AB 467: Domestic violence: restraining orders.
- Session Year: 2023-2024
- House: Assembly
- Latest Version Date: 2023-06-29
Current Status:
Passed
(2023-06-29: Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 14, Statutes of 2023.)
Introduced
In Committee
First Chamber
In Committee
Second Chamber
Enacted
What does this bill do?
The bill clarifies that the court that sentenced a defendant may modify a criminal protective order it issued at any time while the order remains in effect. It applies when a defendant was convicted of domestic violence, human trafficking, certain gang crimes, or sex offenses that require registration, and affects the victims and witnesses protected by those orders.
The summary is provided by generative AI which can make mistakes. For original language, please view the details in the table below.
Existing law allows the court to issue a protective order restraining a defendant from any contact with the victim if the defendant has been convicted of a crime of domestic violence, human trafficking, a crime in furtherance of a criminal street gang, or a registerable sex offense. Under existing law, the protective order may be valid for up to 10 years, as determined by the court.
This bill would clarify that the order may be modified by the sentencing court in the county in which it was issued throughout the duration of the order.
Existing law allows the court to issue a protective order restraining a defendant from any contact with the victim if the defendant has been convicted of a crime of domestic violence, human trafficking, a crime in furtherance of a criminal street gang, or a registerable sex offense. Under existing law, the protective order may be valid for up to 10 years, as determined by the court.
This bill would clarify that the order may be modified by the sentencing court in the county in which it was issued throughout the duration of the order.
Existing law allows the court to issue a protective order restraining a defendant from any contact with the victim if the defendant has been convicted of a crime of domestic violence, human trafficking, a crime in furtherance of a criminal street gang, or a registerable sex offense. Under existing law, the protective order may be valid for up to 10 years, as determined by the court.
This bill would clarify that the order may be modified by the sentencing court in the county in which it was issued throughout the duration of the order.
Existing law allows the court to issue a protective order restraining a defendant from any contact with the victim if the defendant has been convicted of a crime of domestic violence, human trafficking, a crime in furtherance of a criminal street gang, or a registerable sex offense. Under existing law, the protective order may be valid for up to 10 years, as determined by the court.
This bill would clarify that the order may be modified by the sentencing court in the county in which it was issued throughout the duration of the order if the court is convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that the modification is in the best interest of the victim. order.
Existing law allows the court to issue a protective order restraining a defendant from any contact with the victim if the defendant has been convicted of a crime of domestic violence, human trafficking, a crime in furtherance of a criminal street gang, or a registerable sex offense. Under existing law, the protective order may be valid for up to 10 years, as determined by the court.
This bill would clarify that the order may be modified by the sentencing court in the county in which it was issued throughout the duration of the order if the court is convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that the modification is in the best interest of the victim.
(a)(1)Upon a good cause belief that harm to, or intimidation or dissuasion of, a victim or witness has occurred or is reasonably likely to occur, a court with jurisdiction over a criminal matter may issue orders, including, but not limited to, the following:
(A)An order issued pursuant to Section 6320 of the Family Code.
(B)An order that a defendant shall not violate any provision of Section 136.1.
(C)An order that a person before the court other than a defendant, including, but not limited to, a subpoenaed witness or other person entering the courtroom of the court, shall not violate any provision of Section 136.1.
(D)An order that a person described in this section shall have no communication whatsoever with a specified witness or a victim except through an attorney under reasonable restrictions that the court may impose.
(E)An order calling for a hearing to determine if an order described in subparagraphs (A) to (D), inclusive, should be issued.
(F)(i)An order that a particular law enforcement agency within the jurisdiction of the court provide protection for a victim, witness, or both, or for immediate family members of a victim or a witness who reside in the same household as the victim or witness or within reasonable proximity of the victims or witness household, as determined by the court. The order shall not be made without the consent of the law enforcement agency except for limited and specified periods of time and upon an express finding by the court of a clear and present danger of harm to the victim or witness or immediate family members of the victim or witness.
(ii)For purposes of this paragraph, immediate family members include the spouse, children, or parents of the victim or witness.
(G)(i)An order protecting a victim or witness of violent crime from all contact by the defendant or contact with the intent to annoy, harass, threaten, or commit acts of violence by the defendant. The court or its designee shall transmit orders made under this paragraph to law enforcement personnel within one business day of the issuance, modification, extension, or termination of the order pursuant to subdivision (a) of Section 6380 of the Family Code. It is the responsibility of the court to transmit the modification, extension, or termination orders made under this paragraph to the same agency that entered the original protective order into the California Restraining and Protective Order System.
(ii)(I)If a court does not issue an order pursuant to clause (i) when the defendant is charged with a crime involving domestic violence, as defined in Section 13700 of this code or in Section 6211 of the Family Code, the court, on its own motion, shall consider issuing a protective order upon a good cause belief that harm to, or intimidation or dissuasion of, a victim or witness has occurred or is reasonably likely to occur, that provides as follows:
(ia)The defendant shall not own, possess, purchase, receive, or attempt to purchase or receive a firearm while the protective order is in effect.
(ib)The defendant shall relinquish ownership or possession of any firearms pursuant to Section 527.9 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
(II)A person who owns, possesses, purchases, or receives, or attempts to purchase or receive a firearm while this protective order is in effect is punishable pursuant to Section 29825.
(iii)An order issued, modified, extended, or terminated by a court pursuant to this subparagraph shall be issued on forms adopted by the Judicial Council that have been approved by the Department of Justice pursuant to subdivision (i) of Section 6380 of the Family Code. However, the fact that an order issued by a court pursuant to this section was not issued on forms adopted by the Judicial Council and approved by the Department of Justice shall not make the order unenforceable.
(iv)A protective order issued under this subparagraph may require the defendant to be placed on electronic monitoring if the local government, with the concurrence of the county sheriff or the chief probation officer with jurisdiction, adopts a policy to authorize electronic monitoring of defendants and specifies the agency with jurisdiction for this purpose. If the court determines that the defendant has the ability to pay for the monitoring program, the court shall order the defendant to pay for the monitoring. If the court determines that the defendant does not have the ability to pay for the electronic monitoring, the court may order electronic monitoring to be paid for by the local government that adopted the policy to authorize electronic monitoring. The duration of electronic monitoring shall not exceed one year from the date the order is issued. The electronic monitoring shall not be in place if the protective order is not in place.
(2)For purposes of this subdivision, a minor who was not a victim of, but who was physically present at the time of, an act of domestic violence is a witness and is deemed to have suffered harm within the meaning of paragraph (1).
(b)A person violating an order made pursuant to subparagraphs (A) to (G), inclusive, of paragraph (1) of subdivision (a) may be punished for a substantive offense described in Section 136.1 or for a contempt of the court making the order. A finding of contempt shall not be a bar to prosecution for a violation of Section 136.1. However, a person held in contempt shall be entitled to credit for punishment imposed therein against a sentence imposed upon conviction of an offense described in Section 136.1. A conviction or acquittal for a substantive offense under Section 136.1 shall be a bar to a subsequent punishment for contempt arising out of the same act.
(c)(1)(A)Notwithstanding subdivision (e), an emergency protective order issued pursuant to Chapter 2 (commencing with Section 6250) of Part 3 of Division 10 of the Family Code or Section 646.91 shall have precedence in enforcement over any other restraining or protective order, provided the emergency protective order meets all of the following requirements:
(i)The emergency protective order is issued to protect one or more individuals who are already protected persons under another restraining or protective order.
(ii)The emergency protective order restrains the individual who is the restrained person in the other restraining or protective order specified in clause (i).
(iii)The provisions of the emergency protective order are more restrictive in relation to the restrained person than are the provisions of the other restraining or protective order specified in clause (i).
(B)An emergency protective order that meets the requirements of subparagraph (A) shall have precedence in enforcement over the provisions of any other restraining or protective order only with respect to those provisions of the emergency protective order that are more restrictive in relation to the restrained person.
(2)Except as described in paragraph (1), a no-contact order, as described in Section 6320 of the Family Code, shall have precedence in enforcement over any other restraining or protective order.
(d)(1)A person subject to a protective order issued under this section shall not own, possess, purchase, or receive, or attempt to purchase or receive, a firearm while the protective order is in effect.
(2)The court shall order a person subject to a protective order issued under this section to relinquish ownership or possession of any firearms pursuant to Section 527.9 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
(3)A person who owns, possesses, purchases, or receives, or attempts to purchase or receive a firearm while the protective order is in effect is punishable pursuant to Section 29825.
(e)(1)When the defendant is charged with a crime involving domestic violence, as defined in Section 13700 of this code or in Section 6211 of the Family Code, a violation of Section 261, 261.5, or former Section 262, or a crime that requires the defendant to register pursuant to subdivision (c) of Section 290, including, but not limited to, commercial sexual exploitation of a minor in violation of Section 236.1, the court shall consider issuing the above-described orders on its own motion. All interested parties shall receive a copy of those orders. To facilitate this, the courts records of all criminal cases involving domestic violence, a violation of Section 261, 261.5, or former Section 262, or a crime that requires the defendant to register pursuant to subdivision (c) of Section 290, including, but not limited to, commercial sexual exploitation of a minor in violation of Section 236.1, shall be marked to clearly alert the court to this issue.
(2)When a complaint, information, or indictment charging a crime involving domestic violence, as defined in Section 13700 or in Section 6211 of the Family Code, a violation of Section 261, 261.5, or former Section 262, or a crime that requires the defendant to register pursuant to subdivision (c) of Section 290, including, but not limited to, commercial sexual exploitation of a minor in violation of Section 236.1, has been issued, except as described in subdivision (c), a restraining order or protective order against the defendant issued by the criminal court in that case has precedence in enforcement over a civil court order against the defendant.
