BILL ANALYSIS
------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | AB 558|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: AB 558
Author: Portantino (D)
Amended: 4/5/10 in Senate
Vote: 21
SENATE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE : 7-0, 6/15/10
AYES: Leno, Cogdill, Cedillo, Hancock, Huff, Steinberg,
Wright
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE : Senate Rule 28.8
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 72-0, 1/27/10 - See last page for vote
SUBJECT : Sexual assault: rape kit evidence
SOURCE : Author
DIGEST : This bill requires law enforcement agencies that
take or process rape kit evidence to report specified
information concerning the testing and destruction of that
evidence to the Department of Justice.
ANALYSIS : Current law sets forth the "Sexual Assault
Victims' DNA Bill of Rights," which enumerates in statute
certain provisions pertaining to victim notification of
certain information relating to their case, as specified.
(Section 680 of the Penal Code [PEN])
Current law provides that notwithstanding any other
limitation of time, a criminal complaint may be filed
CONTINUED
AB 558
Page
2
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:
1. The crime is one that is described in the sex offense
registration statute.
2. 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. (PEN
Section 803(g)(1)(A)(B))
Current law provides that a criminal complaint may be filed
within one year after a report to a law enforcement agency
that a person was the victim of a sexual offense while
under the age of 18 years. To file such a complaint, the
applicable limitation period must have expired and the
alleged crime must have involved substantial sexual conduct
corroborated by evidence, as specified. (PEN Section 803
(g)(1) and (h)(1))
This bill requires each local law enforcement agency
responsible for taking or processing rape kit evidence to
collect the following information for rape kits collected
on or after January 1, 2011:
1. The total number of rape kits received during the
preceding calendar year and, of that total, the number
of rape kits for which the identity of the assailant is
unknown and the number of rape kits for which the
identity of the assailant is contested.
2. The total number of rape kits tested during the
preceding calendar year and, of that total, the number
of rape kits for which the identity of the assailant is
unknown and the number of rape kits for which the
identity of the assailant is contested.
3. The total number of rape kits that law enforcement has
requested be tested and, of that total, the number of
CONTINUED
AB 558
Page
3
rape kits for which the identity of the assailant is
unknown and the number of rape kits for which the
identity of the assailant is contested.
4. The number of rape kits that law enforcement has
requested be tested that remain untested and, of that
number, the number of rape kits for which the identity
of the assailant is unknown and the number of rape kits
for which the identity of the assailant is contested.
5. The total number of untested rape kits in its possession
as of January 1 of the reporting year.
6. The total number of rape kits destroyed during the
preceding calendar year.
This bill requires each local law enforcement agency
responsible for taking or processing rape kit evidence to
report, by July 1 of each year, the information collected
pursuant to this section during the preceding year to the
Department of Justice (DOJ). The initial report to DOJ
pursuant to this subdivision would be required to be made
by July 1, 2012.
This bill provides that the reports received by DOJ would
be subject to inspection under the California Public
Records Act.
The provisions of this bill become operative until July 1,
2016, and sunset on January 1, 2017.
Prior legislation . AB 1017 (Portantino) passed the Senate
(34-0) on September 2, 2009, but was vetoed. The veto
message stated in part:
"I strongly support efforts to ensure that rape kits are
analyzed and
processed in a timely manner in order to identify and
prosecute sex offenders. However, requiring law
enforcement agencies to provide backlog statistics to the
DOJ would place significant cost burdens on these
agencies and would divert scarce resources away from
processing these kits. In addition, this measure does
not require the DOJ to do anything with the reports
CONTINUED
AB 558
Page
4
received. Assuming that the DOJ would have to
administer, collect, and manage these records, this could
impose additional cost pressures on the DOJ.
"Since this measure would create additional state costs
that cannot be accommodated in a time of fiscal crisis, I
am returning this bill without my signature."
