Existing law, the California Fair Employment and Housing Act, except as specified, makes it an unlawful employment practice for an employer with 5 or more employees to include on any application for employment, before the employer makes a conditional offer of employment to the applicant, any question that seeks the disclosure of an applicant's conviction history, to consider the conviction history of the applicant until after the employer has made a conditional offer of employment to the applicant, or to distribute information about an arrest not followed by conviction, referral to or participation in a pretrial or posttrial diversion program, or convictions that have been sealed, dismissed, expunged, or statutorily eradicated or any conviction for which the convicted person has received a full pardon or has been issued a certificate of rehabilitation while conducting a conviction history background check in connection with an application for employment, as specified. This bill would define the term "conviction or arrest record," for these purposes. The bill would include among those things that it is unlawful for an employer with 5 or more employees to do while conducting a conviction history background check in connection with an application for employment, asking any question that directly or indirectly seeks consent for a conviction history background check or requesting consent for or beginning a conviction history background check before providing the applicant with a list of all essential job duties, requiring a job applicant to cover the cost of a conviction history background check, or requiring any time before or after the conditional job offer, that an applicant self-disclose conviction history or provide the employer with any documentary evidence related to conviction history or rehabilitation, as specified. Existing law requires an employer that intends to deny an applicant a position of employment solely or in part because of the applicant's conviction history to make an individualized assessment of whether the applicant's conviction history has a direct and adverse relationship with the specific duties of the job that justify denying the applicant the position considering specified factors. This bill, instead, would prohibit an employer from denying an applicant a position of employment or taking any other adverse action solely or in part because of the applicant's conviction history unless the employer first, reasonably and in good faith, demonstrates via an individualized assessment, that the applicant's conviction history has a direct and adverse relationship with the specific duties of the job that justifies denying the applicant the position and it complies with a specified process. The bill would require the employer to commit the results of the individualized assessment to writing if it makes a decision to deny a position of employment or takes any adverse action. The bill would specify that it is not an adverse action for an employer to temporarily suspend an employee, with pay and for a reasonable amount of time, while the employer complies with the requirements of these provisions. Existing law makes these provisions inapplicable to a position as a farm labor contractor, as specified or to a position where an employer or agent thereof is required by any state, federal, or local law to conduct criminal background checks for employment purposes or to restrict employment based on criminal history. This bill would remove the exemption for farm labor contractors.
Existing law prohibits the state from seeking or obtaining a criminal conviction or sentence on the basis of race, ethnicity, or national origin, as specified. Existing law allows a defendant to establish a violation of these provisions under specified circumstances, including when a longer or more severe sentence was imposed on the defendant than was imposed on other similarly situated individuals convicted of the same offense and other specified conditions are met. This bill would instead compare the defendant to similarly situated individuals who have engaged in similar conduct, as specified. The bill would make these provisions apply to disparities in plea negotiating and diversion, among other things. Existing law authorizes a defendant in these cases to file a motion requesting disclosure to the defense of all evidence relevant to a potential violation of these provisions, as specified. This bill would additionally authorize a defendant to request any data that has been previously disclosed pursuant to those provisions in another criminal case, and require the court to grant that request, unless the data has no relevance to the current charges. The bill would also revise and recast definitions for these provisions.
Under existing law, an individual who solicits, or who agrees to engage in, or who engages in, any act of prostitution is guilty of disorderly conduct, a misdemeanor. This bill would require a person who commits prostitution with intent to receive compensation, money, or anything of value from another person to, for a first or 2nd violation of those provisions, be offered a diversion program pursuant to specified provisions. By imposing new duties on local officials, the 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.
