BILL ANALYSIS �
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | SB 980|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
Bill No: SB 980
Author: Lieu (D), et al.
Amended: 8/19/14
Vote: 21
SENATE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE : 5-2, 4/22/14
AYES: Hancock, De Le�n, Liu, Mitchell, Steinberg
NOES: Anderson, Knight
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE : 5-2, 5/23/14
AYES: De Le�n, Hill, Lara, Padilla, Steinberg
NOES: Walters, Gaines
SENATE FLOOR : 23-11, 5/29/14
AYES: Anderson, Beall, Block, Corbett, De Le�n, DeSaulnier,
Evans, Hancock, Hernandez, Hill, Hueso, Jackson, Lara, Leno,
Lieu, Liu, Mitchell, Monning, Padilla, Pavley, Steinberg,
Torres, Wolk
NOES: Berryhill, Cannella, Fuller, Gaines, Huff, Knight,
Morrell, Nielsen, Vidak, Walters, Wyland
NO VOTE RECORDED: Calderon, Correa, Galgiani, Roth, Wright, Yee
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 77-1, 08/27/14 - See last page for vote
SUBJECT : Prisoners: DNA testing
SOURCE : California Innocence Project
Loyola Project for the Innocent
Northern California Innocence Project
CONTINUED
SB 980
Page
2
DIGEST : This bill revises the process for obtaining a court
order authorizing post-conviction forensic deoxyribonucleic acid
(DNA) testing.
Assembly Amendments clarify the process for providing
information and documentation of DNA evidence to the convicted
person or convicted person's attorney; insure that any DNA
profile ran through the Combined DNA Index System (CODIS) is not
in violation of any state or federal rules; reduce the
notification period from one year to 180 days; and make a number
of technical and clarifying changes.
ANALYSIS :
Existing law:
1.Provides that a person who was convicted of a felony, and is
currently serving a term of imprisonment may make a written
motion before the trial court that entered the judgment of
conviction in his/her case for performance of DNA testing
under specified circumstances.
2.Provides a person may request appointment of counsel by
sending a written request to the court stating that he/she was
not the perpetrator and that DNA testing is relevant to
his/her assertion of innocence and that the court shall
appoint counsel to investigate and, if appropriate file a
motion for DNA testing.
3.Provides that the motion for DNA testing shall be verified by
the convicted person under penalty of perjury and shall, among
other things explain in light of all evidence how DNA testing
would raise a reasonable probability that the convicted
person's verdict or sentence would be more favorable if the
results of DNA testing had been available at the time of
conviction.
4.Provides that the court shall grant the motion for DNA testing
if it determines all of the following have been established:
A. The evidence to be tested is available and in a
condition that would permit DNA testing requested in the
motion;
CONTINUED
SB 980
Page
3
B. The evidence to be tested has been subject to a chain of
custody sufficient to establish it has not be substituted,
tampered with, replaced or altered in any material aspect;
C. The identity of the perpetrator of the crime was or
should have been, a significant issue in the case;
D. The convicted person has made a prima facie showing that
the evidence sought to be tested is material to the issue
of the convicted person's identity as the perpetrator of,
or accomplice to, the crime, special circumstance or
enhancement allegation that resulted in the conviction or
sentence;
E. The requested DNA testing results would raise a
reasonable probability that, in light of all the evidence,
the convicted person's verdict or sentence would have been
more favorable if the results of DNA testing had been
available at the time of conviction. The court in its
discretion may consider any evidence whether or not it was
introduced at trial;
F. The evidence to be tested was not tested previously or
the evidence was tested previously but the requested DNA
test would provide results that are reasonably more
discriminating and probative of the identity of the
perpetrator or accomplice or have a reasonable probability
of contradicting prior test results; and
G. The testing requested employs a method generally
accepted within the relevant scientific community, as
specified.
1.Provides that if the court grants the motion for DNA testing,
the court order shall identify the specific evidence to be
tested and the DNA technology to be used.
2.Provides that the testing shall be conducted by a laboratory
mutually agreed upon by the district attorney in a noncapital
case, or the Attorney General in a capital case, and the
person filing the motion. If the parties cannot agree, the
court shall designate the laboratory to conduct the testing
and shall consider designating a laboratory accredited by the
American Society of Crime Laboratory Directors Laboratory
CONTINUED
SB 980
Page
4
Accreditation Board.
