BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    



                                                                  AB 960
                                                                  Page  1

          Date of Hearing:   April 29, 2009

                        ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
                                Kevin De Leon, Chair

             AB 960 (V. Manuel Perez) - As Introduced:  February 26, 2009

          Policy Committee:                              Public  
          SafetyVote:  7-0

          Urgency:     No                   State Mandated Local Program:  
          Yes    Reimbursable:              No

           SUMMARY  
           
           This bill clarifies the definition of body armor, for purposes  
          of prosecuting persons with a prior conviction for a violent  
          felony who are prohibited from purchasing or possessing body  
          armor, by  deleting the current definition of body armor in this  
          section, defined as "ballistic resistance to the penetration of  
          the test ammunition for which a complete armor is certified,"  
          and defining body armor as armor made from any bullet resistant  
          material intended to provide trauma protection for the wearer. 

           FISCAL EFFECT
           
          Potential for minor state incarceration costs, to the extent  
          this clarification results in additional state prison  
          commitments. Over the past two years, eight persons have been  
          committed to state prison for this offense. It is unlikely this  
          measure will significantly increase these figures.   

           COMMENTS
           
           Rationale  . Current law makes it a felony, punishable by 16  
          months, 2, or 3 years in state prison for any person with a  
          conviction for a violent felony to purchase or possess body  
          armor. Current law, however, does not explicitly define body  
          armor but references a definition in the California Code of  
          Regulations (CCR). Proponents (law enforcement) contend this  
          definition can be problematic because the relevant CCR Section  
          establishes a standard intended for use by police agencies  
          buying body armor, not for prosecution. 

          Proponents cite a February 2008 California District Appellate  








                                                                  AB 960
                                                                  Page  2

          Court opinion that overturned a conviction for possession of  
          body armor by a person convicted of a violent felony due to lack  
          of evidence that the body armor was certified to "provide  
          ballistic resistance to the penetration of test ammunition." 

          Certification requires testing of the armor, which has to meet  
          the body armor standards defined in the CCR. According to the  
          San Diego County District Attorney's office, "this legislation  
          will help clarify the law, eliminate costly re-trials and help  
          prosecutors punish those who have been convicted of a violent  
          felony and are found in possession of a bullet-proof vest. 

          "Currently, Penal Code Section 12370 requires expert testimony  
          as to whether the specified body armor possessed meets law  
          enforcement testing standards. AB 960 simply streamlines this  
          process by allowing prosecutors to utilize the same definition  
          found in Penal Code Section 12022.2, which is 'any  
          bullet-resistant material intended to provide ballistic and  
          trauma protection for the wearer.' " 

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