Issue · Criminal Justice

Criminal Justice

Every criminal justice bill, vote, and legislator stance in California, automatically classified by Maddy, our AI policy reader.

Total bills
190
2025-2026 Regular Session
Top supporter
Anna Caballero
92% support rate
Top opponent
Phillip Chen
8% support rate
Ranked legislators
10
5 support · 5 oppose
Key legislators

Who's moving criminal justice in California

Legislators moving criminal justice in California
Legislator Party Stance Support rate Decisive votes
Anna Caballero
Anna Caballero Senate · District 14
D
Strong +
92% 140
Joaquin Arambula
Joaquin Arambula House · District 31
D
Strong +
92% 99
Celeste Rodriguez
Celeste Rodriguez House · District 43
D
Strong +
91% 56
Rebecca Bauer-Kahan
Rebecca Bauer-Kahan House · District 16
D
Strong +
91% 86
Aisha Wahab
Aisha Wahab Senate · District 10
D
Strong +
90% 122
Phillip Chen
Phillip Chen House · District 59
R
Strong −
8% 65
Heath Flora
Heath Flora House · District 9
R
Strong −
11% 56
Brian Jones
Brian Jones Senate · District 40
R
Strong −
11% 71
Carl DeMaio
Carl DeMaio House · District 75
R
Strong −
12% 82
Ali Macedo
Ali Macedo House · District 33
R
Strong −
12% 96
Showing 51–60 of 190 bills

All criminal justice bills

passed both · California · Senate Aug 27, 2026

SB 1446: Incarcerated persons: release and parole.

(1) Existing law requires the Board of Parole Hearings to meet with each indeterminately sentenced inmate during the 6th year before the inmate's minimum eligible parole date for the purpose of reviewing and documenting the inmate's activities and conduct pertinent to parole eligibility. One year before the inmate's minimum eligible parole date, existing law requires a panel of the board to meet with the inmate and to grant parole unless the panel or board sitting en banc determines that the gravity of the current convicted offense, or the timing and gravity of current or past convicted offenses, is such that consideration of the public safety requires a more lengthy period of incarceration for the inmate. In certain circumstances, the board will conduct an en banc review and existing law specifies how the en banc review is required to be conducted. Existing law requires a decision of the board to become final unless the board finds that the panel made an error of law, or that the panel's decision was based on an error of fact, or that new information should be presented to the board, and that, when corrected or considered by the board, has a substantial likelihood of resulting in a substantially different decision upon a rehearing. Existing law authorizes the Governor to request a review of a decision by the board to grant or deny parole and, if a request has been made, existing law requires the request to be reviewed by a majority of commissioners, as specified. This bill would instead require a decision by the board to become final unless the board finds an error of law or fact or new information should be presented to the board and that, when corrected or considered by the board, has a substantial likelihood of resulting in a different decision upon a rehearing. The bill would also make the decision and vote of each commissioner of the board in an en banc review a public record. The bill would require the board, when reviewing decisions referred en banc based on review of a panel's decision, to determine if there was a material error of law or fact, or new information that, when corrected or considered by the board, has a substantial likelihood of resulting in a different decision upon a rehearing, and would require the board to vote to either affirm the decision or vacate the decision and set a new hearing. The bill would require the board, when reviewing a parole decision referred en banc by the Governor, to address the Governor's stated reason or reasons for the requested review, and would require the board to either affirm the decision, refer for a recision hearing for lack of substantial evidence, or, in the case of a denial, vacate the decision and set a new hearing. The bill would also make nonsubstantive changes throughout these provisions. (2) 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 authorize the Executive Officer of the Board of Parole Hearings to refer individuals for evaluation as a sexually violent predator pursuant to these provisions. The bill would authorize the secretary or executive officer of the board to refer the person for evaluation if the incarcerated person is determinately sentenced and is scheduled for a parole hearing in the next 6 months. The bill would additionally authorize the secretary or executive officer of the board to refer an individual who is serving an indeterminate term or whose parole was revoked who meets certain criteria for evaluation at least 6 months before the individual's scheduled release date or if the person is scheduled for a parole hearing within the next 6 months, as specified. 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.
passed · California · Senate Aug 27, 2026

SB 1013: Automated license plate recognition systems.

