Criminal Justice

Existing law requires a certain percentage of funds to be allocated to specified rural and small county sheriffs' departments from funds remaining in the Enhancing Law Enforcement Activities Subaccount in the Local Revenue Fund 2011, as specified. Existing law requires that funds allocated pursuant to these provisions be used to enhance law enforcement efforts in those counties. This bill would specifically authorize a county sheriff's department to use up to 20% of those funds for the identification of unidentified human remains, including using the funds for forensic examination and genealogical research.

Existing law, the California Values Act, generally prohibits California law enforcement agencies from investigating, interrogating, detaining, detecting, or arresting persons for immigration enforcement purposes. Existing law provides certain limited exceptions to this prohibition, including transfers of persons pursuant to a judicial warrant and providing certain information to federal authorities regarding serious and violent felons in custody. This bill would prohibit California law enforcement agencies from collaborating with, or providing any information in writing, verbally, on in any other manner to, immigration authorities regarding proposed or currently underway immigration enforcement actions when the actions could be or are taking place within a radius of one mile of any childcare or daycare facility, religious institution, place of worship, hospital, or medical office. To the extent this bill would impose additional duties on local law enforcement agencies or officials, 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. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.

Existing law declares that it is the policy of the state that each county and city shall permit and encourage the development of sufficient numbers and types of alcoholism or drug abuse recovery or treatment facilities as are commensurate with local need. Existing law requires an alcoholism or drug abuse recovery or treatment facility that serves 6 or fewer persons to be considered a residential use of property for the purposes of local regulation, regardless of whether or not unrelated persons are living together. This bill would exempt an alcoholism or drug abuse recovery or treatment facility from being considered a residential use of property for the purposes of local regulation if multiple single-family dwellings are being used as a licensed or unlicensed alcohol or other drug recovery or treatment facility, they share an owner, a director, programs, or amenities with another facility, and any of the dwellings are within 300 feet of that facility, or if a single-family dwelling being used as an alcohol or other drug recovery or treatment facility shares an owner, a director, programs, or amenities with another facility that is commercially owned, operated, and licensed that is located anywhere in the state.

Existing law authorizes a party about to be injured to lawfully resist the commission of a public offense and to use sufficient resistance to prevent the offense. Existing case law provides that, in order to justify an act of self-defense, an individual must have a reasonable belief that the threat is imminent, and limits the right of self-defense to the use of that force that is reasonable under the circumstances. This bill, the Preemptive Self Defense Act of 2025, would clarify that a party who reasonably perceives an imminent threat of bodily harm may make lawful resistance to the commission of a public offense and that the resistance authorized is required to be proportional to the reasonably perceived threat and to cease when the threat is no longer present. The bill would prohibit a party's background, training, and professional fighting skills from being taken into account when determining whether a party has taken reasonable defensive action. Existing law authorizes necessary force to be used to protect from wrongful injury the person or property of oneself, or of a spouse, child, parent, or other relative, or member of one's family, or of a ward, servant, master, or guest. This bill would also specify that there shall not be any civil liability on the part of, and no cause of action shall accrue against, a person who lawfully resists a public offense, as described above.

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. This bill would additionally allow the court to issue a permanent protective order restraining a defendant from any contact with the victim if the defendant has been convicted of any serious or violent felony, as defined, or any felony requiring registration as a sex offender. The bill would also authorize the court to permanently extend certain previously issued orders under certain circumstances. The bill would require the Judicial Council 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.

Existing law authorizes the governing board of a school district to establish a security department under the supervision of a chief of security as designated by, and under the direction of, the superintendent of the school district. Existing law also authorizes the governing board of a school district to establish a school police department under the supervision of a school chief of police and to employ peace officers. This bill would require, commencing with the 2028–29 school year, and each school year thereafter, a rural school district or charter school, as defined, to determine the appropriate number of armed school resource officers, as defined, authorized to carry a loaded firearm for each school of the rural school district or charter school. The bill would require the governing board of the school district or the governing body of the charter school to ensure that at least one armed school resource officer is present during regular school hours at each school of the rural school district or charter school that meets specified criteria, as provided. By imposing an additional requirement on school districts and charter schools, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would authorize the governing board or body, if it is unable to comply with these requirements due to the unavailability of funding or personnel who qualify to serve as an armed school resource officer, to claim a good cause exception to these requirements by adopting a resolution, as provided. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.

Existing law requires each state and local agency that employs peace officers to annually report to the Attorney General specified data on all stops conducted by that agency's peace officers for the preceding calendar year. Existing law defines "stop" for purposes of these provisions to mean any detention by a peace officer of a person or any peace officer interaction with a person in which the peace officer conducts a search of the person's body or property in the person's possession or control. Existing law requires the Attorney General to establish the Racial and Identity Profiling Advisory Board (RIPA) for the purpose of eliminating racial and identity profiling and improving diversity and racial and identity sensitivity in law enforcement. Existing law requires RIPA to include various members, including 2 representatives of human or civil rights tax-exempt organizations, 2 representatives of community organizations, and 2 religious clergy members, as specified. Existing law authorizes the Governor, President pro Tempore of the Senate, and Speaker of the Assembly to each prescribe up to 2 other members to membership of RIPA. This bill would require RIPA to include in its membership the president of the California District Attorneys Association, or their designee. Existing law requires RIPA to issue a report annually that provides RIPA's analysis of, among other things, the reported stop data described above. Existing law also requires the report to provide detailed findings on the past and current status of racial identity profiling and to make policy recommendations for eliminating racial and identity profiling, as specified. This bill would authorize any member of RIPA to cause a dissenting opinion to be included in the report, as specified. The bill would additionally authorize RIPA to include a response to a dissenting opinion in its report.

