Senate BillNo. 694


Introduced by Senator Leno

February 27, 2015


An act to amend Sections 1473 and 1485.55 of the Penal Code, relating to evidence.

LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL’S DIGEST

SB 694, as introduced, Leno. New evidence: habeas corpus: motion to vacate judgment: indemnity.

Existing law allows every person who is unlawfully imprisoned or restrained of his or her liberty to prosecute a writ of habeas corpus to inquire into the cause of his or her imprisonment or restraint. Existing law allows a writ of habeas corpus to be prosecuted for, but not limited to, false evidence that is substantially material or probative to the issue of guilt or punishment that was introduced at trial and false physical evidence which was a material factor directly related to the plea of guilt of the person.

This bill would additionally allow a writ of habeas corpus to be prosecuted on the basis of new evidence which would raise a reasonable probability of a different outcome if a new trial were granted.

Existing law requires the California Victim Compensation and Government Claims Board to recommend an appropriation be made by the Legislature for the purpose of indemnifying a person if the evidence shows that a crime with which the person was charged was either not committed at all, or, if committed, was not committed by that person. Existing law requires that the appropriation recommended shall be a sum equivalent to $100 per day of incarceration served subsequent to the person’s conviction. If a court grants a writ of habeas corpus or vacates a judgment on the basis of new evidence and finds that the new evidence points unerringlying to innocence, existing law requires the board to recommend an appropriation to the Legislature pursuant to these provisions without a hearing.

This bill would require the board to recommend an appropriation to the Legislature if the court finds that the new evidence raises a reasonable probability of a different outcome if a new trial were granted.

Vote: majority. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: yes. State-mandated local program: no.

The people of the State of California do enact as follows:

P2    1

SECTION 1.  

Section 1473 of the Penal Code is amended to
2read:

3

1473.  

(a) Every person unlawfully imprisoned or restrained
4of his or her liberty, under any pretense, may prosecute a writ of
5habeas corpus to inquire into the cause of his or her imprisonment
6or restraint.

7(b) A writ of habeas corpus may be prosecuted for, but not
8limited to, the following reasons:

9(1) False evidence that is substantially material or probative on
10the issue of guilt or punishment was introduced against a person
11at a hearing or trial relating to his or her incarceration.

12(2) False physical evidence, believed by a person to be factual,
13probative, or material on the issue of guilt, which was known by
14the person at the time of entering a plea of guilty, which was a
15material factor directly related to the plea of guilty by the person.

begin insert

16(3) New evidence exists which would raise a reasonable
17probability of a different outcome if a new trial were granted.

end insert

18(c) Any allegation that the prosecution knew or should have
19known of the false nature of the evidence referred to inbegin insert paragraphs
20(1) and (2) ofend insert
subdivision (b) is immaterial to the prosecution of
21a writ of habeas corpus brought pursuant tobegin insert paragraph (1) or (2)
22ofend insert
subdivision (b).

23(d) begin deleteThis section shall not be construed as limiting end deletebegin insertThis section
24does not limit end insert
the grounds for which a writ of habeas corpus may
25be prosecuted orbegin delete as precludingend deletebegin insert precludeend insert the use of any other
26remedies.

27(e) (1) For purposes of this section, “false evidence”begin delete shall
28includeend delete
begin insert includesend insert opinions of experts that have either been
29repudiated by the expert who originally provided the opinion at a
P3    1hearing or trial or that have been undermined by later scientific
2research or technological advances.

3(2) This section does not create additional liabilities, beyond
4those already recognized, for an expert who repudiates his or her
5original opinion provided at a hearing or trial or whose opinion
6has been undermined by later scientific research or technological
7advancements.

8

SEC. 2.  

Section 1485.55 of the Penal Code is amended to read:

9

1485.55.  

(a) In a contested proceeding, if the court grants a
10writ of habeas corpus concerning a person who is unlawfully
11imprisoned or restrained, or when, pursuant to Section 1473.6, the
12court vacates a judgment on the basis of new evidence concerning
13a person who is no longer unlawfully imprisoned or restrained,
14and if the court finds that new evidence on the petitionbegin delete points
15unerringly to innocenceend delete
begin insert raises a reasonable probability of a
16different outcome if a new trial were grantedend insert
, that finding shall be
17binding on the California Victim Compensation and Government
18Claims Board for a claim presented to the board, and upon
19application by the person, the board shall, without a hearing,
20recommend to the Legislature that an appropriation be made and
21the claim paid pursuant to Section 4904.

22(b) If the court grants a writ of habeas corpus concerning a
23person who is unlawfully imprisoned or restrained on any ground
24other than new evidencebegin delete that points unerringly to innocence or
25actual innocenceend delete
begin insert that raises a reasonable probability of a different
26outcome if a new trial were grantedend insert
, the petitioner may move for
27a finding of innocence by a preponderance of the evidence that
28the crime with which he or she was charged was either not
29committed at all or, if committed, was not committed by him or
30her.

31(c) If the court vacates a judgment pursuant to Section 1473.6,
32on any ground other than new evidencebegin delete that points unerringly to
33innocence or actual innocenceend delete
begin insert that raises a reasonable probability
34of a different outcome if a new trial were grantedend insert
, the petitioner
35may move for a finding of innocence by a preponderance of the
36evidence that the crime with which he or she was charged was
37either not committed at all or, if committed, was not committed
38by him or her.

39(d) If the court makes a finding that the petitioner has proven
40his or her innocence by a preponderance of the evidence pursuant
P4    1to subdivision (b) or (c), the board shall, without a hearing,
2recommend to the Legislature that an appropriation be made and
3begin delete theend deletebegin insert anyend insert claimbegin insert filed shall beend insert paid pursuant to Section 4904.

4(e) begin deleteNo end deletebegin insertA end insertpresumptionbegin delete shallend deletebegin insert does notend insert exist in any other
5proceeding for failure to make a motion or obtain a favorable ruling
6pursuant to subdivision (b) or (c).

7(f) If a federal court, after granting a writ of habeas corpus,
8pursuant to a nonstatutory motion or request, finds a petitioner
9innocent by no less than a preponderance of the evidence that the
10crime with which he or she was charged was either not committed
11at all or, if committed, was not committed by him or her, the board
12shall, without a hearing, recommend to the Legislature that an
13appropriation be made andbegin delete theend deletebegin insert anyend insert claimbegin insert filed shall beend insert paid
14pursuant to Section 4904.

15(g) For the purposes of this section, “new evidence” means
16evidence that was not available or known at the time of trial that
17begin delete completely undermines the prosecution case and points unerringly
18to innocenceend delete
begin insert raises a reasonable probability of a different outcome
19if a new trial were grantedend insert
.



O

    99