Existing law prohibits a public agency, which includes the state, a city, a county, a city and county, or any agency or political subdivision of the state, a city, a county, or a city and county, including, but not limited to, a law enforcement agency, from selling, sharing, or transferring automated license plate recognition (ALPR) information, except to another public agency, and only as otherwise permitted by law. Existing law defines ALPR information as information or data collected through the use of an ALPR system. This bill would provide that "public agency" does not include a transportation agency, a public transit operator, department of transportation, public works department, or campus transportation agency, as specified, a public agency or contracted parking operator when engaging in specified activities in a parking facility, a state agency operating specified parking facilities, or the State Air Resources Board. The bill would require a public agency that accesses or provides access to ALPR information to maintain a record of that access, as provided. The bill would, beginning January 1, 2027, require new, updated, renewed, extended, expansions of, or addendums of contractual agreements with ALPR vendors, manufacturers, or suppliers to mandate that no default access is provided to any national ALPR database and that an agency's collected scans are by default not accessible to any other agency, except as specified, and would impose new requirements on sharing between California state law enforcement agencies. This bill would authorize a law enforcement agency to use ALPR information only for purposes of locating vehicles or persons when either are reasonably suspected of being involved in the commission of a public offense or locating an individual who has been reported as missing to a law enforcement agency. The bill, as of January 1, 2028, would require a public agency to archive all ALPR information that has been held for more than 60 days within 14 days, unless that ALPR information is retained in the evidence file of an active investigation or criminal proceeding or matches information on an authorized hot list, as defined, and retain ALPR information that becomes part of an investigation or criminal proceeding in the evidence file as long as the evidence file is required to be held by state law or court order. The bill would prohibit a public agency from querying any archived information except pursuant to a warrant, as specified. By imposing new requirements on public agencies, which include local agencies, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. Existing law defines an ALPR operator as a person that operates an ALPR system, which does not include a transportation agency. Existing law defines an ALPR end-user as a person that accesses or uses an ALPR system, which does not include, among other things, a transportation agency. This bill would additionally exclude from the definitions of "ALPR operator" and "ALPR end-user" a public transit operator, department of transportation, public works department, campus transportation agency, or an airport or airport operator, as provided. The bill would also exclude from the definition of "ALPR operator" the Department of General Services and its operators when engaging in specified activities in a parking facility and would exclude from the definition of "ALPR end-user" a state agency operating specified parking facilities and the State Air Resources Board. Existing law requires an ALPR operator and ALPR end-user to maintain reasonable security procedures and practices, including operational, administrative, technical, and physical safeguards, to protect ALPR information from unauthorized access, destruction, use, modification, or disclosure. This bill would require those security procedures and practices to include safeguards for managing which employees can see the data from their systems, as specified, and requiring data security training and data privacy training for all employees that access ALPR information. Existing law requires an ALPR operator and ALPR end-user to implement a usage and privacy policy that includes, among other things, a description of the job title or other designation of the employees and independent contractors who are authorized to access and use ALPR information. This bill would require the usage and privacy policy to identify what purpose employees and independent contractors access and use ALPR information for. The bill would also require the Department of Justice to, beginning October 1, 2029, and contingent upon an appropriation of sufficient funds, conduct annual random audits on a public agency that is an ALPR operator or ALPR end-user to determine whether they have implemented and are adhering to that usage and privacy policy. Existing law requires an ALPR operator that accesses or provides access to ALPR information to require that ALPR information only be used for the authorized purposes described in the usage and privacy policy and to maintain a record of that access that includes, among other things, the purpose for accessing the information. This bill would instead require that record of access maintained by the ALPR operator to include a brief, accurate, specific, and plain language statement describing the purpose for accessing ALPR information. The bill would include findings that changes proposed by this bill address a matter of statewide concern rather than a municipal affair and, therefore, apply to all cities, including charter cities. 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.
passed both · California · Senate Aug 27, 2026

SB 1401: Criminal procedure: competence to stand trial.