3.Provides that the cost of DNA testing shall be borne by the
state or the applicant as the court may order in the interests
of justice, if it is shown that the applicant is not indigent
and possesses the ability to pay. However, the cost of any
additional testing to be conducted by the district attorney or
Attorney General shall not be borne by the convicted person.
4.Requires the appropriate governmental entity to retain all
biological material that is secured in connection with a
criminal case for the period of time that any person is
incarcerated, as specified.
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/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/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
issue of identity and that the convicted person is not
required to show a favorable DNA test would conclusively
establish his/her innocence.
5.Prohibits the court, in determining whether the convicted
person is entitled to develop potentially exculpatory
CONTINUED
SB 980
Page
5
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 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 NDIS. 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.
Comments
According to the author's office, despite the widespread
acceptance of DNA testing as a powerful and reliable form of
forensic evidence that can conclusively reveal guilt or
innocence, many prisoners face insurmountable hurdles during the
legal process and do not have the legal means to secure testing
on evidence in their cases.
This bill's reforms clarify and streamline the judicial process
associated with post-conviction DNA testing requests, thus
reducing delay and saving the costs of unnecessary litigation.
CONTINUED
SB 980
Page
6
These reforms will help reduce the likelihood of people spending
time in prison for crimes they did not commit and further the
cause of justice in California.
Prior Legislation
SB 1342 (Burton, Chapter 821, Statutes of 2000) requires the
court to grant a motion for the performance of DNA testing under
specified conditions for any person convicted of a felony
currently serving a term of imprisonment, and requires the
appropriate governmental entity to preserve any biological
material secured in a criminal case, as specified.
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes
Local: Yes
According to the Assembly Appropriations Committee:
Potentially moderate ongoing non-reimbursable 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
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
will - that will mean an additional case or two per year.
Extrapolating statewide, this will be an increase of about 10
cases per year, which may range from tens of thousands of
dollars to hundreds of thousands of dollars.
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.
Unknown, likely minor state and local crime lab costs,
depending on the caseload increase and the number of ensuing
DNA index uploads.
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.
CONTINUED
SB 980
Page
7
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.
Minor non-reimbursable (as it is permissive to the courts to
so order) local costs to provide additional evidentiary
information.
Potential General Fund savings to the extent additional DNA
testing results in reduced incarceration, offset by erroneous
conviction payments and cold DNA hits on the actual
perpetrators.
SUPPORT : (Verified 8/27/14)
California Innocence Project (co-source)
Loyola Project for the Innocent (co-source)
Northern California Innocence Project (co-source)
American Association for Laboratory Accreditation
American Civil Liberties Union of California
California Attorneys for Criminal Justice
California Catholic Conference
California District Attorneys Association
California Province of the Society of Jesus
California Public Defenders Association
Equal Justice Society
Friends Committee on Legislation of California
Legal Services for Prisoners with Children
San Diego County District Attorney
Santa Clara County District Attorney
OPPOSITION : (Verified 8/27/14)
California Police Chiefs Association
Citizens for Law and Order, Inc.
Crime Victims Action Alliance
Department of Finance
District Attorney of Sacramento County
Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department
National Organization of Parents of Murdered Children
CONTINUED
SB 980
Page
8
Orange County District Attorney's Office
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 77-1, 08/27/14
AYES: Achadjian, Alejo, Allen, Ammiano, Bigelow, Bloom,
Bocanegra, Bonilla, Bonta, Bradford, Brown, Buchanan, Ian
Calderon, Campos, Chau, Ch�vez, Chesbro, Conway, Cooley,
Dababneh, Dahle, Daly, Dickinson, Donnelly, Eggman, Fong,
Frazier, Beth Gaines, Garcia, Gatto, Gomez, Gonzalez, Gordon,
Gorell, Gray, Grove, Hagman, Hall, Roger Hern�ndez, Holden,
Jones, Jones-Sawyer, Levine, Linder, Logue, Lowenthal,
Maienschein, Mansoor, Medina, Melendez, Mullin, Muratsuchi,
Nazarian, Nestande, Olsen, Pan, Patterson, Perea, John A.
P�rez, V. Manuel P�rez, Quirk, Quirk-Silva, Rendon,
Ridley-Thomas, Rodriguez, Salas, Skinner, Stone, Ting, Wagner,
Waldron, Weber, Wieckowski, Wilk, Williams, Yamada, Atkins
NOES: Fox
NO VOTE RECORDED: Harkey, Vacancy
JG:e 8/27/14 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****
CONTINUED