Existing law authorizes a county to use a children's advocacy center to implement a coordinated multidisciplinary response to investigate reports involving child physical or sexual abuse, exploitation, or maltreatment. Existing law requires a county that utilizes a child advocacy center to meet specified standards, including, among other things, that the children's advocacy center must verify that interviews conducted in the course of investigations are conducted in a forensically sound manner and occur in a child-focused setting designed to provide a safe, comfortable, and dedicated place for children and families. Existing law requires the children's advocacy center or other identified multidisciplinary team member custodian to ensure that all recordings of child forensic interviews be released only in response to a court order, or, upon request, to law enforcement agencies authorized to investigate child abuse or agencies authorized to prosecute juvenile or criminal conduct described in the forensic interview, or to county counsel evaluating an allegation of child abuse. Existing law requires files, reports, records, communications, and working papers used or developed in providing services through a children's advocacy center to be confidential and not public records. Existing law authorizes the members of a multidisciplinary team associated with a children's advocacy center to share with other multidisciplinary team members any information or records concerning the child and family and the person who is the subject of the investigation of suspected child abuse or neglect for the sole purpose of facilitating a forensic interview, case discussion, or providing services to the child or family, as specified. This bill would additionally authorize the members of a multidisciplinary team associated with a children's advocacy center to share with child welfare agencies authorized to investigate child abuse and neglect any information or records, as specified, for the purposes mentioned above.
Existing law requires that the terms of probation granted to a person who has been convicted of domestic violence include, among other things, successful completion of a batterer's program or, if a batterer's program is not available, another appropriate counseling program, as specified. Existing law requires the probation department to design and implement an approval and renewal process for batterer's programs and prescribes the requirements of a batterer's program. Existing law, until July 1, 2026, authorizes the Counties of Napa, San Luis Obispo, Santa Barbara, Santa Clara, Santa Cruz, and Yolo to offer an alternative program for individuals convicted of domestic violence if the program meets specified conditions. This bill would additionally authorize the County of Sacramento to offer an alternative program for individuals convicted of domestic violence. The bill would extend the repeal date of these provisions to July 1, 2030. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
Existing law authorizes a court to grant pretrial diversion to a defendant suffering from a mental disorder, on an accusatory pleading alleging the commission of a misdemeanor or felony offense, in order to allow the defendant to undergo mental health treatment. Existing law provides that a defendant is eligible for diversion if they have been diagnosed with certain mental disorders and the court finds that the mental disorder was a significant factor in the commission of the charged offense, unless there is clear and convincing evidence that the disorder was not a motivating, causal, or contributing factor to the defendant's involvement in the alleged offense. Existing law prohibits defendants charged with specified offenses, including murder, from being placed in this diversion program. This bill would require that the diagnosis or rediagnosis with a mental disorder be within 5 years before the alleged offense. Existing law makes a defendant suitable for this diversion program if, among other criteria, a qualified mental health expert opines that the defendant's symptoms of the mental disorder that caused, contributed to, or motivated the criminal behavior, would respond to mental health treatment and the defendant will not pose an unreasonable risk of danger to public safety if treated in the community, as specified. The bill would revise that standard and instead require the court to find that the defendant will not pose a substantial and undue risk to the physical safety of another person if treated in the community. The bill would require the mental health expert's opinion to include that the proposed mental health diversion plan is clinically appropriate to address the symptoms of the defendant's mental disorder, as specified. The bill would require the court to state the reasons for denial on the record.
Existing law, the Sex Offender Registration Act, requires a person convicted of one of certain crimes, as specified, to register with law enforcement as a sex offender while residing in California or while attending school or working in California, as specified. Existing law, on and after July 1, 2021, authorizes a person to file a petition in the superior court in the county in which they are registered for termination from the sex offender registry on or after their next birthday following the expiration of the mandated minimum registration period. If the district attorney requests a hearing regarding the above-described petition, under existing law, the district attorney is entitled to present evidence regarding whether community safety would be significantly enhanced by requiring continued registration. Existing law requires the court, in determining whether to order continued registration pursuant to the hearing, to consider specified information, including the person's current risk of reoffense as indicated on the State-Authorized Risk Assessment Tool for Sex Offenders (SARATSO) , as specified. This bill would authorize the court to order the petitioner to be present at the hearing described above, as specified. The bill would require the hearing to be heard in the county in which the person is registered. The bill would additionally require the court to consider whether the offender was in a position of trust or authority in relation to the victim and proof of participation in or successful completion of sex offender-specific treatment by the offender in the above-described determination. The bill would require the court to verify, as specified, participation in or completion of treatment. The bill would make other clarifying changes.
