AB 66: Peace officers: body-worn cameras.
- Session Year: 2015-2016
- House: Assembly
- Latest Version Date: 2015-05-06
Existing law makes it a crime to intentionally record a confidential communication without the consent of all parties to the communication. Existing law exempts specified peace officers from that provision if they are acting within the scope of their authority.
This bill would impose specified requirements and prohibitions on a law enforcement agency that requires a peace officer employed by the agency to use a body-worn camera, including, among other things, a requirement that the agency conspicuously post its policies and procedures regarding body-worn cameras on its Internet Web site, and a prohibition on a peace officer operating a body-worn camera under certain circumstances. The bill would further require that when a peace officer is involved in an incident involving a serious use of force, the officer may only review his or her body-worn camera video after making an initial statement and report. The bill would also require those law enforcement agencies to consider specified guidelines when adopting a body-worn camera policy, including, among others, a requirement that a peace officer equipped with a body worn camera activate the camera when responding to calls for assistance and when performing law enforcement activities in the field. Except as provided, the bill would specifically require that a request for a file from a body-worn camera be processed in accordance with the California Public Records Act. site. The bill would prohibit a peace officer employed by a law enforcement agency that requires a body-worn camera to be used by its peace officers from, among other things, making copies of any body-worn camera files for his or her personal use, or using a recording device such as a telephone camera or secondary video camera to record a body-worn camera file or image. Except as provided, the bill would authorize a peace officer subject to its provisions to review his or her body-worn camera video before making his or her initial statement and report.
This bill would specifically authorize a law enforcement agency that requires a body-worn camera to be used by a peace officer that the agency employs to consider specified model policies when adopting a body-worn camera policy, including, among others, a policy regarding where a peace officer is authorized to position the body-worn camera to facilitate optimum recording field of view.
Existing law, the California Public Records Act, requires state and local agencies to make their records available for public inspection, unless an exemption from disclosure applies.
This bill would exempt specified body-worn camera files created by a peace officer of a state or local law enforcement agency from disclosure pursuant to the act, including, among others, files that depict any victim of rape, incest, domestic violence, or child abuse, if the footage relates to any of those incidents.
Existing constitutional provisions require that a statute that limits the right of access to the meetings of public bodies or the writings of public officials and agencies be adopted with findings demonstrating the interest protected by the limitation and the need for protecting that interest.
This bill would make legislative findings to that effect.
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.
Existing law makes it a crime to intentionally record a confidential communication without the consent of all parties to the communication. Existing law exempts specified peace officers from that provision if they are acting within the scope of their authority.
This bill would impose specified requirements and prohibitions on a law enforcement agency that requires a peace officer employed by the agency to use a body-worn camera, including, among other things, a requirement that the agency conspicuously post its policies and procedures regarding body-worn cameras on its Internet Web site, and a prohibition on a peace officer operating a body-worn camera under certain circumstances. The bill would further require that when a peace officer is involved in an incident involving a serious use of force, the officer may only review his or her body-worn camera video after making an initial statement and report. The bill would also require those law enforcement agencies to consider specified guidelines when adopting a body-worn camera policy, including, among others, a requirement that a peace officer equipped with a body worn camera activate the camera when responding to calls for assistance and when performing law enforcement activities in the field. Except as provided, the bill would specifically require that a request for a file from a body-worn camera be processed in accordance with the California Public Records Act.
Existing law makes it a crime to intentionally record a confidential communication without the consent of all parties to the communication. Existing law exempts specified peace officers from that provision if they are acting within the scope of their authority.
This bill would impose specified requirements and prohibitions on a law enforcement agency that requires a peace officer employed by the agency to use a body-worn camera. The bill would require a peace officer to, among other things, activate the camera when responding to calls for assistance and performing law enforcement activities in the field, and would prohibit deactivating the camera during an encounter with a member of the public until the conclusion of that encounter. The bill would also require a peace officer to ensure that the body-worn camera is fully functional, as provided, prior to going into the field. The bill would prohibit a peace officer from using a body-worn camera in a hospital emergency room when it would violate the privacy expectations of a patient, during an ambulance response to an accident or illness when the victim is not involved in criminal activity, or when it would risk the safety of a confidential informant or undercover peace officer. The bill would require a peace officer to give notice of the camera and provide an opportunity for persons to request that the camera be turned off when the subject of the recording is a victim of rape, incest, domestic violence, and other forms of domestic and sexual harm, or when a peace officer is at a private residence without a warrant and in a nonemergency situation. camera, including, among other things, a requirement that the agency conspicuously post its policies and procedures regarding body-worn cameras on its Internet Web site, and a prohibition on a peace officer operating a body-worn camera under certain circumstances. The bill would also require those law enforcement agencies to consider specified guidelines when adopting a body-worn camera policy, including, among others, a requirement that a peace officer equipped with a body worn camera activate the camera when responding to calls for assistance and when performing law enforcement activities in the field.
The bill would require a peace officer to only use a body-worn camera issued and approved by the law enforcement agency that employs the officer, and would prohibit removing, dismantling, or tampering with any components or parts of a body-worn camera. The bill would prohibit a peace officer from using a body-worn camera to record any personal conversation with another member of the law enforcement agency without the consent of that member. The bill would prohibit, among other things, a peace officer from using a body-worn camera to record in a place where a reasonable expectation of privacy exists. The bill would authorize a peace officer to review his or her body-worn camera video only after making his or her initial statement and report in an administrative or criminal inquiry or investigation. Except as provided, the bill would specifically require that a request for a file from a body-worn camera be processed in accordance with the California Public Records Act.
Existing law makes it a crime to intentionally record a confidential communication without the consent of all parties to the communication. Existing law exempts specified peace officers from that provision if they are acting within the scope of their authority.
This bill would establish impose specified requirements if on a law enforcement agency that requires its officers a peace officer employed by the agency to wear body-worn cameras. use a body-worn camera. The bill would require officers a peace officer to, among other things, activate the camera when responding to calls for assistance and performing law enforcement activities in the field, and would prohibit deactivating the cameras camera during encounters an encounter with a member of the public until the conclusion of that encounter. The bill would also require a peace officer to ensure that the body-worn camera is fully functional, as provided, prior to going into the field. The bill would prohibit officers a peace officer from using a body-worn camera in a hospital emergency room when it would violate the privacy expectations of patients, a patient, during an ambulance response to an accident or illness when victims are the victim is not involved in criminal activity, or when it would risk the safety of a confidential informant or undercover peace officer, or during a protest or demonstration. officer. The bill would require officers a peace officer to give notice of the camera and provide an opportunity for persons to request that the camera be turned off when the subject of the recording is a victim of rape, incest, domestic violence, and other forms of domestic and sexual harm, or when an a peace officer is at a private residence without a warrant and in a nonemergency situation.
The bill would require officers a peace officer to only use a body-worn cameras camera issued and approved by the law enforcement agency that employs them, the officer, and would prohibit removing, dismantling, or tampering with any components or parts of the a body-worn cameras. camera. The bill would prohibit a peace officers officer from using a body-worn cameras camera to record any personal conversation with another member of the law enforcement agency without the consent of that member. The bill would prohibit, among other things, officers a peace officer from using a body-worn cameras camera to record in a place where a reasonable expectation of privacy exists. The bill would require law enforcement agencies to retain videos for a minimum of one year, unless specified conditions apply. The authorize a peace officer to review his or her body-worn camera video only after making his or her initial statement and report in an administrative or criminal inquiry or investigation. Except as provided, the bill would specify specifically require that requests a request for files a file from a body-worn cameras are to camera be processed in accordance with the California Public Records Act.
Existing law makes it a crime to intentionally record a confidential communication without the consent of all parties to the communication. Existing law exempts specified peace officers from that provision if they are acting within the scope of their authority.
This bill would state the intent of the Legislature to enact legislation to require local police departments that utilize police body-worn cameras to follow policies and procedures that will streamline best practices to better enhance the quality of the services that those departments provide to Californians. The bill would state the intent of the Legislature to enact legislation to create a task force to study the effectiveness of body-worn cameras and make policy recommendations. The bill would state the intent of the Legislature to enact legislation that best fits the recommendations of this task force.
This bill would establish requirements if a law enforcement agency requires its officers to wear body-worn cameras. The bill would require officers to, among other things, activate the camera when responding to calls for assistance and performing law enforcement activities in the field, and prohibit deactivating the cameras during encounters with a member of the public until the conclusion of that encounter. The bill would prohibit officers from using a body-worn camera in a hospital emergency room when it would violate the privacy expectations of patients, during an ambulance response to an accident or illness when victims are not involved in criminal activity, when it would risk the safety of a confidential informant or undercover peace officer, or during a protest or demonstration. The bill would require officers to give notice of the camera and provide an opportunity for persons to request that the camera be turned off when the subject of the recording is a victim of rape, incest, domestic violence, and other forms of domestic and sexual harm, or when an officer is at a private residence without a warrant and in a nonemergency situation.
The bill would require officers to only use body-worn cameras approved by the law enforcement agency that employs them, and would prohibit removing, dismantling, or tampering with any components or parts of the body-worn cameras. The bill would prohibit peace officers from using body-worn cameras to record any personal conversation with another member of the law enforcement agency without the consent of that member. The bill would prohibit, among other things, officers from using body-worn cameras to record in a place where a reasonable expectation of privacy exists. The bill would require law enforcement agencies to retain videos for a minimum of one year, unless specified conditions apply. The bill would specify that requests for files from body-worn cameras are to be processed in accordance with the California Public Records Act.
Existing law makes it a crime to intentionally record a confidential communication without the consent of all parties to the communication. Existing law exempts specified peace officers from that provision if they are acting within the scope of their authority.
This bill would state the intent of the Legislature to enact legislation to require local police departments that utilize police body-worn cameras to follow policies and procedures that will streamline best practices to better enhance the quality of the services that those departments provide to Californians. The bill would state the intent of the Legislature to enact legislation to create a task force to study the effectiveness of body-worn cameras and make policy recommendations. The bill would state the intent of the Legislature to enact legislation that best fits the recommendations of this task force.
The Legislature finds and declares:
(a)Twenty-first century policing demands more transparency in everyday interactions with the public. In light of a number of high profile use of force incidents involving law enforcement, law-enforcement, body-worn cameras are seen as an important means toward achieving this goal.
(b)Several law enforcement law-enforcement agencies in California are already implementing body-worn camera programs. Because of the potential of this technology to document law enforcement law-enforcement interactions, we must be cognizant in protecting citizen careful that their use is respectful of individual privacy and does not violate civil liberties.
(c)The development of best practices will be necessary to ensure the publics trust in law enforcement. law-enforcement. The use of the portable video recording system a body-worn camera provides documentary evidence for criminal investigations, internal or administrative investigations, and civil litigation.
(d)The Legislature intends that law-enforcement agencies and local governments should periodically review their policies related to the implementation of these requirements and guidelines, to account for changes in technology and the public sentiment, as well as lessons learned and best practices developed throughout the nation.
(d)
(e)The Legislature intends for officers to utilize body-worn cameras in accordance with the provisions requirements in this act to maximize the effectiveness of the audio and video documentation to achieve operational objectives objectives, and to ensure evidence integrity.
