Sexually violent predators: placement outside county of domicile: notice and hearing.
Summary
Existing law defines a sexually violent predator as a person who has been convicted of a sexually violent offense and has a diagnosed mental disorder that makes the person a danger to others in that they are likely to engage in sexually violent criminal behavior. Existing law provides for the commitment of a sexually violent predator to the State Department of State Hospitals. Existing law provides that a sexually violent predator may be conditionally released at the end of their commitment, as specified. Existing law requires a sexually violent predator who is conditionally released to be placed in the county that was the person's county of domicile prior to the person's incarceration, unless extraordinary circumstances exist requiring placement outside the county, as specified. This bill would require advance notice, as specified, if a sexually violent predator is to be released to a county other than their county of domicile. The bill would require the local jurisdiction to give public notice of the intended release and allow for public comment, as specified. The bill would require the court to hold an evidentiary hearing to determine if extraordinary circumstances exist. The bill would place the burden of showing extraordinary circumstances on the State Department of State Hospitals. The bill would require the court to accept remote testimony and written affidavits, as specified, for this hearing. The bill would limit how a lack of housing may be used to justify extraordinary circumstances and would require the department to present specified evidence regarding housing. The bill would also provide for discovery of relevant materials. By requiring local jurisdictions to give public notice and accept public comments, this bill would create 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.
Bill status
failed
1 of 4 stages cleared
Introduction
Feb 2021
Committee Review
Floor Vote
Governor
Introduced Feb 16, 2021
Last action Feb 1, 2022
Floor votes
How they voted
No floor votes recorded yet.
Full legislative history
Actions timeline
Total actions
9
Key actions
4
Committee
6
Amendments
1
Feb 1, 2022
Lower · Passed
From committee: Filed with the Chief Clerk pursuant to Joint Rule 56.
lower
Jan 11, 2022
Lower · Passed
In committee: Set, second hearing. Hearing canceled at the request of author.
lower
Apr 27, 2021
Lower · Passed
In committee: Set, first hearing. Hearing canceled at the request of author.
lower
Mar 22, 2021
Committee
Re-referred to Com. on PUB. S.
lower
Mar 18, 2021
Introduced
From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to Com. on PUB. S. Read second time and amended.
lower
Mar 18, 2021
Committee
Referred to Com. on PUB. S.
lower
Feb 17, 2021
Lower · Passed
From printer. May be heard in committee March 19.
lower
1 primary · 0 co-sponsors
Sponsors
Role
Legislator
Party
State
District
P
Jim Cooper
DDemocratic
Ask Maddy
·
AI policy assistant
Ask Maddy about AB 821
Scope: CA
Hi! I can help you understand AB 821. 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