Existing law prohibits a person from being tried or adjudged to punishment while that person is mentally incompetent. Existing law requires the court to, for a person found mentally incompetent and not charged with certain felony offenses, among other things, determine whether restoring the person to mental competence is in the interests of justice. Existing law requires the court to, if restoring the person to mental competence is not in the interests of justice, conduct a hearing, as specified, and determine the person's eligibility for diversion. Under existing law, if the court determines that the person is ineligible or unsuitable for diversion, the court is authorized to hold a hearing to determine the person's other options, including referral to assisted outpatient treatment, county conservatorship, and the CARE program. Existing law requires a person's charges to be dismissed if the person is accepted into assisted outpatient treatment or the CARE program or upon a filing of either a temporary or permanent conservatorship petition. This bill would authorize a county behavioral health agency to report to the court regarding relevant confidential medical information for the purpose of determining eligibility for behavioral health services pursuant to the above provisions. The bill would exempt from the requirement to dismiss charges instances where the person's case has been referred back to the court within certain time periods. Existing law, when a defendant is returned to court after specified proceedings to restore competency and it appears the defendant is gravely disabled, requires the court to initiate specified conservatorship proceedings. Existing law defines gravely disabled for these purposes as meaning a condition in which a person, as a result of specified disorders, is unable to provide for their basic personal needs for food, clothing, shelter, personal safety, or necessary medical care, or a condition in which the person has been found mentally incompetent and specified facts exist, including that the person is unable to understand the nature and purpose of the proceedings taken against them and to assist counsel in the conduct of their defense in a rational manner. This bill would clarify that gravely disabled includes meeting either or both of these definitions of gravely disabled. Existing law, in the case of a misdemeanor charge in which the defendant is found incompetent, requires the court to hold a hearing to determine whether the defendant is eligible for both diversion and the CARE program. Under existing law, if the defendant is not eligible or suitable for diversion, the court is required to hold another hearing to decide if the defendant should be referred for, among other things, county conservatorship. Existing law only allows a referral for county conservatorship if, based on the opinion of a qualified mental health expert, the defendant appears to be gravely disabled, as defined. This bill would also allow a referral for county conservatorship if, in the opinion of the court, the defendant appears to be gravely disabled.
passed both · California · Senate Aug 27, 2026

SB 1374: Restraining orders: educational institutions.

Existing law authorizes a chief administrative officer of a postsecondary educational institution, as defined, or an officer or employee designated by the chief administrative officer to maintain order on the school campus or facility, that has a student who has suffered unlawful violence or a credible threat of violence from any individual which can reasonably be construed to be carried out or to have been carried out at the school campus or facility, to seek a temporary restraining order and an injunction on behalf of the student and, at the discretion of the court, any number of other students at the campus or facility, as specified. This bill would also authorize a chief administrative officer of the postsecondary educational institution or an officer or employee designated by the chief administrative officer to maintain order on the school campus or facility to seek a temporary restraining order and an injunction on behalf of the postsecondary educational institution, upon becoming aware of unlawful violence or a credible threat of violence directed towards the postsecondary educational institution. The bill would require the Judicial Council, on or before January 1, 2028, to adopt or modify forms, as specified. The bill would also expand the course of conduct, as defined, for which a temporary restraining order can be sought to include making telephone calls or sending correspondence, including, but not limited to, email correspondence, to the postsecondary educational institution or its employees or students, or sending correspondence to the chief administrative officer. These provisions would become operative on July 1, 2029. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 527.85 of the Code of Civil Procedure proposed by AB 1753 to be operative only if this bill and AB 1753 are enacted and this bill is enacted last.
passed both · California · Senate Aug 27, 2026

SB 1173: Jury instructions: lesser related offenses.

