Existing law establishes the Domestic Violence Prevention Act for the purpose of preventing acts of domestic violence, abuse, and sexual abuse and providing for a separation of the persons involved in the domestic violence for a period sufficient to enable those persons to seek a resolution of the causes of the violence. Existing law authorizes a court to issue an ex parte protective order enjoining a party from, among other things, disturbing the peace of the other party. Existing law provides that disturbing the peace of the other party refers to conduct that includes coercive control, as defined, which includes unreasonably engaging in specified actions, including isolating the other party from friends, relatives, or other sources of support. Existing law makes an intentional and knowing violation of a protective order punishable as a misdemeanor. This bill would include forced marriage for purposes of the act. The bill would define "forced marriage" as a spousal relationship in which one or both parties do not or cannot consent and one or both parties are compelled, through force, fraud, coercion, duress, abuse of power, or coercive control, to enter, attempt to enter, or maintain, a marriage, regardless of whether the marriage is legally valid. If a protective order is sought to protect against a forced marriage, the bill would authorize all persons engaged in conduct to arrange, officiate, finance, or facilitate a forced marriage or attempted forced marriage to be included in one action as respondents. The bill would provide that coercive control, for purposes of the act, includes interfering with, threatening, or attempting to prevent a party or witness from participating in a court proceeding. The bill would provide that conduct undertaken to compel, attempt to compel, prepare for, or facilitate a forced marriage constitutes disturbing the peace of the other party, as specified. The bill would require the provisions of the act to be liberally construed. The bill would authorize a court to grant relief regardless of whether a marriage has occurred or whether a purported marriage would be legally valid in this state or any other jurisdiction. Because a violation of a protective order is punishable as a crime, by expanding the bases for the issuance of these orders, the bill would expand an existing crime, thereby imposing 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 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.
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 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. Existing case law prohibits the use of a minor's statements made at a transfer hearing or to a probation officer from being used during a criminal prosecution of the minor transferred to the court of criminal jurisdiction. This bill would codify existing case law to prohibit the use of the minor's statements made during a transfer hearing or to the minor's probation officer for the purposes of preparing a report for a transfer hearing from being used against the minor during subsequent juvenile proceedings or subsequent criminal proceedings, as specified. This bill would state that the provisions of this bill are declaratory of existing law.
Existing law authorizes the Secretary of the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation to prescribe and amend rules and regulations for the administration of prisons and requires regulations, which are adopted by the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, to recognize and consider the value of incarcerated person visitation as a means of increasing safety in prisons, maintaining family and community connections, and preparing incarcerated persons for successful release and rehabilitation. Existing regulations create the framework for establishing a visitation process in prisons that is conducted in as accommodating a manner as possible, subject to the need to maintain order, the safety of persons, the security of institutions and facilities, and required prison activities and operations. This bill, the Humanizing and Uniting Generations Safely Act of 2026, would additionally require those regulations pertaining to incarcerated person visits to recognize and consider the importance of physical contact in incarcerated person visitation. The bill would prohibit the department from unreasonably restricting the ability of incarcerated persons or their visitors to engage in certain types of nonsexual physical contact throughout the visit, as provided. The bill would prohibit the department from taking disciplinary action based on alleged inappropriate physical contact, without first providing a warning and a reasonable opportunity to immediately correct the conduct.
Existing law makes a person who deprives or violates the personal liberty of another with the intent to obtain forced labor or services, or to effect or maintain a violation of various felony or misdemeanor offenses, including offenses relating to prostitution, child pornography, as specified, or extortion, as defined, guilty of human trafficking. Existing law makes a person who causes, induces, or persuades, or attempts to cause, induce, or persuade, a person who is a minor at the time of commission of the offense to engage in a commercial sex act, with the intent to effect or maintain a violation of various felony or misdemeanor offenses, also guilty of human trafficking. Existing law establishes the requirements for a continuance to be granted in a criminal case, including a showing of good cause. Existing law defines "good cause" for this purpose to include, but not be limited to, cases involving specified crimes, including murder and domestic violence, and to apply when the prosecuting attorney assigned to the case has another trial, preliminary hearing, or motion to suppress in progress in that court or another court. This bill would, in a case involving human trafficking, require the court, in determining if good cause for a continuance exists, to give great weight to the fact that the prosecuting attorney assigned to the case has another trial, preliminary hearing, or motion to suppress in progress in that court or another court. The bill would authorize the court to grant only one continuance for a maximum of 10 additional court days for that reason. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 1050 of the Penal Code proposed by AB 2052 to be operative only if this bill and AB 2052 are enacted and this bill is enacted last.