SEC. 2.Section 830.16 is added to the Penal Code, to read:830.16.(a)A law enforcement agency that requires a body-worn camera to be used by a peace officer that the agency employs shall comply with the following requirements:
(1)A law enforcement agency shall conspicuously post its policies and procedures regarding body-worn cameras on its Internet Web site.
(2)A peace officer shall only use the body-worn camera systems issued and approved by the law enforcement agency that employs him or her for official police duties.
(3)A peace officer shall not make copies of any body-worn camera files for his or her personal use or use a recording device such as a telephone camera or secondary video camera to record a body-worn camera file.
(4)A peace officer shall not operate a body-worn camera under any of the following circumstances:
(A)In a health facility or medical office when patients may be in view of the body-worn camera or when a health care practitioner is providing care to an individual.
(B)During an ambulance response to an accident or illness where the victim is not involved in any criminal activity.
(C)Situations where recording would risk the safety of a confidential informant or undercover peace officer.
(5)Operation of a body-worn camera shall begin with the officer providing on-camera notice to a person being recorded that a body-worn camera is recording video, and provide the person with the option to request that the body-worn camera be turned off under both of the following circumstances:
(A)When the subject of the video is a victim of rape, incest, domestic violence, or other forms of domestic or sexual harm.
(B)When an officer is at a private residence without a warrant and in a nonemergency situation.
(6)(A)When a peace officer is involved in an incident involving a serious use of force, a peace officer may only review his or her body-worn camera video after making his or her initial statement and report.
(B)(i)Once a peace officers initial report has been submitted and approved, a supervisor may show the peace officer the body-worn camera video. The peace officer may be given the opportunity to provide additional information to supplement his or her statement. If the review results in a modified report, both of the reports shall be provided to all parties to a civil, criminal, or administrative investigation. The fact that a modified or secondary report was prepared shall not be the sole basis for placing an officer on a Brady List.
(ii)For the purposes of this subparagraph, Brady List means any system, index, list, or other record containing the names of peace officers whose personnel files are likely to contain evidence of dishonesty or bias, which is maintained by a prosecutorial agency or office in accordance with the holding in Brady v. Maryland (1963) 373 U.S. 83.
(C)For the purpose of subparagraph (A), serious use of force means any of the following:
(i)Force resulting in death.
(ii)Force resulting in a loss of consciousness.
(iii)Force resulting in protracted loss, impairment, serious disfigurement, or function of any body part or organ.
(iv)Weapon strike to the head.
(v)Intentional firearm discharge at a person, regardless of injury.
(vi)Unintentional firearm discharge if a person is injured as a result of the discharge.
(b)In addition to subdivision (a), a law enforcement agency shall consider the following guidelines when adopting a body-worn camera policy:
(1)A peace officer equipped with a body-worn camera shall activate the camera when responding to calls for assistance and when performing law enforcement activities in the field, including, but not limited to, traffic or pedestrian stops, pursuits, arrests, searches, seizures, interrogations, and any other investigative or enforcement encounters in the field.
(2)A peace officer shall ensure that a body-worn camera is fully functional, including, but not limited to, ensuring that the camera can be turned on and off and record video and audio, and that the camera is properly charged, prior to going into the field. A peace officer shall not violate a persons reasonable expectation of privacy when ensuring that a body-worn camera is fully functional pursuant to this paragraph.
(3)A peace officer wearing a body-worn camera shall position the camera on his or her chest, head, shoulder, collar, or any area above the mid-torso of his or her uniform to facilitate optimum recording field of view.
(4)Both video and audio recording functions of a body-worn camera shall be activated when an officer is responding to a call for service or at the initiation of any other law enforcement or investigative encounter between a police officer and a member of the public. During an encounter with a member of the public, the officer shall notify the member of the public that the body-worn camera is recording, and shall not deactivate the body-worn camera until the conclusion of the encounter.
(5)A peace officer may stop recording when an arrestee is secured inside a fixed place of detention, as defined in paragraph (3) of subdivision (g) of Section 859.5.
(6)A peace officer shall record any interview of a suspect or witness in its entirety, unless paragraphs (4) and (5) of subdivision (a) apply.
(7)When recording interviews of a suspect, a peace officer shall, where applicable, inform the suspect of his or her rights under Miranda v. Arizona (1966) 384 U.S. 436.
(8)In the event of contradicting requests made by a homeowner, occupant, or renter to stop recording the encounter, the contradicting requests shall be recorded on video and the peace officer shall continue to operate and record the encounter.
(9)A peace officer shall not remove, dismantle, or tamper with any hardware or software components or parts of a body-worn camera.
(10)A peace officer shall not use body-worn camera functions, when there is no investigatory interaction with a member of the public, to record any personal conversation of or with another agency member or employee without the permission of the recorded member or employee.
(11)A peace officer shall not use a body-worn camera to record non-work-related activity or to record in places where a reasonable expectation of privacy exists.
(12)A peace officer shall not allow a computerized facial recognition program or application to be used with a body-worn camera or a recording made by a body-worn camera unless the use has been authorized by a warrant issued by a court.
(13)When safe and practical, an on-scene supervisor may retrieve a body-worn camera from an officer. The supervisor shall be responsible for ensuring the camera data is uploaded into the desired data processing and collection method.
(c)This section does not require a peace officer, in a public venue, to cease recording an event, situation, or circumstance solely at the demand of a citizen.
(d)(1)Any request from within a law enforcement agency for recordings from a body-worn camera from that agency shall be completed by the system administrator with the approval of the head of the agency.
(2)All other requests for recordings from a body-worn camera shall be processed in accordance with the California Public Records Act (Chapter 3.5 (commencing with Section 6250) of Division 7 of Title 1 of the Government Code).
(e)Any use of body-worn cameras by a peace officer not otherwise prescribed by this section or any other law is subject to bargaining pursuant to the Myers-Milias-Brown Act (Chapter 10 (commencing with Section 3500) of Division 4 of Title 1 of the Government Code).
SEC. 2.Section 6254.31 is added to the Government Code, to read:6254.31.Body-worn camera files created by a peace officer of a state or local law-enforcement agency that depict the following individuals and situations are confidential and shall not be disclosed to any member of the public pursuant to this chapter:
(a)Any victim of rape, incest, domestic violence, or child abuse, if the footage relates to any of those incidents.
(b)Any informant of the law-enforcement agency or undercover peace officer.
(c)When a peace officer is at a private residence in a nonemergency situation without a warrant.
SEC. 3.Section 830.16 is added to the Penal Code, to read:830.16.A law-enforcement agency that requires a body-worn camera to be used by a peace officer that the agency employs shall comply with all of the following requirements:
(a)A law-enforcement agency shall conspicuously post its policies and procedures regarding body-worn cameras on its Internet Web site.
(b)A peace officer shall use only the body-worn camera systems issued and approved by the law-enforcement agency that employs him or her. A peace officer shall use the approved body-worn camera only for official police duties during work hours.
(c)Operation of a body-worn camera shall begin with the officer making a reasonable effort to provide on-camera notice to a person or group of persons being recorded that a body-worn camera is recording video, except where a peace officer is in hot pursuit, where injury is imminent, or during any other emergency situation or exigent circumstance.
(d)(1)(A)A peace officer may review his or her body-worn camera video before making his or her initial statement and report, except where the formal policy of a law-enforcement agency, adopted before January 1, 2016, provides otherwise for situations where a peace officer is involved in an incident involving a serious use of force.
(B)For purposes of this paragraph, serious use of force means any of the following:
(i)Force resulting in death.
(ii)Force resulting in a loss of consciousness.
(iii)Force resulting in protracted loss, impairment, serious disfigurement, or function of any body part or organ.
(iv)Weapon strike to the head.
(v)Intentional firearm discharge at a person, regardless of injury.
(vi)Unintentional firearm discharge if a person is injured as a result of the discharge.
(2)(A)If a peace officer is permitted to review his or her body-worn camera video only after making his or her initial statement and report, and the peace officer submits a modified report thereafter, both of the reports shall be provided to all parties to a civil, criminal, or administrative investigation. The fact that a modified or secondary report was prepared shall not be the sole basis for placing a peace officer on a Brady List.
(B)For the purposes of this paragraph, Brady List means any system, index, list, or other record containing the names of peace officers whose personnel files are likely to contain evidence of dishonesty or bias, which is maintained by a prosecutorial agency or office in accordance with the holding in Brady v. Maryland (1963) 373 U.S. 83.
(e)Any request from within a law-enforcement agency for recordings from a body-worn camera from that agency shall be completed by the system administrator with the approval of the head of the agency. All other requests for recordings from a body-worn camera shall be processed in accordance with the California Public Records Act (Chapter 3.5 (commencing with Section 6250) of Division 7 of Title 1 of the Government Code), including, but not limited to, Section 6254.31 of the Government Code.
SEC. 4.Section 830.17 is added to the Penal Code, to read:830.17.(a)A peace officer employed by a law-enforcement agency that requires a body-worn camera to be used by its peace officers shall not do any of the following:
(1)Make copies of any body-worn camera files for his or her personal use, or use a recording device such as a telephone camera or secondary video camera to record a body-worn camera file or image.
(2)Operate a body-worn camera, except in an emergency or other exigent circumstance, under any of the following circumstances:
(A)In a health facility or medical office when patients may be in view of the body-worn camera or when a health care practitioner is providing care to an individual.
(B)During an ambulance response to an accident or illness where the victim is not involved in any criminal activity.
(C)Situations where recording would risk the safety of a confidential informant or undercover peace officer.
(3)Use body-worn camera functions, when there is no investigatory interaction with a member of the public, to record any personal conversation of or with another law-enforcement agency member or employee without the permission of the recorded member or employee.
(4)Use a body-worn camera to record non-work-related activity or to record in places where a reasonable expectation of privacy exists.
(5)Use computerized facial recognition programs or applications with a body-worn camera, or on a recording made by a body-worn camera, unless the use of the program or application has been authorized by a warrant issued by a court.
(6)Use a body-worn camera at a private residence in a nonemergency situation without a warrant if so requested by a homeowner, occupant, or renter. In the event of contradicting requests made by a homeowner, occupant, or renter to stop recording the encounter, the contradicting requests may be recorded on video and the peace officer may continue to operate and record the encounter.
(b)Subject to subparagraph (C) of paragraph (2) of subdivision (a), a peace officer may exercise his or her discretion as to whether or not to operate a body-worn camera when interacting with a confidential informant.
(c)This section does not require a peace officer, in a public venue, to cease recording an event, situation, or circumstance solely at the demand of a citizen.
SEC. 5.Section 830.18 is added to the Penal Code, to read:830.18.Any use of body-worn cameras by a peace officer not otherwise prescribed by Sections 830.16 and 830.17, or any other law, is subject to bargaining pursuant to the Meyers-Milias-Brown Act (Chapter 10 (commencing with Section 3500) of Division 4 of Title 1 of the Government Code)), and to the Ralph C. Dills Act (Chapter 10.3 (commencing with Section 3512) of Division 4 of Title 1 of the Government Code.
SEC. 6.Section 830.19 is added to the Penal Code, to read:830.19.A law-enforcement agency that requires a body-worn camera to be used by a peace officer that the agency employs may consider the following model policies when adopting a body-worn camera policy:
(a)A policy that authorizes a peace officer equipped with a body-worn camera to activate the camera when responding to calls for assistance and when performing law-enforcement activities in the field, including, but not limited to, traffic or pedestrian stops, pursuits, arrests, searches, seizures, interrogations, and any other investigative or enforcement encounters in the field.