Existing law requires the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation to notify the sheriff or chief of police, or both, and the district attorney where certain parolees were convicted and are scheduled to be released of specified information related to the parolee prior to their release. Existing law requires the department to, upon request, provide to the officials described above specified information available to the department, including photographs and fingerprints, concerning persons on parole who may be residing in that city or county, as specified. This bill would additionally require the department to notify the county chief probation officer of, or to provide upon request to the officer, as appropriate, the information described above. Existing law subjects a person to no more than 3 years of postrelease community supervision after release from prison or after the person's term of imprisonment has been deemed to have been served, except as specified. Existing law requires the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation to, among other things, inform each prisoner subject to postrelease community supervision of their responsibility to report to the county probation department. Existing law requires the department, 30 days before release, to notify the county of all information that would otherwise be required for parolees, as specified. This bill would require the department to provide the county probation department written and verbal notification of the scheduled release date of the person and the information described above no less than 90 days before the person's release, and if the discharge date is set or reset for 90 or fewer days into the future, would require the department to provide notification within 5 business days, but no later than 30 days before the discharge date of the person. The bill would require the department to notify the county probation department of the county in which a person is being released of the name and contact information of the prerelease care manager, postrelease care manager, and enhanced care manager for the person being released to ensure California Advancing and Innovating Medi-Cal (CalAIM) processes are integrated with local reentry service delivery and court-ordered conditions. The bill would require, if a county probation department identifies, prior to the release of a person, that the person's current county of residence may be different than the county of the person's last legal residence, the department to coordinate with the probation department to determine the person's current county of residence and to develop coordinated plans for the release and transport of the released person to the person's current county of residence. By increasing duties on county probation departments, this 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 authorizes the Secretary of the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation to establish and maintain classes for incarcerated persons utilizing institutional personnel or entering into an agreement with the governing board of a school district or private school. Existing law requires the department to develop and implement a plan to obtain additional rehabilitation and treatment services for incarcerated persons and parolees. Existing law requires that plan to include, among other things, filling vacant state staff positions that provide direct and indirect rehabilitation services, or obtaining services from local governments and contractors to assist with treatment for parolees and incarcerated persons. This bill would require the department to establish a 3-year pilot program at 2 institutions that would provide access to specified mental health therapy for certain incarcerated persons not classified by the department to receive mental health treatment from the institution. The bill would require communications during therapy sessions, as specified, between the incarcerated person and assigned therapist to be confidential. The bill would require the California Correctional Health Care Services to be the custodian of records for treatment records generated under this pilot program. The bill would require the department to report certain information to the fiscal and appropriate policy committees of the Legislature, from March 1, 2028, to March 1, 2031. The bill would make related findings and declarations.
Existing law, the Trial Jury Selection and Management Act, governs the selection of jurors and formation of trial juries for civil and criminal cases in all trial courts of the state. Existing law requires the judge in a criminal action or proceeding alleging a violent felony, prior to discharging the jury, to provide specified information to trial jurors regarding mental health awareness, including information about stress relief and symptoms that may be experienced following exposure to trauma. This bill would authorize the County of Santa Cruz and two other counties, selected by the Judicial Council, to conduct a pilot program for the provision of no-cost mental health services to jurors and alternate jurors following the receipt of a verdict in a criminal action or proceeding alleging a violent felony, as defined. The bill would require the Judicial Council to enter into a memorandum of understanding with the behavioral health directors of the participating counties for the purposes of providing the above-described mental health services, and would require the memorandum of understanding to include, among other things, the number of no-cost mental health sessions available to jurors. The bill would require the participating counties to terminate the pilot program no later than January 1, 2034, and would require the counties to report specified information regarding the pilot program to the Judicial Council. The bill would require the Judicial Council to provide a report to the Legislature no later than July 1, 2035, regarding the pilot program, and would require the report to include the number of jurors who were offered mental health resources pursuant to this program and recommendations for improving outreach and access to mental health services for jurors. The bill would repeal these provisions on January 1, 2036.
Existing law defines a "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. Existing law requires the Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training (POST) , in consultation with specified subject-matter experts, to develop guidelines and a course of instruction and training for law enforcement officers addressing hate crimes. Existing law also requires POST to consult with the subject-matter experts if the guidelines or course of instruction are updated. Beginning January 1, 2027, this bill would require POST to conduct a comprehensive review of existing hate crimes training programs, as specified. The bill would require the review to be completed by January 1, 2028. The bill would require POST to, by July 1, 2028, adopt evidence-based training requirements to address the gaps identified in the review regarding the prevention, identification, and investigation of hate crimes.