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes
Local: Yes
SUPPORT : (Verified 6/29/10)
City of West Hollywood
Crime Victims Action Alliance
OPPOSITION : (Verified 6/29/10)
California Law Enforcement Association of Records
Supervisors
California State Sheriffs' Association
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : The author states:
"In 2008, it was discovered that the City and County of
Los Angeles had over 10,000 unopened rape kits in their
evidence lockers. Of these, the City of Los Angeles
alone had 403 unopened rape kits that were the result of
stranger rapes.
"It is na?ve to believe that the Los Angeles area is the
only community in the state that is not testing its rape
kits. AB 558 will restore accountability in the
processing of rape kit evidence.
"AB 558 will require all law enforcement agencies to
report to the DOJ their statistics on the numbers of rape
kits that they collect and test and the numbers of these
tests that are stranger rapes or where the identity of
the assailant is contested. This bill will require that
only those kits that are collected after the effective
date of the measure are to be categorized and reported.
"Most local governments currently use the Department of
CONTINUED
AB 558
Page
5
Justice criminal lab to test their rape kits. Although
not ultimately adopted, last year the LAO and several of
the 2009 budget bills proposed requiring the DOJ crime
lab to start billing local government for services such
as testing rape kits. Such a practice would create a
tremendous financial disincentive to test rape kits.
While not all rape kits need to be tested, passage of AB
558 will provide accountability for those kits that do
need to be tested. This will allow California to track
the testing of rape kits by our local law enforcement
agencies and ensure justice for the victims of a horrible
crime.
"Rape kits are evidence of crime. In order to remain
admissible in a criminal trial, such evidence must be
logged as it comes in and tracked and maintained so that
the law enforcement 'chain of custody' is established.
To fail to do so, will cause the evidence to be
inadmissible in a court of law. There is no 'backlog'
reporting in AB 558 in that law enforcement will only
categorize and report on kits that come in after the
effective date of the bill. The costs of AB 558 will be
minor because local law enforcement has to log and track
evidence anyway. They can collect the information when
the kits are logged in as evidence and report on the
totals when required to the DOJ.
"This measure is the same bill as AB 1017 of last year
which was supported by the California Coalition against
Sexual Assault, Crime Victims United and numerous other
organizations. It received bi-partisan support and there
were no, 'NO' votes."
ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION : The California State Sheriffs'
Association and the California Law Enforcement Association
of Records Supervisors oppose this bill, submitting it
"will have significant fiscal impacts on local law
enforcement agencies. ?
"We recognize and share (the author's) intent to ensure
that rape kits are analyzed and processed in a timely
manner in order to identify and convict offenders of
these heinous crimes. However, doing so by requiring law
enforcement agencies to provide backlog statistics to DOJ
CONTINUED
AB 558
Page
6
would place significant cost burdens on these agencies in
terms of resources and personnel and consequently, would
inadvertently hamper our ability to process these kits. ?
"? Due to the fiscal and workload implications of this
bill, we must respectfully oppose AB 558."
ASSEMBLY FLOOR :
AYES: Adams, Ammiano, Anderson, Arambula, Beall, Bill
Berryhill, Tom Berryhill, Blakeslee, Block, Blumenfield,
Bradford, Brownley, Buchanan, Caballero, Charles
Calderon, Chesbro, Conway, Cook, Coto, Davis, De La
Torre, De Leon, DeVore, Emmerson, Eng, Evans, Feuer,
Fletcher, Fong, Fuentes, Fuller, Furutani, Gaines,
Galgiani, Garrick, Gilmore, Hagman, Hayashi, Hernandez,
Hill, Huber, Huffman, Jeffries, Jones, Knight, Lieu,
Logue, Bonnie Lowenthal, Ma, Mendoza, Miller, Monning,
Nava, Nestande, Niello, Nielsen, John A. Perez,
Portantino, Ruskin, Salas, Saldana, Silva, Skinner,
Smyth, Solorio, Audra Strickland, Swanson, Torres,
Torrico, Tran, Villines, Yamada
NO VOTE RECORDED: Carter, Hall, Harkey, V. Manuel Perez,
Torlakson, Bass
RJG:mw 6/30/10 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****
CONTINUED