Diversion.

Replaced enrolled bill formatting (Assembly/Senate passage dates, clerk and secretary signature blocks, blank Governor signature line) with chaptered law formatting (STATE OF CALIFORNIA AUTHENTICATED ELECTRONIC LEGAL MATERIAL header, CHAPTER 18 designation, and the note that it was approved by the Governor on June 29, 2026).

Page numbering changed from 'AB 46' with page reference '93' to 'Ch. 18' with page reference '92', reflecting re-pagination in the official statute compilation.

The burden of proof required for a court to find that a defendant's mental disorder was NOT a significant factor in the offense was lowered from 'clear and convincing evidence' to 'a preponderance of evidence.' This makes it easier for prosecutors to rebut the presumption, making it harder for defendants to qualify for diversion.

The public safety suitability standard was revised. The old version used 'endanger public safety' (defined as treatment likely resulting in physical injury or other serious danger) and 'unreasonable risk of danger to public safety.' The new version requires the court to find the defendant will not pose 'a substantial and undue risk to the physical safety of another person' if treated in the community.

The mental health expert's opinion must now include that the proposed mental health diversion plan is clinically appropriate to address the symptoms of the defendant's mental disorder that caused, contributed to, or motivated the charged offense. Previously, the expert only needed to opine that symptoms would respond to mental health treatment generally.

A new requirement was added that the court must be satisfied the treatment is consistent with the underlying purpose of mental health diversion as described in Section 1001.35. This ties the approved treatment plan to a specific statutory purpose.

Clarification added to subdivision (a) stating that diversion discretion must be exercised 'consistent with subdivision (b) or (c),' reinforcing that courts cannot grant diversion outside the eligibility and suitability framework.

Assembly Member Pacheco was added as a coauthor of the bill.

The evidentiary standard for rebutting the presumption that a defendant's mental disorder was a significant factor in the offense is now clearly 'clear and convincing evidence' rather than the previously conflicting 'preponderance of clear and convincing evidence.' This higher standard makes it harder for the prosecution to defeat the presumption, making diversion more likely.

Added the word 'or rediagnosed' to the requirement that a mental disorder diagnosis occur within five years of the current offense. This broadens eligibility by explicitly covering defendants who were rediagnosed within the window, not just initially diagnosed.

Removed the dual risk standard in subdivision (c)(1)(D). The old version required the defendant to pose neither 'an unreasonable risk of danger to public safety, as defined in Section 1170.18' nor 'a substantial and undue risk to the physical safety of another person.' The new version only requires the latter, eliminating the broader public safety standard and its cross-reference to Section 1170.18.

Removed the provision in subdivision (c)(2) that gave courts additional discretion to deny diversion even when a defendant was otherwise suitable, based on a finding that it is 'more likely than not' the defendant will pose an unreasonable risk to the physical safety of another person if treated in the community. This eliminates an extra gate that courts could use to deny diversion beyond the suitability criteria.

Added Assembly Member Bains as a coauthor and Senator Umberg as a Senate coauthor, indicating broader legislative support for the bill.

Line numbers (line 1, line 2, etc.) were removed from the statutory text, converting it from a marked-up amendment format to clean enrolled bill format.

Page numbering changed from '94' to '93' in headers and footers, reflecting re-pagination of the final document.

The legislative counsel's digest title changed from 'AB 46, as amended, Nguyen' to 'AB 46, Nguyen', dropping the 'as amended' designation now that the bill is in its final form.

Procedural language was added indicating the bill was received by the Governor, with blank fields for date and time, along with an 'Approved ___, 2026' signature line for the Governor.

Attempted murder is now explicitly added to the list of offenses that make a defendant ineligible for pretrial mental health diversion, alongside murder and voluntary manslaughter. Previously the bill only expressed legislative intent to draft future legislation to do this.

The public safety standard for diversion was changed from 'will not pose an unreasonable risk of danger to public safety, as defined in Section 1170.18' to a new defined standard: the defendant must not 'endanger public safety,' which is defined as treatment in the community likely resulting in physical injury or other serious danger to others. Removing 'unreasonable' lowers the threshold for denying diversion on safety grounds.

The requirement that a court find the mental disorder was a significant factor in the offense is now explicitly limited to cases where the defendant has been diagnosed with a mental disorder within five years prior to the current offense, based on evidence offered under the diagnosis requirement. This narrows when the court must make this finding.

Section 1, which stated the Legislature's intent to draft future legislation adding attempted murder to the excluded offenses list, was removed because the bill now directly makes that change in Section 2.

Additional Assembly Members (Krell, Petrie-Norris, and Blanca Rubio) were added as coauthors, and the fiscal committee was given jurisdiction over the bill (changed from 'no' to 'yes').

Attempted murder was removed from the list of charged offenses that disqualify a defendant from pretrial diversion. Only murder and voluntary manslaughter remain as automatic disqualifiers.

Conduct disorder that causes or threatens physical harm to people or animals was removed from the list of excluded mental disorders. Only antisocial personality disorder and pedophilia remain excluded, meaning defendants with qualifying conduct disorders can now be eligible for diversion.

The standard of proof for rebutting the presumption that a mental disorder was a significant factor in the offense was lowered from 'clear and convincing evidence' to 'a preponderance of evidence,' making it easier for defendants to qualify for diversion.

If a court denies diversion, it must now orally state the reasons for denial on the record.

A new provision allows a court to deny diversion even when a defendant is otherwise suitable, if the court finds it is more likely than not that the defendant will pose an unreasonable risk to the physical safety of another person if treated in the community.

The public safety suitability criterion was reworded from 'will not pose a risk of danger to public safety' to 'will not endanger public safety,' with a defined meaning that community treatment would likely result in physical injury or other serious danger to others.

The bill changed from a non-binding statement of legislative intent to an actual amendment of Penal Code Section 1001.36, making it operative law if enacted.

Attempted murder was added to the list of charged offenses that make a defendant ineligible for mental health diversion, alongside murder and voluntary manslaughter (subdivision d(1)).

Conduct disorder that causes or threatens physical harm to people or animals was added to the list of mental disorders that exclude a defendant from eligibility for diversion (subdivision b(1)).

The public safety suitability standard was tightened: the defendant must now 'not pose a risk of danger to public safety' rather than 'not pose an unreasonable risk of danger to public safety,' removing the qualifier that made the threshold easier to meet (subdivision c(4)).

Coauthors were added: Senator Hurtado as principal coauthor, Assembly Member Michelle Rodriguez, and Senator Ashby. The fiscal committee designation changed from 'no' to 'yes.'