Bill Text

Bill Information

PDF |Add To My Favorites |Track Bill | print page

AB-1736 Evidence: hearsay: prior inconsistent statements.(2017-2018)

SHARE THIS:share this bill in Facebookshare this bill in Twitter
Date Published: 07/09/2018 09:00 PM
AB1736:v96#DOCUMENT

Assembly Bill No. 1736
CHAPTER 64

An act to amend Section 1294 of the Evidence Code, relating to evidence.

[ Approved by Governor  July 09, 2018. Filed with Secretary of State  July 09, 2018. ]

LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST


AB 1736, Cunningham. Evidence: hearsay: prior inconsistent statements.
Existing law, known as the “hearsay rule,” provides that, at a hearing, evidence of a statement that was made other than by a witness while testifying at the hearing and that is offered to prove the truth of the matter stated is inadmissible. Existing law provides exceptions to the hearsay rule to permit the admission of specified kinds of evidence. Among other exceptions, certain evidence of prior inconsistent statements of a witness in the form of a video recorded statement or transcript that is properly admitted in a preliminary hearing or trial of the same criminal matter is admissible if certain conditions are met.
This bill would expand this exception to the hearsay rule to include audio recorded statements if the same conditions are met.
Existing law authorizes the defendant or the people, in cases where the defendant has been charged with a specified felony or arrest or where a material witness is about to leave the state, is sick or infirm, or is a dependent adult, to have a witness examined conditionally, as specified. Existing law specifies the information required to be stated in the affidavit applying to examine a witness conditionally.
This bill would expand the above-described exception to the hearsay rule to include prior inconsistent statements of a witness properly admitted in a conditional examination.
Vote: MAJORITY   Appropriation: NO   Fiscal Committee: NO   Local Program: NO  

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


SECTION 1.

 Section 1294 of the Evidence Code is amended to read:

1294.
 (a) The following evidence of prior inconsistent statements of a witness properly admitted in a conditional examination, preliminary hearing, or trial of the same criminal matter pursuant to Section 1235 is not made inadmissible by the hearsay rule if the witness is unavailable and former testimony of the witness is admitted pursuant to Section 1291:
(1) A video or audio recorded statement introduced at a conditional examination, preliminary hearing, or prior proceeding concerning the same criminal matter.
(2) A transcript, containing the statements, of the conditional examination, preliminary hearing, or prior proceeding concerning the same criminal matter.
(b) The party against whom the prior inconsistent statements are offered, at his or her option, may examine or cross-examine any person who testified at the conditional examination, preliminary hearing, or prior proceeding, as to the prior inconsistent statements of the witness.
(c) As used in this section, “conditional examination” has the same meaning as in Chapter 4 (commencing with Section 1335) of Title 10 of Part 2 of the Penal Code.