Existing law provides that, except as specified, a person who assaults another with the intent to commit, among other things, mayhem, rape, sodomy, or oral copulation, shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for 2, 4, or 6 years. Existing law provides that a person who commits those offenses against a person under 18 years of age shall be punished by imprisonment for 5, 7, or 9 years. This bill would additionally punish assault with the intent to commit those specified offenses when committed against a dependent person, as defined, by a caretaker or other adult who has care or custody of the dependent person, if the caretaker or other adult knows or should reasonably know that the victim is a dependent person, with imprisonment for 5, 7, or 9 years. By expanding the definition of 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.

Existing law establishes the Department of Housing and Community Development in the Business, Consumer Services, and Housing Agency and makes the department responsible for administering various housing programs throughout the state, including, among others, the Multifamily Housing Program. This bill would establish the Reentry Housing and Workforce Development Program. The bill would require the department, on or before July 1, 2026, to take specified actions to, upon appropriation by the Legislature, provide grants to applicants, as defined, for innovative or evidence-based housing, housing-based services, and employment interventions to allow people with recent histories of incarceration to exit homelessness and remain stably housed. The bill would require the department to establish a process, in collaboration with the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation and with counties in which recipients are operating, for referral of participants, in accordance with certain guidelines and procedures. The bill would require the department to score applicants to the program competitively according to specified criteria. The bill would require recipients of funds from the program to use those funds for, among other things, long-term rental assistance in permanent housing, incentives to landlords, and innovative or evidence-based services to assist participants in accessing permanent supportive housing. The bill would require the department to distribute funds allocated by executing contracts with awarded entities for a term of 5 years, subject to automatic renewal. The bill would require a recipient of the program to submit an annual report to the department. The bill would require the department to hire an independent evaluator to assess outcomes from the program and would require the department to submit that analysis to specified committees of the Legislature.

Existing law creates specified programs that employ inmates, including the joint venture program, which is established by the Secretary of Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation within state prisons that allows a public entity, nonprofit or for-profit entity, organization, or business to employ inmates confined in the state prison system for the purpose of producing goods or services. Existing law also establishes the Prison Industry Authority within the department for the purpose of developing and operating industrial, agricultural, and service enterprises employing prisoners in institutions under the jurisdiction of the department and for the purpose of creating and maintaining working conditions within the enterprises to ensure prisoners employed have the opportunity to work productively, to earn funds, and to acquire or improve effective work habits and occupational skills. Existing law requires, upon appropriation by the Legislature, the Office of Small Business Advocate within the Governor's Office of Business and Economic Development to establish the California Employee Ownership Hub that would, among other things, work with all California state agencies whose regulations and programs affect employee-owned companies, and businesses with the potential to become employee owned, to enhance opportunities and reduce barriers. Existing law, the Cooperative Corporation Law, governs the organization and operation of cooperatives, including, among others, worker cooperatives. Existing law defines a worker cooperative as a corporation formed under the Cooperative Corporation Law that includes a class of worker-members who are natural persons whose patronage consists of labor contributed to or other work performed for the corporation. Existing law requires specified information to be included in the articles of incorporation or bylaws, including, among other things, the apportionment and distribution of net earnings and losses of a worker cooperative. Existing law makes the violation of specified provisions under the Cooperative Corporation Law a crime. This bill would require the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation to establish the Inmate Cooperative Program to facilitate operations of inmate worker cooperatives within state prison facilities. The bill would authorize a group of inmates who seek to establish a worker cooperative to apply to the program by submitting an application to the warden of the facility. The bill would require the warden to approve an application only if the applicant, or a cooperative community partner acting on their behalf, submits a plan of operation to the warden containing specified information, including, among other things, the cooperative's draft bylaws, which describe the cooperative's mission, the cooperative's internal governance structure, an initial management structure, and compensation structure. The bill would define a cooperative community partner as a nonprofit organization, cooperative association, cooperative corporation, or individual that supports the inmates with the establishment, operation, and governance of certified inmate cooperatives. This bill would require a group of inmates seeking to form a worker cooperative to incorporate as a worker cooperative following the approval of an application by the warden. The bill would require the Inmate Cooperative Program to certify the worker cooperative following approval of an application by the warden and incorporation of the cooperative. The bill would require the department to enter into a contract with the cooperative to outline the terms of operation, responsibilities, and compliance requirements. The bill would require a certified cooperative, as a condition to operate in a state prison facility, to write into their bylaws that their cooperative community partner is required to deduct 40% from each inmate's gross wages and deposit the wages into a specified account. The bill would authorize a certified cooperative to engage in the production of goods, agricultural products, or services for the cooperative's use and sale. This bill would require the California Employee Ownership Hub to choose a cooperative institution, which would, among other things, assist in the selection of a financial institution that would steward and manage an account that would be used to, among other things, create economic opportunities for survivors of crime and other persons impacted by their interactions with the criminal justice system with grants for specified purposes. The bill would define a cooperative institution as a nongovernmental nonprofit organization, cooperative association, or similar entity that is dedicated to supporting, overseeing, and promoting cooperative enterprises. The bill would require the financial institution to submit an annual report to the Governor detailing the account's activities, resource allocations, and measurable outcomes of funded initiatives. This bill would also require the department to deduct from inmate wages mandatory deductions for restitution orders and fines, among other things. The bill would require the department to provide certified cooperatives with access to necessary equipment, materials, and resources to support their operations, with no obligation for the department to fund these resources. The bill would prohibit an employee of the department from serving as a member, officer, or board member of any cooperative established under the Inmate Cooperative Program or from having any direct or indirect financial interest in the cooperative or its operations.