Existing law allows a person who was arrested or convicted of a nonviolent offense while they were a victim of human trafficking to petition the court, under penalty of perjury, for vacatur relief. Existing law requires a court that issues an order for relief pursuant to these provisions to also order specified law enforcement agencies to seal and destroy their records of the offense. This bill would authorize a person who has suffered an arrest for, or was charged with, any offense that did not result in conviction or who was convicted of an eligible offense, as defined, to petition the court to have their records of that conviction, charge, or arrest sealed if 4 years have elapsed since the date, including, among others, on which the person was arrested, as specified, or on which the defendant completed any terms of incarceration, probation, mandatory supervision, postrelease community supervision, or parole associated with the record, whichever was later, during which the person has not been convicted of a new offense. The bill would require a court granting this relief to also order specified law enforcement agencies to seal their records. By increasing duties on local law enforcement, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would exclude specified offenses from being considered an eligible offense, including, among others, a serious or violent felony, or a sex offense. The bill would authorize a criminal justice agency to access and use a conviction record sealed pursuant to these provisions as required by an initiative statute and for the limited purpose of determining eligibility and suitability of a defendant for diversion. 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 a court to issue an ex parte restraining order to prevent abuse based on reasonable proof of a past act or acts of abuse. Existing law authorizes the order to be issued solely on the affidavit or testimony of the person requesting the ex parte restraining order. Existing law requires the ex parte order to be issued or denied on the same day the application is submitted to the court, except as specified. Existing law prohibits an ex parte restraining order from being denied solely because the other party was not provided with notice. This bill would instead prohibit a court from requiring that notice be provided to the party to be restrained in advance of accepting a filing for, or deciding, an application for an ex parte restraining order. The bill would also prohibit a court from requiring an explanation or declaration for not providing notice in advance of accepting a filing for, or deciding, an application for an ex parte restraining order. The bill would prohibit a court from adopting or maintaining any rule, form, or practice that is inconsistent with these provisions.
The State Bar Act establishes the State Bar of California (State Bar) as a public corporation and assigns to the State Bar various duties with respect to the licensing and regulations of attorneys in the state. The Supreme Court of California issued an administrative order on June 17, 2026, directing the State Bar to circulate for public comment a proposed rule of court that, if adopted, would establish a community justice worker program, as specified. This bill would require the State Bar, after it solicits public comment on the proposed rule, at the time it resubmits the proposal to the Supreme Court of California, to transmit to the Assembly and Senate Committees on Judiciary a report specifying any statutory changes the State Bar believes are necessary to implement the community justice worker program. The bill would repeal those provisions on January 1, 2031.
Existing law makes it a felony to knowingly procure or offer a false or forged instrument to be filed, registered, or recorded in a public office in this state, which, if genuine, might be filed, registered, or recorded under any law of this state or the United States. After a person is convicted of that crime or a specified waiver is obtained, and upon written motion of the prosecuting agency, existing law requires the court to issue a written order that the false or forged instrument be adjudged void ab initio. Existing law prescribes procedures for a prosecuting agency to file that motion. The California Constitution provides for the right to truth in evidence, which requires a 23 vote of the Legislature to exclude any relevant evidence from any criminal proceeding, as specified. This bill would authorize a defendant who is granted diversion to stipulate to the voiding of the false or forged instrument. The bill would authorize a court in those circumstances, upon a motion by the prosecution, to issue a written order that the false or forged instrument be adjudged void ab initio. The bill would, if the defendant withdraws from diversion or fails to complete the terms of diversion and criminal proceedings are reinstated, prohibit the stipulation from being used in connection with any civil or criminal proceeding without the defendant's consent. Because that prohibition would affect the admissibility of relevant evidence in criminal proceedings, the bill would require a 23 vote of the Legislature.
Existing law requires any manufacturer, wholesaler, retailer, or other person in this state who sells, transfers, or otherwise furnishes any of a list of specified chemical substances, including gamma-butyrolactone (GBL) , to take specified actions, including to apply to and obtain a permit from the Department of Justice in order to sell, transfer, or otherwise furnish the substances specified above and to submit specified reports to the department, including if the entity obtains any of the substances specified above from a source outside of this state or if a permittee described above discovers the theft or loss of any of the substances specified above. Existing law makes failure to submit a report described above, and selling, transferring, or otherwise furnishing or obtaining any of the specified substances without a permit, a misdemeanor or a felony. This bill would exempt specified chemical mixtures that contain GBL that are obtained or received from a source within or outside this state or are obtained, received, sold, transferred, exported, or otherwise furnished to any person or entity in this state or any other state from the requirements described above. Existing law requires any manufacturer, wholesaler, retailer, or other person that sells to any person or entity in this state or any other state, any chemical reagent or solvent of a value greater than $100 to take specified actions, including to prepare and sign a bill of sale with specified information and to retain the bill of sale for a specified period of time. Existing law makes a violation of this requirement a misdemeanor. This bill would exempt specified chemical mixtures that contain GBL that are obtained or received from a source within or outside this state or are obtained, received, sold, transferred, exported, or otherwise furnished to any person or entity in this state or any other state from the requirements described above if the requirements would be imposed solely due to the presence of GBL in the mixtures. This bill would make related findings and declarations.