(b)A policy that authorizes a peace officer to ensure that a body-worn camera is fully functional prior to going into the field in a way that protects a persons reasonable expectation of privacy, including, but not limited to, authorizing the officer to ensure that the camera can be turned on and off and record video and audio, and that the camera is properly charged.
(c)A policy regarding where a peace officer is authorized to position the body-worn camera to facilitate optimum recording field of view, including, but not limited to, on his or her chest, head, shoulder, collar, or any area above the mid-torso of his or her uniform.
(d)A policy regarding which video and audio recording functions of a body-worn camera a peace officer is authorized to activate when an officer is responding to a call for service or at the initiation of any other law-enforcement or investigative encounter between a police officer and a member of the public. The policy may also address whether, during an encounter with a member of the public, the officer is required to notify the member of the public that the body-worn camera is recording, and whether the peace officer is prohibited from deactivating the body-worn camera until the conclusion of the encounter.
(e)A policy that authorizes a peace officer to stop recording if an arrestee is secured inside a fixed place of detention, as defined in paragraph (3) of subdivision (g) of Section 859.5.
(f)A policy that, subject to the restrictions described in subdivision (c) of Section 830.16 and subdivision (b) of Section 830.17, authorizes a peace officer to record any interview of a suspect or witness in its entirety.
(g)A policy that requires a peace officer, when recording interviews of a suspect, to, where applicable, inform the suspect of his or her rights under Miranda v. Arizona (1966) 384 U.S. 436.
(h)A policy that prohibits a peace officer from removing, dismantling, or tampering with any hardware or software components or parts of a body-worn camera.
(i)A policy that authorizes, when safe and practical, an on-scene supervisor to retrieve a body-worn camera from a peace officer, including but not limited to, authorizing the supervisor to be responsible for ensuring the camera data is uploaded into the desired data processing and collection method.
SEC. 7.The Legislature finds and declares that Section 2 of this act, which adds Section 6254.31 to the Government Code, imposes a limitation on the publics right of access to the writings of public officials and agencies within the meaning of Section 3 of Article I of the California Constitution. Pursuant to that constitutional provision, the Legislature makes the following findings to demonstrate the interest protected by this limitation and the need for protecting that interest:
The need to protect the privacy of victims of serious crimes, the privacy of individuals in their homes, and the identity of confidential police informants and undercover peace officers from the public disclosure of images captured through the use of a body-worn camera outweighs the interest in public disclosure of that information.
SEC. 8.The Legislature finds and declares that Section 2 of this act, which adds Section 6254.31 to the Government Code, furthers, within the meaning of paragraph (7) of subdivision (b) of Section 3 of Article I of the California Constitution, the purposes of that constitutional section as it relates to the right of public access to the writings of local public officials and local agencies. Pursuant to paragraph (7) of subdivision (b) of Section 3 of Article I of the California Constitution, the Legislature makes the following findings:
Because body-worn cameras used by peace officers may capture sensitive information that could compromise important police work in addition to information that is highly valuable to the public, requiring local agencies to disclose certain records created through the use of a body-worn camera and maintain the confidentiality of other body-worn camera records furthers the purpose of Section 3 of Article I of the California Constitution.
SEC. 9.No reimbursement is required by this act pursuant to Section 6 of Article XIII B of the California Constitution because the only costs that may be incurred by a local agency or school district under this act would result from a legislative mandate that is within the scope of paragraph (7) of subdivision (b) of Section 3 of Article I of the California Constitution.
The Legislature finds and declares:
(a)Twenty-first century policing demands more transparency in everyday interactions with the public. In light of a number of high profile use of force incidents involving law enforcement, body-worn cameras are seen as an important means toward achieving this goal.
(b)Several law enforcement agencies in California are already implementing body-worn camera programs. Because of the potential of this technology to document law enforcement interactions, we must be cognizant in protecting citizen privacy and not violate civil liberties.
(c)The development of best practices will be necessary to ensure the publics trust in law enforcement. The use of the portable video recording system provides documentary evidence for criminal investigations, internal or administrative investigations, and civil litigation.
(d)The Legislature intends for officers to utilize body-worn cameras in accordance with the provisions in this act to maximize the effectiveness of the audio and video documentation to achieve operational objectives and to ensure evidence integrity.
SEC. 2.Section 830.16 is added to the Penal Code, to read:830.16.(a)A law enforcement agency that requires a body-worn camera to be used by a peace officer that the agency employs shall comply with the following requirements:
(1)A law enforcement agency shall conspicuously post its policies and procedures regarding body-worn cameras on its Internet Web site.
(2)A peace officer shall only use the body-worn camera systems issued and approved by the law enforcement agency that employs him or her for official police duties.
(3)A peace officer shall not make copies of any body-worn camera files for his or her personal use or use a recording device such as a telephone camera or secondary video camera to record a body-worn camera file.
(4)A peace officer shall not operate a body-worn camera under any of the following circumstances:
(A)In a health facility or medical office when patients may be in view of the body-worn camera or when a health care practitioner is providing care to an individual.
(B)During an ambulance response to an accident or illness where the victim is not involved in any criminal activity.
(C)Situations where recording would risk the safety of a confidential informant or undercover peace officer.
(5)Operation of a body-worn camera shall begin with the officer providing on-camera notice to a person being recorded that a body-worn camera is recording video, and provide the person with the option to request that the body-worn camera be turned off under both of the following circumstances:
(A)When the subject of the video is a victim of rape, incest, domestic violence, or other forms of domestic or sexual harm.
(B)When an officer is at a private residence without a warrant and in a nonemergency situation.
(6)Where (A)When a peace officer is involved in an incident involving use of force or an incident resulting in injury or death, a serious use of force, a peace officer may only review his or her body-worn camera video only after making his or her initial statement and report in an administrative or criminal inquiry or investigation. Once report.
(B)(i)Once a peace officers initial report has been submitted and approved and the officer has been interviewed by the appropriate investigator, the investigator shall approved, a supervisor may show the peace officer the body-worn camera video. The peace officer may be given the opportunity to provide additional information to supplement his or her statement and may be asked additional questions by the investigators. statement. If the review results in a modified report, both of the reports shall be provided to all parties to a civil, criminal, or administrative investigation. The fact that a modified or secondary report was prepared shall not be the sole basis for placing an officer on a Brady List.
(ii)For the purposes of this subparagraph, Brady List means any system, index, list, or other record containing the names of peace officers whose personnel files are likely to contain evidence of dishonesty or bias, which is maintained by a prosecutorial agency or office in accordance with the holding in Brady v. Maryland (1963) 373 U.S. 83.
(C)For the purpose of subparagraph (A), serious use of force means any of the following:
(i)Force resulting in death.
(ii)Force resulting in a loss of consciousness.
(iii)Force resulting in protracted loss, impairment, serious disfigurement, or function of any body part or organ.
(iv)Weapon strike to the head.
(v)Intentional firearm discharge at a person, regardless of injury.
(vi)Unintentional firearm discharge if a person is injured as a result of the discharge.
(b)In addition to subdivision (a), a law enforcement agency shall consider the following guidelines when adopting a body-worn camera policy:
(1)A peace officer equipped with a body-worn camera shall activate the camera when responding to calls for assistance and when performing law enforcement activities in the field, including, but not limited to, traffic or pedestrian stops, pursuits, arrests, searches, seizures, interrogations, and any other investigative or enforcement encounters in the field.
(2)A peace officer shall ensure that a body-worn camera is fully functional, including, but not limited to, ensuring that the camera can be turned on and off and record video and audio, and that the camera is properly charged, prior to going into the field. A peace officer shall not violate a persons reasonable expectation of privacy when ensuring that a body-worn camera is fully functional pursuant to this paragraph.
(3)A peace officer wearing a body-worn camera shall position the camera on his or her chest, head, shoulder, collar, or any area above the mid-torso of his or her uniform to facilitate optimum recording field of view.
(4)Both video and audio recording functions of a body-worn camera shall be activated when an officer is responding to a call for service or at the initiation of any other law enforcement or investigative encounter between a police officer and a member of the public. During an encounter with a member of the public, the officer shall notify the member of the public that the body-worn camera is recording, and shall not deactivate the body-worn camera until the conclusion of the encounter.
(5)A peace officer may stop recording when an arrestee is secured inside a fixed place of detention, as defined in paragraph (3) of subdivision (g) of Section 859.5.
(6)A peace officer shall record any interview of a suspect or witness in its entirety, unless paragraphs (4) and (5) of subdivision (a) apply.
(7)When recording interviews of a suspect or witness, suspect, a peace officer shall, where applicable, inform the suspect or witness of his or her rights under Miranda v. Arizona (1966) 384 U.S. 436.
(8)In the event of contradicting requests made by a homeowner, occupant, or renter to stop recording the encounter, the contradicting requests shall be recorded on video and the peace officer shall continue to operate and record the encounter.
(9)A peace officer shall not remove, dismantle, or tamper with any hardware or software components or parts of a body-worn camera.
(10)A peace officer shall not use body-worn camera functions, when there is no investigatory interaction with a member of the public, to record any personal conversation of or with another agency member or employee without the permission of the recorded member or employee.
(11)A peace officer shall not use a body-worn camera to record non-work-related activity or to record in places where a reasonable expectation of privacy exists.
(12)A peace officer shall not allow a computerized facial recognition program or application to be used with a body-worn camera or a recording made by a body-worn camera unless the use has been authorized by a warrant issued by a court.
(13)When safe and practical, an on-scene supervisor may retrieve a body-worn camera from an officer. The supervisor shall be responsible for ensuring the camera data is uploaded into the desired data processing and collection method.
(c)This section does not require a peace officer, in a public venue, to cease recording an event, situation, or circumstance solely at the demand of a citizen.
(d)(1)Any request from within a law enforcement agency for recordings from a body-worn camera from that agency shall be completed by the system administrator with the approval of the head of the agency.
(2)All other requests for recordings from a body-worn camera shall be processed in accordance with the California Public Records Act (Chapter 3.5 (commencing with Section 6250) of Division 7 of Title 1 of the Government Code).
(e)Any use of body-worn cameras by a peace officer not otherwise prescribed by this section or any other law is subject to bargaining pursuant to the Myers-Milias-Brown Act (Chapter 10 (commencing with Section 3500) of Division 4 of Title 1 of the Government Code).
The Legislature finds and declares:
(a)Twenty-first century policing demands more transparency in everyday interactions with the public. In light of a number of high profile use of force incidents involving law enforcement, body-worn cameras are seen as an important means toward achieving this goal.
(b)Several law enforcement agencies in California are already implementing body-worn camera programs. Because of the potential of this technology to document law enforcement interactions, we must be cognizant in protecting citizen privacy and not violate civil liberties.
(c)The development of best practices will be necessary to ensure the publics trust in law enforcement. The use of the portable video recording system provides documentary evidence for criminal investigations, internal or administrative investigations, and civil litigation.
(d)The Legislature intends for officers to utilize body-worn cameras in accordance with the provisions in this act to maximize the effectiveness of the audio and video documentation to achieve operational objectives and to ensure evidence integrity.
