Disorderly conduct.
Summary
Existing law establishes the offense of disorderly conduct to include, among other acts, specified invasions of privacy and the act of, while loitering, prowling, or wandering upon the private property of another, at any time, peeking in the door or window of any inhabited building or structure, without visible or lawful business with the owner or occupant. Except as specified, existing law makes those offenses punishable by imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding 6 months, by a fine not exceeding $1,000, or by both that fine and imprisonment. This bill would instead provide that, except as specified below, those offenses are punishable by imprisonment in a county jail for not more than 6 months, by a fine of $1,000, or by both that fine and imprisonment, or punishable by imprisonment in a county jail for 16 months, or 2 or 3 years, by a fine of $2,000, or by both that fine and imprisonment. Existing law makes a second or subsequent violation of the invasion of privacy provisions described above punishable by imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding one year, by a fine not exceeding $2,000, or by both that fine and imprisonment. Existing law authorizes the same punishments if the victim of one of those invasions of privacy was a minor at the time of the offense. This bill would instead provide that, except as specified below, a second or subsequent violation of the invasion of privacy provisions described above is punishable by imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding one year, by a fine not exceeding $2,000, or by both that fine and imprisonment, or punishable by imprisonment in a county jail for 16 months, or 2 or 3 years, by a fine not exceeding $5,000, or by both that fine and imprisonment. The bill would authorize the same punishments if the victim of one of those invasions of privacy was a minor at the time of the offense. Existing law provides that, except as specified, every person who, having been convicted of violating the peeking or invasion of privacy provisions described above, commits a second or subsequent violation of those provisions, shall be punished by imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding one year, by a fine not exceeding $1,000, or by both that fine and imprisonment. This bill would provide that, except as specified below, those violations are punishable by imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding one year, by a fine not exceeding $2,000, or by both that fine and imprisonment, or punishable by imprisonment in a county jail for 16 months, or 2 or 3 years, by a fine not exceeding $5,000, or by both that fine and imprisonment. Existing law provides that every person who, having been convicted of violating the peeking or invasion of privacy provisions described above, uses a concealed camcorder, motion picture camera, or photographic camera of any type, to secretly videotape, film, photograph, or record by electronic means, another, identifiable person who may be in a state of full or partial undress, for the purpose of viewing the body of, or the undergarments worn by, that other person, without the consent or knowledge of that other person, in the interior of a bedroom, bathroom, changing room, fitting room, dressing room, or tanning booth, or the interior of any other area in which that other person has a reasonable expectation of privacy, with the intent to invade the privacy of that other person, regardless of whether it is a first, second, or subsequent violation of that specific invasion of privacy provision, shall be punished by imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding one year, by a fine not exceeding $5,000, or by both that fine and imprisonment. This bill would provide that those violations are punishable by imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding one year, by a fine not exceeding $5,000, or by both that fine and imprisonment, or punishable by imprisonment in a county jail for 16 months, or 2 or 3 years, by a fine not exceeding $10,000, or by both that fine and imprisonment. The bill would also make conforming changes. By increasing the penalties for existing crimes, 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 no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
Bill status
failed
1 of 4 stages cleared
Introduction
Feb 2016
Committee Review
Floor Vote
Governor
Introduced Feb 3, 2016
Last action May 27, 2016
Floor votes
How they voted
No floor votes recorded yet.
Full legislative history
Actions timeline
Total actions
11
Key actions
4
Committee
8
May 27, 2016
Lower · Passed
In committee: Held under submission.
lower
May 4, 2016
Committee
In committee: Set, first hearing. Referred to APPR. suspense file.
lower
Apr 21, 2016
Committee
From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 4. Noes 3.) (April 20). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
lower
Apr 14, 2016
Committee
Re-referred to Com. on PUB. S.
lower
Apr 5, 2016
Lower · Passed
In committee: Set, second hearing. Hearing canceled at the request of author.
lower
Mar 29, 2016
Lower · Passed
In committee: Set, first hearing. Hearing canceled at the request of author.
lower
Feb 18, 2016
Committee
Referred to Com. on PUB. S.
lower
Feb 4, 2016
Lower · Passed
From printer. May be heard in committee March 5.
lower
1 primary · 0 co-sponsors
Sponsors
Role
Legislator
Party
State
District
P
Beth Gaines
RRepublican
Ask Maddy
·
AI policy assistant
Ask Maddy about AB 1772
Scope: CA
Hi! I can help you understand AB 1772. What would you like to know?
Try one of these
i
Maddy answers using official bill text and legislative records. Always verify before sharing.
Sources cited inline