Existing law subjects a minor between 12 and 17 years of age, who violates any federal, state, or local law or ordinance, and a minor under 12 years of age who is alleged to have committed specified serious offenses, to the jurisdiction of the juvenile court, which may adjudge the minor to be a ward of the court. Existing law assigns various responsibilities relating to these individuals to the probation officer, including, among others, the responsibility to supervise minors placed on probation. This bill would require the County of Los Angeles to implement a body-worn camera program for the County of Los Angeles Probation Department (probation department) . The bill would require the county, the probation department, and affected employee organizations to develop the body-worn camera policy and a plan for implementing the body-worn camera program by no later than June 1, 2027. The bill would require the body-worn camera program to be implemented beginning on January 1, 2028. The bill would specify the minimum requirements for the policy, including the best practices for officer review of recorded body-worn camera data. Because this bill would create new duties for the County of Los Angeles and the County of Los Angeles Probation Department, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill would make legislative findings and declarations as to the necessity of a special statute for the County of Los Angeles. 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 generally provides for the compensation of victims and derivative victims of specified types of crimes by the California Victim Compensation Board from the Restitution Fund, which is continuously appropriated to the board. Existing law authorizes the board to grant for pecuniary loss, when the board determines that it will best aid the person seeking compensation, as specified. Existing law authorizes the board to reimburse, among other things, the amount of medical or medical-related expenses and outpatient psychiatric, psychological, or other mental health counseling-related expenses incurred by the victim or derivative victim, as specified. This bill would also authorize the board to reimburse the expense of tuition at an educational institution, not to exceed $10,000, to a full- or part-time student who is a victim of sexual assault or violence if the victim is unable to continue attendance or suffers an academic setback, as described. The bill would authorize the board to limit compensation to the term the crime occurred and the immediately following term, and would require the calculation of an award based on certain factors, as specified. By expanding the board's authorization for use of moneys in the Restitution Fund, a continuously appropriated fund, this bill would make an appropriation.
(1) Existing law requires a county social worker to investigate the circumstances of each child taken into temporary custody by a peace officer under specified circumstances. Existing law requires the social worker to conduct an investigation, within 30 days of the child's removal, to identify and locate adult relatives of the child, as specified, and to provide them with a notification that the child has been removed from the custody of the child's parents, guardians, or Indian custodian, and an explanation of the various options to participate in the care and placement of the child. Existing law requires a social worker to use due diligence in investigating the names and locations of relatives, and defines "due diligence" to include family finding, as specified. This bill would authorize a county child welfare agency or probation department to conduct family finding and engagement activities prior to the removal of a child from parental custody, as specified. (2) Existing law establishes various public social services programs to provide for protection, care, and assistance to the people of the state in need of those services. Existing law, in this regard, and with some exceptions, requires all applications and records concerning any individual made or kept by any public officer or agency in connection with the administration of public social services for which grants-in-aid are received by this state from the federal government be kept confidential. Existing law exempts from those confidentiality provisions the disclosure of information between employees of a county's adult protective services agency and a county's child welfare agency for the purpose of multidisciplinary teamwork in the prevention, intervention, management, or treatment of child abuse or neglect or abuse or neglect of an elder or dependent adult. Existing law makes it a misdemeanor to knowingly secure or possess a list of persons who have applied for or who have been granted any form of public service in violation of these provisions. This bill would additionally exempt from these confidentiality provisions information regarding children receiving child welfare services to be disclosed to relatives and nonrelative extended family members without consent if the disclosure is directly connected to the administration of the child welfare program and serves the purpose of identifying placement and support resources for children. By expanding the scope of a crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (3) Existing law defines "child welfare services" to mean public social services that are directed toward the accomplishment of various purposes, including protecting and promoting the welfare of all children, and includes, among other services, emergency response services and family maintenance services. This bill would modify the definition of "child welfare services." The bill would require, upon providing child welfare services to a child or family, whether court-ordered or voluntarily accepted, the county child welfare agency or probation department to develop a case plan, as specified. The bill would authorize, as part of the case planning process, a county child welfare agency or probation department to conduct family finding and engagement activities to support the goals identified in the case plan. The bill would define "family finding and engagement" for these purposes. To the extent this bill increases the duties of county welfare agencies or probation departments, this bill imposes a state-mandated local program. (4) 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.