(3)Custody and visitation with respect to the defendant and the defendants minor children may be ordered by a family or juvenile court consistent with the protocol established pursuant to subdivision (f), but if it is ordered after a criminal protective order has been issued pursuant to this section, the custody and visitation order shall make reference to and, if there is not an emergency protective order that has precedence in enforcement pursuant to paragraph (1) of subdivision (c) or a no-contact order, as described in Section 6320 of the Family Code, acknowledge the precedence of enforcement of an appropriate criminal protective order. On or before July 1, 2014, the Judicial Council shall modify the criminal and civil court forms consistent with this subdivision.
(f)On or before January 1, 2003, the Judicial Council shall promulgate a protocol, for adoption by each local court in substantially similar terms, to provide for the timely coordination of all orders against the same defendant and in favor of the same named victim or victims. The protocol shall include, but shall not be limited to, mechanisms for ensuring appropriate communication and information sharing between criminal, family, and juvenile courts concerning orders and cases that involve the same parties and shall permit a family or juvenile court order to coexist with a criminal court protective order subject to the following conditions:
(1)An order that permits contact between the restrained person and the persons children shall provide for the safe exchange of the children and shall not contain language, either printed or handwritten, that violates a no-contact order issued by a criminal court.
(2)The safety of all parties shall be the courts paramount concern. The family or juvenile court shall specify the time, day, place, and manner of transfer of the child as provided in Section 3100 of the Family Code.
(g)On or before January 1, 2003, the Judicial Council shall modify the criminal and civil court protective order forms consistent with this section.
(h)(1)When a complaint, information, or indictment charging a crime involving domestic violence, as defined in Section 13700 or in Section 6211 of the Family Code, has been filed, the court may consider, in determining whether good cause exists to issue an order under subparagraph (A) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (a), the underlying nature of the offense charged and the information provided to the court pursuant to Section 273.75.
(2)When a complaint, information, or indictment charging a violation of Section 261, 261.5, or former Section 262, or a crime that requires the defendant to register pursuant to subdivision (c) of Section 290, including, but not limited to, commercial sexual exploitation of a minor in violation of Section 236.1, has been filed, the court may consider, in determining whether good cause exists to issue an order under paragraph (1) of subdivision (a), the underlying nature of the offense charged, the defendants relationship to the victim, the likelihood of continuing harm to the victim, any current restraining order or protective order issued by a civil or criminal court involving the defendant, and the defendants criminal history, including, but not limited to, prior convictions for a violation of Section 261, 261.5, or former Section 262, a crime that requires the defendant to register pursuant to subdivision (c) of Section 290, including, but not limited to, commercial sexual exploitation of a minor in violation of Section 236.1, any other forms of violence, or a weapons offense.
(i)(1)When a criminal defendant has been convicted of a crime involving domestic violence, as defined in Section 13700 or in Section 6211 of the Family Code, a violation of subdivision (a), (b), or (c) of Section 236.1 prohibiting human trafficking, Section 261, 261.5, former Section 262, subdivision (a) of Section 266h, or subdivision (a) of Section 266i, a violation of Section 186.22, or a crime that requires the defendant to register pursuant to subdivision (c) of Section 290, the court, at the time of sentencing, shall consider issuing an order restraining the defendant from any contact with a victim of the crime. The order may be valid for up to 10 years, as determined by the court. This protective order may be issued by the court regardless of whether the defendant is sentenced to the state prison or a county jail, whether the defendant is subject to mandatory supervision, or whether imposition of sentence is suspended and the defendant is placed on probation. The order may be modified by the sentencing court in the county in which it was issued throughout the duration of the order. It is the intent of the Legislature in enacting this subdivision that the duration of a restraining order issued by the court be based upon the seriousness of the facts before the court, the probability of future violations, and the safety of a victim and the victims immediate family.
(2) When a criminal defendant has been convicted of a crime involving domestic violence, as defined in Section 13700 or in Section 6211 of the Family Code, a violation of Section 261, 261.5, or former Section 262, a violation of Section 186.22, or a crime that requires the defendant to register pursuant to subdivision (c) of Section 290, the court, at the time of sentencing, shall consider issuing an order restraining the defendant from any contact with a percipient witness to the crime if it can be established by clear and convincing evidence that the witness has been harassed, as defined in paragraph (3) of subdivision (b) of Section 527.6 of the Code of Civil Procedure, by the defendant.
(3) An order under this subdivision may include provisions for electronic monitoring if the local government, upon receiving the concurrence of the county sheriff or the chief probation officer with jurisdiction, adopts a policy authorizing electronic monitoring of defendants and specifies the agency with jurisdiction for this purpose. If the court determines that the defendant has the ability to pay for the monitoring program, the court shall order the defendant to pay for the monitoring. If the court determines that the defendant does not have the ability to pay for the electronic monitoring, the court may order the electronic monitoring to be paid for by the local government that adopted the policy authorizing electronic monitoring. The duration of the electronic monitoring shall not exceed one year from the date the order is issued.
(j)For purposes of this section, local government means the county that has jurisdiction over the protective order.
(a)(1)Upon a good cause belief that harm to, or intimidation or dissuasion of, a victim or witness has occurred or is reasonably likely to occur, a court with jurisdiction over a criminal matter may issue orders, including, but not limited to, the following:
(A)An order issued pursuant to Section 6320 of the Family Code.
(B)An order that a defendant shall not violate any provision of Section 136.1.
(C)An order that a person before the court other than a defendant, including, but not limited to, a subpoenaed witness or other person entering the courtroom of the court, shall not violate any provision of Section 136.1.
(D)An order that a person described in this section shall have no communication whatsoever with a specified witness or a victim except through an attorney under reasonable restrictions that the court may impose.
(E)An order calling for a hearing to determine if an order described in subparagraphs (A) to (D), inclusive, should be issued.
(F)(i)An order that a particular law enforcement agency within the jurisdiction of the court provide protection for a victim, witness, or both, or for immediate family members of a victim or a witness who reside in the same household as the victim or witness or within reasonable proximity of the victims or witness household, as determined by the court. The order shall not be made without the consent of the law enforcement agency except for limited and specified periods of time and upon an express finding by the court of a clear and present danger of harm to the victim or witness or immediate family members of the victim or witness.
(ii)For purposes of this paragraph, immediate family members include the spouse, children, or parents of the victim or witness.
(G)(i)An order protecting a victim or witness of violent crime from all contact by the defendant or contact with the intent to annoy, harass, threaten, or commit acts of violence by the defendant. The court or its designee shall transmit orders made under this paragraph to law enforcement personnel within one business day of the issuance, modification, extension, or termination of the order pursuant to subdivision (a) of Section 6380 of the Family Code. It is the responsibility of the court to transmit the modification, extension, or termination orders made under this paragraph to the same agency that entered the original protective order into the California Restraining and Protective Order System.
(ii)(I)If a court does not issue an order pursuant to clause (i) when the defendant is charged with a crime involving domestic violence, as defined in Section 13700 of this code or in Section 6211 of the Family Code, the court, on its own motion, shall consider issuing a protective order upon a good cause belief that harm to, or intimidation or dissuasion of, a victim or witness has occurred or is reasonably likely to occur, that provides as follows:
(ia)The defendant shall not own, possess, purchase, receive, or attempt to purchase or receive a firearm while the protective order is in effect.
(ib)The defendant shall relinquish ownership or possession of any firearms pursuant to Section 527.9 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
(II)A person who owns, possesses, purchases, or receives, or attempts to purchase or receive a firearm while this protective order is in effect is punishable pursuant to Section 29825.
(iii)An order issued, modified, extended, or terminated by a court pursuant to this subparagraph shall be issued on forms adopted by the Judicial Council that have been approved by the Department of Justice pursuant to subdivision (i) of Section 6380 of the Family Code. However, the fact that an order issued by a court pursuant to this section was not issued on forms adopted by the Judicial Council and approved by the Department of Justice shall not make the order unenforceable.
(iv)A protective order issued under this subparagraph may require the defendant to be placed on electronic monitoring if the local government, with the concurrence of the county sheriff or the chief probation officer with jurisdiction, adopts a policy to authorize electronic monitoring of defendants and specifies the agency with jurisdiction for this purpose. If the court determines that the defendant has the ability to pay for the monitoring program, the court shall order the defendant to pay for the monitoring. If the court determines that the defendant does not have the ability to pay for the electronic monitoring, the court may order electronic monitoring to be paid for by the local government that adopted the policy to authorize electronic monitoring. The duration of electronic monitoring shall not exceed one year from the date the order is issued. The electronic monitoring shall not be in place if the protective order is not in place.
(2)For purposes of this subdivision, a minor who was not a victim of, but who was physically present at the time of, an act of domestic violence is a witness and is deemed to have suffered harm within the meaning of paragraph (1).
(b)A person violating an order made pursuant to subparagraphs (A) to (G), inclusive, of paragraph (1) of subdivision (a) may be punished for a substantive offense described in Section 136.1 or for a contempt of the court making the order. A finding of contempt shall not be a bar to prosecution for a violation of Section 136.1. However, a person held in contempt shall be entitled to credit for punishment imposed therein against a sentence imposed upon conviction of an offense described in Section 136.1. A conviction or acquittal for a substantive offense under Section 136.1 shall be a bar to a subsequent punishment for contempt arising out of the same act.
