Existing law permits a court to exclude evidence if its probative value is substantially outweighed by specified factors, including the probability that its admission will create substantial danger of undue prejudice. Existing law permits a court to hear and determine the question of admissibility of evidence out of the presence or hearing of the jury. This bill would require a court, in a criminal proceeding where a party seeks to admit as evidence a form of creative expression, to consider specified factors when balancing the probative value of that evidence against the substantial danger of undue prejudice. The bill would define "creative expression" as the expression or application of creativity or imagination in the production or arrangement of forms, sounds, words, movements, or symbols, as specified. The bill would require a court, in balancing the probative value of a creative expression against the substantial danger of undue prejudice, to first consider that the probative value of the creative expression for its literal truth is minimal unless that expression meets specified conditions. The bill would then require a court to consider that undue prejudice includes the possibility that the trier of fact will treat the creative expression as evidence of the defendant's propensity for violence or criminal disposition, as well as the possibility that the evidence will inject racial bias into the proceedings. The bill would require the court to consider, if proffered and relevant to the issues in the case, credible testimony on the genre of creative expression as to the context of the expression, research demonstrating that the introduction of a particular type of expression introduces racial bias into the proceedings, and evidence to rebut such research or testimony. The bill would require a court to determine the admissibility of a form of creative expression in a hearing outside the presence and hearing of the jury, and state on the record the court's ruling and reasoning therefor. The California Constitution provides for the Right to Truth-in-Evidence, which requires a 2/3 vote of the Legislature to exclude any relevant evidence from any criminal proceeding, as specified. Because this bill may exclude from a criminal action a form of creative expression that would otherwise be admissible, it requires a 2/3 vote of the Legislature.
Sponsored bills
Existing law requires any adult person who is arrested or charged with any felony offense to provide buccal swab samples, right thumbprints, a full palm print impression of each hand, and any blood specimens or other biological samples required for law enforcement identification analysis. Existing law requires that a DNA specimen and sample be destroyed and that a searchable database profile be expunged from that databank program if the person from whom the specimen or sample was collected has no past or present offense or pending charge that qualifies that person for inclusion in the database and if that person submits an application, as specified, and gives the court discretion to grant or deny the application. This bill would create procedures for reference samples of DNA from a victim to a crime or alleged crime, and to reference samples of DNA from any individual that were voluntarily provided for the purpose of exclusion, as defined. The bill would require those procedures to include, among other things, requiring that law enforcement agencies use these samples only for purposes directly related to the incident being investigated, prohibiting law enforcement agencies from comparing these samples with samples that do not relate to the incident being investigated, and prohibiting law enforcement agencies from including these samples in databases that allow the samples to be compared to or matched with profiles derived from DNA evidence obtained from crime scenes. The bill would specify that these provisions do not prevent crime laboratories from collecting, retaining, and using specified DNA profiles for comparison purposes in multiple cases. By imposing additional duties on local law enforcement agencies, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 680 of the Penal Code proposed by SB 916 to be operative only if this bill and SB 916 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, 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 misdemeanor for a person to willfully violate their written promise to appear or a lawfully granted continuance of their promise to appear in court or before a person authorized to receive a deposit of bail, and requires the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) to suspend the driving privilege of that person upon receipt of notification of that violation from a court. Existing law generally authorizes a court to notify the DMV of a violation of a written promise to appear or a lawfully granted continuance of their promise to appear in court or before a person authorized to receive a deposit of bail, and requires a court to notify the DMV of such a violation when a person is charged with specified offenses related to driving under the influence. Existing law prohibits the department from issuing or renewing a driver's license to a person when it has received one of these notices. This bill would, beginning January 1, 2027, repeal that requirement of the DMV to suspend a person's driving privilege, would terminate any suspension issued by the DMV pursuant to those provisions prior to January 1, 2027, and would remove the prohibition from issuing or renewing a driver's license. The bill would repeal the above-described authorization and requirement that the court notify the DMV of a violation of a written promise to appear or a lawfully granted continuance of their promise to appear in court or before a person authorized to receive a deposit of bail. The bill would make other conforming changes. Existing law prohibits a person from driving a motor vehicle upon a highway, unless the person holds a valid driver's license, except as specified. A violation of this provision is a misdemeanor. This bill would, instead, make a violation of this provision an infraction for a first or 2nd offense, except as specified, and a misdemeanor or an infraction for subsequent violations.