Existing law establishes various privacy protections relating to the collection, use, sale, or distribution of personal information, images, or video recordings, including restrictions relating to the retention, access, use, sale, or sharing of images or video recordings collected through the operation of an in-vehicle camera. This bill would prohibit a security surveillance company, as defined, from distributing, selling, or otherwise authorizing a third party to access, use, or distribute content obtained from a consumer's security surveillance system without first obtaining the express consent of the consumer and the adult residents of a residential rental property or upon receipt of an order of a court or arbitrator.
This bill designates the week of April 19 to April 25, 2026, as Crime Victims' Rights Week. The primary purpose is to formally recognize and highlight the rights and needs of individuals who have been affected by crime. It does not create new laws or alter existing legal procedures but serves as a commemorative resolution to raise awareness during a specific time period.
Existing law, the California Fair Employment and Housing Act, except as specified, makes it an unlawful employment practice for an employer with 5 or more employees to include on any application for employment, before the employer makes a conditional offer of employment to the applicant, any question that seeks the disclosure of an applicant's conviction history, to consider the conviction history of the applicant until after the employer has made a conditional offer of employment to the applicant, or to distribute information about an arrest not followed by conviction, referral to or participation in a pretrial or posttrial diversion program, or convictions that have been sealed, dismissed, expunged, or statutorily eradicated or any conviction for which the convicted person has received a full pardon or has been issued a certificate of rehabilitation while conducting a conviction history background check in connection with an application for employment, as specified. This bill would define the term "conviction or arrest record," for these purposes. The bill would include among those things that it is unlawful for an employer with 5 or more employees to do while conducting a conviction history background check in connection with an application for employment, asking any question that directly or indirectly seeks consent for a conviction history background check or requesting consent for or beginning a conviction history background check before providing the applicant with a list of all essential job duties, requiring a job applicant to cover the cost of a conviction history background check, or requiring any time before or after the conditional job offer, that an applicant self-disclose conviction history or provide the employer with any documentary evidence related to conviction history or rehabilitation, as specified. Existing law requires an employer that intends to deny an applicant a position of employment solely or in part because of the applicant's conviction history to make an individualized assessment of whether the applicant's conviction history has a direct and adverse relationship with the specific duties of the job that justify denying the applicant the position considering specified factors. This bill, instead, would prohibit an employer from denying an applicant a position of employment or taking any other adverse action solely or in part because of the applicant's conviction history unless the employer first, reasonably and in good faith, demonstrates via an individualized assessment, that the applicant's conviction history has a direct and adverse relationship with the specific duties of the job that justifies denying the applicant the position and it complies with a specified process. The bill would require the employer to commit the results of the individualized assessment to writing if it makes a decision to deny a position of employment or takes any adverse action. The bill would specify that it is not an adverse action for an employer to temporarily suspend an employee, with pay and for a reasonable amount of time, while the employer complies with the requirements of these provisions. Existing law makes these provisions inapplicable to a position as a farm labor contractor, as specified or to a position where an employer or agent thereof is required by any state, federal, or local law to conduct criminal background checks for employment purposes or to restrict employment based on criminal history. This bill would remove the exemption for farm labor contractors.
Existing law, the Trial Jury Selection and Management Act, governs the selection of jurors and formation of trial juries for civil and criminal cases in all trial courts of the state. Existing law requires the judge in a criminal action or proceeding alleging a violent felony, prior to discharging the jury, to provide specified information to trial jurors regarding mental health awareness, including information about stress relief and symptoms that may be experienced following exposure to trauma. This bill would authorize the County of Santa Cruz and two other counties, selected by the Judicial Council, to conduct a pilot program for the provision of no-cost mental health services to jurors and alternate jurors following the receipt of a verdict in a criminal action or proceeding alleging a violent felony, as defined. The bill would require the Judicial Council to enter into a memorandum of understanding with the behavioral health directors of the participating counties for the purposes of providing the above-described mental health services, and would require the memorandum of understanding to include, among other things, the number of no-cost mental health sessions available to jurors. The bill would require the participating counties to terminate the pilot program no later than January 1, 2034, and would require the counties to report specified information regarding the pilot program to the Judicial Council. The bill would require the Judicial Council to provide a report to the Legislature no later than July 1, 2035, regarding the pilot program, and would require the report to include the number of jurors who were offered mental health resources pursuant to this program and recommendations for improving outreach and access to mental health services for jurors. The bill would repeal these provisions on January 1, 2036.
