Existing law makes it a felony to knowingly procure or offer a false or forged instrument to be filed, registered, or recorded in a public office in this state, which, if genuine, might be filed, registered, or recorded under any law of this state or the United States. After a person is convicted of that crime or a specified waiver is obtained, and upon written motion of the prosecuting agency, existing law requires the court to issue a written order that the false or forged instrument be adjudged void ab initio. Existing law prescribes procedures for a prosecuting agency to file that motion. The California Constitution provides for the right to truth in evidence, which requires a 23 vote of the Legislature to exclude any relevant evidence from any criminal proceeding, as specified. This bill would authorize a defendant who is granted diversion to stipulate to the voiding of the false or forged instrument. The bill would authorize a court in those circumstances, upon a motion by the prosecution, to issue a written order that the false or forged instrument be adjudged void ab initio. The bill would, if the defendant withdraws from diversion or fails to complete the terms of diversion and criminal proceedings are reinstated, prohibit the stipulation from being used in connection with any civil or criminal proceeding without the defendant's consent. Because that prohibition would affect the admissibility of relevant evidence in criminal proceedings, the bill would require a 23 vote of the Legislature.
Existing law authorizes a judge of the juvenile court in which a petition was filed to dismiss the petition, or set aside the findings and dismiss the petition, if the court finds that the interests of justice and the welfare of the minor require that dismissal, or if the court finds that the minor is not in need of treatment or rehabilitation, regardless of whether the minor is, at the time of the order, a ward or dependent child of the court. This bill would clarify that an adjudication dismissed pursuant to that provision be deemed to have not occurred and prohibit a person from suffering any future adverse questions based on an adjudication dismissed pursuant to that provision. The bill would specify that a dismissal of a sustained petition pursuant to that provision is deemed to include both dismissal of a petition and a setting aside of any findings.
Existing law provides for the prosecution of crimes by the district attorney of each county. Existing law establishes procedures for litigating claims of factual innocence based on newly discovered evidence, including a motion for a new trial or a writ of habeas corpus. This bill would, if the district attorney accepts a case for postconviction review, as defined, authorize the district attorney to file a notice with the court notifying the court of the intent to investigate a claim of factual innocence. The bill would, upon the filing of the above-described notice, deem the case to be treated as if it were an open case for the purposes of investigating a claim of factual innocence. The bill would provide the district attorney with the power to issue subpoenas, compel the production of document and testimony, and file necessary motions to investigate claims, as specified. The bill would also require all materials obtained by the district attorney to be subject to a protective order, as specified, and to be disclosed to the petitioner or the petitioner's counsel within 60 days of the termination of the investigation.
California Assembly Resolution 86 proclaims the week of September 1 through 7, 2026, as Canine "K-9" Appreciation Week to honor police dogs and their handlers. The resolution cites the historical growth of canine units in California and highlights their contributions to law enforcement, such as apprehending suspects, detecting narcotics, and locating missing persons. It also notes that these teams often reduce the need for lethal force and engage with the public through community demonstrations.
(1) Existing law makes it unlawful for a person who is under the influence of any alcoholic beverage, has 0.08 or 0.04 percent or more, by weight, of alcohol in their blood, as specified, is addicted to the use of any drug, is under the influence of any drug, or is under the combined influence of any alcoholic beverage and drug to drive a vehicle. Existing law prohibits a person from driving a vehicle under the influence of any alcoholic beverage or drug and concurrently do an act forbidden by law, or neglect a duty imposed by law in driving the vehicle, which act or neglect proximately causes bodily injury to a person other than the driver. Existing law, until January 1, 2033, requires the Department of Motor Vehicles to immediately suspend or revoke the privilege of a person to operate a motor vehicle upon the receipt of an abstract of the record of a court showing that the person has been convicted of driving a vehicle under the circumstances above as well as for engaging in a motor vehicle speed contest for specified periods of time, depending on the statute under which the driving violation was punished, and prohibits the reinstatement of the driving privilege until the person gives proof of financial responsibility and proof satisfactory to the department of successful completion of a driving-under-the-influence (DUI) program, as specified. Existing law requires the department to advise the person that they may apply for a restricted driver's license if the person meets certain requirements, including, among others, satisfactorily providing proof of enrollment in a certain DUI program and the installment of a functioning, certified ignition interlock device (IID) . Existing law allows, for certain violations, a person who has had their driver's license suspended to apply to the department for a restricted license, subject to certain requirements. For specified violations, existing law requires the department to issue a restricted driver's license if the person has met certain