SEC. 2.Section 830.16 is added to the Penal Code, to read:830.16.(a)A law enforcement agency that requires a body-worn camera to be used by a peace officer that the agency employs shall comply with the requirements of this section. following requirements:
(1)A law enforcement agency shall conspicuously post its policies and procedures regarding body-worn cameras on its Internet Web site.
(2)A peace officer shall only use the body-worn camera systems issued and approved by the law enforcement agency that employs him or her for official police duties.
(3)A peace officer shall not make copies of any body-worn camera files for his or her personal use or use a recording device such as a telephone camera or secondary video camera to record a body-worn camera file.
(4)A peace officer shall not operate a body-worn camera under any of the following circumstances:
(A)In a health facility or medical office when patients may be in view of the body-worn camera or when a health care practitioner is providing care to an individual.
(B)During an ambulance response to an accident or illness where the victim is not involved in any criminal activity.
(C)Situations where recording would risk the safety of a confidential informant or undercover peace officer.
(5)Operation of a body-worn camera shall begin with the officer providing on-camera notice to a person being recorded that a body-worn camera is recording video, and provide the person with the option to request that the body-worn camera be turned off under both of the following circumstances:
(A)When the subject of the video is a victim of rape, incest, domestic violence, or other forms of domestic or sexual harm.
(B)When an officer is at a private residence without a warrant and in a nonemergency situation.
(6)Where a peace officer is involved in an incident involving use of force or an incident resulting in injury or death, a peace officer may only review his or her body-worn camera video only after making his or her initial statement and report in an administrative or criminal inquiry or investigation. Once a peace officers initial report has been submitted and approved and the officer has been interviewed by the appropriate investigator, the investigator shall show the officer the body-worn camera video. The peace officer may be given the opportunity to provide additional information to supplement his or her statement and may be asked additional questions by the investigators. If the review results in a modified report, both of the reports shall be provided to all parties to a civil, criminal, or administrative investigation.
(b)In addition to subdivision (a), a law enforcement agency shall consider the following guidelines when adopting a body-worn camera policy:
(b)(1)A
(1)A peace officer equipped with a body-worn camera shall activate the camera when responding to calls for assistance and when performing law enforcement activities in the field, including, but not limited to, traffic or pedestrian stops, pursuits, arrests, searches, seizures, interrogations, and any other investigative or enforcement encounters in the field.
(2)A peace officer shall ensure that a body-worn camera is fully functional, including, but not limited to, ensuring that the camera can be turned on and off and record video and audio, and that the camera is properly charged, prior to going into the field. A peace officer shall not violate a persons reasonable expectation of privacy when ensuring that a body-worn camera is fully functional pursuant to this paragraph.
(3)A peace officer wearing a body-worn camera shall position the camera on his or her chest, head, shoulder, collar, or any area above the mid-torso of his or her uniform to facilitate optimum recording field of view.
(c)(1)
(4)Both video and audio recording functions of a body-worn camera shall be activated when an officer is responding to a call for service or at the initiation of any other law enforcement or investigative encounter between a police officer and a member of the public. During an encounter with a member of the public, the officer shall notify the member of the public that the body-worn camera is recording, and shall not deactivate the body-worn camera until the conclusion of the encounter.
(2)An
(5)A peace officer may stop recording when an arrestee is secured inside a fixed place of detention, as defined in paragraph (3) of subdivision (g) of Section 859.5.
(3)The following shall apply during any interview of a suspect or witness:
(A)
(6)A peace officer shall record any interview of a suspect or witness in its entirety, unless subdivision (d) applies. paragraphs (4) and (5) of subdivision (a) apply.
(B)
(7)When recording interviews of a suspect or witness, a peace officer shall, where applicable, inform the suspect or witness of his or her rights under Miranda v. Arizona (1966) 384 U.S. 436.
(d)(1)A peace officer shall not operate a body-worn camera under the following circumstances:
(A)In a hospital emergency room, when it would violate the expectation of privacy of a patient.
(B)During an ambulance response to an accident or illness where the victim is not involved in any criminal activity.
(C)Situations where recording would risk the safety of a confidential informant or undercover peace officer.
(2)Operation of a body-worn camera shall begin with the officer providing on camera notice to a person being recorded that a body-worn camera is recording video, and provide the person with the option to request that the body-worn camera be turned off under the following circumstances:
(A)When the subject of the recording is a victim of rape, incest, domestic violence, and other forms of domestic or sexual harm.
(B)When an officer is at a private residence without a warrant and in a nonemergency situation.
(3)
(8)In the event of contradicting requests made by a homeowner, occupant, or renter, renter to stop recording the encounter, the contradicting requests shall be recorded on video and the peace officer shall continue to operate and record the encounter.
(e)(1)A peace officer shall only use the body-worn camera systems issued and approved by the law enforcement agency that employs him or her for official police duties.
(2)A peace officer shall not make copies of any body-worn camera file for his or her personal use or use a recording device such as a phone camera or secondary video camera to record a body-worn camera file.
(3)
(9)A Peace peace officer shall not remove, dismantle, or tamper with any hardware or software components or parts of a body-worn camera.
(4)
(10)A peace officer shall not use body-worn camera functions, when there is no investigatory interaction with a member of the public, to record any personal conversation of or with another agency member or employee without the permission of the recorded member or employee.
(f)(1)
(11)A peace officer shall not use a body-worn camera to record non-work related non-work-related activity or to record in places where a reasonable expectation of privacy exists.
(2)
(12)A law enforcement agency or law enforcement peace officer shall not allow a computerized facial recognition program or application to be used with a body-worn camera or a recording made by a body-worn camera unless the use has been authorized by a warrant issued by a court.
(13)When safe and practical, an on-scene supervisor may retrieve a body-worn camera from an officer. The supervisor shall be responsible for ensuring the camera data is uploaded into the desired data processing and collection method.
(3)
(c)This section does not require a peace officer, in a public venue, to cease recording an event, situation, or circumstance solely at the demand of a citizen.
(g)Each law enforcement agency, subject to the requirements of this section, shall conspicuously post its polices and procedures regarding body-worn cameras on its Internet Web site.
(h)(1)A peace officer may review his or her body-worn camera video only after making his or her initial statement and report in an administrative or criminal inquiry or investigation.
(2)When safe and practical, an on-scene supervisor may retrieve a body-worn camera from an officer. The supervisor shall be responsible for ensuring that the camera data is uploaded into the desired data processing and collection method.
(i)
(d)(1)Any request from within a law enforcement agency for recordings from a body-worn camera from that agency shall be completed by the system administrator with the approval of the head of the agency.
(2)All other requests for recordings from a body-worn camera shall be processed in accordance with the California Public Records Act (Chapter 3.5 (commencing with Section 6250) of Division 7 of Title 1 of the Government Code).
The Legislature finds and declares:
(a)Twenty-first century policing demands more transparency in everyday interactions with the public. In light of a number of high profile use of force incidents involving law enforcement, body-worn cameras are seen as an important means toward achieving this goal.
(b)Several law enforcement agencies in California are already implementing body-worn camera programs. Because of the potential of this technology to document law enforcement interactions, we must be cognizant in protecting citizen privacy and not violate civil liberties.
(c)The development of statewide guidelines and compilation of best practices will be necessary to ensure the publics trust in law enforcement. The use of the portable video recording system provides documentary evidence for criminal investigations, internal or administrative investigations, and civil litigation.
(d)The Legislature intends for officers to utilize body-worn cameras in accordance with the provisions in this act to maximize the effectiveness of the audio and video documentation to achieve operational objectives and to ensure evidence integrity.
SEC. 2.Section 830.105 830.16 is added to the Penal Code, immediately following Section 830.10, to read:830.105.830.16.(a)If a A law enforcement agency that requires a body-worn camera to be worn used by a peace officer that the agency employs, the agency employs shall comply with the requirements of this section.
(b)(1)A peace officer equipped with a body-worn camera shall activate the camera when responding to calls for assistance and when performing law enforcement activities in the field, including, but not limited to, traffic or pedestrian stops, pursuits, arrests, searches, seizures, interrogations, and any other investigative or enforcement encounters in the field.
(2)Peace officers A peace officer shall test ensure that a body-worn cameras camera is fully functional, including, but not limited to, ensuring that the camera can be turned on and off and record video and audio, and that the camera is properly charged, prior to going in to field activities and ensure the unit is properly charged. into the field. A peace officer shall not violate a persons reasonable expectation of privacy when ensuring that a body-worn camera is fully functional pursuant to this paragraph.
(3)Peace officers A peace officer wearing a body-worn camera shall position the camera on their his or her chest, head, shoulder, collar, or any area above the mid-torso of his or her uniform to facilitate optimum recording field of view.
(c)(1)Both video and audio recording functions of a body-worn cameras camera shall be activated when an officer is responding to a call for service or at the initiation of any other law enforcement or investigative encounter between a police officer and a member of the public. During encounters an encounter with a member of the public, the officer shall notify the member of the public that the body-worn camera is recording, and shall not deactivate the body-worn camera shall not be deactivated until the conclusion of the encounter.
(2)Officers An officer may stop recording when an arrestee is secured inside a fixed place of detention, as defined in paragraph (3) of subdivision (g) of Section 859.5.
(3)The following shall apply during any interview of a suspect or witness:
(A)Peace officers A peace officer shall record any interview of a suspect or witness in its entirety, unless subdivision (d) applies.
(B)When recording interviews of a suspect or witness, peace officers a peace officer shall, prior to the interview, record any notification of rights, including, but not limited to, where applicable, inform the suspect or witness of his or her rights under Miranda v. Arizona (1966) 384 U.S. 436.
(d)(1)A peace officer shall not operate a body-worn camera under the following circumstances:
(A)In a hospital emergency room, when it would violate the expectation of privacy of patients. a patient.
(B)During an ambulance response to an accident or illness where victims are the victim is not involved in any criminal activity.
(C)Situations where recording would risk the safety of a confidential informant or undercover peace officer.
(D)During protests or demonstrations.
(2)Under the following circumstances, operation Operation of a body-worn camera shall begin with the officer providing on camera notice to persons a person being recorded that a body-worn camera is recording video, and provide the persons person with the option to request that the body-worn camera be turned off: off under the following circumstances:
(A)When the subject of the recording is a victim of rape, incest, domestic violence, and other forms of domestic or sexual harm.
(B)(i)When an officer is at a private residence without a warrant and in a nonemergency situation.
(ii)
(3)In the event of contradicting requests made by a homeowner homeowner, occupant, or renter, the contradicting requests shall be recorded on video and the peace officer shall continue to operate and record the encounter.
(e)(1)Peace A peace officer shall only use the body-worn camera systems issued and approved by the law enforcement agency that employs him or her for official police duties.
(2)Unauthorized use, duplication, or distribution of body-worn camera files are prohibited. Peace officers A peace officer shall not make copies of any body-worn camera file for their his or her personal use and are prohibited from using or use a recording device such as a phone camera or secondary video camera to record a body-worn camera files. file.
(3)All recorded media, images, and audio from body-worn cameras are property of their respective law enforcement agency, and shall not be copied, released, or disseminated in any form or manner outside the parameters of this section without the written consent of the head of the agency, unless otherwise authorized by law.
(4)Peace officers
(3)A Peace officer shall not remove, dismantle, or tamper with any hardware or software components or parts of body worn-cameras. a body-worn camera.
