Existing law requires the electronic recording of the entire custodial interrogation of a minor who is in a fixed place of detention, as defined, and who, at the time of the interrogation, is suspected of committing or accused of committing murder. Existing law sets forth various exceptions from this requirement, including if the law enforcement officer conducting the interrogation or his or her superior reasonably believes that electronic recording would disclose the identity of a confidential informant or jeopardize the safety of an officer, the individual being interrogated, or another individual. Existing law requires the prosecution to show by clear and convincing evidence that an exception applies to justify the failure to make that electronic recording. Existing law requires the interrogating entity to maintain the original or an exact copy of an electronic recording made of the interrogation until the final conclusion of the proceedings, as specified. Existing law additionally requires the court to provide jury instructions developed by the Judicial Council if the court finds that a defendant was subjected to a custodial interrogation in violation of the above-mentioned provisions. This bill would make this electronic recording requirement applicable to the custodial interrogation of any person suspected of committing murder. By imposing new requirements on local law enforcement, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would exempt from the electronic recording requirement the interrogation of a person who is in custody on a charge of murder if the interrogation is not related to the commission of murder, as specified. Existing law defines "electronic recording" for these provisions as a video recording that accurately records a custodial interrogation. This bill would specify that the above definition applies only to the custodial interrogation of a minor. The bill would expand the definition to include a video or audio recording in the case of the custodial interrogation of an adult and would express the Legislature's encouragement that law enforcement agencies use video recording when available. This bill would make technical, nonsubstantive changes to the above provisions. 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 these statutory provisions.
Sponsored bills
Existing law establishes various crimes relating to computer services and systems, including, but not limited to, knowingly introducing a computer contaminant, as defined. Existing law makes a violation of those crimes punishable by specified fines or terms of imprisonment, or by both those fines and imprisonment. Existing law defines extortion as obtaining the property of another, with his or her consent, induced by a wrongful use of force or fear. Existing law makes extortion a crime, punishable by imprisonment in a county jail for 2, 3, or 4 years. This bill would define ransomware as a computer contaminant or lock placed or introduced without authorization into a computer, computer system, or computer network that restricts access by an authorized person to the computer, computer system, computer network, or any data therein under circumstances in which the person responsible for the placement or introduction of the ransomware demands payment of money or other consideration to remove the computer contaminant, restore access to the computer, computer system, computer network, or data, or otherwise remediate the impact of the computer contaminant or lock. The bill would provide that a person is responsible for placing or introducing ransomware into a computer, computer system, or computer network if the person directly places or introduces the ransomware or directs or induces another person do so, with the intent of demanding payment or other consideration to remove the ransomware, restore access, or otherwise remediate the impact of the ransomware. The bill would provide that a person who, with intent to extort money or other consideration from another, introduces ransomware into any computer, computer system, or computer network is punishable as if that money or other consideration were actually obtained by means of the ransomware. By expanding the scope of a crime, 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 no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
Under existing law, the Lanterman Developmental Disabilities Services Act, the State Department of Developmental Services is authorized to contract with regional centers to provide services and supports to individuals with developmental disabilities. Existing law requires an entity that receives payments from one or more regional centers to obtain an independent audit or independent review report of its financial statements based upon the amount it receives from the regional center or regional centers during the entity's fiscal year. This bill would, commencing January 1, 2018, instead require the entity to obtain an independent review report or an independent audit of its financial statements based upon the amount it receives from the regional center or regional centers during each state fiscal year. Existing law requires regional centers to notify the department of all qualified opinion reports or reports noting significant issues that directly or indirectly impact regional center services within 30 days after receipt. This bill would also require a regional center to submit copies of all independent audit reports that it receives to the department for review. The bill would require the department to compile data, by regional center, on vendor compliance with audit requirements and opinions resulting from audit reports and to annually publish the data in a performance dashboard.
Existing sales and use tax laws impose a tax on retailers measured by the gross receipts from the sale of tangible personal property sold at retail in this state, or on the storage, use, or other consumption in this state of tangible personal property purchased from a retailer for storage, use, or other consumption in this state. Existing law provides for various exemptions from those taxes, including an exemption for certain sales of human blood and containers thereof. This bill, until January 1, 2022, would exempt from those taxes the gross receipts from the sale in this state of, and the storage, use, or other consumption in this state of, animal whole blood, plasma, blood products, and blood derivatives, sold by a nonprofit animal blood banking business for use in the cure, mitigation, treatment, or prevention of injury or disease in animals pursuant to a specified state law. The bill would define "nonprofit" for its purposes. The Bradley-Burns Uniform Local Sales and Use Tax Law authorizes cities and counties to impose local sales and use taxes in conformity with the Sales and Use Tax Law, and existing laws authorize districts, as specified, to impose transactions and use taxes in accordance with the Transactions and Use Tax Law, which generally conforms to the Sales and Use Tax Law. Amendments to the Sales and Use Tax Law are incorporated into the local tax laws. Existing law requires the state to reimburse cities and counties for revenue losses caused by the enactment of sales and use tax exemptions. This bill would provide that, notwithstanding these provisions, no appropriation is made and the state shall not reimburse cities and counties for sales and use tax revenues lost by them pursuant to this bill. This bill would take effect immediately as a tax levy.
This measure would designate a specified portion of Highway Route 79 in the Counties of San Diego and Riverside as Historic Highway Route 79 and request the Department of Transportation to determine the cost of appropriate signs showing this special designation and, upon receiving donations from nonstate sources covering that cost, to erect those signs.