requirements, including proof satisfactory to the department of enrollment in, or completion of, a DUI program, proof of financial responsibility, and the payment of all applicable reinstatement or reissue fees, among other fees, required by the department. This bill, beginning on January 1, 2031, would reorganize and recast the penalties and sanctions for the alcohol- and drug-related driving offenses described above. The bill would recast violations for driving under the influence of any alcoholic beverage or having 0.08 or 0.04 percent or more, by weight of alcohol in blood (collectively "alcohol-related driving violations") from violations for driving under the influence of any drug or driving while a person is addicted to the use of any drug (collectively "drug-related driving violations") . For convictions of alcohol-related driving violations, the bill would require the department to suspend the privilege to operate a motor vehicle and would allow the suspension to be indefinite. The bill would prohibit the reinstatement of that privilege until the person satisfies certain requirements, including, among others, the person applying for and maintaining a restricted driver's license for certain periods of time depending on the statute under which the driving violation is punished, which includes installing a certified IID on each vehicle operated by the person, providing proof satisfactory to the department of successful completion of a DUI program, as specified, paying all applicable reinstatement and reissue fees required by the department, and providing proof of financial responsibility. For convictions of drug-related driving violations described above, this bill would require the department to suspend the privilege to operate a motor vehicle for specified periods of time, depending on the statute under which the violation was punished. The bill would also prohibit the reinstatement of the privilege until the person satisfies certain requirements described above, but the bill would not require the person to install a certified IID or apply for and maintain a restricted driver's license for a specified period of time. This bill, beginning on January 1, 2031, would authorize a person, whose privilege to operate a motor vehicle is suspended for alcohol-related driving violations, to apply for a restricted license if certain requirements are met, including, among others, installing a certified IID on each vehicle operated by the person, as specified, providing proof of financial responsibility for 3 years, providing satisfactorily proof of enrollment in, or completion of, a DUI program, as specified, and paying a fee that is sufficient to cover the costs of administration of these requirements. The bill would require the department to terminate the restricted driver's license and suspend the privilege to drive if the person fails to comply with the DUI program requirements. The bill would also authorize a person, whose driving privilege was suspended for a conviction of a drug-related driving violation, to apply for a restricted driver's license if similar certain requirements are met, except the person would not be required to install a certified IID but would be required to complete a minimum number of months of a suspension period, as specified. This bill, beginning on January 1, 2031, would require the department to monitor the installation and maintenance of an IID that is installed pursuant to specified provisions. The bill would require the installer of the IID to notify the department if the device is removed or indicates that a person has attempted to remove, bypass, or tamper with the device, or the person fails 3 or more times to comply with these requirements. The bill would require the department to immediately suspend or revoke the privilege to operate a motor vehicle and any restricted driver's license if the person attempts to remove, bypass, or tamper with an IID, has the IID removed prior to the termination date of the restriction, or fails 3 or more times to comply with any requirement for the maintenance or calibration of the IID. The bill would require the department, and manufacturers, installers, and repairers of IIDs, to post information regarding filing complaints against manufacturers, installers, and repairers, as specified. (2) Existing law requires an order of suspension of a person's privilege to operate a motor vehicle for any of specified reasons, including the person was driving a motor vehicle when the person had 0.08 percent or more, by weight, of alcohol in their blood. Existing law requires the notice to be served on the person by a peace officer under specified conditions where test results show that the person has specified percentages of alcohol in the person's blood or where a person under 21 years of age refuses to take, or fails to complete, a specified test for alcohol in the blood. This bill, beginning on January 1, 2031, would include a person driving a motor vehicle when a passenger for hire was a passenger in the vehicle and the person had 0.04 percent or more, by weight, of alcohol in their blood as a reason to immediately suspend the privilege to operate a motor vehicle. The bill would authorize a person, whose driving privilege has been suspended pursuant to the provision above but not suspended or revoked based on the person's refusal to submit to, or failure to complete, a chemical test or tests, to apply for a restricted driver's license if certain requirements are met, including completing 30 days of the suspension period, providing proof of enrollment in a DUI program, installing a functioning, certified IID on any vehicle that they operate, being 21 years of age or older at the time of the offense, giving proof of financial responsibility, and paying all reissue and restriction fees. The bill would require the department to terminate the restricted driver's license and suspend the privilege to operate if the person has failed to comply with the DUI program