BILL ANALYSIS �
SB 980
Page 1
SENATE THIRD READING
SB 980 (Lieu)
As Amended August 19, 2014
Majority vote
SENATE VOTE :23-11
PUBLIC SAFETY 5-0 APPROPRIATIONS 13-0
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Ayes:|Ammiano, Jones-Sawyer, |Ayes:|Gatto, Bocanegra, |
| |Quirk, Skinner, Stone | |Bradford, |
| | | |Ian Calderon, Campos, |
| | | |Donnelly, Eggman, Gomez, |
| | | |Holden, Pan, Quirk, |
| | | |Ridley-Thomas, Weber |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY : Revises the process for obtaining a court order
authorizing post-conviction forensic deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA)
testing. Specifically, this bill :
1)Allows the court to order a hearing on the motion for DNA
testing, as specified.
2)Allows the court, upon request of the convicted person or his
or her attorney, to order the prosecutor to make all
reasonable efforts to obtain, and police agencies and law
enforcement laboratories to make all reasonable efforts to
provide, copies of DNA lab reports, chain of custody logs, and
other specified documents in their possession or control.
3)Requires a custodian of record to submit a report to the
prosecutor and the convicted person or his or her attorney
that sets forth the efforts that were made in an attempt to
locate evidence if the evidence has been lost or destroyed.
Requires, except as specified, the report to include the
results of a physical search if the last known or documented
location of the evidence prior to its loss or destruction was
in an area controlled by a law enforcement agency.
4)Provides that, in seeking the granting of the DNA testing, the
convicted person is only required to demonstrate that the
testing would be relevant to, rather than dispositive of, the
SB 980
Page 2
issue of identity and that the convicted person is not
required to show a favorable DNA test would conclusively
establish his or her innocence.
5)Prohibits the court, in determining whether the convicted
person is entitled to develop potentially exculpatory
evidence, from deciding whether the convicted person is
entitled to some form of ultimate relief.
6)Requires the testing to be conducted by a laboratory that
meets the Federal
Bureau Investigation Director's Quality Assurance Standards,
whether mutually agreed upon by the parties or designated by
the court. Specifies that laboratories accredited by listed
entities satisfy this requirement. Prohibits a laboratory
selected to perform testing but which is not a National DNA
Index System (NDIS) participant from initiating analysis until
documented approval has been obtained from an appropriate NDIS
participating laboratory of acceptance of ownership of the DNA
data that may be entered into or searched in the Combined DNA
Index System (CODIS). Allows the laboratory to communicate
with either party, upon request, during the testing process.
7)Allows the court to conduct a hearing to determine if a DNA
profile of an unknown contributor generated from the testing
should be uploaded into the State Index System, and if
appropriate, the National Index System. Allows the court to
issue an order directing the uploading of the profile upon the
satisfaction of specified conditions, so long as it does not
violate any CODIS or state rule, policy or regulation.
Requires notice of the hearing be provided to specified
parties 30 court days prior to the hearing.
8)Extends the period, as specified, that a government entity
must wait to dispose of biological material relating to a case
if the entity does not receive specified requests or court
filings.
FISCAL EFFECT : According to the Assembly Appropriations
Committee:
1)Potentially moderate ongoing nonreimbursable local costs to
district attorneys to the extent this bill results in a
significant increase in the number of post-conviction DNA
testing cases. For order of magnitude purposes, the Los
SB 980
Page 3
Angeles District Attorney's office estimates they handled
about 102 such petitions since 2002. If this bill increased
this frequency by 20% - and it is not at all clear that it
would - that would mean an additional case or two per year.
Extrapolating statewide, this would be an increase of about 10
cases per year, which could range from tens of thousands of
dollars to hundreds of thousands of dollars.
2)Minor ongoing General Fund costs to the Department of Justice
(DOJ) to the extent this bill results in an increase in the
number of post-conviction DNA testing cases handled by DOJ.
3)Unknown, likely minor state and local crime lab costs,
depending on the caseload increase and the number of ensuing
DNA index uploads.
4)Unknown, likely minor state trial court costs for additional
hearings to the extent when the court grants a motion for DNA
testing, and a DNA profile of an unknown person is generated,
the court opts to conduct a hearing to determine if the DNA
profile should be uploaded into the state and national DNA
index systems.
5)Minor potentially state reimbursable local costs, and minor
state costs to DOJ, for additional evidence storage, to the
extent extending the period an entity must retain biological
evidence from 90 days to six months after a person is released
from incarceration, pending specified notifications regarding
potential motions, requires additional storage capacity.
6)Minor non-reimbursable (as it is permissive to the courts to
so order) local costs to provide additional evidentiary
information.
7)Potential GF savings to the extent additional DNA testing
results in reduced incarceration, offset by erroneous
conviction payments and cold DNA hits on the actual
perpetrators.
COMMENTS : According to the author, "One of the greatest
injustices a government can commit is the wrongful conviction
and imprisonment of an innocent person while the true
perpetrator remains free.
SB 980
Page 4
"In 2000, California became one of the first states to create a
process by which an incarcerated person who had been convicted
of a felony could obtain DNA testing to prove innocence.
Fourteen years later, however, California's post-conviction DNA
testing process is in need of some commonsense but crucial
reforms.
"These reforms would provide greater access to available
evidence for people requesting DNA testing. They give courts
the ability to order DNA profiles to be run through the national
DNA database, making it possible to find the real perpetrators
of crimes. They establish more consistent and thorough
protocols for the preservation and destruction of evidence after
conviction, enabling more innocent people to get testing."
Please see the policy committee analysis for a full discussion
of this bill.
Analysis Prepared by : Shaun Naidu / PUB. S. / (916) 319-3744
FN: 0004868