CALIFORNIA LEGISLATURE 20192020 REGULAR SESSION Assembly Bill No. 2933Introduced by Assembly Member KalraFebruary 21, 2020 An act to amend Section 1473 of the Penal Code, relating to criminal proceedings. LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGESTAB 2933, as introduced, Kalra. Criminal proceedings: writ of habeas corpus.Existing law allows a person who is unlawfully imprisoned or restrained to prosecute a writ of habeas corpus to inquire into the cause of the 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 that was a material factor directly related to the plea of guilty of the person.This bill would make technical, nonsubstantive changes to these provisions.Digest Key Vote: MAJORITY Appropriation: NO Fiscal Committee: NO Local Program: NO Bill TextThe people of the State of California do enact as follows:SECTION 1. Section 1473 of the Penal Code is amended to read:1473. (a) A person who is unlawfully imprisoned or restrained of his or her liberty, restrained, under any pretense, may prosecute a writ of habeas corpus to inquire into the cause of his or her the imprisonment or restraint.(b) A writ of habeas corpus may be prosecuted for, but not limited to, any of the following reasons:(1) False evidence that is substantially material or probative on the issue of guilt or punishment was introduced against a person at a hearing or trial relating to his or her the incarceration.(2) False physical evidence, believed by a person to be factual, probative, or material on the issue of guilt, which was known by the person at the time of entering a plea of guilty, which was a material factor directly related to the plea of guilty by the person.(3) (A) New evidence exists that is credible, material, presented without substantial delay, and of such decisive force and value that it would have more likely than not changed the outcome at trial.(B) For purposes of this section, new evidence means evidence that has been discovered after trial, that could not have been discovered prior to trial by the exercise of due diligence, and that is admissible and not merely cumulative, corroborative, collateral, or impeaching.(c) Any An allegation that the prosecution knew or should have known of the false nature of the evidence referred to in paragraphs (1) and (2) of subdivision (b) is immaterial to the prosecution of a writ of habeas corpus brought pursuant to paragraph (1) or (2) of subdivision (b).(d) This section does not limit the grounds for which a writ of habeas corpus may be prosecuted or preclude the use of any other remedies.(e) (1) For purposes of this section, false evidence includes opinions of experts that have either been repudiated by the expert who originally provided the opinion at a hearing or trial or that have been undermined by later scientific research or technological advances.(2) This section does not create additional liabilities, beyond those already recognized, for an expert who repudiates his or her their original opinion provided at a hearing or trial or whose opinion has been undermined by later scientific research or technological advancements.
CALIFORNIA LEGISLATURE 20192020 REGULAR SESSION Assembly Bill No. 2933Introduced by Assembly Member KalraFebruary 21, 2020 An act to amend Section 1473 of the Penal Code, relating to criminal proceedings. LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGESTAB 2933, as introduced, Kalra. Criminal proceedings: writ of habeas corpus.Existing law allows a person who is unlawfully imprisoned or restrained to prosecute a writ of habeas corpus to inquire into the cause of the 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 that was a material factor directly related to the plea of guilty of the person.This bill would make technical, nonsubstantive changes to these provisions.Digest Key Vote: MAJORITY Appropriation: NO Fiscal Committee: NO Local Program: NO
CALIFORNIA LEGISLATURE 20192020 REGULAR SESSION
Assembly Bill
No. 2933
Introduced by Assembly Member KalraFebruary 21, 2020
Introduced by Assembly Member Kalra
February 21, 2020
An act to amend Section 1473 of the Penal Code, relating to criminal proceedings.
LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST
## LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST
AB 2933, as introduced, Kalra. Criminal proceedings: writ of habeas corpus.
Existing law allows a person who is unlawfully imprisoned or restrained to prosecute a writ of habeas corpus to inquire into the cause of the 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 that was a material factor directly related to the plea of guilty of the person.This bill would make technical, nonsubstantive changes to these provisions.
Existing law allows a person who is unlawfully imprisoned or restrained to prosecute a writ of habeas corpus to inquire into the cause of the 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 that was a material factor directly related to the plea of guilty of the person.
This bill would make technical, nonsubstantive changes to these provisions.
