BILL ANALYSIS Ó
SENATE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Senator Ricardo Lara, Chair
2015 - 2016 Regular Session
SB 1186 (Lara) - State claims
-----------------------------------------------------------------
| |
| |
| |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|--------------------------------+--------------------------------|
| | |
|Version: May 3, 2016 |Policy Vote: |
| | |
|--------------------------------+--------------------------------|
| | |
|Urgency: Yes |Mandate: No |
| | |
|--------------------------------+--------------------------------|
| | |
|Hearing Date: May 23, 2016 |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: SB 1186, an urgency measure, would appropriate
approximately $4.38 million from specified funds to the
California Victim Compensation and Government Claims Board
(board) for the payment of 273 state claims.
Fiscal
Impact:
Stale-dated warrants : General Fund appropriations in the
amount of $606,296.25 to pay 227 claims, and appropriations
from specific budget items in the amount of $41,147.07 to pay
40 claims (General Fund/special funds). All of these claims
are for reissuance of stale-dated warrants (expired checks).
The individual claim amounts range from $9.02 to $116,910.
SB 1186 (Lara) Page 1 of
?
Erroneous convictions :
1) General Fund appropriation in the amount of $581,600 to pay
the claim of Obie Steven Anthony III, approved by the board on
September 17, 2015.
2) General Fund appropriation in the amount of $653,600 to pay
the claim of John Smith, approved by the board on September
17, 2015.
3) General Fund appropriation in the amount of $654,500 to pay
the claim of Marco Milla, approved by the board on March 17,
2016.
4) General Fund appropriation in the amount of $762,440 to pay
the claim of Larry Pohlschneider, approved by the board on
April 21, 2016.
5) General Fund appropriation in the amount of $564,100 to pay
the claim of Michael Smith, approved by the board on October
15, 2015.
6) General Fund appropriation in the amount of $512,600 to pay
the claim of Timothy Gantt, approved by the board on October
15, 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
SB 1186 (Lara) Page 2 of
?
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.
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), Chapter 800/2013, specify 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 $140 per day of
SB 1186 (Lara) Page 3 of
?
incarceration served in a state prison subsequent to the
claimant's conviction. That amount was recently raised from
$100 to $140, upon enactment of SB 635 (Nielsen), Chapter
422/2015, so claims approved by the board prior to January 1,
2016 provide payment of $100 per day of incarceration.
Proposed Law:
SB 1186, an urgency measure, appropriates $647,443.32 in
various state funds, including $606,296.25 directly from the
General Fund, to the board for the payment of 267 state claims
for reissuance of stale-dated warrants. The bill would also
appropriate $3,728,840 to the board for payment of six specified
erroneous conviction claims.
Staff
Comments: Background on Erroneous Conviction Claims :
Obie Anthony III, preponderance of evidence, $581,600.
Mr. Anthony was convicted of murder and attempted murder
and sentenced to life in prison without parole in 1995. In
April 2010, Mr. Anthony filed a habeas corpus petition.
His murder conviction was overturned on September 30, 2011
on the grounds of ineffective assistance of counsel, false
and misleading testimony, and prosecutorial misconduct, but
the judge determined that he had not met his burden of
proving actual innocence. Mr. Anthony filed a claim for
compensation as an erroneously convicted person in
September 2013, and the court determined on May 30, 2014
that there was a preponderance of evidence that the
offenses that resulted in the death of one man and injuries
to two others were not committed by Mr. Anthony, and it was
determined that he had no involvement in those offenses or
the events surrounding them. Mr. Anthony was incarcerated
for 5,816 days.
John Smith, preponderance of evidence, $653,600. In
1994, Mr. Smith was convicted of murder, attempted murder
and enhancements of personal use of a firearm, personal
discharge of a firearm from a vehicle, and intentional
infliction of great bodily injury, as a result of a
drive-by shooting in Los Angeles. In October 2010, Mr.