Existing law establishes the Task Force to Study and Develop Reparation Proposals for African Americans, with a Special Consideration for African Americans Who are Descendants of Persons Enslaved in the United States (Task Force) . Under existing law, the Task Force consists of 9 members, with 5 members appointed by the Governor, 2 members appointed by the President pro Tempore of the Senate, and 2 members appointed by the Speaker of the Assembly. Existing law establishes the term of office for members as the life of the Task Force. Existing law requires the Task Force to elect a chair and vice chair from among its members. Existing law requires the Task Force, among other things, to identify, compile, and synthesize the relevant corpus of evidentiary documentation of the institution of slavery that existed within the United States and the colonies, as specified, and to recommend the form of compensation that should be awarded, the instrumentalities through which it should be awarded, and who should be eligible for this compensation. Existing law requires the Task Force to submit a written report of its findings and recommendations to the Legislature within a year of the first meeting of the Task Force, as prescribed. Existing law repeals these provisions on July 1, 2023. This bill would remove the specified term of office for appointees and, instead, subject the appointees to removal at the pleasure of their appointing authority. The bill would authorize the Task Force, by majority vote, to elect officers and create advisory bodies and subcommittees to accomplish its duties. The bill would require the Task Force to submit at least one report. The bill would place any reports of the Task Force within the public domain and would provide that the State of California retains no copyright or other proprietary interest in that information. The bill would extend the operation of these provisions, as amended by the bill, until July 1, 2024.
Existing law places restrictions on the use of room confinement of minors or wards who are confined in a juvenile facility, as specified, and requires the placement of a minor or ward in room confinement to be conducted in accordance with specified guidelines. Existing law excludes from the definition of room confinement the confinement of a minor or ward in a single-person room or cell for brief periods of locked room confinement necessary for required institutional operations. This bill would limit that exclusion to periods of confinement no longer than 2 hours. The bill would also require minors and wards who are confined to be provided reasonable access to toilets at all hours. By increasing the duties of local entities in connection with local juvenile facilities, 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 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.
Existing law requires a shared mobility service provider, as defined, to enter into an agreement with, or obtain a permit from, the city or county with jurisdiction over the area of use. Existing law defines shared mobility device to mean an electrically motorized board, motorized scooter, electric bicycle, bicycle, or other similar personal transportation device, except as provided. Existing law requires a city or county that authorizes a shared mobility device provider to operate within its jurisdiction to adopt operation, parking, and maintenance rules, as provided, regarding the use of the shared mobility devices in its jurisdiction before the provider may offer shared mobility devices for rent or use. This bill would require a shared mobility service provider to affix to each shared mobility device a tactile sign containing raised characters and accompanying Braille, as specified, to identify the device for the purpose of reporting illegal or negligent activity. Existing law requires that the shared mobility provider maintain a specified amount of commercial general liability insurance that, among other things, must be with a carrier doing business in California, in a user agreement before distributing a shared mobility device within that jurisdiction. This bill, rather than require the shared mobility service provider to maintain commercial general liability insurance with a carrier doing business in California, would require the coverage to be with an admitted insurer or a nonadmitted insurer, as specified. Starting July 1, 2023, this bill would require a shared mobility service provider or user of a shared mobility device to offer or make available, or to confirm a user of a shared mobility device maintains, $10,000 of coverage for any bodily injury or death suffered by a pedestrian in any one accident when the injury or death involves, in whole or in part, the negligent conduct of the shared mobility device user, and $1,000 of coverage for any property damage to an assistive technology device, as defined. The bill would prohibit a shared mobility service provider from allowing a user or individual to operate or utilize a shared mobility device without the coverage, and would exempt bicycles propelled exclusively by human power and specified electric bicycles from these requirements. The bill would authorize a provider to partner with an insurer to provide coverage that meets or exceeds those requirements to its users via its digital application or other electronic or digital platform, and fund the cost of providing coverage in its standard fee or through a separate charge to users. The bill would require the shared mobility service provider to maintain coverage if a user does not maintain the