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, the California Public Records Act, requires each state or local agency, upon a request for a copy of records that reasonably describes an identifiable record or records, to make the records promptly available to any person upon payment of fees covering direct costs of duplication, or a statutory fee if applicable, except with respect to public records exempt from disclosure by express provisions of law. Existing law requires, upon request, an exact copy to be provided unless it is impracticable to do so. This bill would specify that a recording of a call or a written communication that is maintained by a state or local agency that reports or describes an incident, as defined, occurring at a private detention facility, and specified records relating to that call or communication in the possession of a law enforcement agency, are not confidential, and would require an agency to disclose those records upon request to any member of the public. By requiring agencies to disclose certain records to the public, the bill would increase the duties of local officials and create a state-mandated local program. Existing law specifies that, except as provided, the act does not require the disclosure of records of complaints to, or investigations conducted by, or records of intelligence information or security procedures of, the office of the Attorney General and the Department of Justice, the Office of Emergency Services and any state or local police agency, or any investigatory or security files compiled by any other state or local police agency, or any investigatory or security files compiled by any other state or local agency for correctional, law enforcement, or licensing purposes. This bill would also except the above-described requirements relating to records relating to private detention facilities from that provision, but would specify that those requirements do not apply to the office of the Attorney General, the Department of Justice, the Department of Consumer Affairs, or any state entity within the Department of Consumer Affairs, as specified. The California Constitution requires local agencies, for the purpose of ensuring public access to the meetings of public bodies and the writings of public officials and agencies, to comply with a statutory enactment that amends or enacts laws relating to public records or open meetings and contains findings demonstrating that the enactment furthers the constitutional requirements relating to this purpose. This bill would make legislative findings to that effect. 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, a grand jury is a body of the required number of persons chosen from the citizens of the county to serve before a court of competent jurisdiction, and sworn to inquire of public offenses that are committed or triable within the county. Existing law requires each grand jury, no later than the end of each fiscal or calendar year, to submit to the presiding judge of the superior court a final report of its findings and recommendations that pertain to county government matters. Existing law requires one copy of each final report and its responses to be placed on file with the clerk of the court who shall immediately forward the report and responses to the State Archivist. This bill would instead require the clerk to compile all final reports and responses issued during the grand jury's term of service and to transfer the reports and responses to the State Archivist within 6 months of the end of the grand jury's term of service, as specified. The bill would specify that the clerk is not required to create new or consolidated documents.
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 authorizes a chief administrative officer of a postsecondary educational institution, as defined, or an officer or employee designated by the chief administrative officer to maintain order on the school campus or facility, that has a student who has suffered unlawful violence or a credible threat of violence from any individual which can reasonably be construed to be carried out or to have been carried out at the school campus or facility, to seek a temporary restraining order and an injunction on behalf of the student and, at the discretion of the court, any number of other students at the campus or facility, as specified. This bill would also authorize a chief administrative officer of the postsecondary educational institution or an officer or employee designated by the chief administrative officer to maintain order on the school campus or facility to seek a temporary restraining order and an injunction on behalf of the postsecondary educational institution, upon becoming aware of unlawful violence or a credible threat of violence directed towards the postsecondary educational institution. The bill would require the Judicial Council, on or before January 1, 2028, to adopt or modify forms, as specified. The bill would also expand the course of conduct, as defined, for which a temporary restraining order can be sought to include making telephone calls or sending correspondence, including, but not limited to, email correspondence, to the postsecondary educational institution or its employees or students, or sending correspondence to the chief administrative officer. These provisions would become operative on July 1, 2029. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 527.85 of the Code of Civil Procedure proposed by AB 1753 to be operative only if this bill and AB 1753 are enacted and this bill is enacted last.
Existing law requires that, as a condition of parole, a prisoner who has a severe mental health disorder, as specified, be treated by the State Department of State Hospitals, if the prisoner meets certain requirements, including, among others, that the person in charge of treating the prisoner and a practicing psychiatrist or psychologist from the State Department of State Hospitals have evaluated the prisoner and that a chief psychiatrist of the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation certify to the Board of Parole Hearings 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 require that certain factors be considered in determining whether an offender poses a substantial danger of physical harm to others, including, but not limited to, a history of violent behavior and prior history of state hospital commitment. Existing law allows a prisoner to request a hearing before the Board of Parole Hearings for the purpose of proving that the prisoner meets the criteria to be treated by the State Department of State Hospitals. Existing law allows a prisoner who disagrees with the determination of the Board of Parole Hearings to file a petition in court for a hearing on whether they met the criteria and, if the court reverses the determination of the Board of Parole Hearings, existing law authorizes the court to require the parties to return to court to ensure that the entities involved in the release of the prisoner have coordinated an exit plan for the prisoner. This bill would require that an exit plan include the submission of an application for Medi-Cal benefits and a recommendation, as appropriate, to the supervising county's behavioral health department by a licensed behavioral health professional, as specified, supervising the treatment of, or treating, the prisoner for a mental health disorder for certain resources and programs, including substance use disorder treatment, assisted outpatient treatment, and early psychosis intervention services. Existing law, the Mental Health Services Act (MHSA) , an initiative measure enacted by the voters as Proposition 63 at the November 2, 2004, statewide general election, funds a system of county mental health plans for the provision of mental health services, as specified. The MHSA establishes the Mental Health Services Fund, a continuously appropriated fund, which is administered by the State Department of Health Care Services (department) , to fund specified county mental health programs. Existing law, the Behavioral Health Services