Open unsolved homicide: review and reinvestigation.

Gipson, joined by coauthors Alvarez, Bonta, Connolly, Kalra, Lee, and Ortega, advances a measure that would establish the California Homicide Victims’ Families’ Rights Act, creating a formal path to review open unsolved homicides and, where warranted, to reinvestigate them. The act would require applicable law enforcement agencies to review the case files upon a written application by designated family members or their designated legal representatives, and to initiate a reinvestigation if the review identifies probative investigative leads, with the constraint that only one reinvestigation may proceed at a time for the same victim.

Key terms and scope unfold in tandem with a defined process. The chapter defines an agency as a California law enforcement entity and an applicable agency as one that is investigating or has investigated a homicide. A designated person is an immediate family member or their State Bar–authorized representative. Homicide encompasses murder, manslaughter, vehicular manslaughter, and related sections, and an open unsolved homicide meets criteria including being committed after January 1, 1990, more than three years before the application, prior investigation, exhausted probative leads, and no identified suspect. A case file review may consider missed investigative steps, witness interviews, forensic testing, and updating the file to current investigative standards. Agencies must provide written acknowledgment of receipt and notify the designated person of their rights, and multiple agencies coordinating so only one review occurs for a given case is required. The review must conclude within 120 days, with a possible extension of up to 60 days if resource considerations justify it, and agencies must explain any extension.

If the review determines that reinvestigation would yield probative leads, the agency shall conduct a reinvestigation, potentially reanalyzing all evidence to develop leads about suspect(s). When more than one agency is involved, they must coordinate to ensure a single reinvestigation at a time. Throughout the process, the agency must provide periodic updates to the designated person and deliver a written statement of the decision at the conclusion, with an option for a face-to-face explanation. The act further provides that, if the case file review concludes not to reinvestigate, no additional reviews may be undertaken for five years unless newly discovered, materially significant evidence arises; similarly, if a reinvestigation occurs and no suspect is identified, the five-year moratorium on further reviews or reinvestigations applies unless new evidence emerges. Privacy and safety protections limit information sharing to avoid endangering persons, impeding ongoing investigations, violating court orders, or breaching privacy obligations.

Implementation considerations are anchored in a recognized state-mandated local program framework. The legislation acknowledges that new duties imposed on local law enforcement may require reimbursement if the state Mandates the costs on local agencies, with statutory mechanisms in place to govern such reimbursement. The act adds a distinct chapter to the Penal Code, aligning open unsolved homicide reinvestigations with defined criteria and a structured, time-bound review and reinvestigation process, while preserving statutory boundaries around sensitive information. The substantive scope centers on homicides committed after 1990 and meeting the outlined criteria, and the policy context reflects an intent to formalize family-led requests for review and potential reinvestigation within a clear procedural timetable that emphasizes accuracy and procedural transparency.