(c)(1)(A)Notwithstanding subdivision (e), an emergency protective order issued pursuant to Chapter 2 (commencing with Section 6250) of Part 3 of Division 10 of the Family Code or Section 646.91 shall have precedence in enforcement over any other restraining or protective order, provided the emergency protective order meets all of the following requirements:
(i)The emergency protective order is issued to protect one or more individuals who are already protected persons under another restraining or protective order.
(ii)The emergency protective order restrains the individual who is the restrained person in the other restraining or protective order specified in clause (i).
(iii)The provisions of the emergency protective order are more restrictive in relation to the restrained person than are the provisions of the other restraining or protective order specified in clause (i).
(B)An emergency protective order that meets the requirements of subparagraph (A) shall have precedence in enforcement over the provisions of any other restraining or protective order only with respect to those provisions of the emergency protective order that are more restrictive in relation to the restrained person.
(2)Except as described in paragraph (1), a no-contact order, as described in Section 6320 of the Family Code, shall have precedence in enforcement over any other restraining or protective order.
(d)(1)A person subject to a protective order issued under this section shall not own, possess, purchase, or receive, or attempt to purchase or receive, a firearm while the protective order is in effect.
(2)The court shall order a person subject to a protective order issued under this section to relinquish ownership or possession of any firearms pursuant to Section 527.9 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
(3)A person who owns, possesses, purchases, or receives, or attempts to purchase or receive a firearm while the protective order is in effect is punishable pursuant to Section 29825.
(e)(1)When the defendant is charged with a crime involving domestic violence, as defined in Section 13700 of this code or in Section 6211 of the Family Code, a violation of Section 261, 261.5, or former Section 262, or a crime that requires the defendant to register pursuant to subdivision (c) of Section 290, including, but not limited to, commercial sexual exploitation of a minor in violation of Section 236.1, the court shall consider issuing the above-described orders on its own motion. All interested parties shall receive a copy of those orders. To facilitate this, the courts records of all criminal cases involving domestic violence, a violation of Section 261, 261.5, or former Section 262, or a crime that requires the defendant to register pursuant to subdivision (c) of Section 290, including, but not limited to, commercial sexual exploitation of a minor in violation of Section 236.1, shall be marked to clearly alert the court to this issue.
(2)When a complaint, information, or indictment charging a crime involving domestic violence, as defined in Section 13700 or in Section 6211 of the Family Code, a violation of Section 261, 261.5, or former Section 262, or a crime that requires the defendant to register pursuant to subdivision (c) of Section 290, including, but not limited to, commercial sexual exploitation of a minor in violation of Section 236.1, has been issued, except as described in subdivision (c), a restraining order or protective order against the defendant issued by the criminal court in that case has precedence in enforcement over a civil court order against the defendant.
(3)Custody and visitation with respect to the defendant and the defendants minor children may be ordered by a family or juvenile court consistent with the protocol established pursuant to subdivision (f), but if it is ordered after a criminal protective order has been issued pursuant to this section, the custody and visitation order shall make reference to and, if there is not an emergency protective order that has precedence in enforcement pursuant to paragraph (1) of subdivision (c) or a no-contact order, as described in Section 6320 of the Family Code, acknowledge the precedence of enforcement of an appropriate criminal protective order. On or before July 1, 2014, the Judicial Council shall modify the criminal and civil court forms consistent with this subdivision.
(f)On or before January 1, 2003, the Judicial Council shall promulgate a protocol, for adoption by each local court in substantially similar terms, to provide for the timely coordination of all orders against the same defendant and in favor of the same named victim or victims. The protocol shall include, but shall not be limited to, mechanisms for ensuring appropriate communication and information sharing between criminal, family, and juvenile courts concerning orders and cases that involve the same parties and shall permit a family or juvenile court order to coexist with a criminal court protective order subject to the following conditions:
(1)An order that permits contact between the restrained person and the persons children shall provide for the safe exchange of the children and shall not contain language, either printed or handwritten, that violates a no-contact order issued by a criminal court.
(2)The safety of all parties shall be the courts paramount concern. The family or juvenile court shall specify the time, day, place, and manner of transfer of the child as provided in Section 3100 of the Family Code.
(g)On or before January 1, 2003, the Judicial Council shall modify the criminal and civil court protective order forms consistent with this section.
(h)(1)When a complaint, information, or indictment charging a crime involving domestic violence, as defined in Section 13700 or in Section 6211 of the Family Code, has been filed, the court may consider, in determining whether good cause exists to issue an order under subparagraph (A) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (a), the underlying nature of the offense charged and the information provided to the court pursuant to Section 273.75.
(2)When a complaint, information, or indictment charging a violation of Section 261, 261.5, or former Section 262, or a crime that requires the defendant to register pursuant to subdivision (c) of Section 290, including, but not limited to, commercial sexual exploitation of a minor in violation of Section 236.1, has been filed, the court may consider, in determining whether good cause exists to issue an order under paragraph (1) of subdivision (a), the underlying nature of the offense charged, the defendants relationship to the victim, the likelihood of continuing harm to the victim, any current restraining order or protective order issued by a civil or criminal court involving the defendant, and the defendants criminal history, including, but not limited to, prior convictions for a violation of Section 261, 261.5, or former Section 262, a crime that requires the defendant to register pursuant to subdivision (c) of Section 290, including, but not limited to, commercial sexual exploitation of a minor in violation of Section 236.1, any other forms of violence, or a weapons offense.
(i)(1)When a criminal defendant has been convicted of a crime involving domestic violence, as defined in Section 13700 or in Section 6211 of the Family Code, a violation of subdivision (a), (b), or (c) of Section 236.1 prohibiting human trafficking, Section 261, 261.5, former Section 262, subdivision (a) of Section 266h, or subdivision (a) of Section 266i, a violation of Section 186.22, or a crime that requires the defendant to register pursuant to subdivision (c) of Section 290, the court, at the time of sentencing, shall consider issuing an order restraining the defendant from any contact with a victim of the crime. The order may be valid for up to 10 years, as determined by the court. This protective order may be issued by the court regardless of whether the defendant is sentenced to the state prison or a county jail, whether the defendant is subject to mandatory supervision, or whether imposition of sentence is suspended and the defendant is placed on probation. The order may be modified by the sentencing court in the county in which it was issued throughout the duration of the order. It is the intent of the Legislature in enacting this subdivision that the duration of a restraining order issued by the court be based upon the seriousness of the facts before the court, the probability of future violations, and the safety of a victim and the victims immediate family.
(2) When a criminal defendant has been convicted of a crime involving domestic violence, as defined in Section 13700 or in Section 6211 of the Family Code, a violation of Section 261, 261.5, or former Section 262, a violation of Section 186.22, or a crime that requires the defendant to register pursuant to subdivision (c) of Section 290, the court, at the time of sentencing, shall consider issuing an order restraining the defendant from any contact with a percipient witness to the crime if it can be established by clear and convincing evidence that the witness has been harassed, as defined in paragraph (3) of subdivision (b) of Section 527.6 of the Code of Civil Procedure, by the defendant.
(3) An order under this subdivision may include provisions for electronic monitoring if the local government, upon receiving the concurrence of the county sheriff or the chief probation officer with jurisdiction, adopts a policy authorizing electronic monitoring of defendants and specifies the agency with jurisdiction for this purpose. If the court determines that the defendant has the ability to pay for the monitoring program, the court shall order the defendant to pay for the monitoring. If the court determines that the defendant does not have the ability to pay for the electronic monitoring, the court may order the electronic monitoring to be paid for by the local government that adopted the policy authorizing electronic monitoring. The duration of the electronic monitoring shall not exceed one year from the date the order is issued.
(j)For purposes of this section, local government means the county that has jurisdiction over the protective order.
(a)(1)Upon a good cause belief that harm to, or intimidation or dissuasion of, a victim or witness has occurred or is reasonably likely to occur, a court with jurisdiction over a criminal matter may issue orders, including, but not limited to, the following:
(A)An order issued pursuant to Section 6320 of the Family Code.
(B)An order that a defendant shall not violate any provision of Section 136.1.
(C)An order that a person before the court other than a defendant, including, but not limited to, a subpoenaed witness or other person entering the courtroom of the court, shall not violate any provision of Section 136.1.
(D)An order that a person described in this section shall have no communication whatsoever with a specified witness or a victim except through an attorney under reasonable restrictions that the court may impose.
(E)An order calling for a hearing to determine if an order described in subparagraphs (A) to (D), inclusive, should be issued.
(F)(i)An order that a particular law enforcement agency within the jurisdiction of the court provide protection for a victim, witness, or both, or for immediate family members of a victim or a witness who reside in the same household as the victim or witness or within reasonable proximity of the victims or witness household, as determined by the court. The order shall not be made without the consent of the law enforcement agency except for limited and specified periods of time and upon an express finding by the court of a clear and present danger of harm to the victim or witness or immediate family members of the victim or witness.
(ii)For purposes of this paragraph, immediate family members include the spouse, children, or parents of the victim or witness.
(G)(i)An order protecting a victim or witness of violent crime from all contact by the defendant or contact with the intent to annoy, harass, threaten, or commit acts of violence by the defendant. The court or its designee shall transmit orders made under this paragraph to law enforcement personnel within one business day of the issuance, modification, extension, or termination of the order pursuant to subdivision (a) of Section 6380 of the Family Code. It is the responsibility of the court to transmit the modification, extension, or termination orders made under this paragraph to the same agency that entered the original protective order into the California Restraining and Protective Order System.
