An act to amend Section 680 of the Penal Code, relating to evidence.
SB 733 amends California’s Sexual Assault Victims DNA Bill of Rights to create a new option for adult sexual assault survivors who are undecided about reporting to law enforcement at the time of a forensic exam. Under the bill, such a survivor may request that collected medical evidence not be tested. If that request is made during the exam, the medical facility may not submit the kit to a crime lab and the investigating agency must retain it until the survivor later requests testing. If the request is made after the exam, the kit must be retained by the investigating agency or returned from the lab if testing has not begun. The bill also allows the survivor to later change course and request testing even if they initially declined it.
The bill preserves the existing framework requiring timely testing and notification for sexual assault forensic evidence, including law enforcement timelines for submission, crime lab processing deadlines, victim status updates, notice before destruction of evidence, and minimum retention periods for unsolved cases. It also clarifies that limited transfers for secure transport, intake, or triage do not count as submission for testing. The measure includes a reimbursement provision if the Commission on State Mandates finds state-mandated local costs, reflecting that local investigating agencies will have new duties related to retention and notification.
SB 733 appears to have been broadly supported throughout the legislative process. The recorded votes were unanimous at each stage, including committee and floor votes in both houses, and the bill moved through consent calendar and concurrence procedures without recorded opposition. The lack of committee transcript material suggests there was little publicly documented debate in the available record.
The main policy issue underlying the bill is survivor autonomy versus evidence preservation. Supporters likely viewed the measure as giving adult survivors more control over whether evidence is tested before they decide whether to involve police, while still preserving the kit for possible future use. The principal point of operational concern is the added burden on medical facilities, investigating agencies, and crime labs to track, retain, and later process kits on survivor request, which is why the bill is treated as a state-mandated local program. No significant opposition is reflected in the vote history provided.
SB 733 amends Penal Code Section 680, part of the Sexual Assault Victims DNA Bill of Rights, to add a new survivor-directed option for delaying testing of sexual assault forensic evidence when an adult survivor is undecided about reporting to law enforcement. It changes the handling rules for kits in those circumstances, requiring retention rather than testing, and authorizes later testing at the survivor’s request. The bill also reinforces existing notice, retention, and destruction rules for unsolved sexual assault evidence and may trigger state reimbursement for local agencies if mandated costs are found.
The bill’s legislative history shows strong, bipartisan support and no recorded opposition in the votes provided. It advanced unanimously through committee and floor votes, including consent calendar action, suggesting broad agreement with the bill’s survivor-centered approach and its preservation of evidence for possible future testing. The absence of committee transcript material indicates little documented controversy in the available record.
The central tension in SB 733 is between giving adult sexual assault survivors more control over whether their evidence is tested before they decide to report, and maintaining the evidence chain for future investigation and prosecution. Potential concerns for law enforcement, medical facilities, and crime labs include added retention, tracking, and notification responsibilities, as well as the need to manage kits that are held untested for an indeterminate period. The bill addresses those concerns by preserving chain-of-custody documentation, retention timelines, and later testing rights, and by treating the measure as a state-mandated local program with possible reimbursement.