BILL ANALYSIS Ó
SENATE COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC SAFETY
Senator Loni Hancock, Chair
2015 - 2016 Regular
Bill No: AB 1744 Hearing Date: June 21, 2016
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Author: |Cooper |
|-----------+-----------------------------------------------------|
|Version: |May 5, 2016 |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Urgency: |No |Fiscal: |Yes |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Consultant:|MK |
| | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Sexual Assault Forensic Medical Evidence Kit
HISTORY
Source: California Clinical Forensic Medical Training Center
Prior Legislation:AB 1475 (Cooper) - Chapter 210, Stats. 2015
AB 1517 (Skinner) - Chapter 874, Stats. 2014
SB 271 (Wyland) not heard 2012
AB 322 (Portantino) Vetoed 2011
Support: Alameda County District Attorney; Attorney General's
Office; CALCASA; California District Attorneys
Association; California Association of Crime
Laboratory Directors; California Peace Officers'
Association; California Sexual Assault Investigators
Association; Crime Victims United of California
Opposition:None known
Assembly Floor Vote: 76 - 0
PURPOSE
AB 1744 (Cooper ) Page
2 of ?
The purpose of this bill is to require the Department of
Justice's Bureau of Forensic Services, the California
Association of Crime Laboratory Directors, and the California
Association of Criminalists to work collaboratively with public
crime laboratories, in conjunction with the California Clinical
Forensic Medical Training Center, to develop a standardized
sexual assault forensic medical evidence kit for use by all
California jurisdictions.
Existing law codifies the "Sexual Assault Victims' DNA Bill of
Rights." (Penal Code, § 680.)
Existing law states that to ensure the delivery of standardized
curriculum, essential for consistent examination procedures
throughout the state, one hospital-based training center shall
be established through a competitive bidding process, to train
medical personnel on how to perform medical evidentiary
examinations for victims of child abuse or neglect, sexual
assault, domestic violence, elder abuse, and abuse or assault
perpetrated against persons with disabilities. (Penal Code, §
13823.99 (b).)
Existing law requires the hospital based training center to
provide training for investigative and court personnel involved
in dependency and criminal proceedings, on how to interpret the
findings of medical evidentiary examinations. (Penal Code, §
13823.99 (b).)
Existing law provides the training provided by the training
center shall be made available to medical personnel, law
enforcement, and the courts throughout the state and meet
specified criteria. (Penal Code § 13823.99 (b) and (c).)
Existing law requires the training center to develop and
implement a standardized training program for medical personnel
that has been reviewed and approved by a multidisciplinary peer
review committee. (Penal Code, § 13823.99 (d)(1).)
This bill provides that the Department of Justice's Bureau of
Forensic Services, the California Association of Crime
Laboratory Directors, and the California Association of
Criminalists shall provide leadership and work collaboratively
with public crime laboratories to develop a standardized sexual
assault forensic medical evidence for use by all California
AB 1744 (Cooper ) Page
3 of ?
jurisdictions.
This bill provides that the packaging and appearance of the kit
may vary, but the kit shall contain a minimum number of basic
components and also clearly permit swabs or representative
evidence samples to be earmarked for a rapid turnaround DNA
program when applicable.
This bill provides that the collaboration to establish the basic
components for a standardized sexual assault forensic medical
evidence kit would be completed by January 30, 2018 and shall be
conducted in conjunction with the California Clinical Forensic
Medical Training Center that is responsible for the development
of sexual assault standardized forensic medical report forms and
for providing training programs.
This bill provides that on or before May 30, 2019, the
California Clinical Forensic Medical Training Center, in
coordination with the Department of Justice's Bureau of Forensic
Services, the California Association of Crime Laboratory
Directors, and the California Association of Criminalists shall
issue guidelines pertaining to the use of the standardized
sexual assault kit components throughout the state.
This bill provides that every local and state agency shall
remain responsible for its own costs in purchasing a
standardized sexual assault forensic medical evidence kit.
This bill provides that failure to use the standardized sexual
assault forensic medical evidence kit created under this bill
shall not constitute grounds to exclude evidence.
