Juveniles: custodial interrogation.
Summary
Existing law prohibits law enforcement officers from employing threats, physical harm, deception, or psychologically manipulative interrogation tactics, as specified, during a custodial interrogation of a person 17 years of age or younger. This bill would prohibit a law enforcement officer from seeking statements or information while working undercover, or by individuals working in collaboration with, or acting as agents of, law enforcement, from a person who was 17 years of age or younger during the commission of crime and who is under 26 years of age while in custody. The bill would direct a court to consider any willful failure of a law enforcement officer in violation of these provisions in determining the credibility of that law enforcement officer. The bill would specify that these provisions do not apply to the admissibility of statements or information provided to an officer or individuals working in collaboration with law enforcement that were sought to protect against an imminent threat to life.
Bill status
passed both
4 of 5 stages cleared
Introduction
Feb 2026
Committee Review
Jul 2026
Assembly Passage
May 2026
Senate Passage
Aug 2026
Governor
Introduced Feb 12, 2026
Last action Aug 25, 2026
Maddy AI version diff · 4 comparisons
What changed between versions
08/27/26 - Enrolled
→
AB1905
·
1 edit
MINOR
No substantive policy changes occurred between these two versions. The difference is purely presentational: the first version is the formal enrolled bill document with signature blocks and certification language, while the second is a web page rendering of the same enacted text with navigation menus and site chrome added.
TECHNICAL
The document changed from a formal enrolled bill format (with Assembly/Senate passage dates, Governor's receipt line, and signature blocks) to a web page layout that includes site navigation elements (search bar, menu links, version history sidebar). The actual legislative text of Section 625.8 is identical in both versions.
Floor votes · Senate Aug 25, 2026 · Assembly May 27, 2026
How they voted
26–12
Passed · 2 other
Total votes 40
Aug 25, 2026
D
Democratic30
86% Yea
R
Republican10
100% Nay
Vote distribution
All Yea
All Nay
Mixed
No data
Full legislative history
Actions timeline
Total actions
17
Key actions
8
Committee
5
Amendments
4
Aug 25, 2026
Lower · Passed
Senate amendments concurred in. To Engrossing and Enrolling. (Ayes 51. Noes 15.).
lower
Aug 25, 2026
Introduced
In Assembly. Concurrence in Senate amendments pending.
lower
Aug 25, 2026
Upper · Passed
Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Assembly. (Ayes 25. Noes 12.).
upper
Aug 4, 2026
Upper · Passed
Read third time and amended. Ordered to second reading.
upper
Jul 1, 2026
Upper · Passed
From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 5. Noes 1.) (June 30).
upper
Jun 10, 2026
Committee
Referred to Com. on PUB. S.
upper
May 27, 2026
Lower · Passed
Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Senate. (Ayes 49. Noes 16.)
lower
May 22, 2026
Lower · Passed
Read third time and amended. Ordered to third reading. (Page 5272.)
lower
Mar 18, 2026
Lower · Passed
From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 7. Noes 0.) (March 17).
lower
Mar 2, 2026
Committee
Referred to Com. on PUB. S.
lower
Feb 13, 2026
Lower · Passed
From printer. May be heard in committee March 15.
lower
1 primary · 2 co-sponsors
Sponsors
Role
Legislator
Party
State
District
P
Nick Schultz
DDemocratic
Co
LaShae Sharp-Collins
DDemocratic
Co
Mia Bonta
DDemocratic
Ask Maddy
·
AI policy assistant
Ask Maddy about AB 1905
Scope: CA
Hi! I can help you understand AB 1905. 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