Probation and mandatory supervision: jurisdiction.
Summary
Existing law requires a court to transfer the case of a person released on probation or mandatory supervision to the superior court in any other county in which the person resides permanently, unless the transferring court determines the transfer would be inappropriate and states its reasons on the record. Existing law requires the court of the receiving county to accept the entire jurisdiction over the case. This bill would require the receiving court to accept the entire jurisdiction over the case effective the date the transferring court orders the transfer. The bill would provide that when fines, forfeitures, penalties, assessments, or restitution have been ordered by the transferring court and have not been fully paid, those payments would be made to the collecting program for the transferring court for distribution and accounting. The bill would authorize the receiving court and probation department to impose additional local fees and costs, as specified, and would authorize the collection program for the receiving court to collect court-ordered payments from the defendant for transmittal to the collection program for the transferring court, as specified. The bill would require the Judicial Council to consider adoption of rules of court as it deems appropriate to implement the collection, accounting, and disbursement requirements of the bill.
Bill status
signed
all 5 stages cleared
Introduction
Feb 2015
Committee Review
Aug 2015
Assembly Passage
Apr 2015
Senate Passage
Jul 2015
Signed into Law
Sep 2015
Introduced Feb 25, 2015
Signed Sep 3, 2015
Floor votes · Senate Jul 16, 2015 · Assembly Aug 20, 2015
How they voted
31–0
Passed · 2 other
Total votes 33
Jul 16, 2015
D
Democratic23
95% Yea
R
Republican10
90% Yea
Vote distribution
All Yea
All Nay
Mixed
No data
Full legislative history
Actions timeline
Total actions
20
Key actions
7
Committee
6
Amendments
3
Sep 3, 2015
Signed into law
Approved by the Governor.
legislature
Aug 20, 2015
Assembly · Passed
Assembly Vote: pass (70-0-2)
assembly
Aug 20, 2015
Lower · Passed
Senate amendments concurred in. To Engrossing and Enrolling. (Ayes 78. Noes 0. Page 2522.).
lower
Jul 16, 2015
Senate · Passed
Senate Vote: pass (31-0-2)
senate
Jul 16, 2015
Introduced
In Assembly. Concurrence in Senate amendments pending. May be considered on or after August 14 pursuant to Assembly Rule 77.
lower
Jul 1, 2015
Upper · Passed
Read second time and amended. Ordered to third reading.
upper
Jun 30, 2015
Introduced
From committee: Amend, and do pass as amended. (Ayes 7. Noes 0.) (June 23).
upper
May 26, 2015
Committee
From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to committee. Read second time, amended, and re-referred to Com. on PUB. S.
upper
May 7, 2015
Committee
Referred to Com. on PUB. S.
upper
Apr 8, 2015
Lower · Passed
From committee: Do pass. To Consent Calendar. (Ayes 7. Noes 0.) (April 7).
lower
Mar 9, 2015
Committee
Referred to Com. on PUB. S.
lower
Feb 26, 2015
Lower · Passed
From printer. May be heard in committee March 28.
lower
1 primary · 0 co-sponsors
Sponsors
Role
Legislator
Party
State
District
P
Miguel Santiago
DDemocratic
Ask Maddy
·
AI policy assistant
Ask Maddy about AB 673
Scope: CA
Hi! I can help you understand AB 673. 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