Upload
vuthuy
View
217
Download
3
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
California Crime Laboratory
Review Task Force
An Examination of
Forensic Science in California
November 2009
California Crime Laboratory
Review Task Force
An Examination of
Forensic Science in California
November 2009
California Crime Laboratory Review Task Force
Members
Dane Gillette, Task Force Chair Chief Assistant Attorney General
Representing: California Attorney Generals Office, Department of Justice
Barry Fisher, Vice Chair
Crime Laboratory Director (retired)
Los Angeles County Sheriffs Departments
Scientific Services Bureau
Representing: The California State Sheriffs Association, from a department with a crime laboratory
Michael Burt, Criminal Defense Attorney Law Office of Michael Burt
Representing: A private criminal defense attorney organization
Dolores A. Carr, District Attorney Santa Clara County
Representing: The California District Attorneys Association, from an office with a crime laboratory
Arturo Castro, Attorney
Office of the General Counsel
Administrative Office of the Courts
Representing: Judicial Council of California
Jennifer Friedman, Deputy Public Defender Los Angeles County Public Defenders Office
Representing: The California Public Defenders Association
Dean M. Gialamas, Director
Orange County Sheriffs Departments
Forensic Science Service Division
Representing: The American Society of Crime Laboratory Directors
Robert A. Jarzen, Director
Laboratory of Forensic Services
Sacramento County District Attorneys Office
Representing: The California Association of
Crime Laboratory Directors
Elizabeth A. Johnson, Ph.D., Forensic Scientist Appointed by: The Office of the President pro Tempore
of the Senate
i
Members
Sam Lucia, Lieutenant San Bernardino County Sheriffs Departments
Scientific Investigations Division
Representing: The California Peace Officers Association
Gregory Matheson, Director
Los Angeles Police Departments
Criminalistics Laboratory
Representing: The California Police Chiefs Association,
from a department with a crime laboratory
James McLaughlin, Chief Planning and Analysis Division
Representing: California Highway Patrol
Jennifer Mihalovich, Criminalist III
Oakland Police Departments Criminalistics Laboratory
Representing: The California Association of Criminalists
Steven Nash, Detective (retired) Marin County Sheriffs Department
Representing: The International Association for Identification
Jeff Rodzen, Ph.D., Senior Wildlife Forensic Specialist
California Department of Fish and Games
Wildlife Forensics Laboratory
Appointed by: The Governor
William C. Thompson, J.D., Ph.D., Professor
University of California, Irvine
Department of Criminology, Law and Society
Appointed by: The Office of the Speaker of the Assembly
Charlotte Wacker, Director
University of California, Davis, Body Donation Program
Appointed by: The Governor
The findings and recommendations expressed in this report are solely those of the California Crime Laboratory Review Task Force, and should not be considered as representing those of any department or agency of the California State Government. The opinions and recommendations expressed in this report reflect the consensus of the Task Force members.
ii
Special Recognition
We wish to recognize and acknowledge the individuals who staffed the Task Force and provided invaluable administrative support, critical technical skills, and a major contribution in the preparation of the Final Report.
California Department of Justice
Michael Chamberlain Deputy Attorney General, Staff Counsel to Task Force Colleen Higgins Staff Services Manager Leah Barros Student Assistant Celia Parks Administrative Assistant
In addition, we would like to express our gratitude to the many members of the public, including members of law enforcement agencies and the legal, academic and scientific communities, who attended one or more of the public Task Force meetings. Many contributed ideas and comments during the meetings. Several individuals provided particularly useful and perceptive input and they are noted below.
Mary Gibbons Manager, Oakland Police Departments Criminalistics Division Kevin Davis California Highway Patrol, in attendance with or for Chief James
McLaughlin
California Department of Justice, Bureau of Forensic Services
Jill Spriggs Chief Eva Steinberger Assistant Chief in charge of DNA Programs Bill Phillips Director, Toxicology Laboratory
iii
Acknowledgments
We also wish to acknowledge the staff of the California Attorney Generals Communications Office, Communications and Imaging Resource Center (CIRC), who contributed to the Final Report.
Jerry Hill Staff Services Manager Daphne Hom Managing Editor Allison Meraz Editor Oscar Estrella Graphic Designer Tricia Morgensen Graphic Designer Janet Mistchenko Graphic Designer
Special thanks to Stan Brown, CIRC photographer, and the CIRC printing staff who assisted in the Final Reports production.
Photo Credits
The California Crime Laboratory Review Task Force is grateful for the photographs provided for this report by the following facilities: Sacramento County District Attorneys Forensic Sciences Laboratory, Orange County Sheriff-Coroner Departments OC Crime Laboratory, Santa Clara County District Attorneys Laboratory of Criminalistics, BFS Jan Bashinski DNA Laboratory, BFS Fresno Regional Laboratory, and the Hertzberg-Davis Forensic Science Center, CSU Los Angeles.
iv
.
Table of Contents
Executive Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Chapter 1
Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Chapter 2
Organization and Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
Chapter 3
Staff and Training
Recruitment and Retention . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
Education. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
Certification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
Chapter 4
Funding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
Chapter 5
Performance Standards and Equipment
Workload Demands . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
Staffing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
Equipment and Facilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68
Accreditation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72
Chapter 6
Statewide Forensic Science Oversight. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85
Appendices A. Task Force Member Biographies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93
B. Penal Code Section 11062 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99
C. Crime Laboratory Survey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .101
D. Law Enforcement Agency Survey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121
E. District Attorney Survey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .127
F. Supplemental Questionnaire. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .137
G. List of Meeting Presentations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .139
H. Recommendations of the 2009 National Academy of Sciences Report. . . . . . . . . . . 141
I. Table of Comparative Salaries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .147
J. Presentation on ASCLD/LAB Certification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .159
K. Existing State Oversight Entities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 171
Executive Summary
An Examination of Forensic Science
in California
Over the years, a network of forensic laboratories was created throughout California to serve the states criminal justice system. The California Department of Justice established several state-level labs while counties or cities developed their own entities. Since the criminal justice system depends on high-quality forensic science services, California enacted legislation in October 2007 to review the states crime laboratory system (Assembly Bill 1079, Richardson) with a mandate to the Department of Justice to create and chair the California Crime Laboratory Review Task Force. The legislation added section 11062 to the California Penal Code,1
which directed the Task Force to make recommendations as to how best to configure, fund, and improve the delivery of