SB 393: Arrests: sealing.

Existing law authorizes a person who was arrested and has successfully completed a prefiling diversion program, a person who has successfully completed a specified drug diversion program, and a person who has successfully completed a specified deferred entry of judgment program to petition the court to seal his or her arrest records. Existing law also specifies that, with regards to arrests that resulted in the defendant participating in certain other deferred entry of judgment programs, the arrest upon which the judgment was deferred shall be deemed not to have occurred.

This bill would also authorize a person who has suffered an arrest that did not result in a conviction, as specified, to petition the court to have his or her arrest sealed. Under the bill, a person would be ineligible for this relief under specified circumstances, including if he or she may still be charged with any offense upon which the arrest was based. The bill would require the Judicial Council to furnish forms to be utilized by a person applying to have his or her arrest sealed, as specified.

The bill would provide that a person who is eligible to have his or her arrest sealed is entitled, as a matter of right, to that sealing unless the person has been charged with certain crimes, including, among others, domestic violence if the petitioners record demonstrates a pattern of domestic violence arrests, convictions, or both, in which case the person may obtain sealing of his or her arrest only upon a showing that the sealing would serve the interests of justice. The bill would specify that the petitioner has the initial burden of proof to show that he or she is either entitled to have his or her arrest sealed as a matter of right or that sealing would serve the interests of justice and, if the court finds that petitioner has satisfied his or her burden of proof, then the burden of proof would shift to the respondent prosecuting attorney.

The bill would require, if the petition is granted, the court to issue a written ruling and order that, among other things, states that the arrest is deemed not to have occurred and that, except as otherwise provided, the petitioner is released from all penalties and disabilities resulting from the arrest. The bill would also require the court to furnish a disposition report to the Department of Justice, as specified. The bill would prohibit, if an arrest is sealed pursuant to the above provisions or pursuant to the specified provisions of existing law that authorize the sealing of arrest records after successfully completing a prefiling diversion program, a specified drug diversion program, or a specified deferred entry of judgment program, or if an arrest is deemed to have never occurred after a defendant participates in certain other deferred entry of judgment programs, the disclosure of the arrest, or information about the arrest that is contained in other records, from being disclosed to any person or entity, except as specified.

The bill would subject a person or entity to a civil penalty if he or she disseminates information relating to a sealed arrest, unless he or she is specifically authorized to disseminate that information. Because the bill would impose new duties on local agencies, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program.

Existing law requires the Department of Justice to maintain state summary criminal history information, as defined, and requires the Attorney General to furnish state summary criminal history information to specified entities and individuals if needed in the course of their duties.

The bill would prohibit the department from disclosing, as part of the state summary criminal history information furnished to specified entities, that an individual was granted relief pursuant to the provisions above describing having an arrest sealed.

This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 1000.4 of the Penal Code proposed by AB 208 to be operative only if this bill and AB 208 are enacted and this bill is enacted last.

This bill would also incorporate additional changes to Section 11105 of the Penal Code proposed by SB 420, AB 1418, and this bill to be operative only if this bill, SB 420, and AB 1418 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.