requirements, or if the person attempts to remove, bypass, or tamper with the IID, removes the IID prior to the termination date of the restriction, or fails 3 or more times to comply with any requirement for the maintenance or calibration of the IID. (3) Existing law requires the department to suspend or revoke a person's privilege to operate a motor vehicle based on a peace officer's sworn statement or report, as specified. Existing law requires the department to review the record to determine whether the suspension or revocation is supported by the record, as specified. This bill, beginning on January 1, 2031, would require the department to review these determinations and consider the sworn report and any other information and evidence, as specified. If, by a preponderance of the evidence, the department determines in the review of a determination certain facts are proven, including, among other facts, that the peace officer had reasonable cause to believe that the person had been driving a motor vehicle in violation of an alcohol- or drug-related driving provision, the bill would require the department to sustain the order of suspension or revocation. If the department determines that any of these certain facts are not proven by a preponderance of the evidence, the bill would require the department to rescind the order of suspension or revocation, as specified. (4) Existing law allows, for certain violations, a person who has had their driver's license suspended to apply to the department for a restricted license, subject to certain requirements as provided above. This bill, beginning on January 1, 2031, would authorize a court to disallow the issuance of the restricted driver's license if the court determines that the person would present a traffic safety or public safety risk if the person were authorized to operate a motor vehicle during the period of suspension. This bill, beginning on January 1, 2031, would make conforming changes to include the provisions above, as applicable, in statutes that generally pertain to the suspension, revocation, or restriction of the privilege to operate a motor vehicle. (5) This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
Existing law generally authorizes the court to suspend a criminal sentence and make and enforce terms of probation for a period not to exceed 2 years, and in misdemeanor cases, for a period not to exceed one year. Existing law imposes various penalties for theft- or fraud-related crimes, including, among others, the abuse or neglect of an elder or dependent adult, mortgage fraud, or identity theft. This bill would authorize the court, upon a conviction of certain felony offenses related to, among other things, the purchase or sale of real property or the recording or attempted recording of a real estate instrument, if the court grants the defendant probation, to impose up to a one-year extension to the probationary term. The bill would create a process for the court to impose the one-year extension if the defendant is on formal probation by requiring the probation department to file a petition to the court to extend the probationary period and requiring the court to make a finding that additional time is necessary for programming. By increasing the period of probation, and increasing the duties on local officials, 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.
Existing law establishes specified rights for victims and witnesses of crimes, including to be notified or informed regarding specified court proceedings and inmate placement or parole eligibility. This bill would require the district attorney's office or other prosecuting agency to ensure that the contact information of the victim and the victim's next of kin is provided to the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation at the time of sentencing in cases that result in a sentence to state prison, to the extent that contact information is reasonably available. By increasing the burdens on local prosecuting agencies, 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.
Existing law establishes the Law Enforcement Assisted Diversion (LEAD) pilot program, which is administered by the Board of State and Community Corrections, to improve public safety and reduce recidivism by increasing the availability and use of social service resources while reducing costs to law enforcement agencies and courts stemming from repeated incarceration. Existing law requires the board to award grants, on a competitive basis, to up to 3 jurisdictions to establish LEAD programs and requires the board to establish minimum standards, funding schedules, and procedures for awarding grants. This bill would rename the program as the Alternatives to Arrest (ATA) pilot program. The bill would require the board to additionally award a grant or grants to the agency administering qualifying programs in the City of Los Angeles and the County of Los Angeles, as well as in other jurisdictions to be identified by the board. Existing law allows a person to be referred to services through a program by a law enforcement officer as an alternative to arrest and through a social contact referral by a law enforcement officer if they believe the person is at high risk of arrest in the future for specified crimes relating to controlled substances and prostitution. Existing law requires those social contact referrals to meet specified criteria, including, among other things, verification that the individual has had prior involvement with low-level drug or prostitution activity and that the individual does not have a pending case in drug court or mental health court. This bill would remove these requirements for social contact referrals and instead authorize them if, absent probable cause to arrest, the officer believes the person would benefit from case management services and is at high risk of arrest in the future and the person expresses interest in voluntarily participating in the program. The bill would expand the offenses eligible