required insurance coverage. The bill would authorize a provider to enter into agreements with users that maintain their own coverage that meets or exceeds the above requirements to exclude the user from the provider's coverage. The bill would also require a provider to keep an up-to-date list of its users that maintain their own coverage and transmit annually, to the Department of Insurance, information on the percentage of total users in the state that maintain their own coverage and the total number of users, as specified. The bill would specify that it does not prohibit a provider from requiring a user to enter into an indemnity contract, and would specify certain requirements that the indemnity contract would be required to meet. The bill would prohibit parties from waiving or modifying any of its provisions by contractual agreement, act, or omission. The bill would require a shared mobility service provider to disclose, in a specified manner, prior to allowing the user to initiate their first use of a device, that the customer's existing homeowner's, renter's, or automobile insurance policies might not provide coverage for liability resulting from the use of shared mobility devices and that the customer should contact their insurance company or insurance agent to determine if coverage is provided. This bill would require, no later than December 31, 2026, the Department of Insurance to submit to the Legislature and insurance committees, as specified, a study that includes, among other things, recommendations to update shared mobility device insurance coverage requirements, how to strengthen the market for individual mobility device liability coverage, and whether there is a need for insurance coverage for injuries involving bicycles propelled exclusively by human power and specified electric bicycles.
(1) Existing law, the Bail Fugitive Recovery Persons Act, regulates bail fugitive recovery agents, defined as a person given written authorization by the bail or depositor of bail and contracted to investigate, surveil, locate, and arrest a bail fugitive and any person employed to assist the bail or depositor of bail to investigate, surveil, locate, and arrest a bail fugitive. Existing law prohibits an insurer from executing an undertaking of bail except by and through a person holding a bail license, as specified. Existing law provides for the issuance of bail licenses under the jurisdiction of the Insurance Commissioner. Under existing law, bail licenses include bail agent licenses, bail permittee licenses, and bail solicitor licenses. Existing law requires the commissioner to charge and collect specified fees for an application for a new or renewed bail license by a bail agent, bail permittee, or bail solicitor. This bill would, commencing July 1, 2023, include bail fugitive recovery agent licenses in the list of bail licenses and would prohibit a person from performing the activities of a bail fugitive recovery agent unless the person holds a license, as specified. The bill would exempt an individual holding a bail agent's, bail permittee's, or bail solicitor's license from a bail fugitive recovery agent's licensing requirements. (2) Existing law permits a bail agent licensee to solicit, negotiate, and effect undertakings of bail on behalf of any surety insurer while an unrevoked notice of appointment, as specified, has been filed. Existing law requires a bail agent licensee to file with the commissioner a surety bond of $1,000. This bill would, commencing July 1, 2023, require a bail fugitive recovery agent to file with the commissioner a surety bond of $1,000 and a policy of liability insurance with minimum limits of $1,000,000. The bill would require the Insurance Commissioner to delay the implementation of the liability insurance requirement, if there is either a reasonable lack of availability or affordability, or both, of liability insurance. The bill would exempt bail agents, bail permittees, and bail solicitors who are applying for a bail fugitive recovery agent license from these filing provisions if they have a current surety bond and liability insurance policy on file with the commissioner. (3) Existing law requires an applicant for a license to act as a bail agent to file with the commissioner a notice of appointment executed by a surety insurer or its authorized representative authorizing that applicant to execute undertakings of bail and to solicit and negotiate those undertakings on its behalf. Existing law allows a notice of appointment to continue in force until the occurrence of 3 specified events. This bill would, commencing July 1, 2023, also require an applicant for a bail fugitive recovery agent's license to file a notice of appointment with the commissioner, and would allow a notice of appointment to continue in force until the termination of a bail fugitive recovery agent's license, the end of the license term, as specified, or the filing of a notice of termination by the bail agent, the insurer, or the bail fugitive recovery agent. The bill would exempt bail agents and bail permittees, who apply for a bail fugitive recovery agent license, from these provisions if they have one or more surety appointments on file with the commissioner and the surety or sureties have authorized the bail agent or bail permittee to work as a bail fugitive recovery agent. The bill would require a bail fugitive recovery agent to disclose to the department that they are also a bail agent, permittee, or solicitor, on their license application and renewal and to carry specified identification cards. The