BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    �



                                                                  AJR 45
                                                                  Page 1

          Date of Hearing:  May 6, 2014
          Counsel:       Stella Choe


                         ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC SAFETY
                                 Tom Ammiano, Chair

                  AJR 45 (Skinner) - As Introduced:  April 10, 2014


           SUMMARY  :  Urges Congress to approve President Obama's proposal  
          to provide $35 million to the states in order for the states to  
          process evidence from sexual assault forensic exams.   
          Specifically,  this resolution  :

          1)Makes declarations regarding sexual violence and its impact on  
            society.

          2)States that effective collection of forensic evidence is of  
            paramount importance to successfully prosecuting sex  
            offenders, as is performing sexual assault forensic exams in a  
            sensitive, dignified, and victim-centered manner.

          3)States that sexual assault forensic examinations are  
            intrusive, lengthy, and complex medical examinations that take  
            an average of three to four hours.

          4)States that a victim who agrees to a sexual assault forensic  
            exam reasonably expects evidence collected from that exam,  
            also referred to as a rape kit, to be analyzed. Untested  
            evidence from a sexual assault forensic exam means lost  
            opportunities to develop deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) profiles,  
            search for matches, link cold cases, and bring justice and  
            resolution to the victim.

          5)States that DNA can help identify unknown offenders, but most  
            sexual assaults are committed by persons known to the victim,  
            and, therefore, identity of the offender is not an issue in  
            most sexual assault cases. However, testing evidence from a  
            sexual assault forensic exam in those cases still has  
            evidentiary value because a DNA profile from the known suspect  
            can yield matches with other cases in which the suspect is  
            unknown, resulting in "cold hits" connecting the known suspect  
            to other crimes.









                                                                  AJR 45
                                                                  Page 2

          6)States that tens of thousands, and possibly over 100,000, rape  
            kits are likely sitting unprocessed in California crime labs  
            and law enforcement evidence lockers.

          7)States that there is no statewide data, but local studies  
            provide insight into the scope of the problem. In 2008, Los  
            Angeles County had more than 12,000 untested rape kits in its  
            custody, and in 2012, Alameda County estimated their backlog  
            of untested rape kits to be almost 2,000.

          8)States that delays in testing evidence collected from a sexual  
            assault forensic exam can also preclude criminal charges from  
            ever being filed against alleged rapists who are identified  
            long after their crimes. Current state law provides a 10-year  
            statute of limitation for most rape cases, but has an  
            exception allowing criminal charges to be filed within one  
            year of the date when a suspect is conclusively identified in  
            cases involving DNA evidence, as long as the DNA is analyzed  
            within two years of the crime.

          9)States that failure to test evidence collected from a sexual  
            assault forensic exam in a timely manner can be tragic, from  
            expired statutes of limitation that preclude prosecution even  
            if a suspect is later identified, to additional rape and  
            murder victims of serial rapists.

          10)States that local jurisdictions that have implemented  
            mandatory testing policies for evidence collected from a  
            sexual assault forensic exam have impressive results to show  
            for their efforts. New York City tested 17,000 backlogged rape  
            kits in 2003 and implemented a policy to test every rape kit  
            in law enforcement custody, which led to 2,000 DNA matches,  
            200 cold case prosecutions, and an increase in the arrest rate  
            for the crime of rape from 40 percent to 70 percent, compared  
            to 24 percent nationally. Detroit, Michigan began testing a  
            backlog of over 11,000 untested rape kits, and has tested  
            1,404 kits resulting in 238 hits in the Combined DNA Index  
            System (CODIS). These CODIS matches have identified 46  
            potential serial rapists who are tied to rapes reported in 12  
            other states and the District of Columbia. In 2003, Fort  
            Worth, Texas began processing their backlog, which led to 200  
            DNA matches in CODIS, and to 47 arrests, 36 felony  
            convictions, and the apprehension of five serial rapists.