Existing law authorizes the finder of fact in a criminal prosecution to find the defendant guilty of an offense that is necessarily included in the charged offense. Case law requires the trial court to instruct the jury that it must find the defendant guilty of a necessarily included offense if there is substantial evidence that the defendant is guilty of the necessarily included offense. This bill would require the court, if requested by a defendant, to instruct the jury on a lesser offense, which is closely related to the offense charged, if the court finds that the defendant has relied on a theory of defense consistent with a conviction for the lesser offense, the evidence of the lesser offense is relevant to and admitted for the purpose of establishing guilt of the charged offense, and a basis exists on which the jury could find the offense to be less than charged. The bill would also authorize the judge to find the defendant guilty of the lesser offense if there is no jury. The bill would require the defendant to provide notice to the prosecution of the intent to seek the above-described jury instruction, as specified.
passed both · California · Assembly Aug 27, 2026

AB 2339: Firearms: prohibited persons.

(1) Existing law prohibits a juvenile who is adjudged a ward of the juvenile court due to the commission of specified serious or violent offenses from subsequently owning or possessing a firearm until they are 30 years of age. Existing law requires the juvenile court to notify the Department of Justice of persons subject to these provisions, as specified. This bill would require the juvenile court to notify the department if the juvenile court grants a dismissal of a juvenile petition for an offense that subjected the juvenile to the above-described firearm prohibition. (2) Existing law authorizes certain juvenile records to be sealed upon order of the court and to subsequently be destroyed. Existing law requires a juvenile record that has been ordered to be sealed, and that contains a sustained petition making a person ineligible to own or possess a firearm, to not be destroyed until the person is 33 years of age. Existing law authorizes a record that has been sealed by a court pursuant to these provisions to be accessed, inspected, or utilized in certain circumstances, including by the Department of Justice for the purpose of determining if the person is suitable to purchase, own, or possess a firearm, as specified. This bill would authorize the Department of Justice, if it determines based on its review of a person's sealed record pursuant to the above-described provisions that a person is or may not be suitable to purchase, own, or possess a firearm, to provide the person with a copy of the record reviewed by the department. (3) Existing law prohibits a person who has been taken into custody, assessed, and admitted to a designated facility, or who has been certified for intensive treatment after having been admitted to a designated facility, because the person is a danger to themselves or others as a result of a mental health disorder, from owning a firearm, as specified. Existing law requires a facility to submit a report to the Department of Justice containing specified information and requires the report to be kept confidential, except for the purpose of court proceedings and determination of eligibility to own, possess, control, receive, or purchase a firearm, other deadly weapon, or ammunition. This bill would require a designated facility that accepts the transfer for placement of a person pursuant to the above-described provisions to be responsible for submitting the report to the department. Existing law also prohibits a person who has been adjudicated to be a danger to others as a result of a mental disorder or mental illness, or who has been adjudicated to be a mentally disordered sex offender, a person who has been found not guilty by reason of insanity of committing specified crimes, a person found by a court to be mentally incompetent to stand trial, or a person who has been placed under conservatorship by a court because the person is gravely disabled as a result of a mental disorder or impairment by chronic alcoholism from purchasing or receiving, or attempting to purchase or receive, or having possession, custody, or control of a firearm or any other deadly weapon. Existing law requires the court to notify the Department of Justice of the court order placing the person under the conservatorship and prohibiting possession of a firearm or other deadly weapon or ammunition by the person, as specified. Existing law requires all information provided to the Department of Justice regarding the conservatorship to be kept confidential and only used to determine eligibility to purchase or possesses a firearm, other deadly weapon, or ammunition, and makes a violation of this provision a misdemeanor. This bill would require all information provided to the department pursuant to the above-described provisions to be kept confidential, separate, and apart from all other records maintained by the department, except in specified circumstances, including, among others, for use by a state law enforcement agency seeking the issuance of a gun violence restraining order, and would make a violation of these provisions a misdemeanor. The bill would require notices or reports submitted pursuant to these provisions to include a copy of documents substantiating the report or detailing the listed offense prohibiting the person from possessing firearms, ammunition, or other deadly weapons, as specified. By expanding the scope of a crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. Under existing law, a person who has been certified for intensive treatment under specified provisions is prohibited from owning, possessing, controlling, receiving, or purchasing, or attempting to own, possess, control, receive, or purchase, a firearm, other deadly weapon, or ammunition for a period of 5 years. This bill would require that a person who was certified for intensive treatment under the specified provisions and is released from intensive treatment following a certification review or a writ of habeas corpus to remain subject to the 5-year prohibition period described above. The bill would require a facility discharging a person certified for intensive treatment to provide the person and the Department of Justice with a copy of a specified form pertaining to the firearm prohibition. Existing law requires the Department of Justice to request specified institutions to submit information necessary to identify persons subject to the prohibitions regarding firearms, destructive devices, and explosives. This bill would require the various reports to the department to include a copy of specified identification information for persons subject to these provisions, as specified. The bill would authorize the department to use, and to give to specified entities, the information provided to the department to determine the eligibility of a person to acquire, care, or possess ammunition. This bill would make unauthorized disclosure of the information provided pursuant to these provisions a misdemeanor. (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.
passed both · California · Assembly Aug 27, 2026

