Existing law allows the court to issue a protective order restraining a defendant from any contact with the victim if the defendant has been convicted of specified crimes, including a crime involving domestic violence, human trafficking, a crime in furtherance of a criminal street gang, or a registerable sex offense. This bill would additionally authorize the court to consider issuing an order restraining the defendant from contact with any person who is a member of the victim's family, as defined, or household. By authorizing the issuance of protective orders in certain circumstances and the extension of certain protective orders, a violation of which is punishable as a crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 136.2 of the Penal Code proposed by AB 1889 to be operative only if this bill and AB 1889 are enacted and this bill is enacted last. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
Existing law requires a probation department to request that the prosecuting attorney petition the committing court for an order directing that a person confined in a secure youth treatment facility remain subject to the control of the department at the time of discharge if the person confined is determined to be physically dangerous to the public because of the person's mental or physical condition, disorder, or other problem that causes the person to have serious difficulty controlling their dangerous behavior. Existing law establishes the process for the petition, probable cause hearing, trial, continued detention, and appeal pursuant to this provision. Under existing law, if an order for continued detention is made pursuant to these provisions, the probation department has continued control over the person, except as specified, and existing law requires the department to, within 2 years after the date of the order made by a juvenile court or after conviction in criminal proceedings, file a new application for continued detention if continued detention is deemed necessary. This bill would require, if a petition is filed pursuant to these provisions, that the person who is the subject of the petition remain in custody in a secure youth treatment facility until the conclusion of the proceedings. The bill would prohibit a probable cause hearing pursuant to these provisions from being continued, except upon a showing of good cause by the party requesting the continuance. The bill would also authorize the court to base the finding of probable cause on certain hearsay statements, as specified. The bill would require the person be brought to trial within 60 days from the probable cause determination, unless good cause to the contrary is shown, the person enters a waiver, or the person requests or consents to the setting of the trial date beyond the 60-day period. The bill would require the court, if the court or jury finds that the person has a mental condition or disorder, to determine a period of continued detention, as specified. The bill would require the department to file a new application within the specified time of an order for continued detention if the department deems continued detention pursuant to these provisions is necessary. The bill would specify that the discovery process for criminal proceedings applies to these provisions. To the extent that this bill would increase local duties relating to the confinement of persons in a secure youth treatment facility, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
Existing law makes it a crime to knowingly or willfully cause another person to engage in the unlawful manufacture of firearms or knowingly or willfully aiding, abetting, prompting, or facilitating the unlawful manufacture of firearms, including the manufacture of assault weapons or .50 BMG rifles or the manufacture of any firearm using a 3-dimensional printer, as specified. Existing law authorizes a civil action against a person who knowingly distributes or causes to be distributed any digital firearm manufacturing code to any person, except as specified. Existing law authorizes the Attorney General, county counsel, or city attorney to bring an action against this person and seek a civil penalty, as specified, for each violation, as well as injunctive relief. This bill would require the Department of Justice to check on a quarterly basis beginning no later than July 1, 2027, whether ASTM International has published industry standards for equipping 3-dimensional printers with firearm blocking technology. The bill would require, if the department determines that ASTM International has published or adopted industry standards for firearm blocking technology for 3-dimensional printers, that the department publish written guidance or regulations within 24 months after making that determination. The bill would require, among other things, the written guidance or regulations to describe minimum performance standards for 3-dimensional printer firearm blocking technology before a printer can lawfully be sold or offered for sale in the state. If, as of July 1, 2029, the department determines that ASTM International has not published industry standards for firearm blocking technology for 3-dimensional printers, the bill would relieve the department of any further responsibility to ascertain whether ASTM International has published or adopted industry standards. The bill would make it unlawful to sell, offer for sale, or transfer for consideration, a 3-dimensional printer in the State of California that is not equipped with firearm blocking technology that also meets the above-described industry standards. The bill would exempt printers used exclusively for the manufacturing of properties (props) in the entertainment industry, and would authorize the department to adopt regulations that provide for additional exceptions to these provisions. This bill would also exempt a person who distributes, or causes the distribution of, digital firearm manufacturing code, solely for the bona fide purpose of, among other things, developing, refining, and testing the functionality of a firearm blocking technology from civil liability. This bill would make these provisions severable.
