False or forged instruments.

Subdivision (e)(1)(B) was changed from 'a defendant who submits a motion for is granted diversion' to 'a defendant who is granted diversion.' This removes the requirement that the defendant personally filed a motion for diversion, meaning the stipulation option now applies regardless of how diversion was obtained (e.g., if the court granted it sua sponte or on the prosecution's motion).

Formatting changes throughout: removal of line numbers, page headers/footers, and reformatting of the bill structure. Addition of 'Passed the Senate August 18, 2026' and 'Passed the Assembly August 17, 2026' dates, plus Governor approval block.

The diversion stipulation provision now applies only to a defendant who is granted diversion, rather than one who merely submits a motion for diversion. This narrows eligibility for the stipulation option.

A defendant's failure to stipulate to voiding the instrument cannot be used as grounds for denying diversion or finding non-compliance with diversion terms.

If the defendant withdraws from diversion or fails to complete its terms and criminal proceedings are reinstated, the stipulation to void the instrument cannot be used in any civil or criminal proceeding without the defendant's consent.

The separate provision allowing a convicted defendant (not in diversion) to stipulate to voiding the instrument was removed, eliminating that alternative path entirely.

The legislative vote requirement changed from majority to two-thirds because the new prohibition on using the stipulation against the defendant affects admissibility of relevant evidence in criminal proceedings, triggering the California Constitution's truth-in-evidence clause.

The trigger for the court to issue a voiding order changed from when a person is 'charged' with a violation to when a person is 'convicted' of a violation. This means the instrument cannot be declared void until after a conviction, not merely upon filing of charges.

A new provision allows a defendant who is charged (not yet convicted) but who has submitted a motion for diversion under any applicable section (including Section 1001.36) to stipulate to the voiding of the false or forged instrument, with the court issuing the order upon written motion by the prosecution after a hearing.

A provision allowing the court to conduct the voiding hearing at any time before or after a defendant is determined incompetent to stand trial under Section 1368 (mental competency proceedings) was removed entirely.

The minimum time between filing the motion and the hearing was reverted from 30 calendar days (Senate version) back to 90 calendar days. The notice period before the hearing was also reverted from 30 days back to 90 days.

A provision allowing the voiding hearing to be held concurrently with the preliminary examination of the defendant under Section 859b was removed.

The deadline for the court to set a hearing on a motion to void a false or forged instrument was shortened from no earlier than 90 calendar days to no earlier than 30 calendar days after the motion is made. The corresponding notice deadline to interested parties was also shortened from 90 days before the hearing to 30 days before the hearing.

Subdivision (e)(1)(A) was changed so that a court may issue an order voiding a false or forged instrument after a person is 'charged with' a violation, rather than only after the person is 'convicted of' a violation. This allows prosecutors to seek voiding of fraudulent instruments earlier in the criminal process, before a final conviction is reached.