          11)States that federal studies demonstrate that crimes labs have  








                                                                  AJR 45
                                                                  Page 3

            struggled over the past decade to meet the demand for DNA  
            testing for all types of crimes. Crime labs were able to  
            process 10 percent more cases in 2011 than in 2009, but they  
            also received 16.4 percent more requests for DNA testing in  
            that time. With demand continuing to outpace capacity, the  
            backlog in testing evidence collected from sexual assault  
            forensic exams may continue to grow.

          12)States that processing evidence collected from a sexual  
            assault forensic exam is not enough, because when  
            jurisdictions process large volumes of evidence collected from  
            a sexual assault forensic exam, they also need the resources  
            to follow up on the leads, which requires trained detectives,  
            victim advocates, and prosecutors available and willing to  
            work together to pursue the new cases.

          13)States that California is committed to enacting systematic  
            reforms to address, once and for all, the backlog of evidence  
            collected from a sexual assault forensic exam through the  
            combination of new screening techniques that have been proven  
            by the state crime laboratory, which is operated by the  
            Department of Justice, greater resources for law enforcement  
            agencies, and a cooperative effort to provide justice to all  
            survivors of sexual assault. Federal funding is crucial to  
            help California put these new initiatives in place to address  
            this problem

          14)States that it is resolved by the Assembly and the Senate of  
            the State of California, jointly, that the Legislature urges  
            the United States Congress to approve President Obama's  
            proposal to provide $35 million to the states in order for the  
            states to process evidence from sexual assault forensic exams.

          15)States that it is resolved that the Chief Clerk of the  
            Assembly transmit copies of this resolution to the President  
            and Vice President of the United States, to the Speaker of the  
            House of Representatives, to the Majority Leader of the  
            Senate, to each Senator and Representative from California in  
            the Congress of the United States, and to the author for  
            appropriate distribution.

           EXISTING LAW  : 

          1)States the intent of the Legislature that a law enforcement  
            agency assigned to investigate specified sexual assault  








                                                                  AJR 45
                                                                  Page 4

            offenses should perform DNA testing of rape kit evidence or  
            other crime scene evidence in a timely manner in order to  
            assure the longest possible statute of limitations.  (Pen.  
            Code, � 680, subd. (b).)

          2)States if the law enforcement agency elects not to analyze DNA  
            evidence within the established time limits, a victim of a  
            sexual assault offense as specified, where the identity of the  
            perpetrator is in issue, shall be informed, either orally or  
            in writing, of that fact by the law enforcement agency.  (Pen.  
            Code, � 680, subd. (d).)

          3)Requires, if the law enforcement agency intends to destroy or  
            dispose of rape kit evidence or other crime scene evidence  
            from an unsolved sexual assault case prior to the expiration  
            of the statute of limitations, a victim of sexual assault, as  
            specified, to be given written notification by the law  
            enforcement agency of that intention.  (Pen. Code, � 680,  
            subd. (e).)

          4)Provides that written notification shall be made at least 60  
            days prior to the destruction or disposal of the rape kit  
            evidence or other crime scene evidence from an unsolved sexual  
            assault case where the election not to analyze the DNA or the  
            destruction or disposal occurs prior to the expiration of the  
            statute of limitations.  (Pen. Code, � 680, subd. (f).)
           
           5)States notwithstanding any other limitation of time described,  
            a criminal complaint may be filed 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 (Pen. Code, � 803, subd. (g)(1)):

             a)   The crime is one that requires the defendant to register  
               as a sex offender; and

             b)   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.  

          6)States, notwithstanding any other limitation of time  








                                                                  AJR 45
                                                                  Page 5

            described, prosecution for a specified felony sex offense  
            shall be commenced within 10 years after the commission of the  
            offense.  (Pen. Code, � 801.1, subd. (b).)

           FISCAL EFFECT  :  Unknown

           COMMENTS  :   

           1)Author's Statement  :  According to the author, "California  
            Penal Code 680, the Sexual Assault Victims' DNA Bill of  
            Rights, identifies DNA as a powerful tool for identifying and  
            prosecuting sexual assault offenders.  Nevertheless, tens (and  
            possibly hundreds) of thousands of rape kits sit unprocessed  
            in California's crime labs and law enforcement evidence  
            lockers. While there is no statewide data to document the  
            problem, local studies provide insight. In 2008, Los Angeles  
            County had more than 12,000 untested rape kits in its custody.  
            In 2012, Alameda County estimated its backlog of untested rape  
            kits to be almost 2,000.  

