Issue · Criminal Justice

Criminal Justice (Courts)

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

Total bills
92
2025-2026 Regular Session
Top supporter
Jesse Gabriel
94% support rate
Top opponent
Heath Flora
7% support rate
Ranked legislators
10
5 support · 5 oppose
Key legislators

Who's moving courts in California

Legislators moving courts in California
Legislator Party Stance Support rate Votes
Jesse Gabriel
Jesse Gabriel House · District 46
D
Strong +
94% 17
Anna Caballero
Anna Caballero Senate · District 14
D
Strong +
94% 32
Al Muratsuchi
Al Muratsuchi House · District 66
D
Strong +
93% 14
Celeste Rodriguez
Celeste Rodriguez House · District 43
D
Strong +
92% 13
Joaquin Arambula
Joaquin Arambula House · District 31
D
Strong +
92% 24
Heath Flora
Heath Flora House · District 9
R
Strong −
7% 15
Jeff Gonzalez
Jeff Gonzalez House · District 36
R
Strong −
12% 17
Phillip Chen
Phillip Chen House · District 59
R
Strong −
12% 17
Brian Jones
Brian Jones Senate · District 40
R
Strong −
15% 20
Leticia Castillo
Leticia Castillo House · District 58
R
Strong −
15% 20
Showing 91–92 of 92 bills

All criminal justice bills

passed · California · Senate Aug 29, 2025

SB 834: Criminal records: relief.

Existing law, subject to an appropriation, requires the Department of Justice, on a monthly basis, to review the records in the statewide criminal justice databases and identify persons who are eligible for automatic conviction record relief. Under existing law, a person is eligible for automatic conviction record relief if the person meets certain requirements, including that it does not appear, based upon information available in the Department of Justice's record, that the person is currently serving a sentence of an offense and there is no indication of pending criminal charges. This bill would require, in determining whether there is a pending criminal charge based on the department's records, the department to conclude that there is no indication of pending criminal charges if at least 3 years have elapsed with no new activity related to that record. Existing law, subject to an appropriation, on a monthly basis, requires the department to electronically submit a notice to the superior court having jurisdiction over the criminal case and inform the court of all cases for which a complaint was filed and for which relief was granted pursuant to the provisions above. Existing law, for any certain record retained by the court, prohibits the court from disclosing information concerning a conviction granted relief pursuant to specified provisions, including the above provisions, to any person or entity, in any format, except to the person whose conviction was granted relief or a criminal justice agency. This bill would require local summary criminal history information provided by the court to any recipient to include notes for any entries for which relief has been granted indicating that relief has been granted pursuant to the above provisions and listing the date the court received notice from the department. The bill would require this note to be included in all local criminal databases maintained by the court. This bill would also require a court, upon the request of the subject of a record granted relief, to furnish a certificate of disposition confirming the court's receipt of notification and compliance with a grant of relief for a specified record granted relief under the above provisions. By placing additional duties on court staff, this 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.
Sub-Topics Courts
passed both · California · Assembly Aug 28, 2026

AB 690: Criminal procedure: indigent defense compensation.

Existing law grants a defendant the right to counsel in a noncapital case, and requires a defendant to be represented by counsel in a capital case. Existing law requires specified assigned counsel to receive a reasonable sum for compensation and for necessary expenses, as determined by the court, to be paid out of the general fund of the county. This bill would, commencing with contracts or memoranda of understanding for indigent defense services entered into after January 1, 2028, revise the process and require a county or court, when contracting for the provision or administration of indigent defense services, to include certain elements in the contract or other agreement for indigent services, as specified. The bill would prohibit a county or court from entering into flat fee contracts, as defined, or per case compensation contracts in cases involving the death penalty or the potential sentence of life without the possibility of parole. The bill would require the structure of the contract for indigent defense services to ensure that attorneys have the resources and time necessary to provide competent legal representation. The bill would require counties that contract with a private entity or law firm to provide indigent defense services to provide all those contracts to the Office of the State Public Defender every 2 years. The bill would make related findings and declarations.
Sub-Topics Courts
Showing 91 to 92 of 92 bills
Previous 1 8 9 10