(ii)(I)If a court does not issue an order pursuant to clause (i) when the defendant is charged with a crime involving domestic violence, as defined in Section 13700 of this code or in Section 6211 of the Family Code, the court, on its own motion, shall consider issuing a protective order upon a good cause belief that harm to, or intimidation or dissuasion of, a victim or witness has occurred or is reasonably likely to occur, that provides as follows:
(ia)The defendant shall not own, possess, purchase, receive, or attempt to purchase or receive, receive a firearm while the protective order is in effect.
(ib)The defendant shall relinquish ownership or possession of any firearms pursuant to Section 527.9 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
(II)A person who owns, possesses, purchases, or receives, or attempts to purchase or receive, receive a firearm while this protective order is in effect is punishable pursuant to Section 29825.
(iii)An order issued, modified, extended, or terminated by a court pursuant to this subparagraph shall be issued on forms adopted by the Judicial Council that have been approved by the Department of Justice pursuant to subdivision (i) of Section 6380 of the Family Code. However, the fact that an order issued by a court pursuant to this section was not issued on forms adopted by the Judicial Council and approved by the Department of Justice shall not make the order unenforceable.
(iv)A protective order issued under this subparagraph may require the defendant to be placed on electronic monitoring if the local government, with the concurrence of the county sheriff or the chief probation officer with jurisdiction, adopts a policy to authorize electronic monitoring of defendants and specifies the agency with jurisdiction for this purpose. If the court determines that the defendant has the ability to pay for the monitoring program, the court shall order the defendant to pay for the monitoring. If the court determines that the defendant does not have the ability to pay for the electronic monitoring, the court may order electronic monitoring to be paid for by the local government that adopted the policy to authorize electronic monitoring. The duration of electronic monitoring shall not exceed one year from the date the order is issued. The electronic monitoring shall not be in place if the protective order is not in place.
(2)For purposes of this subdivision, a minor who was not a victim of, but who was physically present at the time of, an act of domestic violence is a witness and is deemed to have suffered harm within the meaning of paragraph (1).
(b)A person violating an order made pursuant to subparagraphs (A) to (G), inclusive, of paragraph (1) of subdivision (a) may be punished for a substantive offense described in Section 136.1 or for a contempt of the court making the order. A finding of contempt shall not be a bar to prosecution for a violation of Section 136.1. However, a person held in contempt shall be entitled to credit for punishment imposed therein against a sentence imposed upon conviction of an offense described in Section 136.1. A conviction or acquittal for a substantive offense under Section 136.1 shall be a bar to a subsequent punishment for contempt arising out of the same act.
(c)(1)(A)Notwithstanding subdivision (e), an emergency protective order issued pursuant to Chapter 2 (commencing with Section 6250) of Part 3 of Division 10 of the Family Code or Section 646.91 shall have precedence in enforcement over any other restraining or protective order, provided the emergency protective order meets all of the following requirements:
(i)The emergency protective order is issued to protect one or more individuals who are already protected persons under another restraining or protective order.
(ii)The emergency protective order restrains the individual who is the restrained person in the other restraining or protective order specified in clause (i).
(iii)The provisions of the emergency protective order are more restrictive in relation to the restrained person than are the provisions of the other restraining or protective order specified in clause (i).
(B)An emergency protective order that meets the requirements of subparagraph (A) shall have precedence in enforcement over the provisions of any other restraining or protective order only with respect to those provisions of the emergency protective order that are more restrictive in relation to the restrained person.
(2)Except as described in paragraph (1), a no-contact order, as described in Section 6320 of the Family Code, shall have precedence in enforcement over any other restraining or protective order.
(d)(1)A person subject to a protective order issued under this section shall not own, possess, purchase, or receive, or attempt to purchase or receive, a firearm while the protective order is in effect.
(2)The court shall order a person subject to a protective order issued under this section to relinquish ownership or possession of any firearms pursuant to Section 527.9 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
(3)A person who owns, possesses, purchases, or receives, or attempts to purchase or receive, receive a firearm while the protective order is in effect is punishable pursuant to Section 29825.
(e)(1)When the defendant is charged with a crime involving domestic violence, as defined in Section 13700 of this code or in Section 6211 of the Family Code, a violation of Section 261, 261.5, or former Section 262, or a crime that requires the defendant to register pursuant to subdivision (c) of Section 290, including, but not limited to, commercial sexual exploitation of a minor in violation of Section 236.1, the court shall consider issuing the above-described orders on its own motion. All interested parties shall receive a copy of those orders. To facilitate this, the courts records of all criminal cases involving domestic violence, a violation of Section 261, 261.5, or former Section 262, or a crime that requires the defendant to register pursuant to subdivision (c) of Section 290, including, but not limited to, commercial sexual exploitation of a minor in violation of Section 236.1, shall be marked to clearly alert the court to this issue.
(2)When a complaint, information, or indictment charging a crime involving domestic violence, as defined in Section 13700 or in Section 6211 of the Family Code, a violation of Section 261, 261.5, or former Section 262, or a crime that requires the defendant to register pursuant to subdivision (c) of Section 290, including, but not limited to, commercial sexual exploitation of a minor in violation of Section 236.1, has been issued, except as described in subdivision (c), a restraining order or protective order against the defendant issued by the criminal court in that case has precedence in enforcement over a civil court order against the defendant.
(3)Custody and visitation with respect to the defendant and the defendants minor children may be ordered by a family or juvenile court consistent with the protocol established pursuant to subdivision (f), but if it is ordered after a criminal protective order has been issued pursuant to this section, the custody and visitation order shall make reference to and, if there is not an emergency protective order that has precedence in enforcement pursuant to paragraph (1) of subdivision (c) or a no-contact order, as described in Section 6320 of the Family Code, acknowledge the precedence of enforcement of an appropriate criminal protective order. On or before July 1, 2014, the Judicial Council shall modify the criminal and civil court forms consistent with this subdivision.
(f)On or before January 1, 2003, the Judicial Council shall promulgate a protocol, for adoption by each local court in substantially similar terms, to provide for the timely coordination of all orders against the same defendant and in favor of the same named victim or victims. The protocol shall include, but shall not be limited to, mechanisms for ensuring appropriate communication and information sharing between criminal, family, and juvenile courts concerning orders and cases that involve the same parties and shall permit a family or juvenile court order to coexist with a criminal court protective order subject to the following conditions:
(1)An order that permits contact between the restrained person and the persons children shall provide for the safe exchange of the children and shall not contain language, either printed or handwritten, that violates a no-contact order issued by a criminal court.
(2)The safety of all parties shall be the courts paramount concern. The family or juvenile court shall specify the time, day, place, and manner of transfer of the child as provided in Section 3100 of the Family Code.
(g)On or before January 1, 2003, the Judicial Council shall modify the criminal and civil court protective order forms consistent with this section.
(h)(1)When a complaint, information, or indictment charging a crime involving domestic violence, as defined in Section 13700 or in Section 6211 of the Family Code, has been filed, the court may consider, in determining whether good cause exists to issue an order under subparagraph (A) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (a), the underlying nature of the offense charged and the information provided to the court pursuant to Section 273.75.
(2)When a complaint, information, or indictment charging a violation of Section 261, 261.5, or former Section 262, or a crime that requires the defendant to register pursuant to subdivision (c) of Section 290, including, but not limited to, commercial sexual exploitation of a minor in violation of Section 236.1, has been filed, the court may consider, in determining whether good cause exists to issue an order under paragraph (1) of subdivision (a), the underlying nature of the offense charged, the defendants relationship to the victim, the likelihood of continuing harm to the victim, any current restraining order or protective order issued by a civil or criminal court involving the defendant, and the defendants criminal history, including, but not limited to, prior convictions for a violation of Section 261, 261.5, or former Section 262, a crime that requires the defendant to register pursuant to subdivision (c) of Section 290, including, but not limited to, commercial sexual exploitation of a minor in violation of Section 236.1, any other forms of violence, or a weapons offense.
(i)(1)When a criminal defendant has been convicted of a crime involving domestic violence, as defined in Section 13700 or in Section 6211 of the Family Code, a violation of subdivision (a), (b), or (c) of Section 236.1 prohibiting human trafficking, Section 261, 261.5, former Section 262, subdivision (a) of Section 266h, or subdivision (a) of Section 266i, a violation of Section 186.22, or a crime that requires the defendant to register pursuant to subdivision (c) of Section 290, the court, at the time of sentencing, shall consider issuing an order restraining the defendant from any contact with a victim of the crime. The order may be valid for up to 10 years, as determined by the court. This protective order may be issued by the court regardless of whether the defendant is sentenced to the state prison or a county jail, whether the defendant is subject to mandatory supervision, or whether imposition of sentence is suspended and the defendant is placed on probation. The order may be modified by the sentencing court in the county in which it was issued throughout the duration of the order. It is the intent of the Legislature in enacting this subdivision that the duration of a restraining order issued by the court be based upon the seriousness of the facts before the court, the probability of future violations, and the safety of a victim and the victims immediate family.
(2) When a criminal defendant has been convicted of a crime involving domestic violence, as defined in Section 13700 or in Section 6211 of the Family Code, a violation of Section 261, 261.5, or former Section 262, a violation of Section 186.22, or a crime that requires the defendant to register pursuant to subdivision (c) of Section 290, the court, at the time of sentencing, shall consider issuing an order restraining the defendant from any contact with a percipient witness to the crime if it can be established by clear and convincing evidence that the witness has been harassed, as defined in paragraph (3) of subdivision (b) of Section 527.6 of the Code of Civil Procedure, by the defendant.
