Issue · Criminal Justice

Criminal Justice

Every criminal justice bill, vote, and legislator stance in California, automatically classified by Maddy, our AI policy reader.

Total bills
264
2025-2026 Regular Session
Top supporter
Anna Caballero
92% support rate
Top opponent
Phillip Chen
8% support rate
Ranked legislators
10
5 support · 5 oppose
Key legislators

Who's moving criminal justice in California

Legislators moving criminal justice in California
Legislator Party Stance Support rate Decisive votes
Anna Caballero
Anna Caballero Senate · District 14
D
Strong +
92% 140
Joaquin Arambula
Joaquin Arambula House · District 31
D
Strong +
92% 99
Celeste Rodriguez
Celeste Rodriguez House · District 43
D
Strong +
91% 56
Rebecca Bauer-Kahan
Rebecca Bauer-Kahan House · District 16
D
Strong +
91% 86
Aisha Wahab
Aisha Wahab Senate · District 10
D
Strong +
90% 122
Phillip Chen
Phillip Chen House · District 59
R
Strong −
8% 65
Heath Flora
Heath Flora House · District 9
R
Strong −
11% 56
Brian Jones
Brian Jones Senate · District 40
R
Strong −
11% 71
Carl DeMaio
Carl DeMaio House · District 75
R
Strong −
12% 82
Ali Macedo
Ali Macedo House · District 33
R
Strong −
12% 96
Showing 161–170 of 264 bills

All criminal justice bills

failed · California · Assembly May 4, 2026

AB 2450: Sentencing: dismissal of enhancements.

Existing law generally authorizes a court to dismiss an action in the furtherance of justice. Existing law requires a court to dismiss an enhancement if it is in the furtherance of justice to do so, except if dismissal of that enhancement is prohibited by any initiative statute. This bill would make the above-described requirement to dismiss an enhancement inapplicable to specified enhancements related to drug possession and trafficking, and would instead authorize the court to dismiss those specified enhancements if it is in the furtherance of justice to do so, except if dismissal of that enhancement is prohibited by any initiative statute.
failed · California · Assembly May 4, 2026

AB 2438: Imprisonment.

Existing law requires a felony sentence punishable pursuant to specified provisions to be served in the county jail. Existing law requires these sentences to be served in the state prison if, among other things, the defendant has a current or prior serious or violent felony conviction or the defendant is required to register as a sex offender. This bill would additionally require the sentence to be served in the state prison if the sentence results in a total term of imprisonment exceeding 6 years.
failed · California · Assembly Apr 27, 2026

AB 1747: Crimes involving vehicles.

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.
failed · California · Assembly Apr 21, 2026

AB 1748: License suspension and revocation.

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.
failed · California · Assembly Apr 21, 2026

AB 1686: Vehicles: driving under the influence: felonies.

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.
failed · California · Assembly Apr 21, 2026

AB 1968: Juveniles: transfer to court of criminal jurisdiction: offense.

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.
failed · California · Assembly Apr 21, 2026

AB 2701: Domestic Violence Offender Registration Act.

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.
failed · California · Assembly Apr 20, 2026

AB 1701: Recall and resentencing: school shootings.

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.
failed · California · Assembly Apr 20, 2026

AB 1782: Incarcerated persons: mental health evaluations.

Existing law requires that, as a condition of parole, a prisoner who has a severe mental health disorder be treated by the State Department of State Hospitals if the prisoner meets certain requirements, including, among others, that the severe mental health disorder was one of the causes of, or was an aggravating factor in, the commission of a specified crime for which the prisoner was sentenced to prison, and that prior to release on parole, the prisoner has been evaluated, as specified, and the chief psychiatrist of the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation has certified that the prisoner has a severe mental health disorder, that the disorder is not in remission or cannot be kept in remission without treatment, that the severe mental health disorder was one of the causes or was an aggravating factor in the prisoner's criminal behavior, that the prisoner has been in treatment for the severe mental health disorder for 90 days or more within the year prior to the prisoner's parole release day, and that by reason of the prisoner's severe mental health disorder, the prisoner represents a substantial danger of physical harm to others. This bill would instead require the chief psychiatrist of the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation to certify that the prisoner meets three of the following criteria: a severe mental health disorder, the disorder is not in remission or cannot be kept in remission without treatment, the severe mental health disorder was one of the causes or was an aggravating factor in the prisoner's criminal behavior, the prisoner has been in treatment for the severe mental health disorder for 90 days or more within the year prior to the prisoner's parole release day, and by reason of the prisoner's severe mental health disorder, the prisoner represents a substantial danger of physical harm to others. The bill would include sexual harassment and battery under physical harm.
vetoed · California · Senate Mar 2, 2026