## Digest Key
## Bill Text
The people of the State of California do enact as follows:SECTION 1. Section 1473 of the Penal Code is amended to read:1473. (a) A person who is unlawfully imprisoned or restrained of his or her liberty, restrained, under any pretense, may prosecute a writ of habeas corpus to inquire into the cause of his or her the imprisonment or restraint.(b) A writ of habeas corpus may be prosecuted for, but not limited to, any of the following reasons:(1) False evidence that is substantially material or probative on the issue of guilt or punishment was introduced against a person at a hearing or trial relating to his or her the incarceration.(2) False physical evidence, believed by a person to be factual, probative, or material on the issue of guilt, which was known by the person at the time of entering a plea of guilty, which was a material factor directly related to the plea of guilty by the person.(3) (A) New evidence exists that is credible, material, presented without substantial delay, and of such decisive force and value that it would have more likely than not changed the outcome at trial.(B) For purposes of this section, new evidence means evidence that has been discovered after trial, that could not have been discovered prior to trial by the exercise of due diligence, and that is admissible and not merely cumulative, corroborative, collateral, or impeaching.(c) Any An allegation that the prosecution knew or should have known of the false nature of the evidence referred to in paragraphs (1) and (2) of subdivision (b) is immaterial to the prosecution of a writ of habeas corpus brought pursuant to paragraph (1) or (2) of subdivision (b).(d) This section does not limit the grounds for which a writ of habeas corpus may be prosecuted or preclude the use of any other remedies.(e) (1) For purposes of this section, false evidence includes opinions of experts that have either been repudiated by the expert who originally provided the opinion at a hearing or trial or that have been undermined by later scientific research or technological advances.(2) This section does not create additional liabilities, beyond those already recognized, for an expert who repudiates his or her their original opinion provided at a hearing or trial or whose opinion has been undermined by later scientific research or technological advancements.
The people of the State of California do enact as follows:
## The people of the State of California do enact as follows:
SECTION 1. Section 1473 of the Penal Code is amended to read:1473. (a) A person who is unlawfully imprisoned or restrained of his or her liberty, restrained, under any pretense, may prosecute a writ of habeas corpus to inquire into the cause of his or her the imprisonment or restraint.(b) A writ of habeas corpus may be prosecuted for, but not limited to, any of the following reasons:(1) False evidence that is substantially material or probative on the issue of guilt or punishment was introduced against a person at a hearing or trial relating to his or her the incarceration.(2) False physical evidence, believed by a person to be factual, probative, or material on the issue of guilt, which was known by the person at the time of entering a plea of guilty, which was a material factor directly related to the plea of guilty by the person.(3) (A) New evidence exists that is credible, material, presented without substantial delay, and of such decisive force and value that it would have more likely than not changed the outcome at trial.(B) For purposes of this section, new evidence means evidence that has been discovered after trial, that could not have been discovered prior to trial by the exercise of due diligence, and that is admissible and not merely cumulative, corroborative, collateral, or impeaching.(c) Any An allegation that the prosecution knew or should have known of the false nature of the evidence referred to in paragraphs (1) and (2) of subdivision (b) is immaterial to the prosecution of a writ of habeas corpus brought pursuant to paragraph (1) or (2) of subdivision (b).(d) This section does not limit the grounds for which a writ of habeas corpus may be prosecuted or preclude the use of any other remedies.(e) (1) For purposes of this section, false evidence includes opinions of experts that have either been repudiated by the expert who originally provided the opinion at a hearing or trial or that have been undermined by later scientific research or technological advances.(2) This section does not create additional liabilities, beyond those already recognized, for an expert who repudiates his or her their original opinion provided at a hearing or trial or whose opinion has been undermined by later scientific research or technological advancements.
SECTION 1. Section 1473 of the Penal Code is amended to read:
### SECTION 1.
1473. (a) A person who is unlawfully imprisoned or restrained of his or her liberty, restrained, under any pretense, may prosecute a writ of habeas corpus to inquire into the cause of his or her the imprisonment or restraint.(b) A writ of habeas corpus may be prosecuted for, but not limited to, any of the following reasons:(1) False evidence that is substantially material or probative on the issue of guilt or punishment was introduced against a person at a hearing or trial relating to his or her the incarceration.(2) False physical evidence, believed by a person to be factual, probative, or material on the issue of guilt, which was known by the person at the time of entering a plea of guilty, which was a material factor directly related to the plea of guilty by the person.(3) (A) New evidence exists that is credible, material, presented without substantial delay, and of such decisive force and value that it would have more likely than not changed the outcome at trial.(B) For purposes of this section, new evidence means evidence that has been discovered after trial, that could not have been discovered prior to trial by the exercise of due diligence, and that is admissible and not merely cumulative, corroborative, collateral, or impeaching.(c) Any An allegation that the prosecution knew or should have known of the false nature of the evidence referred to in paragraphs (1) and (2) of subdivision (b) is immaterial to the prosecution of a writ of habeas corpus brought pursuant to paragraph (1) or (2) of subdivision (b).(d) This section does not limit the grounds for which a writ of habeas corpus may be prosecuted or preclude the use of any other remedies.(e) (1) For purposes of this section, false evidence includes opinions of experts that have either been repudiated by the expert who originally provided the opinion at a hearing or trial or that have been undermined by later scientific research or technological advances.(2) This section does not create additional liabilities, beyond those already recognized, for an expert who repudiates his or her their original opinion provided at a hearing or trial or whose opinion has been undermined by later scientific research or technological advancements.