(3) An order under this subdivision may include provisions for electronic monitoring if the local government, upon receiving the concurrence of the county sheriff or the chief probation officer with jurisdiction, adopts a policy authorizing electronic monitoring of defendants and specifies the agency with jurisdiction for this purpose. If the court determines that the defendant has the ability to pay for the monitoring program, the court shall order the defendant to pay for the monitoring. If the court determines that the defendant does not have the ability to pay for the electronic monitoring, the court may order the electronic monitoring to be paid for by the local government that adopted the policy authorizing electronic monitoring. The duration of the electronic monitoring shall not exceed one year from the date the order is issued.
(j)For purposes of this section, local government means the county that has jurisdiction over the protective order.
(a)(1)Upon a good cause belief that harm to, or intimidation or dissuasion of, a victim or witness has occurred or is reasonably likely to occur, a court with jurisdiction over a criminal matter may issue orders, including, but not limited to, the following:
(A)An order issued pursuant to Section 6320 of the Family Code.
(B)An order that a defendant shall not violate any provision of Section 136.1.
(C)An order that a person before the court other than a defendant, including, but not limited to, a subpoenaed witness or other person entering the courtroom of the court, shall not violate any provision of Section 136.1.
(D)An order that a person described in this section shall have no communication whatsoever with a specified witness or a victim except through an attorney under reasonable restrictions that the court may impose.
(E)An order calling for a hearing to determine if an order described in subparagraphs (A) to (D), inclusive, should be issued.
(F)(i)An order that a particular law enforcement agency within the jurisdiction of the court provide protection for a victim, witness, or both, or for immediate family members of a victim or a witness who reside in the same household as the victim or witness or within reasonable proximity of the victims or witness household, as determined by the court. The order shall not be made without the consent of the law enforcement agency except for limited and specified periods of time and upon an express finding by the court of a clear and present danger of harm to the victim or witness or immediate family members of the victim or witness.
(ii)For purposes of this paragraph, immediate family members include the spouse, children, or parents of the victim or witness.
(G)(i)An order protecting a victim or witness of violent crime from all contact by the defendant or contact with the intent to annoy, harass, threaten, or commit acts of violence by the defendant. The court or its designee shall transmit orders made under this paragraph to law enforcement personnel within one business day of the issuance, modification, extension, or termination of the order pursuant to subdivision (a) of Section 6380 of the Family Code. It is the responsibility of the court to transmit the modification, extension, or termination orders made under this paragraph to the same agency that entered the original protective order into the California Restraining and Protective Order System.
(ii)(I)If a court does not issue an order pursuant to clause (i) when the defendant is charged with a crime involving domestic violence, as defined in Section 13700 of this code or in Section 6211 of the Family Code, the court, on its own motion, shall consider issuing a protective order upon a good cause belief that harm to, or intimidation or dissuasion of, a victim or witness has occurred or is reasonably likely to occur, that provides as follows:
(ia)The defendant shall not own, possess, purchase, receive, or attempt to purchase or receive, a firearm while the protective order is in effect.
(ib)The defendant shall relinquish ownership or possession of any firearms pursuant to Section 527.9 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
(II)A person who owns, possesses, purchases, or receives, or attempts to purchase or receive, a firearm while this protective order is in effect is punishable pursuant to Section 29825.
(iii)An order issued, modified, extended, or terminated by a court pursuant to this subparagraph shall be issued on forms adopted by the Judicial Council that have been approved by the Department of Justice pursuant to subdivision (i) of Section 6380 of the Family Code. However, the fact that an order issued by a court pursuant to this section was not issued on forms adopted by the Judicial Council and approved by the Department of Justice shall not make the order unenforceable.
(iv)A protective order issued under this subparagraph may require the defendant to be placed on electronic monitoring if the local government, with the concurrence of the county sheriff or the chief probation officer with jurisdiction, adopts a policy to authorize electronic monitoring of defendants and specifies the agency with jurisdiction for this purpose. If the court determines that the defendant has the ability to pay for the monitoring program, the court shall order the defendant to pay for the monitoring. If the court determines that the defendant does not have the ability to pay for the electronic monitoring, the court may order electronic monitoring to be paid for by the local government that adopted the policy to authorize electronic monitoring. The duration of electronic monitoring shall not exceed one year from the date the order is issued. The electronic monitoring shall not be in place if the protective order is not in place.
(2)For purposes of this subdivision, a minor who was not a victim of, but who was physically present at the time of, an act of domestic violence is a witness and is deemed to have suffered harm within the meaning of paragraph (1).
(b)A person violating an order made pursuant to subparagraphs (A) to (G), inclusive, of paragraph (1) of subdivision (a) may be punished for a substantive offense described in Section 136.1 or for a contempt of the court making the order. A finding of contempt shall not be a bar to prosecution for a violation of Section 136.1. However, a person held in contempt shall be entitled to credit for punishment imposed therein against a sentence imposed upon conviction of an offense described in Section 136.1. A conviction or acquittal for a substantive offense under Section 136.1 shall be a bar to a subsequent punishment for contempt arising out of the same act.
(c)(1)(A)Notwithstanding subdivision (e), an emergency protective order issued pursuant to Chapter 2 (commencing with Section 6250) of Part 3 of Division 10 of the Family Code or Section 646.91 shall have precedence in enforcement over any other restraining or protective order, provided the emergency protective order meets all of the following requirements:
(i)The emergency protective order is issued to protect one or more individuals who are already protected persons under another restraining or protective order.
(ii)The emergency protective order restrains the individual who is the restrained person in the other restraining or protective order specified in clause (i).
(iii)The provisions of the emergency protective order are more restrictive in relation to the restrained person than are the provisions of the other restraining or protective order specified in clause (i).
(B)An emergency protective order that meets the requirements of subparagraph (A) shall have precedence in enforcement over the provisions of any other restraining or protective order only with respect to those provisions of the emergency protective order that are more restrictive in relation to the restrained person.
(2)Except as described in paragraph (1), a no-contact order, as described in Section 6320 of the Family Code, shall have precedence in enforcement over any other restraining or protective order.
(d)(1)A person subject to a protective order issued under this section shall not own, possess, purchase, or receive, or attempt to purchase or receive, a firearm while the protective order is in effect.
(2)The court shall order a person subject to a protective order issued under this section to relinquish ownership or possession of any firearms pursuant to Section 527.9 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
(3)A person who owns, possesses, purchases, or receives, or attempts to purchase or receive, a firearm while the protective order is in effect is punishable pursuant to Section 29825.
(e)(1)When the defendant is charged with a crime involving domestic violence, as defined in Section 13700 of this code or in Section 6211 of the Family Code, a violation of Section 261, 261.5, or former Section 262, or a crime that requires the defendant to register pursuant to subdivision (c) of Section 290, including, but not limited to, commercial sexual exploitation of a minor in violation of Section 236.1, the court shall consider issuing the above-described orders on its own motion. All interested parties shall receive a copy of those orders. To facilitate this, the courts records of all criminal cases involving domestic violence, a violation of Section 261, 261.5, or former Section 262, or a crime that requires the defendant to register pursuant to subdivision (c) of Section 290, including, but not limited to, commercial sexual exploitation of a minor in violation of Section 236.1, shall be marked to clearly alert the court to this issue.
(2)When a complaint, information, or indictment charging a crime involving domestic violence, as defined in Section 13700 or in Section 6211 of the Family Code, a violation of Section 261, 261.5, or former Section 262, or a crime that requires the defendant to register pursuant to subdivision (c) of Section 290, including, but not limited to, commercial sexual exploitation of a minor in violation of Section 236.1, has been issued, except as described in subdivision (c), a restraining order or protective order against the defendant issued by the criminal court in that case has precedence in enforcement over a civil court order against the defendant.
(3)Custody and visitation with respect to the defendant and the defendants minor children may be ordered by a family or juvenile court consistent with the protocol established pursuant to subdivision (f), but if it is ordered after a criminal protective order has been issued pursuant to this section, the custody and visitation order shall make reference to and, if there is not an emergency protective order that has precedence in enforcement pursuant to paragraph (1) of subdivision (c) or a no-contact order, as described in Section 6320 of the Family Code, acknowledge the precedence of enforcement of an appropriate criminal protective order. On or before July 1, 2014, the Judicial Council shall modify the criminal and civil court forms consistent with this subdivision.
(f)On or before January 1, 2003, the Judicial Council shall promulgate a protocol, for adoption by each local court in substantially similar terms, to provide for the timely coordination of all orders against the same defendant and in favor of the same named victim or victims. The protocol shall include, but shall not be limited to, mechanisms for ensuring appropriate communication and information sharing between criminal, family, and juvenile courts concerning orders and cases that involve the same parties and shall permit a family or juvenile court order to coexist with a criminal court protective order subject to the following conditions:
(1)An order that permits contact between the restrained person and the persons children shall provide for the safe exchange of the children and shall not contain language, either printed or handwritten, that violates a no-contact order issued by a criminal court.
(2)The safety of all parties shall be the courts paramount concern. The family or juvenile court shall specify the time, day, place, and manner of transfer of the child as provided in Section 3100 of the Family Code.
(g)On or before January 1, 2003, the Judicial Council shall modify the criminal and civil court protective order forms consistent with this section.
(h)(1)When a complaint, information, or indictment charging a crime involving domestic violence, as defined in Section 13700 or in Section 6211 of the Family Code, has been filed, the court may consider, in determining whether good cause exists to issue an order under subparagraph (A) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (a), the underlying nature of the offense charged and the information provided to the court pursuant to Section 273.75.
