Existing law establishes the Domestic Violence Prevention Act for the purpose of preventing acts of domestic violence, abuse, and sexual abuse and providing for a separation of the persons involved in the domestic violence for a period sufficient to enable those persons to seek a resolution of the causes of the violence. Existing law authorizes a court to issue an ex parte protective order enjoining a party from, among other things, disturbing the peace of the other party. Existing law provides that disturbing the peace of the other party refers to conduct that includes coercive control, as defined, which includes unreasonably engaging in specified actions, including isolating the other party from friends, relatives, or other sources of support. Existing law makes an intentional and knowing violation of a protective order punishable as a misdemeanor. This bill would include forced marriage for purposes of the act. The bill would define "forced marriage" as a spousal relationship in which one or both parties do not or cannot consent and one or both parties are compelled, through force, fraud, coercion, duress, abuse of power, or coercive control, to enter, attempt to enter, or maintain, a marriage, regardless of whether the marriage is legally valid. If a protective order is sought to protect against a forced marriage, the bill would authorize all persons engaged in conduct to arrange, officiate, finance, or facilitate a forced marriage or attempted forced marriage to be included in one action as respondents. The bill would provide that coercive control, for purposes of the act, includes interfering with, threatening, or attempting to prevent a party or witness from participating in a court proceeding. The bill would provide that conduct undertaken to compel, attempt to compel, prepare for, or facilitate a forced marriage constitutes disturbing the peace of the other party, as specified. The bill would require the provisions of the act to be liberally construed. The bill would authorize a court to grant relief regardless of whether a marriage has occurred or whether a purported marriage would be legally valid in this state or any other jurisdiction. Because a violation of a protective order is punishable as a crime, by expanding the bases for the issuance of these orders, the bill would expand an existing crime, thereby imposing 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, as amended by the Public Safety and Rehabilitation Act of 2016, enacted by Proposition 57 at the November 8, 2016, statewide general election, authorizes the district attorney to make a motion to transfer a minor from juvenile court to a court of criminal jurisdiction in a case in which a minor is alleged to have committed a felony when the minor was 16 years of age or older, or in a case in which a specified serious offense is alleged to have been committed by a minor when the minor was 14 or 15 years of age, but the minor was not apprehended prior to the end of juvenile court jurisdiction. Existing case law prohibits the use of a minor's statements made at a transfer hearing or to a probation officer from being used during a criminal prosecution of the minor transferred to the court of criminal jurisdiction. This bill would codify existing case law to prohibit the use of the minor's statements made during a transfer hearing or to the minor's probation officer for the purposes of preparing a report for a transfer hearing from being used against the minor during subsequent juvenile proceedings or subsequent criminal proceedings, as specified. This bill would state that the provisions of this bill are declaratory of existing law.
Existing law authorizes the Secretary of the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation to prescribe and amend rules and regulations for the administration of prisons and requires regulations, which are adopted by the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, to recognize and consider the value of incarcerated person visitation as a means of increasing safety in prisons, maintaining family and community connections, and preparing incarcerated persons for successful release and rehabilitation. Existing regulations create the framework for establishing a visitation process in prisons that is conducted in as accommodating a manner as possible, subject to the need to maintain order, the safety of persons, the security of institutions and facilities, and required prison activities and operations. This bill, the Humanizing and Uniting Generations Safely Act of 2026, would additionally require those regulations pertaining to incarcerated person visits to recognize and consider the importance of physical contact in incarcerated person visitation. The bill would prohibit the department from unreasonably restricting the ability of incarcerated persons or their visitors to engage in certain types of nonsexual physical contact throughout the visit, as provided. The bill would prohibit the department from taking disciplinary action based on alleged inappropriate physical contact, without first providing a warning and a reasonable opportunity to immediately correct the conduct.
Existing law makes a person who deprives or violates the personal liberty of another with the intent to obtain forced labor or services, or to effect or maintain a violation of various felony or misdemeanor offenses, including offenses relating to prostitution, child pornography, as specified, or extortion, as defined, guilty of human trafficking. Existing law makes a person who causes, induces, or persuades, or attempts to cause, induce, or persuade, a person who is a minor at the time of commission of the offense to engage in a commercial sex act, with the intent to effect or maintain a violation of various felony or misdemeanor offenses, also guilty of human trafficking. Existing law establishes the requirements for a continuance to be granted in a criminal case, including a showing of good cause. Existing law defines "good cause" for this purpose to include, but not be limited to, cases involving specified crimes, including murder and domestic violence, and to apply when the prosecuting attorney assigned to the case has another trial, preliminary hearing, or motion to suppress in progress in that court or another court. This bill would, in a case involving human trafficking, require the court, in determining if good cause for a continuance exists, to give great weight to the fact that the prosecuting attorney assigned to the case has another trial, preliminary hearing, or motion to suppress in progress in that court or another court. The bill would authorize the court to grant only one continuance for a maximum of 10 additional court days for that reason. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 1050 of the Penal Code proposed by AB 2052 to be operative only if this bill and AB 2052 are enacted and this bill is enacted last.
Existing law authorizes a court to issue an ex parte restraining order to prevent abuse based on reasonable proof of a past act or acts of abuse. Existing law authorizes the order to be issued solely on the affidavit or testimony of the person requesting the ex parte restraining order. Existing law requires the ex parte order to be issued or denied on the same day the application is submitted to the court, except as specified. Existing law prohibits an ex parte restraining order from being denied solely because the other party was not provided with notice. This bill would instead prohibit a court from requiring that notice be provided to the party to be restrained in advance of accepting a filing for, or deciding, an application for an ex parte restraining order. The bill would also prohibit a court from requiring an explanation or declaration for not providing notice in advance of accepting a filing for, or deciding, an application for an ex parte restraining order. The bill would prohibit a court from adopting or maintaining any rule, form, or practice that is inconsistent with these provisions.
The State Bar Act establishes the State Bar of California (State Bar) as a public corporation and assigns to the State Bar various duties with respect to the licensing and regulations of attorneys in the state. The Supreme Court of California issued an administrative order on June 17, 2026, directing the State Bar to circulate for public comment a proposed rule of court that, if adopted, would establish a community justice worker program, as specified. This bill would require the State Bar, after it solicits public comment on the proposed rule, at the time it resubmits the proposal to the Supreme Court of California, to transmit to the Assembly and Senate Committees on Judiciary a report specifying any statutory changes the State Bar believes are necessary to implement the community justice worker program. The bill would repeal those provisions on January 1, 2031.
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.
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 a crime of domestic violence, human trafficking, a crime in furtherance of a criminal street gang, or a registerable sex offense. Under existing law, the protective order may be valid for up to 10 years, as determined by the court. Beginning July 1, 2027, this bill would additionally allow the court to issue a protective order, valid for up to the later of 10 years or until the minor victim reaches 18 years of age, restraining a defendant from any contact with a victim if the defendant has been convicted of a registerable sex offense involving a minor victim, as specified. The bill would require the Judicial Council, no later than July 1, 2027, to develop forms, instructions, and rules relating to these orders. The bill would make other conforming changes. 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. 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.