(5)Peace officers
(4)A peace officer shall not use body-worn camera functions, when there is no investigatory interaction with a member of the public, to record any personal conversation of or with another agency member or employee without the permission of the recorded member or employee.
(f)(1)Peace officers A peace officer shall not use a body-worn cameras camera to record non-work related activity or to record in places where a reasonable expectation of privacy exists.
(2)A law enforcement agency or law enforcement officer shall not allow a computerized facial recognition program or application to be used with a body-worn camera or a recording made by a body-worn camera unless the use has been authorized by a warrant issued by a court.
(3)Nothing in this section shall This section does not require a peace officer, in a public venue, to cease recording an event, situation, or circumstance solely at the demand of the a citizen.
(g)(1)Unless paragraph (2) or (3) applies, a law enforcement agency shall retain video and audio recorded by a body-worn camera for a minimum of one year, after which it will be erased, destroyed, or recycled pursuant to Section 34090.6 of the Government Code.
(2)A law enforcement agency shall retain video and audio recorded by a body-worn camera under this section for 3 years under any of the following situations:
(A)The recording is of an incident involving the use of force by a peace officer.
(B)The recording is of an incident that leads to the detention or arrest of an individual.
(C)The recording is relevant to a formal or informal complaint against a law enforcement officer or a law enforcement agency.
(3)If evidence that may be relevant to a criminal prosecution is obtained from a recording made by a body-worn camera under this section, the law enforcement agency shall retain the recording for any time in addition to that specified in paragraphs (1) and (2), and in the same manner as is required by law for other evidence that may be relevant to a criminal prosecution.
(h)
(g)Each law enforcement agency agency, subject to the requirements of this section, shall conspicuously post its polices and procedures regarding body-worn cameras on its Internet Web site.
(i)
(h)(1)Peace officers A peace officer may only review their his or her body-worn camera video only after making their his or her initial statement and report in an administrative or criminal inquiry or investigation.
(2)When safe and practical, an on-scene supervisor may retrieve a body-worn camera from an officer. The supervisor shall be responsible for assuring ensuring that the camera date data is uploaded into the desired data processing and collection method.
(j)
(i)(1)Any request from within a law enforcement agency for recordings from a body-worn camera from that agency shall be completed by the system administrator with the approval of the head of the agency.
(2)All other requests for recordings from a body-worn camera shall be processed in accordance with the California Public Records Act (Chapter 3.5 (commencing with Section 6250) of Division 7 of Title 1 of the Government Code).
The Legislature finds and declares:
(a)Twenty-first century policing demands more transparency in everyday interactions with the public. In light of a number of high profile use of force incidents involving law enforcement, body-worn cameras are seen as an important means toward achieving this goal.
(b)Several law enforcement agencies in California are already implementing body-worn camera programs. Because of the potential of this technology to document law enforcement interactions, we must be cognizant in protecting citizen privacy and not violate civil liberties.
(c)The development of statewide guidelines and compilation of best practices will be necessary to ensure the publics trust in law enforcement. The use of the portable video recording system provides documentary evidence for criminal investigations, internal or administrative investigations, and civil litigation.
(d)The Legislature intends for officers to utilize body-worn cameras in accordance with the provisions in this act to maximize the effectiveness of the audio and video documentation to achieve operational objectives and to ensure evidence integrity.
SEC. 2.Section 830.105 is added to the Penal Code, immediately following Section 830.10, to read:830.105.(a)If a law enforcement agency requires a body-worn camera to be worn by a peace officer that the agency employs, the agency shall comply with the requirements of this section.
(b)(1)A peace officer equipped with a body-worn camera shall activate the camera when responding to calls for assistance and when performing law enforcement activities in the field, including, but not limited to, traffic or pedestrian stops, pursuits, arrests, searches, seizures, interrogations, and any other investigative or enforcement encounters in the field.
(2)Peace officers shall test body-worn cameras prior to going in to field activities and ensure the unit is properly charged.
(3)Peace officers wearing a body-worn camera shall position the camera on their uniform to facilitate optimum recording field of view.
(c)(1)Both video and audio recording functions of body-worn cameras shall be activated when an officer is responding to a call for service or at the initiation of any other law enforcement or investigative encounter between a police officer and a member of the public. During encounters with a member of the public, the body-worn camera shall not be deactivated until the conclusion of the encounter.
(2)Officers may stop recording when an arrestee is secured inside a fixed place of detention, as defined in paragraph (3) of subdivision (g) of Section 859.5.
(3)The following shall apply during any interview of a suspect or witness:
(A)Peace officers shall record any interview of a suspect or witness in its entirety, unless subdivision (d) applies.
(B)When recording interviews of a suspect or witness, peace officers shall, prior to the interview, record any notification of rights, including, but not limited to, rights under Miranda v. Arizona (1966) 384 U.S. 436.
(d)(1)A peace officer shall not operate a body-worn camera under the following circumstances:
(A)In a hospital emergency room, when it would violate the expectation of privacy of patients.
(B)During an ambulance response to an accident or illness where victims are not involved in any criminal activity.
(C)Situations where recording would risk the safety of a confidential informant or undercover peace officer.
(D)During protests or demonstrations.
(2)Under the following circumstances, operation of a body-worn camera shall begin with the officer providing on camera notice to persons recorded that a body-worn camera is recording video, and provide the persons with the option to request that the body-worn camera be turned off:
(A)When the subject of the recording is a victim of rape, incest, domestic violence, and other forms of domestic or sexual harm.
(B)(i)When an officer is at a private residence without a warrant and in a nonemergency situation.
(ii)In the event of contradicting requests made by a homeowner or renter, the contradicting requests shall be recorded on video and the peace officer shall continue to operate and record the encounter.
(e)(1)Peace officer shall only use the body-worn camera systems issued and approved by the law enforcement agency that employs him or her for official police duties.
(2)Unauthorized use, duplication, or distribution of body-worn camera files are prohibited. Peace officers shall not make copies of any body-worn camera file for their personal use and are prohibited from using a recording device such as a phone camera or secondary video camera to record body-worn camera files.
(3)All recorded media, images, and audio from body-worn cameras are property of their respective law enforcement agency, and shall not be copied, released, or disseminated in any form or manner outside the parameters of this section without the written consent of the head of the agency, unless otherwise authorized by law.
(4)Peace officers shall not remove, dismantle, or tamper with any hardware or software components or parts of body worn-cameras.
(5)Peace officers shall not use body-worn camera functions, when there is no investigatory interaction with a member of the public, to record any personal conversation of or with another agency member or employee without the permission of the recorded member or employee.
(f)(1)Peace officers shall not use body-worn cameras to record non-work related activity or to record in places where a reasonable expectation of privacy exists.
(2)A law enforcement agency or law enforcement officer shall not allow a computerized facial recognition program or application to be used with a body-worn camera or a recording made by a body-worn camera unless the use has been authorized by a warrant issued by a court.
(3)Nothing in this section shall require a peace officer, in a public venue, to cease recording an event, situation, or circumstance solely at the demand of the citizen.
(g)(1)Unless paragraph (2) or (3) applies, a law enforcement agency shall retain video and audio recorded by a body-worn camera for a minimum of one year, after which it will be erased, destroyed, or recycled pursuant to Section 34090.6 of the Government Code.
(2)A law enforcement agency shall retain video and audio recorded by a body-worn camera under this section for 3 years under any of the following situations:
(A)The recording is of an incident involving the use of force by a peace officer.
(B)The recording is of an incident that leads to the detention or arrest of an individual.
(C)The recording is relevant to a formal or informal complaint against a law enforcement officer or a law enforcement agency.
(3)If evidence that may be relevant to a criminal prosecution is obtained from a recording made by a body-worn camera under this section, the law enforcement agency shall retain the recording for any time in addition to that specified in paragraphs (1) and (2), and in the same manner as is required by law for other evidence that may be relevant to a criminal prosecution.
(h)Each law enforcement agency shall conspicuously post its polices and procedures regarding body-worn cameras on its Internet Web site.
(i)(1)Peace officers may only review their body-worn camera video after making their initial statement and report in an administrative or criminal inquiry or investigation.
(2)When safe and practical, an on-scene supervisor may retrieve a body-worn camera from an officer. The supervisor shall be responsible for assuring the camera date is uploaded into the desired data processing and collection method.
(j)(1)Any request from within a law enforcement agency for recordings from a body-worn camera from that agency shall be completed by the system administrator with the approval of the head of the agency.
(2)All other requests shall be processed in accordance with the California Public Records Act (Chapter 3.5 (commencing with Section 6250) of Division 7 of Title 1 of the Government Code).
SECTION 1.(a)It is the intent of the Legislature to enact legislation to require local police departments that utilize police body-worn cameras to follow policies and procedures that will streamline best practices to better enhance the quality of the services that those departments provide to Californians.
(b)It is further the intent of the legislature to enact legislation to create a task force to study the effectiveness of body-worn cameras for peace officers, and for this task force to create a comprehensive policy and best practices manual to be used by state and local law enforcement agencies. It is further the intent of the legislature to enact legislation that best fits the recommendations of this task force.
(a)It is the intent of the Legislature to enact legislation to require local police departments that utilize police body-worn cameras to follow policies and procedures that will streamline best practices to better enhance the quality of the services that those departments provide to Californians.
(b)It is further the intent of the legislature to enact legislation to create a task force to study the effectiveness of body-worn cameras for peace officers, and for this task force to create a comprehensive policy and best practices manual to be used by state and local law enforcement agencies. It is further the intent of the legislature to enact legislation that best fits the recommendations of this task force.
|
Date
|
Status
|
|---|---|
| Apr 20, 2015 | Read second time and amended. |
| Feb 1, 2016 | From committee: Filed with the Chief Clerk pursuant to Joint Rule 56. |
| Jan 31, 2016 | Died pursuant to Article IV, Sec. 10(c) of the Constitution. |
| May 7, 2015 | Re-referred to Com. on APPR. |
| May 6, 2015 | Read second time and amended. |
| May 5, 2015 | From committee: Amend, and do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 6. Noes 0.) (April 30). |
| Apr 28, 2015 | Re-referred to Com. on P. & C.P. |
| Apr 27, 2015 | From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to Com. on P. & C.P. Read second time and amended. |
| Apr 21, 2015 | Re-referred to Com. on P. & C.P. |
| Dec 17, 2014 | Introduced. To print. |
| Apr 16, 2015 | From committee: Amend, and do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on P. & C.P. (Ayes 5. Noes 1.) (April 14). |
| Apr 13, 2015 | Re-referred to Com. on PUB. S. |
| Apr 9, 2015 | From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to Com. on PUB. S. Read second time and amended. |
| Apr 6, 2015 | Re-referred to Com. on PUB. S. |
| Mar 26, 2015 | Referred to Coms. on PUB. S. and P. & C.P. |
| Mar 26, 2015 | From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to Com. on PUB. S. Read second time and amended. |
| Jan 5, 2015 | Read first time. |
| Dec 18, 2014 | From printer. May be heard in committee January 17. |
|
Date
|
Description
|
Location
|
Votes
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 30, 2015 | Do pass as amended and be re-referred to the Committee on [Appropriations] | Assembly Standing Committee on Privacy and Consumer Protection |
Passed |
|
| Apr 14, 2015 | Do pass as amended and be re-referred to the Committee on [Privacy and Consumer Protection] | Assembly Standing Committee on Public Safety |
Passed |
This list shows positions taken on this bill by organizations on the date displayed, which is linked to the original source.