AB 2122: Infractions: warrants and penalties.

(1) Existing law makes it a misdemeanor to willfully fail to appear in court, as specified. Existing law, when a person has failed to appear and has not posted bail, requires the magistrate to issue a warrant for the person's arrest within 20 days of the failure to appear. This bill would make those sections only apply when the underlying charge is not an infraction. (2) Existing law authorizes the issuance of a bench warrant of arrest when a person fails to appear in court as promised in specified criminal proceedings. This bill would prohibit the issuance of a bench warrant of arrest when the underlying crime is an infraction issued pursuant to the Vehicle Code. The bill would require bench warrants for other infractions to be limited to only authorizing arrest and booking at the scene followed by immediate release, as specified. (3) Existing law makes it a misdemeanor to willfully fail to appear in court for a violation of the Vehicle Code, and requires the court to report a conviction of this offense to the Department of Motor Vehicles. This bill would make that misdemeanor only apply when the underlying charge is not an infraction. The bill would also remove the requirement for the court to report a conviction of this offense to the department. (4) Existing law authorizes the imposition of a civil assessment or the issuance of an arrest warrant when a person fails to make an installment payment on bail imposed by the court for an infraction violation of the Vehicle Code. Existing law also makes it a misdemeanor to fail to pay bail in installments or to fail to pay a fine imposed for the violation of a state or local traffic law. This bill would remove the misdemeanor for failure to pay a bail installment or fine if the original charge was an infraction. The bill would remove the authorization to issue an arrest warrant for failure to pay a bail installment. (5) Existing law, if a defendant does not appear at the time the case is called for a violation of the Vehicle Code, authorizes the court to declare the bail forfeited and order that no further proceedings be had in the case, or to issue a warrant for the arrest of the defendant. However, if a defendant is charged with specified crimes, including disposing of a flaming or glowing substance on or near a road and littering a highway, has previously been convicted of the same crime, and fails to appear at the time the case is called to trial, existing law authorizes the court to declare the bail forfeited and requires the court to issue a bench warrant for the arrest of the person charged, unless the magistrate finds that undue hardship will be imposed by requiring the defendant to appear. This bill would remove the requirement that the magistrate issue a bench warrant when the person has committed one of the crimes specified above.
passed both · California · Senate Aug 27, 2026

SB 936: Nitrous oxide: sales.