Existing law requires the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, when amending or adopting regulations that may impact the visitation of inmates, to recognize and consider the value of visiting as a means to improve prison safety, the important role of inmate visitation in maintaining connection with family and community, and the role of inmate visitation in preparing for successful release. This bill would require each facility, as defined, to establish at least 3 days of visitation per week. The bill would require a facility, if it will not be open for visitation, to provide notice to the impacted population as soon as possible. The bill would authorize a facility to deny contact visits only for specified reasons, including, among others, possession of contraband or pending or sustained rules violations that result in a restricted housing unit term. The bill would require facility staff to take specified actions with regard to correctable issues with a visitation, including, among other things, allowing the visitor a reasonable opportunity to correct the issue and return to visiting up to one hour before the end of the visiting period. The bill would prohibit denial of visitation if a visitor has traveled more than 170 miles to attend a visit and has not visited within 30 days, unless there has been a finding of a credible and documented security threat. The bill would prohibit a facility from searching visitors without their voluntary, informed, and written consent. The bill would authorize a facility to respond to refusal of that search only with denial of contact visiting for that day, and would require the facility to offer a noncontact visit on the same day, if space is available. The bill would authorize other restrictions and procedures for searches of visitors, as specified.
Existing law requires a person, who claims title to a firearm that is in the custody of a court or law enforcement agency and wishes to have it returned, to make an application for a determination by the Department of Justice as to whether the applicant is eligible to possess a firearm. Under existing law, a law enforcement agency or court that has taken custody of a firearm is prohibited from returning the firearm to an individual unless specified requirements are met, including, but not limited to, requiring the person to be eligible to possess a firearm and verifying that the firearm is not listed as stolen and the firearm has been recorded in the Automated Firearms System in the name of the person, as specified. Existing law requires any weapon that was carried unlawfully for specified crimes to be surrendered to specified law enforcement entities. Existing law requires weapons surrendered pursuant to these provisions to be destroyed by the law enforcement entity. This bill would authorize a law enforcement agency, as defined, to create a voluntary firearm storage program that allows a person to voluntarily transfer custody of their firearm to the local law enforcement agency for temporary safekeeping purposes to prevent firearm violence, suicide, and other injury. The bill would require a law enforcement agency adopting this program to provide clear instructions on the procedure to voluntarily transfer custody of a firearm and to provide clear instructions on the process for requesting return of the firearm, as specified. Upon receipt of a firearm, the bill would require a law enforcement agency to, among other things, check a certain database to ensure the firearm has not previously been reported lost, stolen, or involved in a crime and ensure that the requesting person is eligible to possess firearms when the firearm is returned to the person. The bill would require a law enforcement agency to destroy a firearm that a person failed to retrieve at the end of a time period specified by the law enforcement agency, except as provided. Existing law prohibits the carrying of a concealed firearm or the open carrying of a firearm, as specified. Existing law provides certain exemptions to these prohibitions, including exemptions for peace officers, retired peace officers, and persons possessing a valid license to carry a concealed firearm. Existing law generally regulates the sale and transfer of firearms, including, among other requirements and subject to exceptions, that the transfer of a firearm be conducted through a firearms dealer. This bill would exempt the voluntary transfer of a firearm to a local law enforcement agency pursuant to the provisions above from these prohibitions and regulations.
Existing law authorizes any employer or authorized bargaining representative, as specified, whose employee has suffered unlawful violence or a credible threat of violence that can reasonably be construed to be carried out or to have been carried out at the workplace, to seek a temporary restraining order and an order after hearing on behalf of the employee and other employees at the workplace, as described. This bill would, beginning on January 1, 2028, allow any party or witness to a petition for a restraining order to appear remotely at a hearing and would prohibit any fee for appearing remotely. The bill would require the court of each county to develop rules and instructions for such remote appearances and post them on its website. The bill would also, commencing on January 1, 2028, require courts to allow filings related to such protective orders to be submitted electronically, as specified. The bill would make conforming changes. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 527.8 of the Code of Civil Procedure proposed by AB 1961 to be operative only if this bill and AB 1961 are enacted and this bill is enacted last.
Existing law authorizes a peace officer, humane society officer, or animal control officer to take possession of a stray or abandoned animal in specified circumstances, including when the animal is kept without proper care and attention, as specified. Existing law provides that if an animal is seized pursuant to those provisions or pursuant to a warrant, the owner is personally liable to the seizing agency for the cost of the seizure and care of the animal. Existing law deems the animal to then be abandoned by the owner under specified circumstances, including if the owner, within 14 days of notice of availability of the animal to be returned, fails to pay charges and take possession of the animal. This bill would make those provisions apply to animals seized pursuant to any provision of California law.