Positions by individuals are not included.
|
Organization
|
Position
|
Date
|
|---|---|---|
| 15 version) | ** Support | Apr 30, 2015 |
| 15 version) | ** Against | Apr 30, 2015 |
| A New PATH | ** Support | Apr 30, 2015 |
| ACLU of California | * Support | Apr 30, 2015 |
| AFSCME Local 685 | * Against | Apr 30, 2015 |
| AFSCME, Local 685(4 | * Against | Apr 30, 2015 |
| American Civil Liberties Union (4 | * Support | Apr 30, 2015 |
| American Civil Liberties Union of California | * Support | Apr 30, 2015 |
| Association For Los Angeles Deputy Sheriffs | * Against | Apr 30, 2015 |
| Association for Los Angeles Deputy Sheriffs (4 | * Against | Apr 30, 2015 |
| California Association Of Highway Patrolmen | ** Against | Apr 30, 2015 |
| California College And University Police Chiefs Association | * Against | Apr 30, 2015 |
| California Narcotic Officers' Association | ** Against | Apr 30, 2015 |
| California Police Chiefs Association | * Indeterminate | Apr 30, 2015 |
| California Public Defenders Association | ** Support | Apr 30, 2015 |
| California State Lodge, Fraternal Order of Police | ** Against | Apr 30, 2015 |
| California State Sheriffs' Association | ** Against | Apr 30, 2015 |
| California State Sheriffs' Association (4 | ** Against | Apr 30, 2015 |
| Chief Probation Officers Of California | ** Against | Apr 30, 2015 |
| Drug Policy Alliance Network | * Support | Apr 30, 2015 |
| Employee Rights Center | ** Support | Apr 30, 2015 |
| FACTS Education Fund & Fair Chance Project | ** Support | Apr 30, 2015 |
| Fraternal Order of Police, California State Lodge | ** Against | Apr 30, 2015 |
| Lodi Police Department | * Against | Apr 30, 2015 |
| Long Beach Police Officers Association | ** Against | Apr 30, 2015 |
| Los Angeles County Probation Officers Union | ** Against | Apr 30, 2015 |
| Los Angeles County Professional Peace Officers Association | ** Against | Apr 30, 2015 |
| Los Angeles Police Protective League | * Against | Apr 30, 2015 |
| NAACP Sacramento Branch | * Support | Apr 30, 2015 |
| Oxnard Police Department | * Against | Apr 30, 2015 |
| Peace Officers Research Association Of California | * Against | Apr 30, 2015 |
| Peace Officers Research Association Of California | * Indeterminate | Apr 30, 2015 |
| PICO California | * Support | Apr 30, 2015 |
| Pleasanton Police Department | * Against | Apr 30, 2015 |
| Read & Associates, Aaron | * Against | Apr 30, 2015 |
| Riverside Sheriffs' Association | * Against | Apr 30, 2015 |
| Sacramento County Deputy Sheriffs' Association | ** Against | Apr 30, 2015 |
| San Diego Organizing Project | ** Support | Apr 30, 2015 |
| Santa Ana Police Officer Association | ** Against | Apr 30, 2015 |
| Sonoma State University | * Support | Apr 30, 2015 |
| Union City Police Department | * Against | Apr 30, 2015 |
| Urban League of San Diego County (4 | ** Support | Apr 30, 2015 |
| Vacaville Police Department | * Against | Apr 30, 2015 |
AB 66
Page 8
Date of Hearing: April 30, 2015
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON PRIVACY AND CONSUMER PROTECTION
Mike Gatto, Chair
AB 66
(Weber) – As Amended April 27, 2015
SUBJECT: Peace officers: body-worn cameras
SUMMARY: Establishes mandatory requirements and recommended guidelines for the use of body-worn cameras by peace officers and the handling of the resulting video and audio data. Specifically, this bill:
Requires a law enforcement agency that requires body-worn cameras to be used by peace officers to comply with the requirements and prohibitions of this bill.
Requires a law enforcement agency to conspicuously post its policies and procedures regarding body-worn cameras on its website.
Requires a peace officer to only use the body-worn camera systems issued and approved by the law enforcement agency that employs him or her.
Prohibits a peace officer from making copies of any body-worn camera file for his or her personal use or use a recording device such as a phone camera or secondary video camera to record a body-worn camera file.
Prohibits a peace officer from operating a body-worn camera under the following circumstances:
In a health facility or medical office when patients may be in view of the body-worn camera or when a health care practitioner is providing care to an individual;
During an ambulance response to an accident or illness where the victim is not involved in any criminal activity; or,
Situations where recording would risk the safety of a confidential informant or undercover peace officer.
Requires that a peace officer begin the operation of a body-worn camera with the officer providing on camera notice to a person being recorded that a body-worn camera is recording video, and provide the person with the option to request that the body-worn camera be turned off under either of the following circumstances:
When the subject of the recording is a victim of rape, incest, domestic violence, and other forms of domestic or sexual harm; or,
When an officer is at a private residence without a warrant and in a nonemergency situation.
Clarifies that the provisions of this bill shall not be construed to require a peace officer in a public venue to cease recording an event, situation, or circumstance solely at the demand of a citizen.
Provides that, where a peace officer is involved in an incident involving a serious use of force, the peace officer may review his or her body-worn camera video only after making his or her initial statement. Once the initial report is submitted and approved, a supervisor may show the video to the peace officer, as specified.
Provides that the preparation or modification of secondary report shall not be the sole basis for placing a peace officer on a Brady List.
Defines the term "Brady List" to mean any system, index, list, or other record containing the names of peace officers whose personnel files are likely to contain evidence of dishonesty or bias, which is maintained by a prosecutorial agency or office in accordance with the holding in Brady v. Maryland (1963) 373 U.S. 83.
Defines the term "serious use of force" to mean any of the following: force resulting in death; force resulting in a loss of consciousness; force resulting in protracted loss, impairment, serious disfigurement, or function of any body part or organ; weapon strike to the head; intentional firearm discharge at a person, regardless of injury; or, unintentional firearm discharge if a person is injured as a result of the discharge.
Requires a law enforcement agency to consider the following guidelines when adopting a body-worn camera policy:
A peace officer shall activate a body-worn camera when responding to calls for assistance and when performing law enforcement activities in the field, as specified.
A peace officer shall ensure that a body-worn camera is fully functional and properly charged prior to going into the field, and shall not violate a person’s reasonable expectation of privacy when ensuring that a body-worn camera is fully functional.
A peace officer wearing a body-worn camera shall position the camera on his or her chest, head, shoulder, collar, or any area above the mid-torso of his or her uniform.
A peace officer shall activate both video and audio recording functions of a body-worn camera when responding to a call for service or at the initiation of any other law enforcement or investigative encounter between a police officer and a member of the public.
A peace officer may stop recording when an arrestee is secured inside a fixed place of detention.
A peace officer must record any interview of a suspect or witness in its entirety, unless a specified exemption applies.
A peace officer, when recording interviews of a suspect, must inform the suspect of his or her legal rights, as specified.
A peace officer shall, in the event of contradicting requests made by a homeowner, occupant, or renter to stop recording the encounter, record the contradicting requests on video and shall continue to operate and record the encounter.
A peace officer shall not remove, dismantle, or tamper with any hardware or software components or parts of a body-worn camera.
A peace officer shall not use body-worn camera functions when there is no investigatory interaction with a member of the public, to record any personal conversation of or with another agency member or employee without the permission of the recorded member or employee.
A peace officer shall not use a body-worn camera to record non-work-related activity or to record in places where a reasonable expectation of privacy exists.
A peace officer shall not allow a computerized facial recognition program or application to be used with a body-worn camera or a recording made by a body-worn camera unless the use has been authorized by a warrant issued by a court.
An on-scene supervisor may, when safe and practical, retrieve a body-worn camera from an officer, who shall then be responsible for ensuring that the camera data is uploaded.
Requires that any request from within a law enforcement agency for recordings from a body-worn camera from that agency shall be completed by the system administrator with the approval of the head of the agency.
Requires that all other requests for recordings from a body-worn camera, other than those explicitly provided for herein, shall be processed in accordance with the California Public Records Act (CPRA).
Provides that any use of body-worn cameras by a peace officer not otherwise prescribed by law is subject to bargaining pursuant to the Meyers-Milias-Brown Act, as specified.
Makes findings and declarations relative to the importance of utilizing best practices in the deployment and use of body cameras by law enforcement.
EXISTING LAW:
Makes it a crime to intentionally record a confidential communication without the consent of all parties to the communication. (Penal Code (PC) Section 632, subd. (a))
Exempts specified peace officers from that provision if they are acting within the scope of their authority. (PC 633)
Generally requires, pursuant to the CPRA, that public agencies disclose a government record to the public upon request, unless there is a specific reason to withhold it or if a public agency can establish that the public interest in nondisclosure clearly outweighs the public interest in disclosure. (Government Code Section 6250, et seq.)
FISCAL EFFECT: Unknown
COMMENTS:
Purpose of this bill. This bill is intended to provide a variety of mandatory requirements and recommended guidelines for law enforcement agencies that require body-worn cameras to be used by their peace officers. AB 66 is author-sponsored.
Author's statement. According to the author, "Uniformity among the departments throughout the state for policies and procedures as it relates to the body-worn camera technology is not existent. To ensure that California's unwavering commitment to fairness, civil rights, community policing, transparency, and justice is further realized, this bill seeks to adopt and standardize the best practices for use of police body-worn cameras in this state."
"A report by the U.S. Department of Justice […] found that roughly one-third of police departments nationwide that use body-worn cameras operate without any standard procedure or practice when operating their cameras. Currently, in California, the regions of Los Angeles, Oakland, San Diego, and San Leandro, among others, have developed best practices for the local utilization of peace officer body-worn cameras with more cities rapidly following suit. However, there are no uniform standardized practices and policies addressing the implementation of these body-camera programs."
"People travel frequently in California. For citizens who travel from city to city, town to town and not have an idea of what their basic rights are regarding officers equipped with BWC's [body-worn cameras], puts them in an unnecessary vulnerable place. As such, we must be committed to standardizing some basic common core BWC principles for Californians to know their rights when crossing into different law enforcement department jurisdictions."
The use of body-worn cameras in law enforcement. As a result of a string of well-publicized incidents involving the use of force by law enforcement officers against African-American men, beginning with the shooting of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri on August 9, 2014, a public debate has emerged over the use of body-worn cameras by peace officers. According to the National Conference of State Legislatures, there are no fewer than 30 states currently considering some form of legislation on the topic.
A body-worn camera is a small video camera – typically attached to an officer's clothing, helmet or sunglasses – that can capture, from an officer's point of view, video and audio recordings of activities, including traffic stops, arrests, searches, interrogations, and critical incidents such as officer-involved shootings.
There is substantial evidence to suggest that body-worn cameras can have positive effects on policing. A 2012 study of the Rialto, CA police department's use of body-worn cameras found that the devices were correlated with a 60% reduction in officer use of force incidents following camera deployment, with twice the number of use of force incidents reported among the group of officers without cameras. The report also found an 88% reduction in the number of citizens' complaints in the year after cameras were introduced. To explain the effect of body-worn cameras, the Rialto Chief of Police was quoted as saying, "Whether the reduced number of complaints was because of the officers behaving better or the citizens behaving better – well, it was probably a little bit of both."