Existing law makes it a misdemeanor to possess nitrous oxide with the intent of inhaling it for specified purposes, including to cause intoxication. Existing law also makes it a misdemeanor to sell nitrous oxide to any person under 18 years of age. Existing law makes it a misdemeanor to dispense nitrous oxide to a person and knowing that the person will use it for specified prohibited purposes, if that person then causes death or great bodily injury to themselves or another person. Under existing law, the Cigarette and Tobacco Products Licensing Act of 2003, the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration (CDTFA) administers and enforces a statewide program to license manufacturers, importers, distributors, wholesalers, and retailers of cigarettes and tobacco products. Existing law specifically requires a retailer, distributor, or wholesaler, as defined, to hold a license from the CDTFA to engage in the sale of cigarettes or tobacco products. Existing law subjects these licenses to suspension or revocation for violations of existing law. Existing law imposes specified noticing and posting requirements for retailer licenses that are revoked. A violation of these provisions is a misdemeanor. This bill would, except as specifically exempted, prohibit the sale and distribution of a nitrous oxide container that is capable of holding more than 8 grams of nitrous oxide or from which an individual may directly inhale nitrous oxide. The bill would also prohibit the sale and distribution of a nitrous oxide that has, or is marketed as having, the taste or smell of any food. The bill would prohibit knowingly selling or distributing a device that allows an individual to inhale nitrous oxide from the container or hold nitrous oxide for the purposes of inhalation. The bill would punish a violation of these provisions as an infraction, as specified. The bill would also authorize a court to suspend a business license if the business has a prior conviction for violating these prohibitions, and to revoke a license to sell tobacco products if the business has 2 prior convictions for violating these prohibitions. The bill would make any person, distributor, or business found to have violated these prohibitions liable for all reasonable costs incurred by a public agency in the investigation, inspection, seizure, storage, transportation, handling, venting, abatement, disposal, or destruction of nitrous oxide products, nitrous oxide containers, inhalation devices, or related materials involved in the violation, as specified. This bill would prohibit a person that is engaged in the business of selling cigarettes or tobacco products in this state from possessing, storing, owning, or selling nitrous oxide, in violation of the criminal provisions outlined above, at any site where cigarettes and tobacco products are stored or sold. The bill would authorize the CDTFA to seize nitrous oxide products, as prescribed. The bill would subject a violator to civil penalties in amounts depending on the aggregate retail value of the seized nitrous oxide and the number of violations within 5 years of the first violation. The bill would require the deposit of collected civil penalties in the Cigarette and Tobacco Products Compliance Fund. The bill would also subject a violator who commits a 2nd violation to license suspension and who commits a 3rd violation to license revocation, as prescribed. This bill would establish procedures for the CDTFA to follow for a court-ordered revocation. The bill would require the CDTFA to assess a $250 civil penalty for each revoked license and to deposit collected civil penalties into the fund, to be made available to the department, upon appropriation by the Legislature, for purposes of administering the bill. The bill would authorize a licensee to apply for a new license at the previously revoked location 6 months after the date of revocation and would authorize the CDTFA, at its discretion, to issue a new license. The bill would apply these noticing and posting requirements to a retailer subject to a court-ordered revocation pursuant to the bill. The California Constitution provides for the establishment of the State Board of Equalization, which, before July 1, 2017, had primary responsibility for most of the state's duties, powers, and responsibilities regarding the administration of taxes and fees. Existing law, on July 1, 2017, transferred to the CDTFA various duties, powers, and responsibilities of the State Board of Equalization, including administration of the Cigarette and Tobacco Products Licensing Act of 2003, as specified. This bill would change references in the provisions of the Cigarette and Tobacco Products Licensing Act of 2003 amended by this bill from the "State Board of Equalization" to the "California Department of Tax and Fee Administration" to reflect the transfer of the board's duties, powers, and responsibilities to the CDTFA. Because this bill would create new crimes, it 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.
passed both · California · Assembly Aug 27, 2026

AB 871: Mandated reporters of suspected financial abuse of an elder or dependent adult.

