Existing law defines a sexually violent predator to mean a person who has been convicted of a sexually violent offense against one or more victims and who has a diagnosed mental disorder that makes the person a danger to the health and safety of others in that it is likely that the person will engage in sexually violent criminal behavior. For purposes of this definition, a conviction for a sexually violent offense includes convictions that resulted in either a determinate or an indeterminate prison sentence, as specified. Existing law requires the Secretary of the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation to refer a person who is in custody under that department's jurisdiction, and who is serving a determinate sentence or whose parole has been revoked, for evaluation by the State Department of State Hospitals at least 6 months prior to that individual's scheduled date for release from prison if the secretary determines that the person may be a sexually violent predator. Existing law requires a petition for commitment as a sexually violent predator to be filed in the county in which the person was convicted of the sexual offense for which the person was committed to the jurisdiction of the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation. This bill would also require the Executive Officer of the Board of Parole Hearings to make that referral and revise the criteria for referral to additionally apply to a person who is serving an indeterminate prison sentence. The bill would also authorize the secretary, or the Executive Officer of the Board of Parole Hearings, to refer the person for evaluation if the person will be scheduled for a parole hearing within the next 6 months. By imposing additional duties on counties regarding commitment of persons as sexually violent predators, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would also make conforming changes. 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.
Existing law defines "hate crime" as a criminal act committed, in whole or in part, because of actual or perceived characteristics of the victim, including, among other things, race, religion, disability, and sexual orientation. Except as provided, existing law requires the fact that a person committed or attempted to commit a felony that is a hate crime to be considered a circumstance in aggravation of the crime in imposing a specified term. This bill, the Hortman-Kirk Political Violence Prevention Act, in the case of any felony conviction, would authorize the court to consider as a circumstance in aggravation in sentencing the fact that the defendant's conduct was motivated, in whole or in part, by the victim's actual or perceived political affiliation. The bill would define "political affiliation" to mean the state of belonging to a political party, the endorsement of a political party or a platform of a political party, or the endorsement of a politician or a platform of a politician. By increasing the punishment for a crime, the bill would impose 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 no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
Existing law makes it a misdemeanor to, by force or threat of force, willfully injure, intimidate, interfere with, oppress, or threaten another person in the free exercise or enjoyment of a right or privilege secured by the Constitution or laws of this state or by the Constitution or laws of the United States, in whole or in part, because of one or more of specified actual or perceived characteristics of the victim, including disability, gender, religion, race, or sexual orientation. This bill would make it a crime for an elected or appointed official, under color of authority, to retaliate or exert political retribution, as defined, against a person for exercising a constitutionally protected right. The bill would make a violation of this crime punishable by forfeiture of office. The bill would specify that these provisions do not apply to the hiring or personnel decisions of elected or appointed officials that are relative to an employee or prospective employee of that elected or appointed official. By creating a new crime, the bill would impose 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 no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
Existing law, the Alcoholic Beverage Control Act, provides for the issuance, suspension, revocation, and conditions upon licensure for the manufacture, distribution, and sale of alcoholic beverages. Existing law makes every person who sells, furnishes, gives, or causes to be sold, furnished or given away any alcoholic beverage to any person under 21 years of age guilty of a misdemeanor. Existing law also makes it unlawful for a person who is under the influence of any alcoholic beverage or drug, or the combined influence of both, to drive a vehicle and requires a court, when granting probation following conviction of a driving under the influence offense, to impose certain terms and conditions, including that the individual not drive a vehicle with any measurable amount of alcohol in their blood, among others. This bill would require everyone who sells or furnishes alcoholic beverages to first review bona fide evidence of majority and identity, as described. The bill would authorize a court when granting probation for certain driving under the influence offenses to prohibit the person from purchasing alcohol and would require the Department of Motor Vehicles to issue an identification card or driver's license with an appropriate designation on the face upon the receipt of an abstract of the record of a court. The bill would authorize the court to prohibit the purchase of alcohol when the offense occurred within 10 years of 2 or more driving under the influence offenses that resulted in conviction or certain other prior convictions, or if the conviction was for vehicular manslaughter, as specified. The bill would require a seller of alcoholic beverages to refuse to sell or serve someone subject to such an order. To the extent this bill would require a higher level of service from court staff who are county employees, the bill would impose 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.