(1) Existing law, the Naturopathic Doctors Act, provides for the licensure and regulation of naturopathic doctors by the Naturopathic Medicine Committee in the Osteopathic Medical Board of California. Existing law authorizes a naturopathic doctor to perform certain tasks, including physical and laboratory examinations for diagnostic purposes and to order diagnostic imaging studies, consistent with naturopathic training as determined by the committee. Under the act, a naturopathic doctor is authorized to dispense, administer, order, prescribe, furnish, or perform certain things, including health education and health counseling. This bill would, instead, authorize a naturopathic doctor to perform certain tasks, consistent with the practice of naturopathic medicine, and would additionally authorize a naturopathic doctor to dispense, administer, order, prescribe, provide, or furnish devices and durable medical equipment consistent with the naturopathic training as determined by the committee. (2) Existing law, the California Uniform Controlled Substances Act, classifies controlled substances into 5 designated schedules, with the most restrictive limitations generally placed on controlled substances classified in Schedule I, and the least restrictive limitation generally placed on controlled substances classified in ScheduleV. Existing law states that nothing in the Naturopathic Doctors Act or any other law shall be construed to prohibit a naturopathic doctor from furnishing or ordering drugs when, among other requirements, the naturopathic doctor is functioning pursuant to standardized procedure, as defined, or protocol developed and approved, as specified, and the Naturopathic Medicine Committee has certified that the naturopathic doctor has satisfactorily completed adequate coursework in pharmacology covering the drugs to be furnished or ordered. Existing law requires that the furnishing or ordering of drugs by a naturopathic doctor occur under the supervision of a physician and surgeon. Existing law also authorizes a naturopathic doctor to furnish or order controlled substances classified in Schedule III, IV, or V of the California Uniform Controlled Substances Act, but limits this authorization to those drugs agreed upon by the naturopathic doctor and physician and surgeon as specified in the standardized procedure. Existing law further requires that drugs classified in Schedule III be furnished or ordered in accordance with a patient-specific protocol approved by the treating or supervising physician. This bill would instead provide that, except as specified, nothing in the provisions governing naturopathic doctors or any other law shall be construed to prohibit a naturopathic doctor from administering, furnishing, ordering, or prescribing drugs and would make a conforming change to the scope of the certification duties of the Naturopathic Medicine Committee. The bill would delete certain provisions described above restricting the authority of naturopathic doctors to furnish or order drugs. The bill would authorize a naturopathic doctor to administer, furnish, order, or prescribe Schedule III and Schedule IV controlled substances pursuant to a standardized procedure or protocol and under the supervision of a physician and surgeon, as specified. (3) Existing law, notwithstanding any provision of the Naturopathic Doctors Act, authorizes a naturopathic doctor to independently prescribe and administer certain things, including, among others, epinephrine to treat anaphylaxis. This bill would authorize a naturopathic doctor to independently administer, furnish, order, or prescribe Schedule V controlled substances and any drug approved by the federal Food and Drug Administration and labeled "for prescription only," except chemotherapeutics, that is not classified, after the completion of 12 months of physician and surgeon supervision, as specified, and would waive that supervision requirement for a naturopathic doctor who has completed a residency program, as specified, or who has a license in good standing and practiced for at least 12 months in another state where independent prescribing is within a naturopathic doctor's scope of practice in that other state.
This measure would congratulate the United States Women's National Soccer Team on its impressive and historic World Cup victory on July 5, 2015.
The Medical Practice Act provides for the licensure and regulation of physicians and surgeons by the Medical Board of California and establishes specific requirements for licensure and renewal. That act generally requires that an application for a certificate be accompanied by the fee required by the act, but requires the waiver of the fee for a physician and surgeon residing in California who certifies to the board that the license is for the sole purpose of providing voluntary, unpaid service. The act establishes a parallel fee waiver requirement for the renewal of a physician and surgeon's certificate. This bill would remove from those application and renewal fee waiver provisions the requirement that a physician and surgeon reside in California.
Under existing law, the Medical Waste Management Act, the State Department of Public Health regulates the management and handling of medical waste, including pharmaceutical waste, as defined. The act generally prohibits a person from transporting, storing, treating, disposing, or causing the treatment of medical waste in a manner not authorized by the act. A violation of that provision is a crime. Under existing law, everyone is generally responsible, not only for the result of his or her willful acts, but also for an injury occasioned to another by his or her want of ordinary care or skill in the management of his or her property or person, except so far as the latter, has willfully or by want of ordinary care, brought the injury upon himself or herself. This bill would provide that a collector, as defined, is not liable for civil damages, or subject to criminal prosecution, for any injury or harm that results from the collector maintaining a secure drug take-back bin on its premises provided that the collector, not for compensation, acts in good faith to take specified steps, including that the collector regularly inspects the area surrounding the secure drug take-back bin for potential tampering or diversion, to ensure the health and safety of consumers and employees and the proper disposal in the waste stream of home-generated pharmaceutical waste, as defined, contained in the bins.
Existing law contains provisions governing the operation and financing of community mental health services for the mentally disordered in every county through locally administered and locally controlled community mental health programs. Existing law, the Mental Health Services Act, 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 act establishes the Mental Health Services Fund, which is continuously appropriated to, and administered by, the State Department of Health Care Services, to fund specified county mental health programs, including programs funded under the Adult and Older Adult Mental Health System of Care Act. Existing law prohibits these funds from being used to pay for persons incarcerated in state prison or parolees from state prisons. This bill would clarify that the counties may use Mental Health Services Fund moneys to provide voluntary outpatient crisis stabilization services to individuals, even when individuals who are receiving involuntary services are treated at the same facility. Because the bill would clarify the procedures and terms of Proposition 63, it would require a majority vote of the Legislature.