            "A victim who agrees to a forensic examination after a sexual  
            assault reasonably expects evidence collected from that exam  
            to be analyzed. Untested rape kits mean lost opportunities to  
            develop DNA profiles, search for matches, link cold cases,  
            prosecute offenders, and bring resolution to rape victims.  
            Delays in testing can also preclude criminal charges from ever  
            being filed against rapists who are identified long after  
            their crimes. 

            "States and cities outside of California that have  
            systematically tested their backlogged rape kits have seen  
            phenomenal results.  For example, New York City tested its  
            17,000 rape kit backlog in 2003 and implemented a policy to  
            test every rape kit in law enforcement custody.  New York  
            City's arrest rate for rape jumped from 40% to 70% (compared  
            to 24% nationally and 31% in California).  Clearing the  
            backlog led to 2,000 DNA matches and 200 cold case  
            prosecutions in New York City.  Survivors of sexual assault in  
            California deserve similar results. 

            "Federal studies demonstrate that crime labs have struggled  
            over the past decade to meet the demand for DNA testing for  
            all types of crimes. While labs were able to process 10% more  
            cases in 2011 than in 2009, they also received 16.4% more  
            requests for DNA testing. And with demand continuing to  








                                                                  AJR 45
                                                                  Page 6

            outpace capacity, the rape kit backlog may continue to grow.   
            Resources for the testing of rape kits alone is not enough.   
            When jurisdictions test large volumes of rape kits, they also  
            need the resources to follow-up on the leads, which  
            necessitates trained detectives, victim advocates, and  
            prosecutors being available and willing to work together to  
            pursue the new cases.  However, federal funding will help  
            California hold sexual offenders accountable and provide  
            closure and justice to survivors of sexual assault."  

           2)Background  :  As part of the 2015 Budget, President Obama has  
            proposed providing $35 million to the states in order for the  
            states to process evidence from sexual assault forensic exams.  
            The new grant program would provide funding to inventory and  
            test rape kits, develop "cold case" units to pursue new  
            investigative leads, and support victims throughout the  
            process.  The grants could also be used to develop  
            evidence-tracking systems, train law enforcement on sexual  
            assault investigations, and conduct research on outcomes in  
            sexual assault cases.

            "As of 2007, [Attorney General] AG Holder said 43 percent of  
            law enforcement agencies did not have computers to track  
            forensic evidence.' We have been asked to do more with less  
            ... but we cannot and will not allow budget cuts to come at  
            expense of survivors of sexual assault,' he said.

            "According to information from the White House, the budget the  
            president released yesterday provides $423 million to  
            reinforce efforts to combat and respond to violent crimes  
            against women. Even though prior investments have helped civil  
            and criminal justice systems be more responsive to victims,  
            and even though rates of domestic violence have dropped and  
            more perpetrators have been put behind bars, reducing such  
            violence and meeting the needs of the 1.3 million women  
            victimized by rape and sexual assault annually, and the nearly  
            seven million victims of intimate partner violence each year,  
            remains a critical priority.

            "This funding includes $193 million for STOP Grants to Combat  
            Violence Against Women, $42 million to provide legal services  
            to victims, $27 million for the Sexual Assault Services  
            Program, and $11 million to reduce violent crimes against  
            women on campus."  
            ( AJR 45
                                                                  Page 7

            tion-national-backlog-of-untested-rape-kits> (as of April 29,  
            2014).)
             
           3)CODIS  :  According to the Federal Bureau of Investigation's  
            (FBI) web site, "CODIS is the acronym for the 'Combined DNA  
            Index System' and is the generic term used to describe the  
            FBI's program of support for criminal justice DNA databases as  
            well as the software used to run these databases.  The  
            National DNA Index System or NDIS is considered one part of  
            CODIS, the national level, containing the DNA profiles  
            contributed by federal, state, and local participating  
            forensic laboratories.

