Existing law, subject to exceptions, provides that any person who has been convicted of certain misdemeanors may not, within 10 years of the conviction, own, purchase, receive, possess or have under their custody or control, any firearm and makes a violation of that prohibition punishable as a misdemeanor or a felony. Under existing law, a person who alters, removes, or obliterates, or who buys, receives, disposes of, sells, offers for sale, or has in possession any pistol, revolver, or other firearm that has had the name of the maker or model or the manufacturer's number or other mark of identification changed, altered, removed, or obliterated is guilty of a misdemeanor. This bill would prohibit a person, who is convicted on or after January 1, 2027, of the above prohibition, from owning, purchasing, receiving, or having in their possession or under their custody or control any firearm within 10 years of the conviction. By expanding the scope of an existing crime, the bill would create a state-mandated local program. This bill would provide that the provisions of this bill are severable. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 29805 of the Penal Code proposed by AB 1753 to be operative only if this bill and AB 1753 are enacted and this bill is enacted last. 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 a prosecuting attorney to disclose to the defendant or their attorney all relevant real evidence seized or obtained as a part of the investigation of the offenses charged that is in the possession of the prosecuting attorney or known to be in the possession of the investigating agencies. Existing law requires the disclosures to be made at least 30 days prior to the trial, unless good cause is shown why a disclosure should be denied, restricted, or deferred. Existing law prohibits an attorney from disclosing or permitting to be disclosed to a defendant, members of the defendant's family, or anyone else copies of child pornography evidence, unless specifically permitted to do so by the court after a hearing and a showing of good cause. Existing law authorizes an attorney to disclose or permit to be disclosed copies of child pornography evidence to persons employed by the attorney or to persons appointed by the court to assist in the preparation of a defendant's case if that disclosure is required for that preparation. This bill would require the court, in specified criminal cases involving sexually explicit material depicting an adult victim, to issue a protective order governing the disclosure of that material, with conditions sufficient to safeguard the victim's privacy, prevent unnecessary copying, transmission, or dissemination of the material, and ensure the defendant's right to a fair trial and a meaningful opportunity to participate in their own defense. This bill would, if the court issues that protective order, prohibit the parties from disclosing to any person copies of sexually explicit material depicting an adult victim, unless specifically permitted to do so by the protective order. The bill would authorize an attorney for any party to disclose or permit to be disclosed copies of sexually explicit material depicting an adult victim subject to the protective order, to a person necessary for the preparation of the case, including the defendant. The bill would, if a party receives any other sexually explicit material of the adult victim, require the party to notify the court for inclusion of the material in any existing protective order, or inclusion in a new or separate protective order. By increasing duties on local prosecutors, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill would clarify that these provisions do not relieve the prosecution from the duty to disclose the existence of any relevant or exculpatory evidence nor affect the admissibility of any relevant evidence in court. 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 Medicinal and Adult-Use Cannabis Regulation and Safety Act (MAUCRSA) , among other things, consolidates the licensure and regulation of commercial medicinal and adult-use cannabis activities. Existing law gives the Department of Cannabis Control the power, duty, purpose, responsibility, and jurisdiction to regulate commercial cannabis activity in the state. Existing law authorizes the department to take disciplinary actions against a licensee, as provided. Existing law requires the department to prepare and disseminate, as specified, an annual report relating to the department's activities, including, among other things, the amount of funds allocated and spent by the department for cannabis licensing, enforcement, and administration, and the number of state licenses issued, renewed, denied, suspended, and revoked. This bill, the Cannabis Enforcement Accountability and Public Health Prioritization Act of 2026, would require the department, beginning January 1, 2028, to prioritize its enforcement of MAUCRSA in a manner consistent with an enforcement prioritization policy, as defined, based on specified categories, that are listed from highest to lowest priority, based on conduct or conditions, as specified, that create a risk of harm, as described. The bill would define "risk of harm" as the likelihood of, among other things, interference with enforcement of state law. Beginning January 1, 2028, the bill would require the department to adopt and publish an enforcement prioritization policy, as specified, and would require the department to include in the above-described annual report the number, geographic distribution, and, as applicable, dollar amount of specified enforcement activities in relation to the risk-based enforcement framework, as provided.
Existing law that governs the labor relations of public employees and employers, including, among others, the Meyers-Milias-Brown Act, the Ralph C. Dills Act, provisions relating to public schools, and provisions relating to higher education prohibits employers from taking certain actions relating to employee organization, including imposing or threatening to impose reprisals on employees, discriminating or threatening to discriminate against employees, or otherwise interfering with, restraining, or coercing employees because of their exercise of their guaranteed rights. Those provisions of existing law further prohibit denying to employee organizations the rights guaranteed to them by existing law. This bill would prohibit a public employer from questioning a public employee, a representative of a recognized employee organization, or an exclusive representative regarding communications made in confidence between an employee and an employee representative in connection with representation relating to any matter within the scope of the recognized employee organization's representation. The bill would also prohibit a public employer from compelling a public employee, a representative of a recognized employee organization, or an exclusive representative to disclose those confidential communications to a third party. The bill would not apply to a criminal investigation or when a public safety officer is under investigation and certain circumstances exist.