bill would prohibit a person convicted of a felony from being a bail licensee, unless the person is licensed pursuant to statute. (4) Existing law allows the commissioner to issue a temporary license to the executor or administrator of a deceased holder of a bail agent's or bail permittee's license. This bill would, commencing July 1, 2023, allow the commissioner to issue a temporary license to the executor or administrator of the estate of a deceased holder of a bail fugitive recovery person's license. (5) Existing law requires the commissioner to charge and collect specified fees for an application for a new or renewed bail license by a bail agent, bail permittee, or bail solicitor. Under existing law, the fee for an application or request for a bail agent's or bail solicitor's license is $283. Existing law establishes the fee for a bail permittee's license at $567, and establishes other fees for renewal applications, fictitious name statements, bond filings, and amendments of applications, as specified. This bill would increase the application fee for a bail agent's or bail solicitor's license to $311. The bill would also increase the application fee for a bail permittee's license to $624. The bill would increase the fees to file other applications and documents, as specified. The bill would, commencing July 1, 2023, require the commissioner to collect an annual fee of $311 to file an application for a bail fugitive recovery person's license and an annual fee of $94 for a bail fugitive recovery agent's renewal application. (6) Existing law requires the commissioner to publish and maintain a list of holders of certain licenses, as specified. This bill would, commencing July 1, 2023, require the commissioner to publish and maintain a list of holders of bail fugitive recovery person's licenses on the department's internet website, along with the license numbers. (7) Existing law requires certain persons contracting their services as a bail fugitive recovery agent and certain licensees who engage in the arrest of a defendant to comply with various requirements, including being at least 18 years of age and completing various courses and classes. This bill would, commencing July 1, 2023, require a bail fugitive recovery agent, a bail agent, a bail permittee, or bail solicitor who contracts their services as a bail fugitive recovery person and a bail agent, bail permittee, or bail solicitor who engages in the arrest of a defendant to instead comply with specified provisions of the Insurance Code and any regulations promulgated by the commissioner. (8) Existing law requires an applicant, prior to taking an examination for a bail license, to complete a minimum of 20 hours of classroom education pertaining to the duties and responsibilities of a bail licensee. Existing law requires a licensee to complete in each 2-year license term not fewer than 12 hours of continuing education in these subjects prior to renewal of their license. The bill would, commencing July 1, 2023, include an additional requirement, prior to taking an examination for a bail license, of completing a 40-hour power of arrest course, and would clarify that the completion of the course would be for educational purposes only and not intended to confer the power of arrest unless the person is employed by a governmental agency to make arrests. The bill would require a bail fugitive recovery agent and a bail agent, who hires, trains, or designates assignments for bail fugitive recovery agents, to complete the 40-hour power of arrest course. (9) Existing law prohibits a person, other than a certified law enforcement officer, to apprehend, detain, or arrest a bail fugitive unless the person is a specified bail licensee, bail fugitive recovery agent, a private investigator licensed in this state, or holds a specified license in another state. Existing law makes a violation of the Bail Fugitive Recovery Persons Act a misdemeanor, punishable by a fine of $5,000, or imprisonment in a county jail not to exceed one year, or both that fine and imprisonment. This bill would, commencing July 1, 2023, limit that authority to apprehend, detain, or arrest a bail fugitive to a specified bail licensee and a private investigator licensed in this state who are also bail fugitive recovery agents. The bill would prohibit a bail licensee and a private investigator who are licensed in another state from apprehending, arresting, or detaining a bail fugitive in this state, unless they obtain a bail fugitive recovery agent license in this state and comply with the laws of this state. By increasing the scope of an existing crime and by creating a new crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (10) 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 allows the sheriff of each county to operate a store in connection with the county jail to sell confectionary, tobacco, postage and writing materials, and toilet articles and supplies to inmates in the jail. Existing law requires the sheriff to fix the sale prices of articles offered by the store and requires any profit to be deposited in the inmate welfare fund. Existing law also requires that any money, refund, rebate, or commission received from a telephone company or pay telephone provider attributable to the use of pay telephones primarily used by incarcerated persons to be deposited in the inmate welfare fund. The bill would rename the inmate welfare fund the incarcerated peoples' welfare fund and would require money in the fund to be expended solely for the benefit, education, and welfare of incarcerated people.
