BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    Ó



                                                                  SB 1031
                                                                  Page  1


          SENATE THIRD READING
          SB 1031 (De León)
          As Amended  April 3, 2014
          2/3 vote.  Urgency 

           SENATE VOTE  :27-3  
           
           APPROPRIATIONS      12-5                                        
           
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |Ayes:|Gatto, Bocanegra,         |     |                          |
          |     |Bradford,                 |     |                          |
          |     |Ian Calderon, Campos,     |     |                          |
          |     |Eggman, Gomez, Holden,    |     |                          |
          |     |Pan, Quirk,               |     |                          |
          |     |Ridley-Thomas, Weber      |     |                          |
          |     |                          |     |                          |
          |-----+--------------------------+-----+--------------------------|
          |Nays:|Bigelow, Donnelly, Jones, |     |                          |
          |     |Linder, Wagner            |     |                          |
          |     |                          |     |                          |
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
           SUMMARY  :  This bill, one of two annual state claims bills  
          introduced pursuant to the California Victim Compensation and  
          Government Claims Board (board) determinations and carried by  
          the Assembly and Senate Appropriations Committee chairs,  
          appropriates $776,947 to pay 332 claims against the state as  
          approved by the board, and $305,900 to pay the costs of one  
          erroneous conviction case.  

           FISCAL EFFECT  :  According to the Assembly Appropriations  
          Committee: 

          1)Appropriates $776,947 ($699,347 General Fund (GF); $77,600  
            special funds) to the board for payment of 332 stale-dated  
            warrants.   

          2)Appropriates $305,900 (GF) for payment for one board-approved  
            erroneous conviction case. 

           COMMENTS  :

          1)Rationale. Government Code Section 13928 requires the board to  
            ensure that all claims approved by the board, for which no  








                                                                  SB 1031
                                                                  Page  2


            legally available appropriation exists, are submitted for  
            legislative approval at least twice during each calendar year.  
              

             The re-issuance of stale-dated warrants (expired checks) is  
            the most prevalent claim approved by the board.  For  
            stale-dated warrants, the State Controller must confirm the  
            check was not cashed and that more than three years has passed  
            since the check was issued and the monies have reverted to the  
            GF or to the relevant special fund.  For these warrants an  
            appropriation is needed to reissue the payment.  

            In addition to stale-dated warrants, Penal Code Section 4900  
            et seq. authorizes a person convicted and imprisoned for a  
            felony to submit a claim to the board for pecuniary injury  
            sustained as a result of erroneous conviction and  
            imprisonment.  Pursuant to SB 618 (Leno), Chapter 800,  
            Statutes of 2013, if a person has secured a declaration of  
            factual innocence from the court after having his or her  
            conviction set aside, the finding is grounds for payment of a  
            claim against the state and upon application by the  
            petitioner, the board shall, without a hearing, recommend to  
            the Legislature an appropriation to cover the claim.   
            Likewise, if the court finds the petitioner has proven his or  
            her innocence by a preponderance of the evidence, or the court  
            grants a writ of habeas corpus concerning a person who is  
            unlawfully imprisoned, or when the court vacates a judgment  
            for a person on the basis of new evidence concerning a person  
            who is no longer unlawfully imprisoned, and the court finds  
            the evidence points unerringly to innocence, the board shall,  
            upon application by the claimant, without a hearing, recommend  
            to the Legislature an appropriation to cover the petitioner's  
            claim.

            Otherwise, a claimant is required to introduce evidence in  
            support of his or her claim at a hearing before the board, and  
            the Attorney General may introduce evidence in opposition. The  
            claimant must prove, by a preponderance of the evidence:  a)  
            the crime was not committed at all, or, if committed, was not  
            committed by the claimant; b) the claimant did not contribute  
            to the arrest or conviction for the crime; and c) the claimant  
            sustained pecuniary injury though the erroneous conviction and  
            imprisonment. 









                                                                  SB 1031
                                                                  Page  3


            If a claimant meets the burden of proof, the board shall  
            recommend to the Legislature an appropriation of $100 per day  
            of incarceration served in a state prison subsequent to the  
            claimant's conviction.

          2)Support. This bill, supported by the board, the Department of  
            Finance, and the administration, has no opposition.
             
             This bill passed the Senate with a 27-3 vote.

          3)All 332 claims are for stale-dated warrants, ranging from $15  
            to $90,688.  The average claim is $2,340. 

          4)Erroneous Conviction Claim, $305,900.  Mario Rocha, pursuant  
            to statute and the board's determination, met the statutory  
            requirements for compensation, proving by a preponderance of  
            the evidence that he did not commit the crimes with which he  
            was charged.

            On February 16, 1996, at a Highland Park party a fight broke  
            out and gunfire ensued.  Martin Aceves was shot and killed.   
            Three defendants were tried together and on December 4, 1997,  
            a jury found all three guilty of murder and attempted murder,  
            and found that each defendant used a firearm in the commission  
            of the crimes.  Three witnesses identified Rocha as a shooter;  
            nine others testified he was not the shooter.  Most witnesses  
            testified to hearing four to six gunshots and none testified  
            to seeing more than two shooters.  Two bullets were recovered  
            from the scene and expert testimony indicated that they came  
            from two different guns.

            Rocha was sentenced to 29 years-to-life in prison for the  
            murder.  Rocha filed numerous challenges, including a claim  
            for ineffective assistance of counsel.  On December 28, 2005,  
            the Court of Appeals granted Rocha's writ of habeas corpus  
            based on ineffective counsel. Rocha was released on bail on  
            August 24, 2006, while the Los Angeles District Attorney  
            (D.A.) determined whether to retry him.  On October 28, 2008,  
            the D.A. dismissed the charges against Rocha, citing the  
            unavailability of witnesses. Rocha then filed a claim with the  
            board for compensation related to erroneous conviction.

            The board's decision concludes Rocha met his burden of proving  
            by a preponderance of the evidence that he did not commit the  








                                                                  SB 1031
                                                                  Page  4


            crimes of murder and attempted murder.  The decision states,  
            in part: 

               When looking at the totality of the evidence, the  
               forensic evidence shows that only two guns were fired  
               and no witness named three different shooters.  There  
               was simply no evidence whatsoever that there was a  
               third shooter.  Two documented gang members who  
               brought weapons to the party were convicted of murder  
               and attempted murder and are still in prison.  Nine  
               witnesses state that Rocha was not the shooter while  
               only one solidly states that Rocha was the shooter,  
               and a third witness originally told law enforcement he  
               did not even see the shooter.  Based on this evidence  
               Rocha has met his burden of proving by a preponderance  
               of the evidence that he did not commit the crimes of  
               murder and attempted murder. 

          5)Related Legislation.  AB 1617 (Gatto) of the current  
            legislative session, which appropriates $745,043 to pay 136  
            claims and $1,450,200 to pay the costs of three erroneous  
            conviction cases, is pending in the Assembly.   


           Analysis Prepared by  :    Geoff Long / APPR. / (916) 319-2081 


                                                         FN: 0004572