1473. (a) A person who is unlawfully imprisoned or restrained of his or her liberty, restrained, under any pretense, may prosecute a writ of habeas corpus to inquire into the cause of his or her the imprisonment or restraint.(b) A writ of habeas corpus may be prosecuted for, but not limited to, any of the following reasons:(1) False evidence that is substantially material or probative on the issue of guilt or punishment was introduced against a person at a hearing or trial relating to his or her the incarceration.(2) False physical evidence, believed by a person to be factual, probative, or material on the issue of guilt, which was known by the person at the time of entering a plea of guilty, which was a material factor directly related to the plea of guilty by the person.(3) (A) New evidence exists that is credible, material, presented without substantial delay, and of such decisive force and value that it would have more likely than not changed the outcome at trial.(B) For purposes of this section, new evidence means evidence that has been discovered after trial, that could not have been discovered prior to trial by the exercise of due diligence, and that is admissible and not merely cumulative, corroborative, collateral, or impeaching.(c) Any An allegation that the prosecution knew or should have known of the false nature of the evidence referred to in paragraphs (1) and (2) of subdivision (b) is immaterial to the prosecution of a writ of habeas corpus brought pursuant to paragraph (1) or (2) of subdivision (b).(d) This section does not limit the grounds for which a writ of habeas corpus may be prosecuted or preclude the use of any other remedies.(e) (1) For purposes of this section, false evidence includes opinions of experts that have either been repudiated by the expert who originally provided the opinion at a hearing or trial or that have been undermined by later scientific research or technological advances.(2) This section does not create additional liabilities, beyond those already recognized, for an expert who repudiates his or her their original opinion provided at a hearing or trial or whose opinion has been undermined by later scientific research or technological advancements.
1473. (a) A person who is unlawfully imprisoned or restrained of his or her liberty, restrained, under any pretense, may prosecute a writ of habeas corpus to inquire into the cause of his or her the imprisonment or restraint.(b) A writ of habeas corpus may be prosecuted for, but not limited to, any of the following reasons:(1) False evidence that is substantially material or probative on the issue of guilt or punishment was introduced against a person at a hearing or trial relating to his or her the incarceration.(2) False physical evidence, believed by a person to be factual, probative, or material on the issue of guilt, which was known by the person at the time of entering a plea of guilty, which was a material factor directly related to the plea of guilty by the person.(3) (A) New evidence exists that is credible, material, presented without substantial delay, and of such decisive force and value that it would have more likely than not changed the outcome at trial.(B) For purposes of this section, new evidence means evidence that has been discovered after trial, that could not have been discovered prior to trial by the exercise of due diligence, and that is admissible and not merely cumulative, corroborative, collateral, or impeaching.(c) Any An allegation that the prosecution knew or should have known of the false nature of the evidence referred to in paragraphs (1) and (2) of subdivision (b) is immaterial to the prosecution of a writ of habeas corpus brought pursuant to paragraph (1) or (2) of subdivision (b).(d) This section does not limit the grounds for which a writ of habeas corpus may be prosecuted or preclude the use of any other remedies.(e) (1) For purposes of this section, false evidence includes opinions of experts that have either been repudiated by the expert who originally provided the opinion at a hearing or trial or that have been undermined by later scientific research or technological advances.(2) This section does not create additional liabilities, beyond those already recognized, for an expert who repudiates his or her their original opinion provided at a hearing or trial or whose opinion has been undermined by later scientific research or technological advancements.
1473. (a) A person who is unlawfully imprisoned or restrained of his or her liberty, restrained, under any pretense, may prosecute a writ of habeas corpus to inquire into the cause of his or her the imprisonment or restraint.
(b) A writ of habeas corpus may be prosecuted for, but not limited to, any of the following reasons:
(1) False evidence that is substantially material or probative on the issue of guilt or punishment was introduced against a person at a hearing or trial relating to his or her the incarceration.
(2) False physical evidence, believed by a person to be factual, probative, or material on the issue of guilt, which was known by the person at the time of entering a plea of guilty, which was a material factor directly related to the plea of guilty by the person.
(3) (A) New evidence exists that is credible, material, presented without substantial delay, and of such decisive force and value that it would have more likely than not changed the outcome at trial.
(B) For purposes of this section, new evidence means evidence that has been discovered after trial, that could not have been discovered prior to trial by the exercise of due diligence, and that is admissible and not merely cumulative, corroborative, collateral, or impeaching.
(c) Any An allegation that the prosecution knew or should have known of the false nature of the evidence referred to in paragraphs (1) and (2) of subdivision (b) is immaterial to the prosecution of a writ of habeas corpus brought pursuant to paragraph (1) or (2) of subdivision (b).
(d) This section does not limit the grounds for which a writ of habeas corpus may be prosecuted or preclude the use of any other remedies.
(e) (1) For purposes of this section, false evidence includes opinions of experts that have either been repudiated by the expert who originally provided the opinion at a hearing or trial or that have been undermined by later scientific research or technological advances.
(2) This section does not create additional liabilities, beyond those already recognized, for an expert who repudiates his or her their original opinion provided at a hearing or trial or whose opinion has been undermined by later scientific research or technological advancements.