(2)When a complaint, information, or indictment charging a violation of Section 261, 261.5, or former Section 262, or a crime that requires the defendant to register pursuant to subdivision (c) of Section 290, including, but not limited to, commercial sexual exploitation of a minor in violation of Section 236.1, has been filed, the court may consider, in determining whether good cause exists to issue an order under paragraph (1) of subdivision (a), the underlying nature of the offense charged, the defendants relationship to the victim, the likelihood of continuing harm to the victim, any current restraining order or protective order issued by a civil or criminal court involving the defendant, and the defendants criminal history, including, but not limited to, prior convictions for a violation of Section 261, 261.5, or former Section 262, a crime that requires the defendant to register pursuant to subdivision (c) of Section 290, including, but not limited to, commercial sexual exploitation of a minor in violation of Section 236.1, any other forms of violence, or a weapons offense.
(i)(1)When a criminal defendant has been convicted of a crime involving domestic violence, as defined in Section 13700 or in Section 6211 of the Family Code, a violation of subdivision (a), (b), or (c) of Section 236.1 prohibiting human trafficking, Section 261, 261.5, former Section 262, subdivision (a) of Section 266h, or subdivision (a) of Section 266i, a violation of Section 186.22, or a crime that requires the defendant to register pursuant to subdivision (c) of Section 290, the court, at the time of sentencing, shall consider issuing an order restraining the defendant from any contact with a victim of the crime. The order may be valid for up to 10 years, as determined by the court. This protective order may be issued by the court regardless of whether the defendant is sentenced to the state prison or a county jail, whether the defendant is subject to mandatory supervision, or whether imposition of sentence is suspended and the defendant is placed on probation. The order may be modified by the sentencing court in the county in which it was issued throughout the duration of the order if the court is convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that the modification is in the best interest of the victim. order. It is the intent of the Legislature in enacting this subdivision that the duration of a restraining order issued by the court be based upon the seriousness of the facts before the court, the probability of future violations, and the safety of a victim and the victims immediate family.
(2) When a criminal defendant has been convicted of a crime involving domestic violence, as defined in Section 13700 or in Section 6211 of the Family Code, a violation of Section 261, 261.5, or former Section 262, a violation of Section 186.22, or a crime that requires the defendant to register pursuant to subdivision (c) of Section 290, the court, at the time of sentencing, shall consider issuing an order restraining the defendant from any contact with a percipient witness to the crime if it can be established by clear and convincing evidence that the witness has been harassed, as defined in paragraph (3) of subdivision (b) of Section 527.6 of the Code of Civil Procedure, by the defendant.
(3) An order under this subdivision may include provisions for electronic monitoring if the local government, upon receiving the concurrence of the county sheriff or the chief probation officer with jurisdiction, adopts a policy authorizing electronic monitoring of defendants and specifies the agency with jurisdiction for this purpose. If the court determines that the defendant has the ability to pay for the monitoring program, the court shall order the defendant to pay for the monitoring. If the court determines that the defendant does not have the ability to pay for the electronic monitoring, the court may order the electronic monitoring to be paid for by the local government that adopted the policy authorizing electronic monitoring. The duration of the electronic monitoring shall not exceed one year from the date the order is issued.
(j)For purposes of this section, local government means the county that has jurisdiction over the protective order.
(a)(1)Upon a good cause belief that harm to, or intimidation or dissuasion of, a victim or witness has occurred or is reasonably likely to occur, a court with jurisdiction over a criminal matter may issue orders, including, but not limited to, the following:
(A)An order issued pursuant to Section 6320 of the Family Code.
(B)An order that a defendant shall not violate any provision of Section 136.1.
(C)An order that a person before the court other than a defendant, including, but not limited to, a subpoenaed witness or other person entering the courtroom of the court, shall not violate any provision of Section 136.1.
(D)An order that a person described in this section shall have no communication whatsoever with a specified witness or a victim, victim except through an attorney under reasonable restrictions that the court may impose.
(E)An order calling for a hearing to determine if an order described in subparagraphs (A) to (D), inclusive, should be issued.
(F)(i)An order that a particular law enforcement agency within the jurisdiction of the court provide protection for a victim, witness, or both, or for immediate family members of a victim or a witness who reside in the same household as the victim or witness or within reasonable proximity of the victims or witness household, as determined by the court. The order shall not be made without the consent of the law enforcement agency except for limited and specified periods of time and upon an express finding by the court of a clear and present danger of harm to the victim or witness or immediate family members of the victim or witness.
(ii)For purposes of this paragraph, immediate family members include the spouse, children, or parents of the victim or witness.
(G)(i)An order protecting a victim or witness of violent crime from all contact by the defendant, or contact, defendant or contact with the intent to annoy, harass, threaten, or commit acts of violence, violence by the defendant. The court or its designee shall transmit orders made under this paragraph to law enforcement personnel within one business day of the issuance, modification, extension, or termination of the order, order pursuant to subdivision (a) of Section 6380 of the Family Code. It is the responsibility of the court to transmit the modification, extension, or termination orders made under this paragraph to the same agency that entered the original protective order into the California Restraining and Protective Order System.
(ii)(I)If a court does not issue an order pursuant to clause (i) when the defendant is charged with a crime involving domestic violence violence, as defined in Section 13700 of this code or in Section 6211 of the Family Code, the court, on its own motion, shall consider issuing a protective order upon a good cause belief that harm to, or intimidation or dissuasion of, a victim or witness has occurred or is reasonably likely to occur, that provides as follows:
(ia)The defendant shall not own, possess, purchase, receive, or attempt to purchase or receive, a firearm while the protective order is in effect.
(ib)The defendant shall relinquish ownership or possession of any firearms, firearms pursuant to Section 527.9 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
(II)Every A person who owns, possesses, purchases, or receives, or attempts to purchase or receive, a firearm while this protective order is in effect is punishable pursuant to Section 29825.
(iii)An order issued, modified, extended, or terminated by a court pursuant to this subparagraph shall be issued on forms adopted by the Judicial Council of California that have been approved by the Department of Justice pursuant to subdivision (i) of Section 6380 of the Family Code. However, the fact that an order issued by a court pursuant to this section was not issued on forms adopted by the Judicial Council and approved by the Department of Justice shall not, in and of itself, not make the order unenforceable.
(iv)A protective order issued under this subparagraph may require the defendant to be placed on electronic monitoring if the local government, with the concurrence of the county sheriff or the chief probation officer with jurisdiction, adopts a policy to authorize electronic monitoring of defendants and specifies the agency with jurisdiction for this purpose. If the court determines that the defendant has the ability to pay for the monitoring program, the court shall order the defendant to pay for the monitoring. If the court determines that the defendant does not have the ability to pay for the electronic monitoring, the court may order electronic monitoring to be paid for by the local government that adopted the policy to authorize electronic monitoring. The duration of electronic monitoring shall not exceed one year from the date the order is issued. The electronic monitoring shall not be in place if the protective order is not in place.
(2)For purposes of this subdivision, a minor who was not a victim of, but who was physically present at the time of, an act of domestic violence, violence is a witness and is deemed to have suffered harm within the meaning of paragraph (1).
(b)A person violating an order made pursuant to subparagraphs (A) to (G), inclusive, of paragraph (1) of subdivision (a) may be punished for any a substantive offense described in Section 136.1, 136.1 or for a contempt of the court making the order. A finding of contempt shall not be a bar to prosecution for a violation of Section 136.1. However, a person held in contempt shall be entitled to credit for punishment imposed therein against a sentence imposed upon conviction of an offense described in Section 136.1. A conviction or acquittal for a substantive offense under Section 136.1 shall be a bar to a subsequent punishment for contempt arising out of the same act.
(c)(1)(A)Notwithstanding subdivision (e), an emergency protective order issued pursuant to Chapter 2 (commencing with Section 6250) of Part 3 of Division 10 of the Family Code or Section 646.91 shall have precedence in enforcement over any other restraining or protective order, provided the emergency protective order meets all of the following requirements:
(i)The emergency protective order is issued to protect one or more individuals who are already protected persons under another restraining or protective order.
(ii)The emergency protective order restrains the individual who is the restrained person in the other restraining or protective order specified in clause (i).
(iii)The provisions of the emergency protective order are more restrictive in relation to the restrained person than are the provisions of the other restraining or protective order specified in clause (i).
(B)An emergency protective order that meets the requirements of subparagraph (A) shall have precedence in enforcement over the provisions of any other restraining or protective order only with respect to those provisions of the emergency protective order that are more restrictive in relation to the restrained person.
(2)Except as described in paragraph (1), a no-contact order, as described in Section 6320 of the Family Code, shall have precedence in enforcement over any other restraining or protective order.
(d)(1)A person subject to a protective order issued under this section shall not own, possess, purchase, or receive, or attempt to purchase or receive, a firearm while the protective order is in effect.
(2)The court shall order a person subject to a protective order issued under this section to relinquish ownership or possession of any firearms, firearms pursuant to Section 527.9 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
(3)A person who owns, possesses, purchases, or receives, or attempts to purchase or receive, a firearm while the protective order is in effect is punishable pursuant to Section 29825.
(e)(1)When the defendant is charged with a crime involving domestic violence, as defined in Section 13700 of this code or in Section 6211 of the Family Code, or a violation of Section 261, 261.5, or former Section 262, or a crime that requires the defendant to register pursuant to subdivision (c) of Section 290, including, but not limited to, commercial sexual exploitation of a minor in violation of Section 236.1, the court shall consider issuing the above-described orders on its own motion. All interested parties shall receive a copy of those orders. In order to To facilitate this, the courts records of all criminal cases involving domestic violence or violence, a violation of Section 261, 261.5, or former Section 262, or a crime that requires the defendant to register pursuant to subdivision (c) of Section 290, including, but not limited to, commercial sexual exploitation of a minor in violation of Section 236.1, shall be marked to clearly alert the court to this issue.
