Court records: sealing.
Summary
Existing law authorizes a person to petition the court for an order sealing the record of conviction and other official records in a case in which that person was under 18 years of age at the time of commission of a misdemeanor and is eligible for, or has previously received, specified relief. Existing law authorizes that person to be required to reimburse the court, the county, or any city for the actual cost of services rendered, as specified. This bill would only make persons 26 years of age or older liable to reimburse the court, the county, or any city for the cost of services. Existing law authorizes in a case in which a petition has been filed with a juvenile court to commence proceedings to adjudge a person a ward of the court, in a case in which a person is cited to appear before a probation officer or is taken before a probation officer pursuant to a specified provision of law, or in a case in which a minor is taken before an officer of a law enforcement agency, the person or the county probation officer to petition the court for the sealing of arrest records and records relating to the person's case in the custody of the juvenile court and the probation officer and any other agencies, including law enforcement agencies and public officials as the petitioner alleges to have custody of the records. This bill would prohibit an unfulfilled order of restitution that has been converted to a civil judgment from barring the sealing of a record pursuant to the above provisions. The bill would also prohibit outstanding restitution fines and court-ordered fees from being considered when assessing whether a petitioner's rehabilitation has been attained to the satisfaction of the court and from barring the sealing of a record pursuant to the above provisions. The bill would provide that a minor is not relieved of the obligation to pay victim restitution, restitution fines, and court-ordered fines and fees because the minor's records are sealed. The bill would provide that sealing a record does not prohibit a court from enforcing a civil judgment for an unfulfilled order of restitution, and that a victim or a local collection program may continue to enforce victim restitution orders, restitution fines, and court-ordered fines and fees after a record is sealed. By increasing the number of records local agencies would be required to seal, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. Existing law makes a father, mother, spouse, or other person liable for the support of a minor person, the minor when he or she becomes an adult, or the estates of those persons, liable for the cost to the county and court for any investigation related to the sealing and for the sealing of any juvenile court or arrest records pursuant to the above-mentioned provisions. Existing law also authorizes those persons to be required to reimburse the court, county, or a city for the actual cost of services rendered, as specified. This bill would only require persons 26 years of age or older who petition for an order sealing his or her record, pursuant to specified provisions, to be liable for the investigative costs and to reimburse the costs of services rendered. 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 these statutory provisions.
Bill status
signed
all 5 stages cleared
Introduction
Feb 2015
Committee Review
Sep 2015
Senate Passage
Jun 2015
Assembly Passage
Aug 2015
Signed into Law
Sep 2015
Introduced Feb 26, 2015
Signed Sep 30, 2015
Floor votes · Senate Jun 2, 2015 · Assembly Aug 31, 2015
How they voted
23–10
Passed · 2 other
Total votes 35
Jun 2, 2015
D
Democratic24
95% Yea
R
Republican11
90% Nay
Vote distribution
All Yea
All Nay
Mixed
No data
Full legislative history
Actions timeline
Total actions
28
Key actions
8
Committee
11
Amendments
2
Sep 30, 2015
Signed into law
Approved by the Governor.
legislature
Sep 1, 2015
Upper · Passed
Assembly amendments concurred in. (Ayes 26. Noes 14. Page 2370.) Ordered to engrossing and enrolling.
upper
Aug 31, 2015
Assembly · Passed
Assembly Vote: pass (56-16-3)
assembly
Aug 31, 2015
Introduced
In Senate. Concurrence in Assembly amendments pending.
upper
Aug 19, 2015
Lower · Passed
From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 11. Noes 4.) (August 19).
lower
Jul 15, 2015
Lower · Passed
July 15 hearing postponed by committee.
lower
Jul 14, 2015
Committee
From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
lower
Jul 1, 2015
Committee
From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 4. Noes 2.) (June 30). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
lower
Jun 18, 2015
Committee
Referred to Com. on PUB. S.
lower
Jun 2, 2015
Senate · Passed
Senate Vote: pass (23-10-2)
senate
Jun 1, 2015
Upper · Passed
Read second time and amended. Ordered to third reading.
upper
May 28, 2015
Upper · Passed
From committee: Do pass as amended. (Ayes 5. Noes 2. Page 1155.) (May 28).
upper
Apr 22, 2015
Committee
From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 5. Noes 2. Page 730.) (April 21). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
upper
Apr 9, 2015
Committee
Re-referred to Com. on PUB. S.
upper
Apr 6, 2015
Committee
From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on RLS.
upper
Mar 12, 2015
Committee
Referred to Com. on RLS.
upper
Feb 26, 2015
Introduced
Introduced. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment. To print.
upper
1 primary · 0 co-sponsors
Sponsors
Role
Legislator
Party
State
District
P
Ricardo Lara
DDemocratic
Ask Maddy
·
AI policy assistant
Ask Maddy about SB 504
Scope: CA
Hi! I can help you understand SB 504. 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