Existing law defines vehicular manslaughter while intoxicated as the unlawful killing of a human being without malice aforethought, in the driving of a vehicle while intoxicated and the killing was either the proximate result of the commission of an unlawful act, not amounting to a felony, but without gross negligence, or the proximate result of the commission of a lawful act that might produce death, in an unlawful manner, but without gross negligence. Under existing law, a violation of this provision is punishable as a misdemeanor or felony. This bill would make a violation of the above provision punishable only as a felony. 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 no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
Existing law requires the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) to suspend the privilege of a person to operate a motor vehicle for 6 months if they are convicted of either driving under the influence (DUI) of any alcoholic beverage or drug, or under the combined influence of any alcoholic beverage and drug or driving while having 0.08% or more, by weight, of alcohol in the person's blood. Under existing law, if a person is convicted of DUI and the offense occurred within 10 years of a separate violation or 2, 3, or 4 or more separate violations for DUI that resulted in specified convictions, the DMV is required to suspend or revoke the privilege of a person to operate a motor vehicle for 2, 3, 4, or 5 years, as specified. Existing law requires the department to suspend the privilege of a person to operate a motor vehicle for 10 months if they are convicted of a DUI and their blood-alcohol concentration was 0.20% or more or they refused to take a chemical test, and the court refers the person to participate in a licensed program that provides alcohol or drug recovery services, as specified. This bill would require the DMV to suspend the privilege of a person to operate a motor vehicle for 1 year if a person is convicted of DUI. The bill would require the DMV to suspend or revoke the privilege of a person to operate a motor vehicle for 3, 5, or 10 years, as specified, if a person is convicted of DUI and the offense occurred within 10 years of a separate violation or 2 or 3 separate violations for DUI that resulted in specified convictions. The bill would also require the DMV to permanently revoke the privilege of a person to operate a motor vehicle if a person is convicted of DUI and the offense occurred within 10 years of 4 or more separate violations. The bill would require the department to suspend the privilege of a person to operate a motor vehicle for 16 months who is convicted of a DUI and whose blood-alcohol concentration was 0.20% or more or who refused to take a chemical test, and who is referred by the court to participate in a licensed program that provides alcohol or drug recovery services, as specified. The bill would make other conforming changes. 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 no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
Under existing law, it is unlawful to drive a motor vehicle while under the influence (DUI) of alcohol or 0.08% or more, by weight, of alcohol in one's blood. A first violation of this prohibition is punishable as a misdemeanor. Under existing law, if a person is convicted of a DUI violation and the offense occurs within 10 years of one or 2 separate DUI violations that resulted in specified convictions, the offense is also punishable as a misdemeanor, as specified, with escalating fines, suspensions, and other sanctions. Under existing law, if a person is convicted of a DUI violation and the offense occurs within 10 years of 3 or more separate DUI violations that resulted in specified convictions, the offense is punishable either as a misdemeanor or as a felony. This bill would make a conviction of a DUI violation with the offense occurring within 10 years of one or 2 separate DUI violations that resulted in specified convictions also punishable either as a misdemeanor or as a felony. By increasing the punishment for a crime, the bill imposes 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 no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
Existing law, as amended by the Public Safety and Rehabilitation Act of 2016, enacted by Proposition 57 at the November 8, 2016, statewide general election, authorizes the district attorney or other prosecuting officer to make a motion to transfer a minor from juvenile court to a court of criminal jurisdiction in a case in which a minor is alleged to have committed a felony when the minor was 16 years of age or older, or in a case in which a specified serious offense is alleged to have been committed by a minor when the minor was 14 or 15 years of age, but the minor was not apprehended prior to the end of juvenile court jurisdiction. This bill would add the crime of conspiracy to commit murder whereby the conspiracy involves premeditated planning of an attack that is intended to cause multiple deaths or target a school, place of worship, or other public location to the list of offenses for which a juvenile may be transferred to a court of criminal jurisdiction pursuant to the above-described provisions.
Existing law requires each county to develop a procedure for electronically transmitting, upon the issuance of certain types of protective orders, the contents of the order and other specified information to the Department of Justice through the California Law Enforcement Telecommunications System. Existing law also requires the department to maintain a California Restraining and Protective Order System and to make specified information electronically available to court clerks and law enforcement personnel. This bill, the Domestic Violence Offender Registration Act, would require the department, upon an appropriation by the Legislature, to create a database for the purpose of storing and sharing information with local agencies and the court, regarding persons convicted of a registrable offense, as defined. The bill would also require the department to publish that information on its internet website, as specified. The bill would require the offender, as defined, to register, for up to 20 years, certain information including their place of birth and current address with the law enforcement agency having jurisdiction over their residence, as specified. The bill would create a petition process for an offender to seek removal from the registry before having completed the applicable term if they demonstrate rehabilitation and no new qualifying offenses, or they demonstrate exoneration, as specified. The bill would require the court to notify the department of certain petition-related events, including when a petition for termination from the registry is granted, denied, or summarily denied. The bill would require local agencies and the court to create a database for the purpose of storing information received from offenders pursuant to these provisions. The bill would create both civil and criminal penalties for the misuse of information disclosed pursuant to these provisions, including, if a person uses that information to commit a felony, a 5-year prison sentence in addition to and consecutive to any other punishment. The bill would also make an offender's failure to comply with registration requirements a misdemeanor, punishable by imprisonment in the county jail for up to one year. By increasing the duties on local agencies and creating new crimes, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would declare its provisions to be severable. 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 with regard to certain mandates no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason. With regard to any other mandates, this bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs so mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.
Existing law allows a person sentenced to life imprisonment without the possibility of parole who was under 18 years of age at the time of the offense to petition the court for recall of their sentence and resentencing, as specified. Existing law prohibits a person from seeking recall and resentencing pursuant to these provisions if it is pleaded and proved that the person committed certain offenses and the victim was a public safety official, including any law enforcement personnel. This bill would additionally prohibit a person from seeking recall and resentencing pursuant to these provisions for an offense that meets the definition of a school shooting, as defined.