(2)When a complaint, information, or indictment charging a crime involving domestic violence, as defined in Section 13700 or in Section 6211 of the Family Code, or a violation of Section 261, 261.5, or former Section 262, or a crime that requires the defendant to register pursuant to subdivision (c) of Section 290, including, but not limited to, commercial sexual exploitation of a minor in violation of Section 236.1, has been issued, except as described in subdivision (c), a restraining order or protective order against the defendant issued by the criminal court in that case has precedence in enforcement over a civil court order against the defendant.
(3)Custody and visitation with respect to the defendant and the defendants minor children may be ordered by a family or juvenile court consistent with the protocol established pursuant to subdivision (f), but if it is ordered after a criminal protective order has been issued pursuant to this section, the custody and visitation order shall make reference to, to and, if there is not an emergency protective order that has precedence in enforcement pursuant to paragraph (1) of subdivision (c), (c) or a no-contact order, as described in Section 6320 of the Family Code, acknowledge the precedence of enforcement of, of an appropriate criminal protective order. On or before July 1, 2014, the Judicial Council shall modify the criminal and civil court forms consistent with this subdivision.
(f)On or before January 1, 2003, the Judicial Council shall promulgate a protocol, for adoption by each local court in substantially similar terms, to provide for the timely coordination of all orders against the same defendant and in favor of the same named victim or victims. The protocol shall include, but shall not be limited to, mechanisms for ensuring appropriate communication and information sharing between criminal, family, and juvenile courts concerning orders and cases that involve the same parties, parties and shall permit a family or juvenile court order to coexist with a criminal court protective order subject to the following conditions:
(1)An order that permits contact between the restrained person and the persons children shall provide for the safe exchange of the children and shall not contain language, either printed or handwritten, that violates a no-contact order issued by a criminal court.
(2)The safety of all parties shall be the courts paramount concern. The family or juvenile court shall specify the time, day, place, and manner of transfer of the child, child as provided in Section 3100 of the Family Code.
(g)On or before January 1, 2003, the Judicial Council shall modify the criminal and civil court protective order forms consistent with this section.
(h)(1)When a complaint, information, or indictment charging a crime involving domestic violence, as defined in Section 13700 or in Section 6211 of the Family Code, has been filed, the court may consider, in determining whether good cause exists to issue an order under subparagraph (A) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (a), the underlying nature of the offense charged, charged and the information provided to the court pursuant to Section 273.75.
(2)When a complaint, information, or indictment charging a violation of Section 261, 261.5, or former Section 262, or a crime that requires the defendant to register pursuant to subdivision (c) of Section 290, including, but not limited to, commercial sexual exploitation of a minor in violation of Section 236.1, has been filed, the court may consider, in determining whether good cause exists to issue an order under paragraph (1) of subdivision (a), the underlying nature of the offense charged, the defendants relationship to the victim, the likelihood of continuing harm to the victim, any current restraining order or protective order issued by a civil or criminal court involving the defendant, and the defendants criminal history, including, but not limited to, prior convictions for a violation of Section 261, 261.5, or former Section 262, a crime that requires the defendant to register pursuant to subdivision (c) of Section 290, including, but not limited to, commercial sexual exploitation of a minor in violation of Section 236.1, any other forms of violence, or a weapons offense.
(i)(1)When a criminal defendant has been convicted of a crime involving domestic violence violence, as defined in Section 13700 or in Section 6211 of the Family Code, a violation of subdivision (a), (b), or (c) of Section 236.1 prohibiting human trafficking, Section 261, 261.5, former Section 262, subdivision (a) of Section 266h, or subdivision (a) of Section 266i, a violation of Section 186.22, or a crime that requires the defendant to register pursuant to subdivision (c) of Section 290, the court, at the time of sentencing, shall consider issuing an order restraining the defendant from any contact with a victim of the crime. The order may be valid for up to 10 years, as determined by the court. This protective order may be issued by the court regardless of whether the defendant is sentenced to the state prison or a county jail or jail, whether the defendant is subject to mandatory supervision, or whether imposition of sentence is suspended and the defendant is placed on probation. The order may be modified by the sentencing court in the county in which it was issued throughout the duration of the order if the court is convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that the modification is in the best interest of the victim. It is the intent of the Legislature in enacting this subdivision that the duration of a restraining order issued by the court be based upon the seriousness of the facts before the court, the probability of future violations, and the safety of a victim and the victims immediate family. (2)
(2) When a criminal defendant has been convicted of a crime involving domestic violence violence, as defined in Section 13700 or in Section 6211 of the Family Code, a violation of Section 261, 261.5, or former Section 262, a violation of Section 186.22, or a crime that requires the defendant to register pursuant to subdivision (c) of Section 290, the court, at the time of sentencing, shall consider issuing an order restraining the defendant from any contact with a percipient witness to the crime if it can be established by clear and convincing evidence that the witness has been harassed, as defined in paragraph (3) of subdivision (b) of Section 527.6 of the Code of Civil Procedure, by the defendant. (3)
(3) An order under this subdivision may include provisions for electronic monitoring if the local government, upon receiving the concurrence of the county sheriff or the chief probation officer with jurisdiction, adopts a policy authorizing electronic monitoring of defendants and specifies the agency with jurisdiction for this purpose. If the court determines that the defendant has the ability to pay for the monitoring program, the court shall order the defendant to pay for the monitoring. If the court determines that the defendant does not have the ability to pay for the electronic monitoring, the court may order the electronic monitoring to be paid for by the local government that adopted the policy authorizing electronic monitoring. The duration of the electronic monitoring shall not exceed one year from the date the order is issued.
(j)For purposes of this section, local government means the county that has jurisdiction over the protective order.
|
Date
|
Status
|
|---|---|
| Jun 29, 2023 | Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 14, Statutes of 2023. |
| Jun 29, 2023 | Approved by the Governor. |
| Jun 23, 2023 | Enrolled and presented to the Governor at 3 p.m. |
| Jun 19, 2023 | Senate amendments concurred in. To Engrossing and Enrolling. (Ayes 67. Noes 0. Page 2284.). |
| Jun 12, 2023 | In Assembly. Concurrence in Senate amendments pending. May be considered on or after June 14 pursuant to Assembly Rule 77. |
| Jun 12, 2023 | Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Assembly. (Ayes 35. Noes 0. Page 1516.). |
| Jun 7, 2023 | Read second time and amended. Ordered to consent calendar. |
| Jun 6, 2023 | From committee: Amend, and do pass as amended. To Consent Calendar. (Ayes 5. Noes 0.) (June 6). |
| May 10, 2023 | Referred to Com. on PUB S. |
| Apr 27, 2023 | In Senate. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment. |
| Apr 27, 2023 | Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Senate. (Ayes 80. Noes 0. Page 1357.) |
| Mar 16, 2023 | Read second time. Ordered to third reading. |
| Mar 15, 2023 | Read second time and amended. Ordered returned to second reading. |
| Mar 14, 2023 | From committee: Amend, and do pass as amended. (Ayes 8. Noes 0.) (March 14). |
| Feb 17, 2023 | Referred to Com. on PUB. S. |
| Feb 7, 2023 | From printer. May be heard in committee March 9. |
| Feb 6, 2023 | Read first time. To print. |
|
Date
|
Description
|
Location
|
Votes
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 19, 2023 | AB 467 Gabriel Concurrence in Senate Amendments | Assembly Floor |
Passed |
|
| Jun 12, 2023 | Consent Calendar AB467 Gabriel et al. | Senate Floor |
Passed |
|
| Jun 6, 2023 | Do pass as amended, and be ordered to the Consent Calendar | Senate Standing Committee on Public Safety |
Passed |
|
| Apr 27, 2023 | AB 467 Gabriel Assembly Third Reading | Assembly Floor |
Passed |
|
| Mar 14, 2023 | Do pass as amended. | 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
|
|---|---|---|
| American Association Of University Women - California | ** Support | |
| California Attorneys For Criminal Justice | ** Support | |
| California Catholic Conference | ** Support | |
| California Partnership To End Domestic Violence | ** Support | |
| California Public Defenders Association | * Indeterminate | Mar 14, 2023 |
| California State Sheriffs' Association | ** Support | |
| Prosecutors Alliance of California | ** Support | |
| Santa Clara County District Attorney | ** Support |
CONCURRENCE IN SENATE AMENDMENTS
CSA1 Bill Id:AB 467
Author:(Gabriel)
As Amended Ver:June 7, 2023
Majority vote
SUMMARY
Clarifies that a court that sentenced a defendant and issued a 10-year criminal protective order, may make modifications to it throughout the duration of the order.
Senate Amendments
Make technical non-substantive amendments.
COMMENTS
Need for this Bill: According to background information provided by the author's office, some courts have decided that although Penal Code Section 136.2 enables them to issue a 10-year criminal protective order (CPO), the statute does not allow for them to modify the order past the period a defendant is serving their sentence or on probation.
The Legislature did not expressly state that a court can modify the protective order and so, some courts may feel they are unable to modify the statute because they no longer have jurisdiction over the case. For the courts that do modify the protective orders, they may feel they can do so under their inherent authority as a court. People v. Municipal Court (Ryan) (1978) 20 Cal.3d 523, 532 [opining that courts should decline to exercise their inherent powers to achieve a different result which would conflict with legislation]; People v. Trippet (1997) 56 Cal.App.4th 1532, 1550.)
