BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    �



                                                                  AB 593
                                                                  Page  1


          ASSEMBLY THIRD READING
          AB 593 (Ma)
          As Amended  January 5, 2012
          Majority vote 

           PUBLIC SAFETY       4-1                                         
           
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |Ayes:|Ammiano, Cedillo,         |     |                          |
          |     |Mitchell, Skinner         |     |                          |
          |     |                          |     |                          |
          |-----+--------------------------+-----+--------------------------|
          |Nays:|Knight                    |     |                          |
          |     |                          |     |                          |
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
           SUMMARY  :  Deletes the January 1, 2020, repeal date on provisions 
          of law that allow a writ of habeas corpus to be prosecuted on 
          grounds that evidence relating to intimate partner battering  
          and its effects was not introduced at the trial, thereby 
          affecting the outcome of the trial.  Expands eligibility for the 
          current writ of habeas corpus to include petitioners who were 
          allowed to introduce evidence relating to intimate partner 
          battering and its effects at the trial court proceedings but was 
          limited, and this evidence is of such substance that had it not 
          been limited there is a reasonable probability, sufficient to 
          undermine the confidence in the judgment of conviction, that the 
          result of the proceedings would have been different.

           EXISTING LAW  :

          1)Provides that a writ of habeas corpus may be brought on the 
            basis that evidence relating to intimate partner battering and 
            its effects, as defined, was not introduced at the trial 
            relating to the prisoner's incarceration for a conviction of a 
            violent felony, as defined, and was of such substance that had 
            it been introduced there is a reasonable probability, 
            sufficient to undermine confidence in the judgment of 
            conviction, that the result of the proceedings would have been 
            different.  

          2)Provides that a petitioner's previous filing for habeas corpus 
            under this section is grounds for denial of the new petition 
            if a court determined on the merits in the prior petition that 
            the omission of expert testimony relating to battered women's 








                                                                  AB 593
                                                                  Page  2


            syndrome or intimate partner battering and its effects at 
            trial was not prejudicial and did not entitle the petitioner 
            to the writ of habeas corpus.  

          3)Provides that the section authorizing a writ of habeas corpus 
            based on intimate partner battering and its effects shall 
            remain in effect only until January 1, 2020.  

          4)Provides that in a criminal action expert testimony is 
            admissible by either the prosecution or defense regarding 
            intimate partner battering and its effects, including the 
            nature and effect of physical, emotional, or mental abuse on 
            the beliefs, perceptions, or behavior of victims of domestic 
            violence, except when offered against a defendant to prove the 
            occurrence of the act or acts of abuse which form the basis of 
            a criminal charge.  

          5)Provides that the court in its discretion may exclude evidence 
            if its probative value is substantially outweighed by the 
            probability that its admission will necessitate undue 
            consumption of time or create substantial danger of undue 
            prejudice, of confusing the issues, or of misleading the jury. 
             

          6)Provides that every person unlawfully imprisoned or restrained 
            of his or her liberty, under any pretense whatever, may 
            prosecute a writ of habeas corpus to inquire into the cause of 
            such imprisonment or restraint.  

          7)Provides that a writ of habeas corpus may be prosecuted for, 
            but not limited to, the following reasons:

             a)   False evidence that is substantially material or 
               probative on the issue of guilt, or punishment was 
               introduced against a person at any hearing or trial 
               relating to his or her incarceration; and,

             b)   False physical evidence believed by a person to be 
               factual, material or probative on the issue of guilt, which 
               was known by the person at the time of entering a plea of 
               guilty and which was a material factor directly related to 
               the plea of guilty by the person.  

           FISCAL EFFECT  :  Unknown.  This bill is keyed non-fiscal by the 








                                                                  AB 593
                                                                  Page  3


          Legislative Counsel.

           COMMENTS  :  According to the author, "AB 593 seeks to delete the 
          January 1, 2020 sunset date of current law, which allows 
          domestic violence survivors convicted of 'violent' felonies to 
          petition the court for a retrial or reduced sentence by filing 
          habeas corpus petitions if expert testimony on intimate partner 
          battering and its effects was not considered at the time their 
          case originally was prosecuted."

          Please see the policy committee analysis for a full discussion 
          of this bill.
           

          Analysis Prepared by  :    Stella Choe / PUB. S. / (916) 319-3744 

                                                               FN:  0003003