BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    Ó



                                                                       AB 909


                                                                      Page  1





          ASSEMBLY THIRD READING


          AB  
          909 (Quirk)


          As Introduced  February 26, 2015


          Majority vote


           ------------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |Committee       |Votes |Ayes                |Noes                  |
          |                |      |                    |                      |
          |                |      |                    |                      |
          |----------------+------+--------------------+----------------------|
          |Public Safety   |5-0   |Quirk,              |                      |
          |                |      |Jones-Sawyer,       |                      |
          |                |      |Lackey, Low,        |                      |
          |                |      |Santiago            |                      |
          |                |      |                    |                      |
          |----------------+------+--------------------+----------------------|
          |Appropriations  |13-0  |Gomez, Bonta,       |                      |
          |                |      |Calderon, Chang,    |                      |
          |                |      |Daly, Eggman,       |                      |
          |                |      |Eduardo Garcia,     |                      |
          |                |      |Gordon, Holden,     |                      |
          |                |      |Quirk, Rendon,      |                      |
          |                |      |Weber, Wood         |                      |
          |                |      |                    |                      |
          |                |      |                    |                      |
           ------------------------------------------------------------------- 


          SUMMARY:  Requires law enforcement agencies responsible for taking  
          or processing rape kit evidence to annually report to the  
          Department of Justice (DOJ) specified information pertaining to  








                                                                       AB 909


                                                                      Page  2





          the processing of rape kits.  Specifically, this bill:  
          1)Provides that a law enforcement agency responsible for taking or  
            processing rape kit evidence shall annually report, by July 1 of  
            each year, all of the following information to the DOJ:
             a)   The number of rape kits the law enforcement agency  
               collects;
             b)   The number of rape kits the law enforcement agency  
               collects that are tested; and


             c)   The number of rape kits the law enforcement agency  
               collects that are not tested and the reason the rape kit was  
               not tested.


          2)Requires, beginning January 1, 2017, and each January 1st after  
            that date, DOJ to submit a report to the appropriate policy  
            committees of the Legislature summarizing the information DOJ  
            receives pursuant to the provisions in this bill.
          3)States that the report shall be submitted in compliance with  
            requirements in existing statutes relating to submission of  
            reports by state or local agencies.


          EXISTING LAW: 


          1)Establishes the Sexual Assault Victims' DNA Bill of Rights which  
            provides victims of sexual assault with the following rights:
             a)   The right to be informed whether or not a deoxyribonucleic  
               acid (DNA) profile of the assailant was obtained from the  
               testing of the rape kit evidence or other crime scene  
               evidence from their case;
             b)   The right to be informed whether or not the DNA profile of  
               the assailant developed from the rape kit evidence or other  
               crime scene evidence has been entered into DOJ Data Bank of  
               case evidence; and










                                                                       AB 909


                                                                      Page  3





             c)   The right to be informed whether or not there is a match  
               between the DNA profile of the assailant developed from the  
               rape kit evidence or other crime scene evidence and a DNA  
               profile contained in the DOJ Convicted Offender DNA Data  
               Base, provided that disclosure would not impede or compromise  
               an ongoing investigation.  


          2)States the Legislative finding that law enforcement agencies  
            have an obligation to victims of sexual assaults in the proper  
            handling, retention, and timely DNA testing of rape kit evidence  
            or other crime scene evidence and to be responsive to victims  
            concerning the developments of forensic testing and the  
            investigation of their cases.  
          3)Specifies that law enforcement should do one of the following  
            for any sexual assault forensic evidence received by the law  
            enforcement agency on or after January 1, 2015:


             a)   Submit sexual assault forensic evidence to the crime lab  
               within 20 days after it is booked into evidence; or
             b)   Ensure that a rapid turnaround DNA program is in place to  
               submit forensic evidence collected from the victim of a  
               sexual assault directly from the medical facility where the  
               victim is examined to the crime lab within five days after  
               the evidence is obtained from the victim.  