for referral as an alternative to arrest to include, among other things, specified disorderly conduct crimes, shoplifting, or other violations identified by the local jurisdiction with agreement of the police chief or sheriff, the city attorney or district attorney, and the implementing public health or behavioral health agency administering case management services. Existing law requires the Board of State and Community Corrections to contract with a nonprofit research entity, university, or college to evaluate the effectiveness of the program, as specified. Existing law also authorizes the board to contract with experts for the purpose of providing technical assistance to participating jurisdictions. Existing law appropriated $15,000,000 from the General Fund for the program and authorized the board to spend up to $550,000 for the purposes of the evaluation contract and technical assistance. This bill would repeal those provisions and would require, upon appropriation by the Legislature for these programs, that the funds be granted to the entity responsible for LEAD or ATA in the City of Los Angeles and the County of Los Angeles and agencies in other jurisdictions to be identified by the board. The bill would authorize the board to spend a portion of those funds on contracts with experts on the implementation of ATA or similar programs in other jurisdictions for the purpose of providing technical assistance to participating jurisdictions, as specified. The bill would require local jurisdictions to commit to using these funds and local resources to support ATA or LEAD planning, implementation, and services and not supplant local resources that had been previously dedicated to ATA or LEAD programs and services. The bill would require the board to report to the Legislature on the effectiveness of the program on or before September 1, 2031.
Existing law, the Medicinal and Adult-Use Cannabis Regulation and Safety Act (MAUCRSA) , among other things, consolidates the licensure and regulation of commercial medicinal and adult-use cannabis activities. Existing law gives the Department of Cannabis Control the power, duty, purpose, responsibility, and jurisdiction to regulate commercial cannabis activity in the state. Existing law authorizes the department to take disciplinary actions against a licensee, as provided. Existing law requires the department to prepare and disseminate, as specified, an annual report relating to the department's activities, including, among other things, the amount of funds allocated and spent by the department for cannabis licensing, enforcement, and administration, and the number of state licenses issued, renewed, denied, suspended, and revoked. This bill, the Cannabis Enforcement Accountability and Public Health Prioritization Act of 2026, would require the department, beginning January 1, 2028, to prioritize its enforcement of MAUCRSA in a manner consistent with an enforcement prioritization policy, as defined, based on specified categories, that are listed from highest to lowest priority, based on conduct or conditions, as specified, that create a risk of harm, as described. The bill would define "risk of harm" as the likelihood of, among other things, interference with enforcement of state law. Beginning January 1, 2028, the bill would require the department to adopt and publish an enforcement prioritization policy, as specified, and would require the department to include in the above-described annual report the number, geographic distribution, and, as applicable, dollar amount of specified enforcement activities in relation to the risk-based enforcement framework, as provided.
Existing law requires specified businesses and other establishments, including, among others, airports, intercity passenger rail or light rail stations, bus stations, and truck stops, to post a notice, as developed by the Department of Justice, that contains information relating to slavery and human trafficking, including information regarding specified nonprofit organizations that a person can call for services or support in the elimination of slavery and human trafficking. This bill would additionally require a privately operated entity that operates in a designated disaster site or designated mitigation site, as those terms are defined, that is involved in the response, recovery, rebuilding, or cleanup of a disaster site, permitting related to recovery, rebuilding, or cleanup of a disaster site, or efforts to mitigate or prevent the occurrence of a disaster, to post the above-described notice, except for telecommunications companies or internet service providers. Existing law requires a business or other establishment that operates intercity passenger rail or light rail stations or bus stations to provide at least 20 minutes of training to specified employees in recognizing the signs of human trafficking and how to report those signs to the appropriate law enforcement agency. Existing law requires that training to include, among other things, the definition of human trafficking, including sex trafficking and labor trafficking, and guidance on how to identify individuals who are most at risk for human trafficking. This bill would, starting June 1, 2027, require a privately operated entity that operates in a designated disaster site or designated mitigation site to provide at least 20 minutes of training to all employees involved in specified disaster recovery or mitigation tasks. The bill would authorize the training to be developed or administered by a nonprofit or private entity with professional experience related to human trafficking and would require the training to be delivered in the language that is the most widely spoken language among the employees that will receive the training. The bill would require the training to include the same elements as the training described in the above-paragraph and examples and case scenarios relevant to how trafficking occurs at designated disaster sites and designated mitigation sites.
