasury bonds that have
not been redeemed within ten years of their maturity date (there
are no such claims in this bill), but the majority of warrants
are payroll or tax refund checks.
AB 165 (Gomez) Page 2 of
?
In addition to stale-dated warrants, existing law 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. Recent changes to these
provisions, SB 618 (Leno), Chap. 800/2013, specifies that a
person who has secured a declaration of factual innocence from
the court after having his or her conviction set aside is
eligible payment in a claim against the state. Upon
application by the petitioner, the board shall, 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.
Proposed Law:
AB 165 would appropriate $504,743.99 in various state funds,
including $227,308.96 from the General Fund, to the board for
the payment of 110 state claims for reissuance of stale-dated
warrants. The bill would also appropriate $968,400 to the board
for payment of three specified erroneous conviction claims. AB
AB 165 (Gomez) Page 3 of
?
165 is an urgency measure.
Related
Legislation: SB 304 (Lara), a spot bill that is currently in
this Committee, will be the vehicle for the second batch of
claims that have yet to be approved by the board.
Staff
Comments:
Background on Erroneous Conviction Claims .
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
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.
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.
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
AB 165 (Gomez) Page 4 of
?
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.
-- END --