Existing law prohibits the use of kinetic energy projectiles or chemical agents by any law enforcement agency to disperse any assembly, protest, or demonstration, except in compliance with specified standards. Existing law requires kinetic energy projectiles and chemical agents only to be deployed by a peace officer that has received proper training for crowd control, as specified, or to bring an objectively dangerous and unlawful situation safely and effectively under control and only in accordance with certain requirements, including that de-escalation techniques have been attempted and have failed, kinetic energy projectiles are not aimed at the head, neck, or any other vital organs, and, if the chemical agent to be deployed is tear gas, only a commanding officer at the scene of the assembly, protest, or demonstration may authorize the use of tear gas. This bill would expand the above prohibition and exception to include flash-bang grenades, as defined. The bill would define law enforcement agency as any department or agency of the state or any local government, special district, or other political subdivision thereof, that employs any peace officer, as defined, or any federal law enforcement agency. The bill would prohibit the use of flash-bang grenades by any law enforcement agency for the purposes of immigration enforcement, except as specified. The bill would also only allow a commanding officer at the scene to authorize the use of flash-bang grenades. Existing law requires each law enforcement agency to publish specified use of force incidents to the Department of Justice and requires the Department of Justice to publish those reports, as specified. This bill would additionally require law enforcement agencies to report the use of flash-bang grenades. By imposing new duties on local law enforcement agencies, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. Existing law prohibits the possession of any destructive device and makes a violation of this prohibition punishable as a misdemeanor or felony. Existing law exempts specified peace officers from this prohibition. This bill would prohibit a peace officer, as defined, from using an explosive breaching charge, as defined, for the purpose of immigration enforcement, except as specified. 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. The bill would declare the severability of its provisions.
Existing law authorizes a court to issue a gun violence restraining order to prohibit a person from purchasing or possessing a firearm or ammunition for a period of one to 5 years, subject to renewal for additional one- to 5-year periods, if the subject of the petition poses a significant danger of self-harm or harm to another in the near future by having a firearm and the order is necessary to prevent personal injury to the subject of the petition or another. Existing law also allows a gun violence restraining order to be issued on an ex parte basis for up to 21 days. Existing law allows a petition for these gun violence restraining orders to be made by a law enforcement officer, or an immediate family member, employer, coworker, or teacher, as specified, of the subject of the petition. This bill would authorize the Counties of Alameda, El Dorado, Santa Clara, and Ventura to establish, until January 1, 2032, a pilot program to additionally authorize a district attorney to request that the court issue a temporary emergency gun violence restraining order, as specified. The bill would require the district attorney of a county that establishes a pilot program, commencing April 1, 2027, to annually submit specified data to the California Firearm Violence Research Center at UC Davis, and would authorize the center, commencing July 1, 2027, to conduct an evaluation of the pilot program and annually report that evaluation to the Legislature, as specified. The bill would require the district attorney of a county that establishes a pilot program, commencing April 1, 2027, to make the data described above available upon request to the Department of Justice and the Judicial Council. The bill would make related findings and declarations.
(1) Existing law establishes procedures by which a person may petition the court for certain protective or restraining orders, including civil harassment restraining orders, domestic violence restraining orders, elder or dependent adult abuse restraining orders, gun violence restraining orders, postsecondary school restraining orders, and workplace violence restraining orders, to enjoin a restrained person from taking specified actions. Beginning January 1, 2026, upon a court's issuance of such a protective order, existing law will require the restrained person to relinquish any firearm and ammunition in that person's immediate possession or control, according to specified procedures. Existing law prescribes procedures by which the restrained person must certify compliance with the court, and for the court to determine, by a preponderance of the evidence, whether the person has a firearm in violation of the order. This bill would make clarifying and conforming changes to the procedures relating to the protective or restraining orders described above by explicitly requiring the restrained person to relinquish, in addition to any firearm, any ammunition in that person's immediate possession or control. The bill would require courts to permit a party, support person, or witness to appear remotely at a hearing for a postsecondary educational institution or workplace violence restraining order at no cost. This bill would also require courts to develop rules and instructions for such remote appearances and to post them on its website. (2) Existing law requires a peace officer who is at the scene of a domestic violence incident or enforcing a domestic violence restraining order or gun violence restraining order to take temporary custody of any firearm or other deadly weapon in plain sight or discovered pursuant to a consensual or otherwise lawful search, as specified. This bill would additionally require a peace officer to take temporary custody of any ammunition in plain sight or discovered pursuant to such a search. By expanding the duties of local law enforcement agencies, 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 Control, Regulate and Tax Adult Use of Marijuana Act (AUMA) , an initiative measure, authorizes a person who obtains a state license under AUMA to engage in commercial adult-use cannabis activity pursuant to that license and applicable local ordinances. The Medicinal and Adult-Use Cannabis Regulation and Safety Act (MAUCRSA) , among other things, consolidates the licensure and regulation of commercial medicinal and adult-use cannabis