Existing law, the Elder Abuse and Dependent Adult Civil Protection Act, establishes procedures for the reporting, investigation, and prosecution of elder and dependent adult abuse. Existing law requires a mandated reporter of suspected financial abuse of an elder or dependent adult, as defined, to report financial abuse in a specified manner, including by telephone or through a confidential internet reporting tool, as specified, immediately, or as soon as practicably possible. If reported by telephone, existing law requires a written report to be sent, or an internet report to be made through the internet reporting tool, to the local adult protective services agency or the local law enforcement agency within 2 working days. Existing law deems all officers and employees of a financial institution to be mandated reporters of suspected financial abuse of an elder or dependent adult. A mandated reporter who fails to report financial abuse of an elder or dependent adult is liable for civil penalties, as specified. If a report of financial abuse is made by a mandated reporter, as described above, this bill would also require a report to be made to the Federal Bureau of Investigation Internet Crime Complaint Center within 2 working days. Within 48 hours of filing a report, the bill would require a financial institution to notify the elder or dependent adult identified in the report, as specified, and provide additional required information. The bill would require a financial institution to provide annual training to its mandated reporters on how to escalate internally and report suspected financial abuse of an elder or a dependent adult to both local and federal authorities, as specified. The bill would specify that violations of these provisions would not incur the above-described liability for civil penalties. The bill would make its provisions operative on January 1, 2028.
passed both · California · Senate Aug 27, 2026

SB 490: Alcohol and drug programs.

Existing law provides for the licensure and regulation of adult alcohol or other drug recovery or treatment facilities by the State Department of Public Health and prohibits the operation of one of those facilities without a current valid license. Existing law requires the department, if a facility is alleged to be in violation of that prohibition, to conduct a site visit to investigate the allegation. Existing law requires, if the department's employee or agent finds evidence that the facility is providing services without a license, the employee or agent to take specified actions, including, among others, submitting the findings of the investigation to the department and issuing a written notice to the facility that includes the date by which the facility is required to cease providing services. Existing law establishes the Medi-Cal program, which is administered by the State Department of Health Care Services and under which qualified low-income individuals receive health care services, through fee-for-service or managed care delivery systems. The Medi-Cal program is, in part, governed and funded by federal Medicaid program provisions. Existing law establishes the Drug Medi-Cal Treatment Program (Drug Medi-Cal) and authorizes the department to enter into a Drug Medi-Cal contract with each county for the provision of alcohol and drug use services within the county service area. This bill would require the department, if it determines it has jurisdiction over the allegation, to assign the complaint to an analyst within 10 days of receiving the allegation and, except as specified, complete the investigation within 120 days of assigning the complaint. The bill would require the department, if it receives a complaint that does not fall under its jurisdiction, to notify, to the extent feasible, the complainant that it does not investigate that type of complaint. The bill would require the employee or agent to provide their findings to the department and would require the department to issue the notice described above within 10 days of the employee or agency submitting their findings and to conduct a followup site visit to determine whether the facility has ceased providing services as required. The bill would authorize, in counties that elect to administer the Drug Medi-Cal organized delivery system and that provide optional recovery housing services, the county behavioral health agency to request approval from the department to conduct a site visit of a recovery residence that the county contracts with that is alleged to be operating without a license. The bill would permit the department to approve that request in certain circumstances, including that the department has sufficient evidence to substantiate the allegation. Existing law requires licensed adult alcohol or other drug recovery or treatment facilities and certified alcohol or other drug programs to disclose to the department whether any of its agents, partners, directors, officers, or owners has a specified interest in a recovery residence and requires the department to take action against an unlicensed facility that is disclosed as a recovery residence. This bill would require the department, if it takes action against a recovery residence pursuant to that provision, to conduct a site visit of a certified program or licensed facility that has disclosed the specified interest in the recovery residence. The bill would also require, no later than July 15, 2027, and by July 15 each year thereafter, that all programs certified or facilities licensed by the department submit to the department a report of all money transfers between the program or facility and a recovery residence during the previous fiscal year, in order to detect patient brokering, illicit kickbacks, or unethical inducements that harm patients. The bill would require the department to analyze that data and develop guidelines for permissible and impermissible transfers.
Showing 51 to 60 of 190 bills
Previous 1 … 5 6 7 … 19 Next