          "CODIS was designed to compare a target DNA record against the  
            DNA records contained in the database. Once a match is  
            identified by the CODIS software, the laboratories involved in  
            the match exchange information to verify the match and  
            establish coordination between their two agencies. The match  
            of the forensic DNA record against the DNA record in the  
            database may be used to establish probable cause to obtain an  
            evidentiary DNA sample from the suspect. The law enforcement  
            agency can use this documentation to obtain a court order  
            authorizing the collection of a known biological reference  
            sample from the offender. The casework laboratory can then  
            perform a DNA analysis on the known biological sample so that  
            this analysis can be presented as evidence in court."  
            (http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/lab/biometric-analysis/codis/codis 
            -and-ndis-fact-sheet (as of March 5, 2014).)

           4)Argument in Support  :   Attorney General Kamala Harris  writes,  
            "Untested forensic evidence kits are lost opportunities to  
            develop DNA profiles, search for matches, link cold cases,  
            prosecute offenders and bring resolution for rape victims.   
            Delays in testing can also prevent criminal charges from ever  
            being filed against offenders who are identified long after  
            they committed their crimes.  

          "President Obama recently proposed allocating $35 million to  
            local law enforcement agencies and crime labs, so that these  
            local jurisdiction can process untested kits.  This funding is  
            crucial.  Federal studies show that crime labs have struggled  
            over the past decade to meet the demand for DNA testing for  
            all types of crimes.  While labs were able to process 10% more  
            cases in 2011 than in 2009, they also received 16.4% more  
            requests for DNA testing.  With demand continuing to outpace  








                                                                  AJR 45
                                                                  Page 8

            capacity, the rape kit backlog may continue to grow."

           5)Current Legislation  : AB 1517 (Skinner) sets timelines for law  
            enforcement agencies and crime labs to perform and process  
            deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) testing of rape kit evidence.  AB  
            1517 is pending in the Committee on Appropriations.

           6)Prior Legislation  :

             a)   AB 322 (Portantino), of the 2011-12 Legislative Session,  
               would have created a pilot project, commencing July 1, 2012  
               and ending on January 1, 2016, in 10 counties to have DOJ  
               test all rape kits collected after the start date of the  
               pilot project in those counties to determine if such  
               testing increases their arrest rates in rape cases.  AB 322  
               was vetoed.

             b)   SB 271 (Wyland), of the 2011-12 Legislative Session,  
               would have required law enforcement agencies to submit rape  
               kits to a laboratory within 10 business days of receipt and  
               would have required the laboratory to complete analysis of  
               that rape kit within 6 months of receipt if sufficient  
               staffing and resources are available. SB 271 would also  
               have required that the results of all rape kits submitted  
               for analysis be uploaded to the CAL-DNA Databank and the  
               Federal Bureau of Investigation CODIS.  SB 271 was never  
               heard by the Senate Committee on Public Safety.

             c)   AB 558 (Portantino), of the 2009-10 Legislative Session,  
               would have required local law enforcement agencies  
               responsible for taking or collecting rape kit evidence to  
               annually report to the Department of Justice statistical  
               information pertaining to the testing and submission for  
               DNA analysis of rape kits, and would have made the reports  
               subject to inspection under the California Public Records  
               Act.  AB 558 was vetoed.

             d)   AB 1017 (Portantino), of the 2009-10 Legislative  
               Session, would have required that beginning July 1, 2012,  
               and annually thereafter until July 1, 2016, each local law  
               enforcement agency responsible for taking or collecting  
               rape kit evidence shall annually report to the DOJ various  
               statistical information pertaining to the testing and  
               submission for DNA analysis of rape kits, as specified.  AB  
               1017 was vetoed.








                                                                  AJR 45
                                                                  Page 9


           REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION  :   

           Support 
           
          Alameda County Office of the District Attorney
          California Attorney General Kamala Harris

           Opposition 

           None

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