According to a November 2014, report by the U.S. Department of Justice's Office of Community Oriented Policing Services and the Police Executive Research Forum (PERF), a broad survey of police departments that had deployed body-worn cameras has many benefits: "body-worn cameras are useful for documenting evidence; officer training; preventing and resolving complaints brought by members of the public; and strengthening police transparency, performance and accountability...body-worn cameras [also] help police departments ensure events are also captured from an officer's perspective." However, the report also notes that "[t]he use of body-worn cameras also raises important questions about privacy and trust."The California Public Records Act. As noted above, the video and audio data produced by peace officers with body-worn cameras is considered a public record under the CPRA, and is therefore subject to disclosure to the public unless otherwise exempt.
The CPRA requires public agencies to generally respond to a records request within 10 days, and make eligible public records promptly available to a requester who pays the direct costs of duplication. In order to withhold a record, a public agency must demonstrate that a record is exempt under express provisions of the CPRA, or else must show that "on the facts of the particular case the public interest served by not disclosing the record clearly outweighs the public interest served by disclosure of the record." Whenever a state or local agency discloses a public record that would otherwise be exempt, that disclosure constitutes a waiver of the exemption.
The CPRA provides a detailed list of information and documents that are exempt from disclosure, including: personnel files and records of complaints or investigatory or security files complied by state or local law enforcement agencies, although specified written information must be provided regarding the individuals involved in those incidents or investigations.
Arguments in support. A coalition of supporters writes, "[i]n California, the cities of Los Angeles, Oakland, and San Diego, among others, have developed best practices for the local utilization of police body-worn cameras [BWCs] with more cities rapidly following suit. However, there are no uniform standardized practices and policies addressing the implementation of these body-camera programs across the state.…By providing uniform guidelines, AB 66 will make members of the public and peace officers aware of their rights and expectations across the state in regards to peace officers’ use of BWC."
The American Civil Liberties Union states, "Like most surveillance technologies, depending on the method of use, BWCs implicate privacy interests, transparency in police operations, and increased evidence documentation. For example, BWCs can record in residences and other places that pose heightened privacy expectations, or capture footage of a crime in a public setting. AB 66 strikes an appropriate balance between these factors."
"Specifically, AB 66….addresses privacy in sensitive social situations by prohibiting recording in a health facility, and during an ambulance response to an accident entailing no criminal activity. In addition, when at a private residence, or in the presence of a victim of rape, incest, domestic violence or sexual harm, AB 66 would require that peace officers provide the subject of a recording with on-camera notice of the BWC and an opportunity to request that the BWC be turned-off. " [citations omitted]Arguments in opposition. According to a coalition of law enforcement agencies, "AB 66 establishes requirements which are unfair to officers, abrogate [local government labor relations law], and are vague, ambiguous, unworkable, and demonstrate a clear lack of knowledge and understanding of day to day law enforcement activity…. AB 66 creates the unfortunate scenario wherein rank and file officers will strongly resist the implementation of the use of body-worn cameras. If the policy goal is to increase and enhance the use of officer-worn body cameras, then AB 66 would be a major set-back, because it creates unnecessary risks and substantial liabilities both the officer and his or her employing Department."
The California State Sheriffs' Association writes, "In addition, we disagree with this bill's approach at handling public record act requests. While there are exceptions to the [CPRA] when it comes to records created by law enforcement agencies, given the broad privacy concerns with body-worn cameras, we would urge an exemption to the [CPRA] for all footage obtained by body-worn cameras. Any information that is subject to public concern could still be obtained through criminal or civil discovery processes or may be released by an agency (as is currently done with mugshots). We believe the privacy concerns of victims of crime and the damage that can be done through the wide dissemination of video through social media outweigh the public's interest in being able to view all footage recorded by law enforcement."Privacy considerations related to this bill. The PERF report notes that "[b]ody-worn cameras raise many privacy issues," and this bill includes a number of provisions that directly affect individual privacy: restrictions on the handling of the camera itself and the data produced, prohibitions on the filming of certain highly vulnerable places and people, and guidelines recommending a ban on the use of facial recognition software without a warrant and the use of body-worn cameras for non-investigatory interactions with the public.
However, the bill makes clear that, beyond the few restrictions imposed by this bill, all other requests for recordings from a body-worn camera will be processed in accordance with the CPRA. As noted above, the CPRA provides an exemption for the investigatory files held by law enforcement, but it does not similarly protect non-investigatory records. To the extent that this bill merely recommends, but does not require, peace officers to avoid recording non-investigatory interactions with the public, the footage of such encounters may become public records subject to disclosure.
Author's amendments. The author has requested the following technical amendments to the bill:
The first amendment would revise the recommended best practice
pertaining to peace officer review of video to require that a
supervisor show a peace officer the video once an initial report has
been submitted and approved, and that the officer must be given an
opportunity to provide additional information to supplement his or
her statement. The current language of the bill was mistakenly
drafted to be permissive.
On page 3, line 38 and 39, strike and replace "may" with "shall"
The second amendment would shift the provisions requiring that the use of body-worn cameras be subject to collective bargaining pursuant to the Meyers-Milias-Brown Act from a requirement to a recommended best practice.
On page 6, cut lines 18-22, and add them to Section 2 at page 4,
line 24, as (a)(7); strike and replace "Myers" with
"Meyers"
Related Legislation. AB 69 (Rodriguez) specifies a set of best practices that a law enforcement agency, department or entity establishing policies and procedures for the implementation and operation of a body-worn camera system must consider. AB 69 is currently pending in the Assembly Privacy and Consumer Protection Committee.
AB 65 (Alejo) would redirect funds from the Driver Training Penalty Assessment Fund and allocates that money to the Board of State and Community Corrections to be used to fund local law enforcement agencies to operate a body-worn camera program. AB 65 is currently pending on the Suspense File in the Assembly Appropriations Committee.
AB 1246 (Quirk) would prohibit the disclosure of a recording made by a body-worn camera, except to the person whose image is recorded by the body worn camera. AB 1246 is currently pending in the Assembly Public Safety Committee.
SB 175 (Huff) would require each department or agency that
employs peace officers and that elects to require those peace
officers to wear body-worn cameras to develop a policy relating to
the use of body-worn cameras. SB 175 is currently pending in on the
Senate Floor.
SB 195 (Anderson) would state the intent of the Legislature to enact legislation that protects the privacy of individuals recorded by body-worn cameras utilized by law enforcement officers and the privacy of the officers wearing these cameras. SB 195 is currently pending in the Senate Rules Committee.
Double-referral. This bill was double-referred to the Assembly Public Safety Committee, where it was heard on April 14, 2015, and passed out on a 5-1 vote.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:
Support
A New PATH (Parents for Addiction Treatment and Healing)
American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) (4/20/15 version)
American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) (4/9/15 version)
Employee Rights Center
FACTS Education Fund & Fair Chance Project
San Diego Organizing Project
Urban League of San Diego County (4/20/15 version)
Opposition
AFSCME, Local 685 (4/9/15 version)
Association for Los Angeles Deputy Sheriffs (4/9/15 version)
California Association of Highway Patrolmen
California State Lodge, Fraternal Order of Police
California State Sheriffs’ Association (4/20/15 version)
Chief Probation Officers of California (4/20/15 version)
Long Beach Police Officers Association
Los Angeles County Professional Peace Officers Association
Los Angeles Police Protective League (4/9/15 version)
Los Angeles Probation Officers Union (4/9/15 version)
Peace Officers Research Association of California (PORAC) (4/20/15 version)
Riverside Sheriffs' Association (4/9/15 version)
Sacramento County Deputy Sheriffs Association
Santa Ana Police Officers Association
Analysis Prepared by: Hank Dempsey / P. & C.P. / (916) 319-2200
AB 66
Page 8
Date of Hearing: April 14, 2015
Counsel: Stella Choe
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC SAFETY
Bill Quirk, Chair
AB 66
(Weber) – As Amended April 9, 2015
As Proposed to be Amended in Committee
SUMMARY:
Provides statewide policies and guidelines for law enforcement
agencies that require its officers to wear body-worn cameras.
Specifically, this bill:
States that if a law enforcement agency requires a body-worn camera to be worn by a peace officer that the agency employs, the agency shall comply with the following requirements:
Each law enforcement agency shall conspicuously post its policies and procedures regarding body-worn cameras on its Internet Web site;
A peace officer shall only use the body-worn camera systems issued and approved by the law enforcement agency that employs him or her for official police duties;
A peace officer shall not make copies of any body-worn camera files for his or her personal use or use a recording device such as a phone camera or secondary video camera to record a body-worn camera file;
A peace officer shall not operate a body-worn camera under the following circumstances:
In a health facility or medical office when patients may be in view of the body-worn camera or when a health care practitioner is providing care to an individual;
During an ambulance response to an accident or illness where the victim is not involved in any criminal activity; or,
Situations where recording would risk the safety of a confidential informant or undercover peace officer.
Operation of a body-worn camera shall begin with the officer providing on camera notice to a person being recorded that a body-worn camera is recording video, and provide the person with the option to request that the body-worn camera be turned off under the following circumstances:
When the subject of the video is a victim of rape, incest, domestic violence, or other forms of domestic or sexual harm; or
When an officer is at a private residence without a warrant and in a nonemergency situation;
Where a peace officer is involved in an incident involving use of force or an incident resulting in injury or death, a peace officer may only review his or her body-worn camera video only after making his or her initial statement and report in an administrative or criminal inquiry or investigation; and
Once a peace officer's initial report has been submitted and approved and the officer has been interviewed by the appropriate investigator, the investigator will show the member the body-worn camera video. The peace officer will be given the opportunity to provide additional information to supplement his or her statement and may be asked additional questions by the investigators. If this results in a modified report, both of the reports shall be provided to all parties to a criminal or administrative investigation.
Provides that the following are guidelines that a law enforcement agency shall consider when adopting their own policies for a body-worn camera program:
A peace officer equipped with a body-worn camera shall activate the camera when responding to calls for assistance and when performing law enforcement activities in the field including, but not limited to, traffic or pedestrian stops, pursuits, arrests, searches, seizures, interrogations, and any other investigative or enforcement encounters in the field;
A peace officer shall ensure that a body-worn camera is fully functional, including but not limited to, ensuring that the camera can be turned on and off and record video and audio, and that the camera is properly charged prior to going into the field. A peace officer shall not violate a person's reasonable expectation of privacy when ensuring that a body-worn camera is fully functional pursuant to this paragraph;
A peace officer wearing a body-worn camera shall position the camera on his or her chest, head, shoulder, collar or any area above mid-torso of his or her uniform to facilitate optimum recording field of view;
Both video and audio recording functions of a body-worn camera shall be activated when an officer is responding to a call for service or at the initiation of any other law enforcement or investigative encounter between a police officer and a member of the public;
During an encounter with a member of the public, the officer shall notify the member of the public that the body-worn camera is recording, and shall not deactivate the body-worn camera until the conclusion of the encounter;
An officer may stop recording when an arrestee is secured inside of the department of police station, as defined;
A peace officer shall record any interview of a suspect or witness it entirety, unless an exception applies;
When recording interviews of a suspect of witness, a peace officer shall, where applicable, inform the suspect or witness of his or her rights under Miranda v. Arizona (1996) 384 U.S. 436;
In the event of contradicting requests made by a homeowner, occupant, or renter to stop recording, the contradicting requests shall be recorded on video and the peace officer shall continue to operate and record the encounter;
A peace officer shall not remove, dismantle, or tamper with any hardware or software components or parts of a body-worn camera;
A peace officer shall not use body-worn camera functions, when there is no investigatory interaction with a member of the public, to record any personal conversation of or with another agency member or employee without the permission of the recorded member or employee;
A peace officer shall not use a body-worn camera to record non-work related activity or to record in places where a reasonable expectation of privacy exists;
A law enforcement agency or law enforcement officer shall not allow a computerized facial recognition program or application to be used with a body-worn camera or a recording made by a body-worn camera unless the use has been authorized by a warrant issued by a court; and
When safe and practical, an on-scene supervisor may retrieve a body-worn camera from an officer. The supervisor shall be responsible for ensuring the camera data is uploaded into the desired data processing and collection method.