Smith filed a habeas corpus petition, asserting that false
testimony was introduced during his trial identifying him
SB 1186 (Lara) Page 4 of
?
as the shooter. The sole eye witness recanted his
statement identifying Mr. Smith as the shooter in the
incident, and the court found that the eyewitness perjured
himself at trial and granted the habeas petition vacating
Smith's convictions and sentencing, but declined to make
any finding of factual innocence. Mr. Smith filed a claim
for compensation as an erroneously convicted person with
the board in September 2014. The Los Angeles District
Attorney's Office conceded that he met his burden of
establishing his innocence by a preponderance of the
evidence, and the Attorney General's Office concurred. The
board ultimately determined that Mr. Smith met his burden
of proving he did not commit the murder as charged and
convicted and there is a preponderance of evidence that he
is innocent of the crime, and that he sustained pecuniary
injury through his erroneous conviction and imprisonment.
Mr. Smith was incarcerated for 6,536 days.
Marco Milla, binding finding of factual innocence,
$654,500. On October 24, 2001, Marco Milla was arrested
and charged with one count of murder and five counts of
attempted murder after it was alleged that he shot at a
passing vehicle during a gang-related shooting. On
December 23, 2002, the jury found Mr. Milla guilty on all
charges and sentenced him to life in prison without the
possibility of parole, and the conviction was affirmed on
appeal on December 20, 2004. In 2010, the Los Angeles
County District Attorney's Office was informed by the US
Department of Homeland Security that a confidential
informant on an unrelated investigation had witnessed the
shooting for which Mr. Milla was convicted. The informant
named a gang member who was the shooter and stated that
Milla was not even present at the scene. In January 2014,
Mr. Milla filed a habeas corpus petition based on the newly
discovered informant, and the informant testified at the
hearing that Milla was not the shooter. His petition was
granted, his prior convictions were vacated, and a new
trial was ordered. The LA District Attorney declined to
seek a second trial and on January 13, 2016, Milla received
a finding of factual innocence. Mr. Milla was incarcerated
SB 1186 (Lara) Page 5 of
?
for 4,675 days.
Larry Pohlschneider, binding finding of factual
innocence, $762,440. In January of 2001, Mr. Pohschneider
was convicted of three counts of continuous sexual abuse of
a child, with a multiple victim enhancement, and was
sentenced to 24 years in state prison. On October 7, 2015,
the trial court granted Mr. Pohlschneider' petition for
writ of habeas corpus based on a claim of ineffective
assistance of counsel, and on November 24, 2015 the trial
court found that he had met his burden of proving actual
innocence and that the crimes with which he was charged
were not committed by him. Mr. Pohlschneider was
incarcerated for 5,446 days.
Timothy Gantt ($512,600) and Michael Smith ($564,100),
board approved claim. In 1994, Mr. Gantt and Mr. Smith
were convicted on charges of murder and second degree
robbery, along with a special circumstance of murder while
engaged in the commission of a robbery, and sentenced to
life imprisonment without the possibility of parole. The
judgments were affirmed on appeal. Mr. Gantt subsequently
filed multiple habeas corpus petitions. In March 1998, his
petition alleging the prosecutor had withheld exculpatory
evidence from the defense was initially dismissed, but the
Court of Appeals reversed the dismissal and remanded the
matter back to District Court for an evidentiary hearing.
On April 21, 2006, the District Court granted Mr. Gantt's
writ of habeas corpus, which was affirmed on appeal. The
Los Angeles District Attorney's Office elected to retry
Gantt, but during the trial the D.A. stated that it was
unable to proceed due to difficulties with an eye witness,
and dismissed the case. The witness expressed uncertainty
about his identification of Gantt. Mr. Gantt was released
from custody on June 5, 2008. In November 2009, Mr. Smith
filed a habeas corpus petition. The D.A. did not oppose
the motion and Smith was released from prison.
Mr. Gantt filed his claim for compensation for erroneous
conviction and imprisonment on November 17, 2008, and Mr.
SB 1186 (Lara) Page 6 of
?
Smith filed his claim on July 14, 2011. All parties agreed
to join the claims for a hearing before the board since the
evidence and facts are similar. At the board hearing, the
Attorney General's Office acknowledged that evidence
against the claimants was not strong, but argued that the
claimants had not met their burden of proving their
innocence to a preponderance of the evidence more likely
than not that they are innocent than guilty. The board
members noted that the evidence against the claimants was
weak and circumstantial, and unanimously approved the
claims for compensation. Mr. Gantt was imprisoned for
5,125 days and Mr. Smith was imprisoned for 5,640 days.
-- END --