Suspension and allocation of judgeships.
Summary
Existing law specifies the number of judges for the superior court of each county. Existing law allocates additional judgeships to the various counties in accordance with uniform standards for factually determining additional judicial need in each county, as updated and approved by the Judicial Council, pursuant to the Update of Judicial Needs Study, based on specified criteria, including, among others, workload standards that represent the average amount of time of bench and nonbench work required to resolve each case type. This bill would require the suspension of 4 vacant judgeships, as defined, in superior courts with more authorized judgeships than their assessed judicial need. The bill would require the allocation of 4 judgeships to superior courts with fewer authorized judgeships than their assessed judicial need and would require the judgeships to be funded using existing appropriations for the compensation of superior court judges. The bill would require the suspension to be in accordance with a methodology approved by the Judicial Council, as specified, and would require the determination of a superior court's assessed judicial need to be in accordance with the above uniform standards and be based on the criteria described above. The bill would require the Judicial Council, if a vacant judgeship is eligible for suspension, to promptly notify the applicable courts, the Legislature, and the Governor that the judgeship will be suspended, subject to approval by the Governor. This bill would also make a statement of legislative intent regarding the authority of the Legislature, the Governor, and the Chief Justice of California.
Bill status
in committee
1 of 4 stages cleared
Introduction
Dec 2016
Committee Review
Floor Vote
Governor
Introduced Dec 5, 2016
Last action Feb 1, 2018
Floor votes
How they voted
No floor votes recorded yet.
Full legislative history
Actions timeline
Total actions
11
Key actions
2
Committee
3
May 25, 2017
Upper · Passed
May 25 hearing: Held in committee and under submission.
upper
Mar 29, 2017
Upper · Passed
From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 6. Noes 1. Page 539.) (March 28). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
upper
Jan 12, 2017
Committee
Referred to Com. on JUD.
upper
Dec 5, 2016
Introduced
Introduced. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment. To print.
upper
1 primary · 3 co-sponsors
Sponsors
Role
Legislator
Party
State
District
P
Richard Roth
DDemocratic
Co
Freddie Rodriguez
DDemocratic
Co
Jay Obernolte
RRepublican
Co
Sabrina Cervantes
DDemocratic
Ask Maddy
·
AI policy assistant
Ask Maddy about SB 39
Scope: CA
Hi! I can help you understand SB 39. 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