Existing provisions of the California Constitution provide that the University of California constitutes a public trust and require the university to be administered by the Regents of the University of California (regents) , a corporation in the form of a board, with full powers of organization and government, subject to legislative control only for specified purposes, including any competitive bidding procedures as may be applicable to the university by statute for specified purposes, including the purchasing of materials, goods, and services. Existing law requires the regents, except as provided, to let all contracts involving an expenditure of $100,000 or more annually for goods and materials or services, excepting personal or professional services, to the lowest responsible bidder meeting certain specifications, or to reject all bids. Existing policy of the regents establishes a general prohibition on contracting out for services and functions that can be performed by university staff, with certain exceptions, establishes employment standards for contract employees, and provides for the conversion of contract employees to university employment under prescribed circumstances. This bill would make it unlawful for any vendor, as defined, to accept payment above a specified threshold from the university pursuant to a contract for prescribed services if the vendor is performing services or supplying the university with employees to perform services who are paid less than the higher of the total compensation rate specified in the vendor's contract with the university or as required by university policy. The bill would require a vendor to provide those employees with prescribed written notice relating to compensation. The bill would require a vendor, twice yearly, to provide basic payroll information, as defined, to the university and members of any joint labor-management committee or similar meeting body established with the exclusive representative of university employees who perform the same or similar services. The bill would also require a vendor to provide specified additional written notice, including specific text, relating to the release of basic payroll information, to all employees who agree to perform services for the university or continue doing so. The bill would also require basic payroll information for an individual employee who performs services for the university, on request, to be made available for inspection by that individual employee or that individual employee's designated representative or to be furnished to that individual employee or that individual employee's authorized representative. This bill would authorize an employee or university employee to provide a vendor with written notice of a violation of the bill and the opportunity to correct and cure the violation and thereafter file suit only if the vendor fails to provide prescribed documentation. The bill would establish remedies, including civil penalties and restitution, for prevailing claimants and would provide for the disqualification of the vendor, for a minimum of 5 years, from submitting any bid to the university, or executing, renewing, or extending any contract with or otherwise receiving payment from the university in exchange for services. The bill would make its provisions severable.
Existing law designates specific days as holidays in this state. Existing law designates holidays on which community colleges and public schools are required to close, including days appointed by the President. Existing law entitles state employees, with specified exceptions, to be given time off with pay for specified holidays. This bill would add June 19, known as "Juneteenth," to the list of state holidays. The bill would specify that holidays created by federal legislation signed by the President are considered days appointed as holidays for the purposes of the above-described provisions requiring community colleges and public schools to close. The bill would authorize state employees to elect to take time off with pay in recognition of Juneteenth, as specified. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Sections 45203, 79020, and 88203 of the Education Code proposed by AB 1801 to be operative only if this bill and AB 1801 are enacted and this bill is enacted last. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Sections 6700, 19853, and 19853.1 of the Government Code proposed by AB 1801 and AB 2596 to be operative only if this bill and either or both AB 1801 and AB 2596 are enacted and this bill is enacted last.