Mike Gatto
- Democratic
Author
(1) Existing law, as amended by the DNA Fingerprint, Unsolved Crime and Innocence Protection Act, Proposition 69, approved by the voters at the November 2, 2004, general election (the DNA Act) requires any adult person who is arrested or charged with any felony offense to provide buccal swab samples, right thumbprints, and a full palm print impression of each hand, and any blood specimens or other biological samples required for law enforcement identification analysis. Existing law requires that blood specimens and buccal swab samples be forwarded promptly to the Department of Justice for analysis. Existing case law, People v. Buza (2014) 231 Cal.App.4th 1446, for which review has been granted by the California Supreme Court, holds that the DNA Act, to the extent it requires felony arrestees to submit to a DNA sample for law enforcement analysis and inclusion in the state and federal DNA databases, without independent suspicion, a warrant, or a judicial or grand jury determination of probable cause, unreasonably intrudes on the arrestee's expectation of privacy and is invalid under the California Constitution. The DNA Act provides that it may be amended by a statute passed by each house of the Legislature that furthers the purpose of the measure. This bill would state that it is the intention of the Legislature to further the purposes of the DNA Act in light of the above-specified case law. The bill would, if the California Supreme Court rules to uphold People v. Buza, require that a blood specimen or buccal swab sample taken from a person arrested for the commission of a felony be forwarded to the department after a felony arrest warrant has been signed by a judicial officer, a grand jury indictment has been found and issued, or a judicial determination of probable cause to believe the person has committed the offense for which he or she was arrested has been made. (2) Existing law, as amended by the DNA Act, requires that a DNA specimen and sample be destroyed and that a searchable database profile be expunged from that databank program if the person from whom the specimen or sample was collected has no past or present offense or pending charge which qualifies that person for inclusion in the database and if that person submits an application, as specified. Existing law gives the court discretion to grant or deny the application. This bill would, if the California Supreme Court rules to uphold People v. Buza, require the DNA specimen and sample to be destroyed and the searchable database profile expunged from the database without the requirement of an application.
Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 487, Statutes of 2015.
Approved by the Governor.
Enrolled and presented to the Governor at 4 p.m.
Senate amendments concurred in. To Engrossing and Enrolling. (Ayes 76. Noes 1. Page 3154.).
Motion to reconsider made by Senator Hancock.
Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Assembly. (Ayes 38. Noes 0. Page 2706.).
In Assembly. Concurrence in Senate amendments pending.
Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Assembly. (Ayes 40. Noes 0. Page 2710.).
Reconsideration granted. (Ayes 40. Noes 0. Page 2710.)
Read second time. Ordered to third reading.
Read third time and amended. Ordered to second reading.
Read second time and amended. Ordered to third reading.
From committee: Amend, and do pass as amended. (Ayes 6. Noes 0.) (August 27).
From committee: Amend, and do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 7. Noes 0.) (July 14).
Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
Withdrawn from committee.
From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to committee. Read second time, amended, and re-referred to Com. on APPR.
In committee: Hearing postponed by committee.
From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. with recommendation: To Consent Calendar. (Ayes 5. Noes 0.) (June 16). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
In Senate. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment.
Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Senate. (Ayes 74. Noes 0. Page 1560.)
Read second time. Ordered to Consent Calendar.
From committee: Do pass. To Consent Calendar. (Ayes 17. Noes 0.) (May 13).
Read second time and amended.
From committee: Amend, and do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on APPR. with recommendation: To Consent Calendar. (Ayes 7. Noes 0.) (April 29).
From committee: Be re-referred to Com. on E. & R. Re-referred. (Ayes 10. Noes 0.) (April 23). Re-referred to Com. on E. & R.
In committee: Set, first hearing. Hearing canceled at the request of author.
Re-referred to Com. on RLS. pursuant to Assembly Rule 96.
From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to Com. on INS. Read second time and amended.
From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to Com. on INS. Read second time and amended.
Read first time.
From printer. May be heard in committee March 31.
Introduced. To print.
| Bill Text Versions | Format |
|---|---|
| AB1492 | HTML |
| 02/27/15 - Introduced | |
| 03/26/15 - Amended Assembly | |
| 04/15/15 - Amended Assembly | |
| 04/30/15 - Amended Assembly | |
| 06/29/15 - Amended Senate | |
| 07/16/15 - Amended Senate | |
| 08/31/15 - Amended Senate | |
| 09/04/15 - Amended Senate | |
| 09/16/15 - Enrolled | |
| 10/04/15 - Chaptered |
| Document | Format |
|---|---|
| No related documents. |
Data on Open States is updated periodically throughout the day from the official website of the California State Legislature.
If you notice any inconsistencies with these official sources, feel free to file an issue.