States that the provisions in this bill do not require a peace officer, in a public venue to cease recording an event, situation, or circumstance solely at the demand of a citizen.
States that any request from within a law enforcement agency for recordings from a body-worn camera from that agency shall be completed by the system administrator with the approval of the head of the agency.
Provides that all other requests for recordings from a body-worn camera shall be processed in accordance with the California Public Records Act.
States Legislative findings and declarations related to body-worn cameras.
EXISTING LAW:
Provides that it is a an alternate felony/misdemeanor for any person who, by means of any machine, instrument, or contrivance, or in any other manner, intentionally taps, or makes any unauthorized connection, whether physically, electrically, acoustically, inductively, or otherwise, with any telegraph or telephone wire, line, cable, or instrument, including the wire, line, cable, or instrument of any internal telephonic communication system, or who willfully and without the consent of all parties to the communication, or in any unauthorized manner, reads, or attempts to read, or to learn the contents or meaning of any message, report, or communication while the same is in transit or passing over any wire, line, or cable, or is being sent from, or received at any place within this state; or who uses, or attempts to use, in any manner, or for any purpose, or to communicate in any way, any information so obtained, or who aids, agrees with, employs, or conspires with any person or persons to unlawfully do, or permit, or cause to be done any of the acts or things mentioned above in this section, is punishable by a fine not exceeding $2,500, or by imprisonment in the county jail not exceeding one year, or by imprisonment in the county jail for 16 months, or two or three years, or by both a fine and imprisonment. (Pen. Code, § 631.)
States that every person who, intentionally and without the consent of all parties to a confidential communication, by means of any electronic amplifying or recording device, eavesdrops upon or records the confidential communication, whether the communication is carried on among the parties in the presence of one another or by means of a telegraph, telephone, or other device, except a radio, shall be punished by a fine not exceeding $2,500, or imprisonment in the county jail not exceeding one year, or in the state prison, or by both that fine and imprisonment. (Pen. Code, § 632, subd. (a).)
Defines "confidential communication" to include any communication carried on in circumstances as may reasonably indicate that any party to the communication desires it to be confined to the parties thereto, but excludes a communication made in a public gathering or any legislative, judicial, executive or administrative proceeding open to the public, or in any circumstance that the parties may reasonably expect that the communication may be overheard or recorded. (Pen. Code, § 632, subd. (c).)
Provides that nothing in the sections prohibiting eavesdropping or wiretapping prohibits specified law enforcement officers or their assistants or deputies acting within the scope of his or her authority, from overhearing or recording any communication that they could lawfully overhear or record. (Pen. Code, § 633.)
FISCAL EFFECT:
Unknown
COMMENTS:
Author's Statement: According to the author, "Over the last year, there have been over a dozen police shootings across the nation of unarmed citizens, many involving minorities. These killings have shaken our communities and mobilized efforts to prevent or mitigate these tragedies. One such creative effort is the use of cameras attached to the clothing or uniform of law enforcement personnel referred to as body-worn cameras (BWC). Even before the devastating events surrounding the shooting of 18-year old unarmed Michael Brown on August 9, 2014 in Ferguson, Missouri, law enforcement had implemented or had plans to implement a body-worn camera program.
"In February of 2011, the City of Rialto began a study to
investigate the usefulness of body-worn cameras. Since then, the city
has seen a 60 percent reduction in officer use of force incidents and
88 percent reduction in the number of citizen complaints between the
year prior to and following camera deployment. Currently, in
California, the regions of Los Angeles, Oakland, San Diego, and San
Leandro, among others, have developed best practices for the local
utilization of peace officer body-worn cameras with more cities
rapidly following suit. However, there are no uniform standardized
practices and policies addressing the implementation of these
body-camera programs.
"People travel frequently in California. For citizens who travel
from city to city, town to town and not have an idea of what their
basic rights are regarding officers equipped with BWC’s, puts them
in an unnecessary vulnerable place. Of such, we must be committed to
standardizing some basic common core BWC principles for Californians
to know their rights when crossing into different law enforcement
department jurisdictions."
Background: A recent report released by U.S. Department of Justice's Office of Community Oriented Policing Services and the Police Executive Research Forum studied the use of body-worn cameras by police agencies. This research included a survey of 250 police agencies, interviews with more than 40 police executives, a review of 20 existing body-camera policies, and a national conference at which more than 200 police chiefs, sheriffs, federal justice representatives, and other experts shared their knowledge of and experiences with body-worn cameras. The report shows that body-worn cameras can help agencies demonstrate transparency and address the community's questions about controversial events. Among other reported benefits are that the presence of a body-worn camera have helped strengthen officer professionalism and helped to de-escalate contentious situations, and when questions do arise following an event or encounter, police having a video record helps lead to a quicker resolution. (Miller and Toliver, Implementing a Body-Worn Camera Program: Recommendations and Lessons Learned, Police Executive Research Forum (Nov. 2014).)
Proposed Amendments: This bill is being considered by the Committee as proposed to be amended. The bill as it is currently written provides that all of the provisions listed in the new section are requirements that law enforcement must comply with if the agency requires its officers to use a body-worn camera. The proposed amendments change many of those provisions from requirements to guidelines that the agencies must consider when adopting their own policies. The amendments provide policy recommendations that cover when to turn the camera on and off, where the camera should be worn on the body, how to ensure the camera if fully charged and operating properly, who should upload data, and how to avoid violating the privacy of the public as well as other officers.
The provisions that have not been changed to policy recommendations are requirements that a law enforcement agency must comply with if the agency requires its officers to use body-worn cameras. These provisions require the officer to provide notice to person who is being recorded, specifies that in cases of use of force, an officer must write his or her initial report based upon his or her memory prior to being allowed to view the video. There are also prohibitions on recording in hospitals or other situations where information must be kept confidential as well as prohibitions on using any recording device not authorized by the agency. As stated in the author's statement, the intent of retaining these provisions as requirements, rather than guidelines, is to ensure some level of standardization of the policies that the public may rely on when encountered with body-worn cameras in their jurisdictions.
Argument in Support: According to the American Civil Liberties of California, "Like most surveillance technologies, depending on the method of use, BWCs [body-worn cameras] implicate privacy interests, transparency in police operations, and increased evidence documentation. For example, BWCs can record in residence and other places that pose heightened privacy expectations, or capture footage of a crime in a public setting. AB 66 strikes the appropriate balance between those factors.
. . .
"Under AB 66, the Penal Code would provide that '[p]eace officers may only review their body worn camera video after making their initial statement and report, an officer could review BWC video and make an amendment to their statement or report to account for facts not initially recalled.
"Multiple law enforcement agencies have policies that align with this rule. The Oakland Police Department, for instance, has a policy prohibiting officers from reviewing view prior to making a statement in an investigation arising out of a Level 1 use of force (most serious, including shootings, equivalent to LAPD's categorical use of force). Similarly, when the Los Angeles Sheriff's Department recently installed video cameras in its jails, the department, after careful consideration, adopted a policy that requires deputies in the jails to file reports on incidents before viewing video . . .
"In Implementing Body-Worn Camera Program: Recommendations and Lessons Learned, published by the Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) division of the U.S. Department of Justice, a police executive explained as follows, '[i]n terms of the officer's statement, what matters is the officer's perspective at the time of the event, not what is in the video.' [Citation omitted.]"
Argument in Opposition: According to the California State Sheriffs' Association, "[W]e disagree with this bills approach at handling public records act requests. While there are exceptions to the California Public Records Act (Gov. Code, §§ 6250 et seq.) when it comes to records created by law enforcement agencies, given the broad privacy concerns with body-worn cameras, we would urge an exemption to the Public Records Act for all footage obtained by body worn cameras. Any information that is subject to public concern could still be obtained through criminal or civil discovery processes, or may be released by an agency (such as is currently done with mugshots). We believe the privacy concerns of victims of crime and the damage that can be done through the wide dissemination of video through social media outweigh the public's interest in being able to view all footage recorded by law enforcement. This measure would allow the broad dissemination of camera footage of victims of crime and people in crisis.
"Finally, this measure would prohibit the viewing of body-camera footage by an officer prior to making a report. We believe that in the vast majority of cases, it would be detrimental to a law enforcement investigation to prohibit officers from viewing video of questioning before writing a report; it would be akin to prohibiting an officer from reviewing field notes before writing a report. This policy simply seeks to undermine the credibility of an officer that cannot remember an incident exactly as it unfolded."
Related Legislation:
AB 65 (Alejo), would redirect funds from the Driver Training Penalty Assessment Fund and allocates that money to the Board of State and Community Corrections to be used to fund local law enforcement agencies to operate a body worn camera program. AB 65 is pending a hearing by the Assembly Committee on Appropriations.
AB 69 (Rodriguez) requires law enforcement agencies to follow specified best practices when establishing policies and procedures for downloading and storing data from body-worn cameras. AB 69 is pending hearing by the Assembly Committee on Privacy and Consumer Protection.
SB 175 (Huff) would require each department or agency that employs peace officers and that elects to require those peace officers to wear body-worn cameras to develop a policy relating to the use of body-worn cameras. The bill would require the policy to be developed in collaboration with nonsupervisory officers and to include certain provisions, including, among others, the duration, time, and place when body-worn cameras shall be worn and operational. SB 175 is pending hearing by the Senate Committee on Public Safety.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:
Support
American Civil Liberties Union of California
American Federation
of State, County, and Municipal Employees (AFSCME),
AFL-CIO
California Public Defenders Association
PICO
California
Opposition
Association for Los Angeles Deputy Sheriffs
California
Association of Highway Patrolmen
California Narcotic Officers'
Association
California Peace Officers' Association
California
State Sheriffs' Association
Chief Probation Officers of
California
Fraternal Order of Police, California State
Lodge
Long Beach Police Officers Association
Los Angeles
County Probation Officers Union
Los Angeles County Professional
Peace Officers Association
Los Angeles Police Protective
League
Peace Officers Research Association of
California
Riverside Sheriffs' Association
Santa Ana Police
Officer Association
Sacramento County Deputy Sheriffs'
Association
Analysis Prepared by:
Stella Choe / PUB. S. / (916) 319-3744
Discussed in Hearing
1H
Assembly Standing Committee on Privacy and Consumer Protection
Bill Author