RECEIVERSHIP/OVERCROWDING CRISIS AGGRAVATION
For the past several years this Committee has scrutinized
legislation referred to its jurisdiction for any potential
impact on prison overcrowding. Mindful of the United States
Supreme Court ruling and federal court orders relating to the
state's ability to provide a constitutional level of health care
to its inmate population and the related issue of prison
overcrowding, this Committee has applied its "ROCA" policy as a
content-neutral, provisional measure necessary to ensure that
the Legislature does not erode progress in reducing prison
overcrowding.
AB 1744 (Cooper ) Page
4 of ?
On February 10, 2014, the federal court ordered California to
reduce its in-state adult institution population to 137.5% of
design capacity by February 28, 2016, as follows:
143% of design bed capacity by June 30, 2014;
141.5% of design bed capacity by February 28, 2015; and,
137.5% of design bed capacity by February 28, 2016.
In December of 2015 the administration reported that as "of
December 9, 2015, 112,510 inmates were housed in the State's 34
adult institutions, which amounts to 136.0% of design bed
capacity, and 5,264 inmates were housed in out-of-state
facilities. The current population is 1,212 inmates below the
final court-ordered population benchmark of 137.5% of design bed
capacity, and has been under that benchmark since February
2015." (Defendants' December 2015 Status Report in Response to
February 10, 2014 Order, 2:90-cv-00520 KJM DAD PC, 3-Judge
Court, Coleman v. Brown, Plata v. Brown (fn. omitted).) One
year ago, 115,826 inmates were housed in the State's 34 adult
institutions, which amounted to 140.0% of design bed capacity,
and 8,864 inmates were housed in out-of-state facilities.
(Defendants' December 2014 Status Report in Response to February
10, 2014 Order, 2:90-cv-00520 KJM DAD PC, 3-Judge Court, Coleman
v. Brown, Plata v. Brown (fn. omitted).)
While significant gains have been made in reducing the prison
population, the state must stabilize these advances and
demonstrate to the federal court that California has in place
the "durable solution" to prison overcrowding "consistently
demanded" by the court. (Opinion Re: Order Granting in Part and
Denying in Part Defendants' Request For Extension of December
31, 2013 Deadline, NO. 2:90-cv-0520 LKK DAD (PC), 3-Judge Court,
Coleman v. Brown, Plata v. Brown (2-10-14). The Committee's
consideration of bills that may impact the prison population
therefore will be informed by the following questions:
Whether a proposal erodes a measure which has contributed
to reducing the prison population;
Whether a proposal addresses a major area of public safety
or criminal activity for which there is no other
reasonable, appropriate remedy;
Whether a proposal addresses a crime which is directly
dangerous to the physical safety of others for which there
AB 1744 (Cooper ) Page
5 of ?
is no other reasonably appropriate sanction;
Whether a proposal corrects a constitutional problem or
legislative drafting error; and
Whether a proposal proposes penalties which are
proportionate, and cannot be achieved through any other
reasonably appropriate remedy.
COMMENTS
1. Need for This Bill
According to the author:
There are variations in sexual assault forensic medical
evidence kits in California. The CA Department of
Justice Bureau of Forensic Services (BFS) serves 48
counties with one kit. The ten large California
counties have separate kits. This causes problems for
sexual assault nurse examiners who perform sexual
assault forensic medical exams for several
jurisdictions. Their job is to collect evidence
(including DNA evidence) and properly preserve, package
and label it to ensure that chain of custody has been
properly followed for all exams.
Sexual assault victims and California communities
expect effective and competent intervention at from all
disciplines in response to sexual assault.
Inter-agency cooperation and collaboration within
disciplines is essential to deliver optimum care to
victims of sexual assault.
There are approximately 10-12 different sexual assault
evidence "rape kits" used in California. Some forensic
medical examination teams are required to be familiar
with multiple kits which creates the potential for
error.
Currently, crime laboratories create their own kits
based on the statutory exam elements and the required
standard state form. As a result, there are variations
among crime laboratories. Some exam teams serve
AB 1744 (Cooper ) Page
6 of ?
multiple crime laboratories depending upon which law
enforcement jurisdiction the crime occurred and must
adapt to variations in crime laboratory evidence kits.