(1) Existing law requires a county social worker to investigate the circumstances of each child taken into temporary custody by a peace officer under specified circumstances. Existing law requires the social worker to conduct an investigation, within 30 days of the child's removal, to identify and locate adult relatives of the child, as specified, and to provide them with a notification that the child has been removed from the custody of the child's parents, guardians, or Indian custodian, and an explanation of the various options to participate in the care and placement of the child. Existing law requires a social worker to use due diligence in investigating the names and locations of relatives, and defines "due diligence" to include family finding, as specified. This bill would authorize a county child welfare agency or probation department to conduct family finding and engagement activities prior to the removal of a child from parental custody, as specified. (2) Existing law establishes various public social services programs to provide for protection, care, and assistance to the people of the state in need of those services. Existing law, in this regard, and with some exceptions, requires all applications and records concerning any individual made or kept by any public officer or agency in connection with the administration of public social services for which grants-in-aid are received by this state from the federal government be kept confidential. Existing law exempts from those confidentiality provisions the disclosure of information between employees of a county's adult protective services agency and a county's child welfare agency for the purpose of multidisciplinary teamwork in the prevention, intervention, management, or treatment of child abuse or neglect or abuse or neglect of an elder or dependent adult. Existing law makes it a misdemeanor to knowingly secure or possess a list of persons who have applied for or who have been granted any form of public service in violation of these provisions. This bill would additionally exempt from these confidentiality provisions information regarding children receiving child welfare services to be disclosed to relatives and nonrelative extended family members without consent if the disclosure is directly connected to the administration of the child welfare program and serves the purpose of identifying placement and support resources for children. By expanding the scope of a crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (3) Existing law defines "child welfare services" to mean public social services that are directed toward the accomplishment of various purposes, including protecting and promoting the welfare of all children, and includes, among other services, emergency response services and family maintenance services. This bill would modify the definition of "child welfare services." The bill would require, upon providing child welfare services to a child or family, whether court-ordered or voluntarily accepted, the county child welfare agency or probation department to develop a case plan, as specified. The bill would authorize, as part of the case planning process, a county child welfare agency or probation department to conduct family finding and engagement activities to support the goals identified in the case plan. The bill would define "family finding and engagement" for these purposes. To the extent this bill increases the duties of county welfare agencies or probation departments, this bill imposes a state-mandated local program. (4) 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, the Alcoholic Beverage Control Act, provides for the issuance, suspension, revocation, and conditions upon licensure for the manufacture, distribution, and sale of alcoholic beverages. Existing law makes every person who sells, furnishes, gives, or causes to be sold, furnished or given away any alcoholic beverage to any person under 21 years of age guilty of a misdemeanor. Existing law also makes it unlawful for a person who is under the influence of any alcoholic beverage or drug, or the combined influence of both, to drive a vehicle and requires a court, when granting probation following conviction of a driving under the influence offense, to impose certain terms and conditions, including that the individual not drive a vehicle with any measurable amount of alcohol in their blood, among others. This bill would require everyone who sells or furnishes alcoholic beverages to first review bona fide evidence of majority and identity, as described. The bill would authorize a court when granting probation for certain driving under the influence offenses to prohibit the person from purchasing alcohol and would require the Department of Motor Vehicles to issue an identification card or driver's license with an appropriate designation on the face upon the receipt of an abstract of the record of a court. The bill would authorize the court to prohibit the purchase of alcohol when the offense occurred within 10 years of 2 or more driving under the influence offenses that resulted in conviction or certain other prior convictions, or if the conviction was for vehicular manslaughter, as specified. The bill would require a seller of alcoholic beverages to refuse to sell or serve someone subject to such an order. To the extent this bill would require a higher level of service from court staff who are county employees, the 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.
