Conservatorships: medical record: hearsay rule.
Summary
Existing law, the Lanterman-Petris-Short Act, authorizes the appointment of a conservator of the person, of the estate, or of the person and the estate, for a person who is gravely disabled as a result of a mental health disorder or impairment by chronic alcoholism. The act also authorizes the appointment of a conservator, in the County of Los Angeles, the County of San Diego, or the City and County of San Francisco, for a person who is incapable of caring for the person's own health and well-being due to a serious mental illness and substance use disorder. Existing law establishes the hearsay rule, under which evidence of a statement is generally inadmissible if it was made other than by a witness while testifying at a hearing and is offered to prove the truth of the matter stated. Existing law sets forth exceptions to the hearsay rule to permit the admission of specified kinds of evidence. Under this bill, for purposes of an expert witness in any proceeding relating to the appointment or reappointment of a conservator pursuant to the above-described provisions, the statements of specified health practitioners or a licensed clinical social worker included in the medical record would not be hearsay. The bill would authorize the court to grant a reasonable continuance if an expert witness in a proceeding relied on the medical record and the medical record has not been provided to the parties or their counsel upon request within a reasonable time before the proceeding.
Bill status
passed
3 of 5 stages cleared
Introduction
Feb 2022
Committee Review
May 2022
Senate Passage
May 2022
Assembly Passage
Governor
Introduced Feb 9, 2022
Last action Jun 9, 2022
Floor votes · Senate May 9, 2022
How they voted
33–0
Passed · 7 other
Total votes 40
May 9, 2022
D
Democratic31
87% Yea
R
Republican9
66% Yea
Vote distribution
All Yea
All Nay
Mixed
No data
Full legislative history
Actions timeline
Total actions
15
Key actions
6
Committee
3
Amendments
5
May 19, 2022
Committee
Referred to Com. on JUD.
lower
May 9, 2022
Upper · Passed
Read third time. Passed. (Ayes 33. Noes 0. Page 3644.) Ordered to the Assembly.
upper
Apr 28, 2022
Upper · Passed
Read second time and amended. Ordered to third reading.
upper
Apr 27, 2022
Upper · Passed
From committee: Do pass as amended. (Ayes 11. Noes 0. Page 3513.) (April 26).
upper
Apr 18, 2022
Upper · Passed
From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on JUD.
upper
Apr 6, 2022
Upper · Passed
From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on JUD.
upper
Mar 23, 2022
Committee
Re-referred to Com. on JUD.
upper
Mar 15, 2022
Upper · Passed
From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on RLS.
upper
Feb 16, 2022
Committee
Referred to Com. on RLS.
upper
Feb 9, 2022
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
Susan Eggman
DDemocratic
Ask Maddy
·
AI policy assistant
Ask Maddy about SB 965
Scope: CA
Hi! I can help you understand SB 965. 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