          4)Specifies that the crime lab should do one of the following for  
            any sexual assault forensic evidence received by the crime lab  
            on or after January 1, 2016:
             a)   Process sexual assault forensic evidence, create DNA  
               profiles when able, and upload qualifying DNA profiles into  
               the Combined DNA Index System (CODIS) as soon as practically  
               possible, but not later than 120 days after initially  
               receiving the evidence; or
             b)   Transmit the sexual assault forensic evidence to another  
               crime lab as soon as practically possible, but no later than  
               30 days after initially receiving the evidence for processing  








                                                                       AB 909


                                                                      Page  4





               of the evidence for the presence of DNA.  If a DNA profile is  
               created, the transmitting crime lab should upload the profile  
               into CODIS as soon as practically possible, but no later than  
               30 days after being notified about the presence of DNA.  


          5)Provides that the above provisions establishing timelines for  
            testing DNA do not require a lab to test all items of forensic  
            evidence obtained in a sexual assault forensic evidence  
            examination.  A lab is considered to be in compliance with the  
            guidelines set forth in those provisions when representative  
            samples of the evidence are processed by the lab in an effort to  
            detect the foreign DNA of the perpetrator.  
          6)Defines "rapid turnaround DNA program" as a program for the  
            training of sexual assault team personnel in the selection of  
            representative samples of forensic evidence from the victim to  
            be the best evidence, based on the medical evaluation and  
            patient history, the collection and preservation of that  
            evidence, and the transfer of the evidence directly from the  
            medical facility to the crime lab, which is adopted pursuant to  
            a written agreement between the law enforcement agency, the  
            crime lab, and the medical facility where the sexual assault  
            team is based.  


          7)States if the law enforcement agency elects not to analyze DNA  
            evidence within six months prior to the established time limits,  
            a victim of a sexual assault offense as specified, shall be  
            informed, either orally or in writing, of that fact by the law  
            enforcement agency.  


          8)States notwithstanding any other limitation of time described, a  
            criminal complaint may be filed within one year of the date on  
            which the identity of the suspect is conclusively established by  
            DNA testing, if both of the following conditions are met:


             a)   The crime is one that requires the defendant to register  








                                                                       AB 909


                                                                      Page  5





               as a sex offender; and
             b)   The offense was committed prior to January 1, 2001, and  
               biological evidence collected in connection with the offense  
               is analyzed for DNA type no later than January 1, 2004, or  
               the offense was committed on or after January 1, 2001, and  
               biological evidence collected in connection with the offense  
               is analyzed for DNA type no later than two years from the  
               date of the offense.  


          FISCAL EFFECT:  According to the Assembly Appropriations  
          Committee:


          1)Moderate reimbursable mandated local costs for providing the  
            information to the DOJ in excess of $150,000 (General Fund), if  
            more than 30 agencies submit claims in excess of $5,000  
            annually.  Reporting the reason why a rape kit was not tested  
            will be more resource intensive than providing statistical data.


          2)Minor annual absorbable costs to the DOJ for compiling the data  
            and submitting the annual report.


          COMMENTS:  According to the author, "Over the last several years,  
          hundreds of thousands of unanalyzed rape kits have been discovered  
          nationwide. In response, several states have passed legislation  
          that sets timelines for analyzing the kits in a timely manner.  
          Others passed measures to track and report rape kits.  


          "An October 2014 California State Auditor report highlighted the  
          pressing need for California to more adequately track and report  
          rape kits and recommended that law enforcement agencies report  
          this information annually.


          "Tracking and reporting rape kits is essential to fully  








                                                                       AB 909


                                                                      Page  6





          understanding why investigators choose to send some kits to be  
          analyzed and not others.  It is essential to understand how large  
          the backlog really is in order to tackle the problem effectively.   



          "Law enforcement agencies are not required to track or report the  
          number of rape kits they collect or how many go unanalyzed.   
          Further, investigators are not required to document their reasons  
          for not submitting a rape kit to be tested.  Due to the lack of  
          tracking and reporting requirements, the total number of  
          unanalyzed kits statewide is unknown.  The unknown number of  
          unanalyzed kits that are sitting in evidence rooms across the  
          state allow perpetrators to walk free and deprive victims of  
          justice.



          "AB 909 will require local law enforcement agencies to track and  
          report on the number of rape kits they collect, test and how many  
          go untested. For untested rape kits, law enforcement agencies will  
          be required to document the reason for not submitting the kit to  
          be tested.  Law enforcement agencies will also be required to  
          submit this information to the Department of Justice annually."




          Analysis Prepared by:                                               
                          Stella Choe / PUB. S. / (916) 319-3744  FN:  
          0000657
















                                                                       AB 909


                                                                      Page  7