Act (BHSA) , a legislative act amending the MHSA that was approved by the voters as Proposition 1 at the March 5, 2024, statewide primary election, recast the MHSA by, among other things, renaming the fund to the Behavioral Health Services Fund and reallocating how moneys from that fund may be spent. The BHSA requires each county to establish and administer a full-service partnership program that includes, among other things, outpatient behavioral health services, as specified, and housing interventions. Existing law establishes criteria for an individual with a serious mental illness to be presumptively eligible for a full-service partnership, including, among other things, the person is transitioning to the community after 6 months or more in the state prison or county jail. This bill would add to the criteria for presumptively eligibility for a full-service partnership an individual transitioning to the community after 6 months or more in a state hospital. Existing law establishes the Medi-Cal program, which is administered by the State Department of Health Care Services and under which qualified low-income individuals receive health care services. The Medi-Cal program is, in part, governed and funded by federal Medicaid program provisions. Existing law, the California Advancing and Innovating Medi-Cal (CalAIM) Act, supports the stated goals of identifying and managing the risk and needs of Medi-Cal beneficiaries, transitioning and transforming the Medi-Cal program to a more consistent and seamless system, and improving quality outcomes. Existing law makes a qualifying inmate of a public institution eligible, commencing no sooner than January 1, 2023, to receive targeted Medi-Cal services, limited to those services approved in the CalAIM Terms and Conditions for 90 days, as specified. This bill would also make a qualifying inmate of a state hospital eligible to receive targeted Medi-Cal services, as described. By expanding the population receiving benefits under the BHSA and to the extent that the bill would create new duties for counties relating to Medi-Cal eligibility determinations, 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 makes it a crime to operate a vehicle while under the influence of alcohol or drugs, and sets forth the penalties for a violation of these provisions. Under existing law, if a person is convicted of a driving under the influence violation and the offense occurs within 10 years of one or more separate driving under the influence violations that resulted in convictions, the offense is subject to escalating fines, suspensions, and other sanctions. This bill would require the Department of Motor Vehicles, upon an appropriation from the Legislature, to provide, as appropriate, a summary of the penalties for specified violations involving alcohol or drugs on specified vehicle registration materials and with each driver's license, and license renewal, as specified. The bill would require the department's summary to include, among other things, the financial consequences of driving under the influence (DUI) of alcohol or drugs, and annual updates to DUI-related statutes.
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 requires any person who purchases or receives a firearm to possess a firearm safety certificate. Existing law also prohibits a person from selling or transferring a firearm to any person who does not possess a firearm safety certificate. A violation of either of these provisions is punishable as a misdemeanor. Existing law requires a personal firearm importer, within 60 days of bringing any firearm into this state, to, among other things, submit a report including information concerning that individual and a description of the firearm in question to the Department of Justice. Existing law requires that a personal firearm importer be found to have complied with these provisions if certain requirements are satisfied. This bill would extend the above-described time period to within 180 days and would also require, commencing January 1, 2028, that personal firearm importer to certify under penalty of perjury that they have obtained a valid firearm safety certificate, or an exemption to the certificate requirement, as specified, and would make a failure to provide specified information in the report an infraction. The bill would prohibit a person from bringing a firearm into this state without obtaining a valid firearm safety certificate within 180 days, except as specified, and make a violation of this provision an infraction. The bill would remove the requirement that a personal firearm importer be found to have complied with these provisions if certain requirements are satisfied. By creating a new crime, and expanding the crime of perjury, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. Existing law requires any costs incurred by the department to implement the above-described provisions regarding personal firearm importers to be absorbed by the department within its existing budget and fees allocated in the Dealers' Record of Sale Special Account. This bill would authorize the appropriation of additional funds for implementation of the above-described provisions if the department determines that sufficient funding is not available to implement these provisions. Existing law requires an applicant for a firearm safety certificate to pass a test developed by the department covering specified subjects, including, among others, the laws applicable to carrying and handling firearms and the responsibilities of ownership of firearms. This bill would require an applicant for a firearm safety certificate, on or after January 1, 2029, to complete within the prior year a training course no less than 4 hours in length that, among other things, includes instruction on firearm safety and handling and live-fire shooting exercises on a firing range. The bill would authorize the Department of Justice to promulgate regulations and provide additional information for the implementation of these provisions. This bill would provide that the provisions of this bill are 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 no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
(1) Existing law requires a court to determine whether a minor in custody will be released from, or detained in, custody, considering, among other things, whether it is a matter of immediate and urgent necessity for the protection of the minor or reasonably necessary for the protection of the person or property of another and whether continuance in the home is contrary to the minor's welfare. This bill would prohibit the court from ordering that a minor be detained in a juvenile hall unless it makes a finding that a less restrictive alternative to detention in the juvenile hall is unsuitable. The bill would also require the court, upon request, to reconsider whether continued detention in the juvenile hall is necessary based on new or current information and consistent with these provisions. (2) Existing law prohibits a ward or dependent child from being taken from the physical custody of a parent or guardian unless the court makes specified findings. Under existing law, if a minor is removed from the physical custody of the minor's parent or guardian as a result of an order of wardship pursuant to specified provisions, the order is required to specify the period of imprisonment. Existing law authorizes the court to commit a minor to a juvenile hall, juvenile home, ranch, camp, or forestry camp. This bill would prohibit a minor from being committed to physical confinement, unless the court finds that a less restrictive alternative disposition for the ward is unsuitable. The bill would require the court to consider, prior to removing a minor from the physical custody of the minor's parent or guardian, whether reasonable efforts were made to prevent or eliminate the need for removal or continued removal from the home, and whether services could be provided to enable the child's parent or legal guardian to effectively provide the care and control necessary for the child to return home.