SB 274: Automated license plate recognition systems.

Existing law prohibits a public agency, which includes the state, a city, a county, a city and county, or any agency or political subdivision of the state, a city, a county, or a city and county, including, but not limited to, a law enforcement agency, from selling, sharing, or transferring automated license plate recognition (ALPR) information, except to another public agency, and only as otherwise permitted by law. Existing law defines ALPR information as information or data collected through the use of an ALPR system. This bill would provide that "public agency" does not include a transportation agency, a public transit operator, or a local department of transportation or public works department, as specified. The bill would, beginning January 1, 2026, require new, updated, expansions of, or addendums of contractual agreements with ALPR vendors, manufacturers, or suppliers to mandate that no default access is provided to any national ALPR database and that an agency's collected scans are by default not accessible to any other agency, and would impose new requirements on sharing between California state law enforcement agencies. The bill would authorize a law enforcement agency to use ALPR information only for purposes of locating vehicles or persons when either are reasonably suspected of being involved in the commission of a public offense. The bill would prohibit a public agency from retaining ALPR information for more than 60 days after the date of collection if it does not match information on an authorized hot list, as defined, and as of January 1, 2026, would require a public agency to delete all ALPR information that has been held for more than 60 days and does not match information on an authorized hot list within 14 days. By imposing new requirements on public agencies, which include local agencies, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. Existing law defines an ALPR operator as a person that operates an ALPR system, which does not include a transportation agency. Existing law defines an ALPR end-user a person that accesses or uses an ALPR system, which does not include, among other things, a transportation agency. This bill would additionally exclude from the definitions of "ALPR operator" and "ALPR end-user" a public transit operator, a local department of transportation or public works department, or an airport or airport operator, as provided. Existing law requires an ALPR operator and ALPR end-user to maintain reasonable security procedures and practices, including operational, administrative, technical, and physical safeguards, to protect ALPR information from unauthorized access, destruction, use, modification, or disclosure. This bill would require those security procedures and practices to include safeguards for managing which employees can see the data from their systems, as specified, and requiring data security training and data privacy training for all employees that access ALPR information. Existing law requires an ALPR operator and ALPR end-user to implement a usage and privacy policy that includes, among other things, a description of the job title or other designation of the employees and independent contractors who are authorized to access and use ALPR information. This bill would require the usage and privacy policy to identify what purpose employees and independent contractors access and use ALPR information for. The bill would also require the Department of Justice to, contingent upon an appropriation of sufficient funds, conduct annual random audits on a public agency that is an ALPR operator or ALPR end-user to determine whether they have implemented and are adhering to that usage and privacy policy. Existing law requires an ALPR operator that accesses or provides access to ALPR information to require that ALPR information only be used for the authorized purposes described in the usage and privacy policy and to maintain a record of that access that includes, among other things, the purpose for accessing the information. This bill would instead require that record of access maintained by the ALPR operator to include the case file number or task force name, as applicable, that justifies the search query, and would provide that no queries shall be allowed without a log entry with a valid and current case file number or task force name from the agency conducting the query. The bill would include findings that changes proposed by this bill address a matter of statewide concern rather than a municipal affair and, therefore, apply to all cities, including charter cities. 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.
Showing 161 to 170 of 264 bills
Previous 1 … 16 17 18 … 27 Next