BILL ANALYSIS �
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | SB 1193|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: SB 1193
Author: Evans (D)
Amended: 5/20/14
Vote: 21
SENATE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE : 6-0, 4/29/14
AYES: Hancock, Anderson, Knight, Liu, Mitchell, Steinberg
NO VOTE RECORDED: De Le�n
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE : 7-0, 5/19/14
AYES: De Le�n, Walters, Gaines, Hill, Lara, Padilla, Steinberg
SUBJECT : Controlled substances: destruction of seized
marijuana
SOURCE : Peace Officers Research Association of California
DIGEST : This bill reduces the storage and sample-size
requirements for growing or harvested marijuana that has been
seized by law enforcement agencies; requires a 30 day retention
period of a two pound sample and five representative samples,
prior to destruction, as specified; and codifies the practice of
compensation to a defendant found to be in lawful possession of
marijuana, as specified, who was acquitted or whose case was
dismissed.
ANALYSIS :
Existing law:
CONTINUED
SB 1193
Page
2
1. Provides that controlled substances and devices or
paraphernalia for using controlled substances that are
possessed in violation of relevant statutes may be seized by
law enforcement officers. The seized controlled substances
are required to be destroyed upon a defendant's conviction,
or in cases without trial, dismissal, or conviction, the
seized property is to be destroyed unless the court finds
that the defendant lawfully possessed the property.
2. States that an order for destruction of controlled substances
and associated instruments and paraphernalia may be carried
out by a police or sheriff's agency, the Department of
Justice (DOJ), Highway Patrol, or Department of Alcoholic
Beverage Control.
3. Provides that law enforcement may, without a court order,
destroy seized controlled substances in excess of 10 pounds,
subsequent to all of the following requirements being met:
A. At least five random samples are taken and preserved
in addition to the 10 pounds required to be retained.
B. In the case of marijuana, at least one 10 pound
sample and five representative samples consisting of
leaves or buds are retained for evidence.
C. Photographs of the material to be destroyed are
taken.
D. The gross weight of the entire material is
determined.
E. The chief law enforcement officer has determined
that it is not reasonably possible to keep all of the
material or to store it in another place.
F. Within 30 days of destruction of the material, an
affidavit must be filed with the court demonstrating
compliance with the above provisions.
This bill:
1. Reduces the amount of growing or harvested marijuana that has
been seized by a law enforcement agency that must be retained
CONTINUED
SB 1193
Page
3
for evidence from at least 10 pounds to at least two pounds.
2. Reduces the required representative sample size of growing or
harvested marijuana from one 10 pound sample, to one two
pound sample.
3. Requires counsel for the defendant to have 30 days from the
date the growing or harvested marijuana was seized to examine
the two pound sample and five representative samples prior to
destruction if criminal proceedings are pending, as
specified.
4. Provides, upon a court order, for the following in a criminal
prosecution in which the defendant is acquitted or the case
is dismissed:
A. Any marijuana, instrument, or paraphernalia seized in
the case that was lawfully possessed by the defendant must
be returned to the defendant.
B. If any marijuana, instrument, or paraphernalia was
damaged or destroyed, the defendant must receive
reasonable compensation for the damage or loss.
C. A claim must be presented not later than six months
after acquittal or dismissal.
Comments
According to the author, "Current law requires a law enforcement
agency to retain as evidence ten pounds of confiscated cannabis,
along with five random samples of the evidence.
"Many sheriffs' departments, especially those in rural Northern
California counties, are finding the "ten pound" requirement
burdensome in two ways. First, the storage space alone can be
troublesome and expensive. Most evidence lockers were not built
to contain such large quantities of cannabis and sometimes
outdoor storage facilities are being considered, adding an
additional risk and cost to the agency. Second, and most
importantly, the peace officers working in these evidence
facilities are may be subject to unknown pesticides and
chemicals being used to sustain what may be an illegal grow.
Further, after a short period of time, much of the crop can
CONTINUED
SB 1193
Page
4
begin to spoil and mildew, causing additional health risks.
"This bill will simply reduce the storage requirement for
California's law enforcement agencies to a more sustainable
quantity, while simultaneously clarifying a defendant's evidence
rights."
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes
Local: Yes
According to the Senate Appropriations Committee:
Significant ongoing cost savings to local law enforcement
(Local) and the DOJ for reduced long-term retention and
storage costs, offset to a minor degree by increased costs for
the destruction of slightly more marijuana, the local costs of
which will be non-reimbursable (Local).
Potential minor state and state-reimbursable local costs
(General Fund) to retain the required samples of marijuana for
30 days from the date of seizure to allow counsel to examine
the evidence.
Potential state-reimbursable costs (General Fund) for mandated
compensation to defendants who were acquitted or whose cases
were dismissed for lawful possession of marijuana that was
subsequently damaged or destroyed after seizure. This bill
could also result in future cost savings to the state in
avoided causes of action that otherwise would have been filed.
SUPPORT : (Verified 5/20/14)
Peace Officers Research Association of California (source)
Americans for Safe Access
California Cannabis Industry Association
Drug Policy Alliance
JG:d 5/20/14 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
CONTINUED
SB 1193
Page
5
**** END ****
CONTINUED