Existing law establishes the Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training (POST) to set minimum standards for the recruitment and training of peace officers and to develop training courses and curriculum. Existing law authorizes POST to suspend or revoke the certification of a peace officer if the peace officer has engaged in any serious misconduct, as specified. Existing law requires POST to adopt by regulation a definition of "serious misconduct" that serves as the criteria to be considered for ineligibility for, or revocation of, certification, as provided. This bill would additionally authorize POST to suspend or revoke the certification of a peace officer who commits specified theft under color of authority, where the peace officer acted with specific intent to permanently deprive the owner of the property. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 13510.8 of the Penal Code proposed by AB 1896 to be operative only if this bill and AB 1896 are enacted and this bill is enacted last.
Existing law requires each law enforcement agency, on or before January 1, 2021, to maintain a policy that provides a minimum standard on the use of force. Existing law requires that the policy include, among other things, training standards and requirements relating to demonstrated knowledge and understanding of the law enforcement agency's use of force policy by officers, investigators, and supervisors. Existing law prohibits a law enforcement agency from authorizing the use of a carotid restraint or choke hold by any peace officer employed by that agency. This bill would, until January 1, 2030, prohibit a law enforcement agency, including a federal law enforcement agency, from using a wearable electroshock device within the State of California. The bill would also prohibit a law enforcement agency from using state funds to purchase a wearable electroshock device. The bill would require a law enforcement agency to update their use of force policies to prohibit the use of a wearable electroshock device. By increasing the duties on local law enforcement, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would require the Division of Law Enforcement within the Department of Justice to conduct a study on the safety and community impacts of wearable electroshock devices and provide recommendations for appropriate standards and safeguards for their use, and would require the department to report to the Legislature on the findings and recommendations of the study on or before January 1, 2029. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.
Existing law requires the Board of Parole Hearings, among other responsibilities, to conduct parole suitability hearings and determine whether an individual is suitable for parole. Existing law establishes the Elderly Parole Program for the purpose of reviewing parole suitability of inmates who are 50 years of age or older and who have served a minimum of 20 years of continuous incarceration on their sentence. Existing law requires the Board of Parole Hearings, when considering the release of qualifying inmates, to give special consideration to whether certain criteria have reduced the elderly inmate's risk for future violence. Existing law excludes various persons from these provisions, including persons sentenced pursuant to existing sentencing provisions commonly known as the 3 strikes law. Under an existing court order, although statutorily excluded, an individual may be eligible for parole under the Elderly Parole Program when they are 60 years of age or older and have been continuously incarcerated for at least 25 years. This bill would instead specify that persons convicted of various sexual offenses, including rape, sodomy, or aggravated sexual assault of a child, or sentenced pursuant to a provision applicable where the crimes involved had multiple victims, as specified, are not eligible for parole under the Elderly Parole Program, unless the person is 65 years of age or older and has served a minimum of 25 years of continuous incarceration on their current sentence. The bill would require the board to review a sexual dangerousness screening of an individual sentenced to an indeterminate sentence for a sexually violent offense, as defined, and would require the board to refer a person whose sexual dangerousness screening indicates that they may qualify as a sexually violent predator to the State Department of State Hospitals for further evaluation, as described. The bill would require commissioners who conduct hearings to undergo training in sex offender behaviors and risks. Existing law defines a sexually violent predator to mean a person who has been convicted of a sexually violent offense against one or more victims and who has a diagnosed mental disorder that makes the person a danger to the health and safety of others in that it is likely that the person will engage in sexually violent criminal behavior. For purposes of this definition, a conviction for a sexually violent offense includes convictions that resulted in either a determinate or an indeterminate prison sentence, as specified. Existing law requires the Secretary of the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation to refer a person who is in custody under that department's jurisdiction, and who is serving a determinate sentence or whose parole has been revoked, for evaluation by the State Department of State Hospitals at least 6 months prior to that individual's scheduled date for release from prison if the secretary determines that the person may be a sexually violent predator. Existing law requires a petition for commitment as a sexually violent predator to be filed in the county in which the person was convicted of the sexual offense for which the person was committed to the jurisdiction of the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation. This bill would also require the Executive Officer of the Board of Parole Hearings to make that referral and revise the criteria for referral to additionally apply to a person who is serving an indeterminate prison sentence. The bill would also authorize the secretary, or the Executive Officer of the Board of Parole Hearings, to refer the person for evaluation if the person's scheduled release date is less than 4 months after the date of the decision to grant parole, or if the person will be scheduled for a parole hearing in the next 6 months. By imposing additional duties on counties regarding commitment of persons as sexually violent predators, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.
