BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    



                                                                  AB 383
                                                                  Page  1

          Date of Hearing:   April 22, 2009

                        ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
                                Kevin De Leon, Chair

                  AB 383 (Lieu) - As Introduced:  February 23, 2009 

          Policy Committee:                              Public  
          SafetyVote:  7-0

          Urgency:     No                   State Mandated Local Program:  
          No     Reimbursable:               

           SUMMARY  

          This bill increases, from two to five years, the time frame in  
          which DNA evidence (rape kits) must be tested in order to  
          preserve the statute of limitations in sex offense cases. 

           FISCAL EFFECT  

          1)Unknown annual GF costs to the extent this bill results in  
            convictions and state prison terms that would not otherwise be  
            achieved within the timeframe required by current law. If this  
            bill results in just two annual convictions with an average of  
            four years served, the annual cost would be about $350,000 in  
            four years. 

          2)Unknown nonreimbursable local costs, potentially in the low  
            millions of dollars, to the extent this bill allows local  
            crime labs to analyze DNA evidence that might otherwise have  
            not been tested due to the two-year time limitation. L.A.  
            County alone has a backlog of about 12,000 kits. At a cost of  
            about $2,500 per rape kit analysis, every 1,000 kits tested  
            represents a cost of about $2.5 million.  

          3)Potential GF costs to the CA Department of Justice (DOJ),  
            which provides DNA lab services for 47 counties. While DOJ is  
            meeting the two- year analysis requirement, budget cuts could  
            create a backlog that would necessitate an extension of the  
            current two- year period.  

           COMMENTS  

           1)Rationale  . According to proponents, including the L.A.  








                                                                  AB 383
                                                                  Page  2

            Sheriff's Department and the L.A. District Attorney's Office,  
            one of the biggest problems facing the criminal justice system  
            today is the substantial backlog of unanalyzed DNA samples and  
            biological evidence from crime scenes, especially in sexual  
            assault cases. A recent L.A. City Auditor's report revealed  
            thousands of rape kits awaiting DNA processing in LAPD  
            evidence lockers. Timely analysis of these samples and  
            placement into a DNA database can avert tragic results.   
            Currently, there are over 12,000 sexual assault rape kits  
            awaiting DNA processing in Los Angeles County alone.  By  
            extending - from two years to five years - the time period in  
            which law enforcement agencies have to analyze biological  
            evidence collected in sexual assault cases, AB 383 ensures  
            that rape kits are processed and all biological evidence  
            collected in connection with the offense is analyzed for DNA  
            type and entered into the Combined DNA Index System (CODIS).  

          DNA evidence collected from a crime scene can implicate or  
            eliminate a suspect, similar to the use of fingerprints. It  
            also can analyze unidentified remains through comparisons with  
            DNA from relatives. Additionally, when evidence from one crime  
            scene is compared with evidence from another using CODIS,  
            those crime scenes can be linked to the same perpetrator  
            locally, statewide, and nationally. When biological evidence  
            is collected and stored properly, DNA can be found on evidence  
            that is decades old. Therefore, old cases previously thought  
            unsolvable may contain valuable DNA evidence capable of  
            identifying the perpetrator.

           2)Current law  allows a criminal complaint to be filed within one  
            year of the date on which the identity of the suspect is  
            conclusively established by DNA testing if the following  
            conditions are met: 

             a)   The alleged offense is a registerable sex offense, and 

             b)   The offense was committed before Jan. 1, 2001 and DNA  
               evidence is analyzed no later than January 1, 2004; or the  
               offense was committed after Jan. 1, 2001 and DNA is  
               analyzed no later than two years from the date of the  
               offense.  

           3)Statutes of limitations for sex offenses  depend on  
            circumstances and offense. A criminal complaint may be filed  
            within one year of the date of a report to law enforcement by  








                                                                  AB 383
                                                                  Page  3

            any person who, while under the age of 18, was the victim of  
            rape, sodomy, child molestation, forcible oral copulation,  
            continuous sexual abuse of a child, sexual penetration and  
            fleeing the state with the intent to avoid prosecution for a  
            specified sex offense. However, the existing statute of  
            limitations must have expired, the crime must have involved  
            substantial sexual conduct and there must be independent  
            evidence to corroborate the victim's allegations. If the  
            victim is 21 years of age or older at the time of the report,  
            the independent evidence must clearly and convincingly  
            corroborate the victim's allegations.  A criminal complaint  
            may also be filed for the above-mentioned sex offenses any  
            time before the victim's 28th birthday when the offense is  
            alleged to have occurred when the victim was under the age of  
            18. Also any prosecution for a felony registerable sex offense  
            may begin 10 years after the date of commission.  

           4)The rationale for statutes of limitations  . Statutes of  
            limitations ensure that prosecutions are based upon reasonably  
            fresh evidence, as over time memories fade, witnesses die or  
            move, and physical evidence becomes more difficult to obtain.  
            Statutes of limitations also encourage law enforcement  
            officials to investigate suspected criminal activity in a  
            timely fashion. In short, the possibility of erroneous  
            conviction or acquittal is minimized when prosecution is  
            prompt.  

           5)Prior Legislation  : AB 718 (Fuller), of the 2007-08 Legislative  
            Session, would have deleted the time frame in which DNA  
            evidence must be tested after it is collected in order to  
            preserve the statute of limitations in sex offense cases, as  
            specified.  AB 718 was held on this committee's  Suspense File



           Analysis Prepared by  :    Geoff Long / APPR. / (916) 319-2081