BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 1060
Page 1
ASSEMBLY THIRD READING
AB 1060 (Roger Hernández)
As Amended April 28, 2011
Majority vote
PUBLIC SAFETY 5-0 APPROPRIATIONS 12-5
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Ayes:|Ammiano, Cedillo, Hill, |Ayes:|Fuentes, Blumenfield, |
| |Mitchell, Skinner | |Bradford, Charles |
| | | |Calderon, Campos, Davis, |
| | | |Gatto, Hall, Hill, Lara, |
| | | |Mitchell, Solorio, |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY : Creates a special maritime criminal jurisdiction to
extend the power of the state to prosecute crimes committed on
ships sailing outside California's territorial waters.
Specifically, this bill :
1)Declares that California is a major center for international
travel and trade by sea, and therefore has an interest in
protecting people traveling to and from California by sea, as
well as an interest in cooperating with not only masters of
ships, but also other governments to maintain law and order on
board ships.
2)Creates a special maritime criminal jurisdiction of California
providing that the courts of this state may exercise
jurisdiction over a crime occurring outside California on
board a large passenger vessel, as defined.
3)Provides the special maritime criminal jurisdiction applies
under any of the following circumstances:
a) When the criminal suspect on board the ship is either a
California resident or a resident of a state which consents
to the jurisdiction of California;
b) When either the master of the ship or a flag-state
official turns a suspect on board over to the custody of
state law enforcement;
c) When the state in whose territory the crime occurred
AB 1060
Page 2
asks California to exercise jurisdiction;
d) When the crime occurs during a voyage where the majority
of the paying passengers embarked and intended to disembark
in California;
e) When the crime victim is a state law enforcement officer
who is on board the ship in connection with his or her
official duties;
f) When a crime of violence, detention, or depredation is
committed against a California resident;
g) When the crime constitutes either an attempt or a
conspiracy to cause a substantial effect in California that
is an element of the charged offense; or,
h) When the crime committed is one with respect to which
all states could exercise criminal jurisdiction under
international law or treaty.
4)Provides that if a crime is punishable under California law,
it shall be punishable in the same way when prosecuted under
the special criminal maritime jurisdiction.
5)Creates an affirmative defense when an act or omission was
authorized by the ship's master or an officer of the flag
state in accordance with the laws of that state and
international law.
6)Includes a double-jeopardy provision disallowing prosecution
if the suspect has been tried in good faith by another state
for substantially the same conduct.
7)Requires state law enforcement officers and prosecuting
attorneys not to interfere with assertion of jurisdiction by
the federal government, the flag state, or a state in whose
territory the crime occurs; to consistently apply these
provisions with federal and international law, particularly
that of the flag state; and, to cooperate with the flag state
and master of the ship, when feasible.
8)Creates certain enforcement limitations on this jurisdiction,
including:
AB 1060
Page 3
a) Does not authorize a boarding, search or detention
without the consent of the flag state or ship master if the
ship is outside California;
b) Does not constitute an assertion of jurisdiction over
military or law enforcement acting in accordance with
international law;
c) Does not restrict the application of other California
laws, or the duty of law enforcement to protect human life,
property, or the environment from imminent harm; and,
d) Does not prohibit otherwise-allowable gambling.
9)Encourages local law enforcement to enter into agreements or
memoranda of understanding with both the Coast Guard and
Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) in order to facilitate
the prosecution of crimes.
10)Requires ship owners and operators to notify passengers that
passengers can contact California law enforcement to assist
them with the prosecution of a crime.
FISCAL EFFECT : According to the Assembly Appropriations
Committee:
1)Unknown, potentially significant annual state trial court
General Fund (GF) costs to the extent special maritime
jurisdiction results in additional court time and trials. For
example, 10 trials averaging two weeks, would cost in the
range of $400,000.
2)Unknown, annual GF costs to the extent the special
jurisdiction results in additional convictions and state
prison commitments. Four felony convictions could result in
annual GF costs of almost $200,000.
3)Unknown nonreimbursable local law enforcement costs.
COMMENTS : According to the author, "While we can't stop crimes
from happening, we can strengthen existing laws and improve the
coordination of our law enforcement efforts to ensure public
safety and justice for victims of crimes. Currently, victims of
AB 1060
Page 4
crimes at sea are not getting justice they deserve. Only a
startling few of the cases that are reported are actually ever
prosecuted mainly because these crimes fall under the
jurisdiction of the FBI, who gives little priority to robberies
and sex crimes on cruise ships. In 2008 for example, the FBI
released data that indicates that there were only six sentences
for any crime that was committed at sea.
"Additionally, a prominent maritime attorney who has practiced
this area of law for 35 years indicated that he had only seen
one conviction for a sexual crime on a cruise ship during his
entire career."
Please see the policy committee for a full discussion of this
bill.
Analysis Prepared by : Sandy Uribe / PUB. S. / (916) 319-3744
FN: 0000895