AB 1744 would require that the California Department of
Justice's Bureau of Forensic Services, the California
Association of Crime Laboratory Directors, the
California Association of Criminalists and the
California Clinical Forensic Medical Training Center to
collaborate and develop a standardized sexual assault
evidence kit.
2. Bureau of Forensic Services
The Bureau of Forensic Services (BFS) is the scientific arm of
the Attorney General's Office whose mission is to serve the
people of California on behalf of the Attorney General's Office.
Forensic scientists collect, analyze, and compare physical
evidence from suspected crimes. They provide analysis of
evidence in toxicology, including alcohol, controlled substances
and clandestine drug labs, biology and DNA, firearms, impression
evidence such as shoeprints, tire marks or fingerprints, trace
evidence including hair, fibers, and paint, and crime-scene
analysis of blood spatter patterns and evidence collection, and
they testify in state and federal court cases about their
analyses in criminal trials. Descriptions of the forensic
services BFS provides as well as the BFS regional service areas
can be found on the BFS Laboratory Services page. BFS also
offers specialized forensic science training to personnel who
are practitioners in the field of forensic science through the
California Criminalistics Institute (CCI).
(https://oag.ca.gov/bfs) 3)
3. California Clinical Forensic Medical Training Center
The California Clinical Forensic Medical Training Center was
established by state law in 1995 to increase access by victims
of interpersonal violence to trained nursing and medical
professionals. The California legislature determined that access
to healthcare professionals knowledgeable about medical
evidentiary examinations and psychological trauma caused by
violence and abuse was uneven in both rural and urban areas
throughout California. As a result, laws were enacted to meet
this need and create this public policy direction. The Center is
AB 1744 (Cooper ) Page
7 of ?
primarily funded by the California Governor's Office of
Emergency Services (Cal OES) with Federal and State funds, and
other sources of funding.
(www.ccfmtc.org/about-us-2/history-and-mission/)
4. Standardized Sexual Assault Evidence Collection Kits
The U.S. Department of Justice developed a national protocol for
sexual assault examinations in 2004. The protocol has continued
to be updated. This protocol was developed with the input of
national, local, and tribal experts throughout the country,
including law enforcement representatives, prosecutors,
advocates, medical personnel, forensic scientists, and others.
The protocol recommended that sexual assault examine kits meet
minimum standards. It also suggested standardization of sexual
assault evidence collection kits within a jurisdiction and
across a state, although it recognized potential issues with
standardization. (A National Protocol for Sexual Assault Medical
Forensic Examinations, U.S. DOJ, Office on Violence Against
Women, April 2013, p. 71.)
To the extent that evidence kits are standardized, the
protocol makes the following recommendations (Id. at p. 72.):
a) That a designated agency in the jurisdiction be
responsible for oversight of kit development and
distribution.
b) Ensure that facilities that conduct sexual assault medical
forensic exams are involved in kit development and supplied
with kits.
c) Work with relevant agencies (e.g., crime labs, law
enforcement agencies, exam facilities and examiner programs,
advocacy programs, and prosecutors' offices) to keep abreast
of related changes in technology, scientific advances, and
cutting-edge practice.
d) Review periodically (e.g., every 2 to 3 years) kit
efficiency and usefulness.
e) Make adjustments to the kit as necessary.
f) Establish mechanisms to ensure that kits at exam
facilities are kept up to date (e.g., if a new evidence
collection procedure is added, facilities need to know what
additional supplies should be readily available).
AB 1744 (Cooper ) Page
8 of ?
The protocol recognized the potential challenges of a
standardized sexual assault evidence collection kit. Some
challenges could include building consensus across communities
regarding best practices, obtaining buy-in from involved
agencies, and costs to the state and local communities.
This bill has the Department of Justices Bureau of Forensic
Services, the California Association of Criminalists and the
California Association of Crime Laboratories work together to
create a standardized sexual assault forensic medical kit for
use in California.
-- END -