activities. Existing law establishes the California Cannabis Tax Fund as a continuously appropriated fund consisting of specified taxes, interest, penalties, and other amounts related to commercial cannabis activity. Each fiscal year, AUMA requires the Controller to make specified disbursements from the fund, including, through the 2022–23 fiscal year, reasonable costs incurred by the Department of Cannabis Control for implementing, administering, and enforcing MAUCRSA. This bill would require the Controller to make a disbursement from the fund for reasonable costs incurred by the Department of Cannabis Control for maintaining and operating the track and trace program and for conducting civil or criminal enforcement against unauthorized commercial cannabis activity, as specified. By requiring moneys in the California Cannabis Tax Fund, a continuously appropriated fund, to be used for a new purpose, the bill would make an appropriation. AUMA also requires the Controller to make a disbursement from the fund to the Board of State and Community Corrections for making grants to local governments to assist with law enforcement, fire protection, or other local programs addressing public health and safety associated with the implementation of AUMA. AUMA prohibits the board from making grants to local governments that ban both indoor and outdoor commercial cannabis cultivation, or ban retail sale of cannabis or cannabis products. This bill would repeal that prohibition, thereby authorizing the Board of State and Community Corrections to make grants to local governments that ban both indoor and outdoor commercial cannabis cultivation or ban retail sale of cannabis or cannabis products. In order to be eligible for a grant, the bill would require a local government either to allow the retail sale of cannabis in storefronts or, for jurisdictions with a population of 10,000 residents or less, to allow cannabis delivery, as specified. The bill would require the board to prioritize grant awards for local governments whose grant application includes illicit cannabis enforcement, and would authorize the board to award grants both competitively and based on a formula to provide consistent and ongoing funding for local governments, as provided. AUMA authorizes the Legislature to amend its provisions with a 23 vote of both houses to further its purposes and intent, except as specified. This bill would declare that its provisions further the purposes and intent of AUMA. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as a bill providing for appropriations related to the Budget Bill.
Existing law makes it a felony, generally known as human trafficking, to deprive or violate the personal liberty of another with the intent to effect or maintain a felony violation of, among other crimes, pimping, pandering, or abducting a minor for the purpose of prostitution. Existing law authorizes the forfeiture of vehicles, boats, airplanes, money, negotiable instruments, securities, real property, or other things of value used for the purpose of facilitating the human trafficking of a victim under 18 years of age for purposes of a commercial sex act and property acquired through, or that was received in exchange for the proceeds of, that crime. Existing law establishes a procedure for a prosecutor to petition for forfeiture of an interest in these items that includes appointment of a receiver to take possession of and manage any property. This bill would make the above-described provisions authorizing forfeiture of property and the procedure for effecting it applicable to all offenses of human trafficking involving a commercial sex act, regardless of the age of the victim.
Existing law, the Control, Regulate and Tax Adult Use of Marijuana Act (AUMA) , an initiative measure, authorizes a person who obtains a state license under AUMA to engage in commercial adult-use cannabis activity pursuant to that license and applicable local ordinances. The Medicinal and Adult-Use Cannabis Regulation and Safety Act (MAUCRSA) , among other things, consolidates the licensure and regulation of commercial medicinal and adult-use cannabis activities. Existing law establishes the California Cannabis Tax Fund as a continuously appropriated fund consisting of specified taxes, interest, penalties, and other amounts related to commercial cannabis activity. Each fiscal year, AUMA requires the Controller to make specified disbursements from the fund, including, through the 2022–23 fiscal year, reasonable costs incurred by the Department of Cannabis Control for implementing, administering, and enforcing MAUCRSA. This bill would require the Controller to make a disbursement from the fund for reasonable costs incurred by the Department of Cannabis Control for maintaining and operating the track and trace program and for conducting civil or criminal enforcement against unauthorized commercial cannabis activity, as specified. By requiring moneys in the California Cannabis Tax Fund, a continuously appropriated fund, to be used for a new purpose, the bill would make an appropriation. AUMA also requires the Controller to make a disbursement from the fund to the Board of State and Community Corrections for making grants to local governments to assist with law enforcement, fire protection, or other local programs addressing public health and safety associated with the implementation of AUMA. AUMA prohibits the board from making grants to local governments that ban both indoor and outdoor commercial cannabis cultivation, or ban retail sale of cannabis or cannabis products. This bill would repeal that prohibition, thereby authorizing the Board of State and Community Corrections to make grants to local governments that ban both indoor and outdoor commercial cannabis cultivation or ban retail sale of cannabis or cannabis products. In order to be eligible for a grant, the bill would require a local government either to allow the retail sale of cannabis in storefronts or, for jurisdictions with a population of 10,000 residents or less, to allow cannabis delivery, as specified. The bill would require the board to prioritize grant awards for local governments whose grant application includes illicit cannabis enforcement, and would authorize the board to award grants both competitively and based on a formula to provide consistent and ongoing funding for local governments, as provided. AUMA authorizes the Legislature to amend its provisions with a 23 vote of both houses to further its purposes and intent, except as specified. This bill would declare that its provisions further the purposes and intent of AUMA. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as a bill providing for appropriations related to the Budget Bill.