This bill would clarify that a court is allowed to modify a 10-year protective order throughout the duration of the order. Doing so will provide courts that were hesitant to modify such a protective order greater guidance.
According to the Author
"AB 467 is a common-sense measure that will change current statute to allow courts to modify the terms of a contact order as long as the court is convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that the modification is in the best interest of the victim. In doing so, this bill will not only strengthen protections for victims of domestic violence – who cannot change the order themselves, thereby endangering their safety – but also prevent punitive practices and overly-harsh punishments in our criminal legal system for couples who reconcile and wish to have the order changed."
Arguments in Support
According to the California Partnership to End Domestic Violence, "A domestic violence restraining order is a court order issued in a domestic violence case that mandates that the accused refrain from harming, threatening, or harassing the victim. The specific terms and conditions of a restraining order will vary from case to case. However, all orders include provisions related to contact between the restrained person and the protected person. The order can either be a 'peaceful contact order' (PCO) or a no contact order (NCO). Victims often seek to modify the terms of the order from PCO to NCO or vice versa.
"Some courts have determined that if the defendant is no longer serving a sentence or is on probation, they do not have the jurisdiction to modify the order. Similarly, some judges have determined that if the defendant is no longer serving a sentence or on probation, they do not have jurisdiction to modify the order, even if the order is active and both the victim and defendant request it.
"This is detrimental to both victims and defendants. Victims who seek to modify a PCO or NCO cannot change the order, which can endanger their safety. Additionally, couples who reconcile and wish to have a PCO cannot change the order, thereby exposing the defendant to additional criminal protective order violations for consensual contact.
"AB 467 will change the current statute to allow courts to modify the terms of a peaceful contact order or no contact order as long as the court is convince beyond a reasonable doubt that the modification is in the best interest of the victim."
Arguments in Opposition
According to the California Public Defenders Association, "CPDA sympathizes with crime victims and understands that modifications to restraining orders may become necessary over time but is concerned that the bill provides no notice requirements or opportunities to be heard by the individuals who are the ones that will be subject to any modifications made to the restraining orders and who will be penalized if they violate the new terms of said orders.
"Moreover, requiring a standard of proof "beyond a reasonable doubt that the modification is in the best interest of the victim" robs victims of their agency by patronizing them. It combines the standard to determine the deprivation of liberty, beyond a reasonable doubt, with the standard for determining child custody 'in the best interest'… "
FISCAL COMMENTS
Unknown. This bill is keyed non-fiscal by the Legislative Counsel.
VOTES:
ASM PUBLIC SAFETY: 8-0-0
YES: Jones-Sawyer, Alanis, Bonta, Bryan, Lackey, Ortega, Santiago, Zbur
ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 80-0-0
YES: Addis, Aguiar-Curry, Alanis, Alvarez, Arambula, Bains, Bauer-Kahan, Bennett, Berman, Boerner, Bonta, Bryan, Calderon, Juan Carrillo, Wendy Carrillo, Cervantes, Chen, Connolly, Megan Dahle, Davies, Dixon, Essayli, Flora, Mike Fong, Vince Fong, Friedman, Gabriel, Gallagher, Garcia, Gipson, Grayson, Haney, Hart, Holden, Hoover, Irwin, Jackson, JonesSawyer, Kalra, Lackey, Lee, Low, Lowenthal, Maienschein, Mathis, McCarty, McKinnor, Muratsuchi, Stephanie Nguyen, Ortega, Pacheco, Papan, Jim Patterson, Joe Patterson, Pellerin, Petrie-Norris, Quirk-Silva, Ramos, Reyes, Luz Rivas, Robert Rivas, Rodriguez, Blanca Rubio, Sanchez, Santiago, Schiavo, Soria, Ta, Ting, Valencia, Villapudua, Waldron, Wallis, Ward, Weber, Wicks, Wilson, Wood, Zbur, Rendon
SENATE FLOOR: 35-0-5
YES: Allen, Alvarado-Gil, Archuleta, Ashby, Atkins, Becker, Blakespear, Bradford, Caballero, Cortese, Dahle, Dodd, Durazo, Glazer, Gonzalez, Grove, Hurtado, Laird, Limón, McGuire, Menjivar, Min, Newman, Nguyen, Padilla, Portantino, Roth, Rubio, Seyarto, Skinner, Smallwood-Cuevas, Umberg, Wahab, Wiener, Wilk
ABS, ABST OR NV: Eggman, Jones, Niello, Ochoa Bogh, Stern
UPDATED
VERSION: June 7, 2023
CONSULTANT: Mureed Rasool / PUB. S. / (916) 319-3744 FN: 0001070
SENATE RULES COMMITTEE Office of Senate Floor Analyses (916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) 327-4478 | AB 467 |
CONSENT
Bill No: AB 467
Author: Gabriel (D), et al.
Amended: 6/7/23 in Senate
Vote: 21
SENATE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE: 5-0, 6/6/23
AYES: Wahab, Ochoa Bogh, Bradford, Skinner, Wiener
ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 80-0, 4/27/23 - See last page for vote
SUBJECT: Domestic violence: restraining orders
SOURCE: Santa Clara County District Attorney
DIGEST:
This bill clarifies that a court that sentenced a defendant and issued a post-conviction protective order may make modifications to the protective order throughout the duration of the order.
ANALYSIS:
Existing law:
- Authorizes the trial court in a criminal case to issue protective orders when there is a good cause belief that harm to, or intimidation or dissuasion of, a victim or witness has occurred or is reasonably likely to occur. (Pen. Code, § 136.2, subd. (a).)
- Provides that a person violating a protective order may be punished for any substantive offense described in provisions of law related to intimidation of witnesses or victims, or for contempt of court. (Pen. Code, § 136.2, subd. (b).)
- Requires a court, at the time of sentencing, to consider issuing an order restraining the defendant from any contact with the victim, that may be valid for up to 10 years, for convictions for domestic violence, human trafficking, a crime in furtherance of a criminal street gang, and offenses requiring sex offender registration. (Pen. Code, § 136.2, subd. (i).)
- Provides that a post-conviction protective order may be issued by the court regardless of whether the defendant is sentenced to the state prison, or a county jail, or subject to mandatory supervision, or whether the defendant is placed on probation. Provides that the duration of a protective order issued by the court be based upon the seriousness of the facts before the court, the probability of future violations, and the safety of the victim and the victim’s immediate family. (Pen. Code, § 136.2, subd. (i)(1).)
- Requires a court to consider issuing an order restraining the defendant from any contact with a percipient witness, upon clear and convincing evidence of witness harassment, in cases in which the defendant has been convicted of domestic violence, specified sex crimes, a crime in furtherance of a criminal street gang, and sex registerable offenses. (Pen. Code, § 136.2, subd. (i)(2).)
- Authorizes a post-conviction protective order to include a condition of electronic monitoring for up to one year, as specified. (Pen. Code, § 136.2, subd. (i)(3).)
- Prohibits a person who is subject to a protective order from owning, possessing, purchasing, attempting to purchase or receive, a firearm while the protective order is in effect, and requires the court to order a person subject to the protective order to relinquish ownership or possession of any firearms. (Pen. Code, § 136.2, subd. (d).)
- Makes it a misdemeanor to willfully and knowingly violating a protective order. (Pen. Code, § 166.)
This bill clarifies that a court that sentenced a defendant and issued a post-conviction protective order may make modifications to the protective order throughout the duration of the order.
Background
As a general matter, a court can issue a restraining order in any criminal proceeding pursuant to Penal Code section 136.2, subdivision (a)(1), upon a good cause belief that harm to, or intimidation or dissuasion of, a victim or witness has occurred or is reasonably likely to occur. Protective orders issued under this portion of the statute are valid only during the pendency of the criminal proceedings. (People v. Ponce (2009) 173 Cal.App.4th 378, 382.)
For certain types of convictions, including domestic violence, the court has the authority to issue a post-conviction protective order for up to ten years. (Pen. Code, § 136.2, subd. (i).)
Disobedience of a court order may be punished as criminal contempt. The crime of contempt is a general intent crime. It is proven by showing that the defendant intended to commit the prohibited act, without any additional showing that he or she intended “to do some further act or achieve some additional consequence.” (People v. Greenfield (1982) 134 Cal.App.3d Supp. 1, 4.) Nevertheless, a violation must also be willful, which in the case of a court order encompasses both intent to disobey the order, and disregard of the duty to obey the order.” (In re Karpf (1970) 10 Cal.App.3d 355, 372.)
Criminal contempt under Penal Code section 166 is a misdemeanor, and proceedings under the statute are conducted like any other misdemeanor offense. (In re McKinney (1968) 70 Cal.2d 8, 10; In re Kreitman (1995) 40 Cal.App.4th 750, 755.) The criminal contempt power is vested in the prosecution, and the trial court has no power to institute criminal contempt proceedings under the Penal Code. (In re McKinney, supra, 70 Cal.2d at p. 13.) A defendant charged with the crime of contempt is “entitled to the full panoply of substantive and due process rights.” (People v. Kalnoki (1992) 7 Cal.App.4t Supp. 8, 11.) Therefore, the defendant has the right to a jury trial, regardless of the sentence imposed. (People v. Earley (2004) 122 Cal.App.4th 542, 550.)
According to the bill’s sponsor, some courts have interpreted Penal Code section 136.2 as not permitting the court to modify a post-conviction protective order once the defendant has completed their sentence or period of probation. This bill would clarify that a court is allowed to modify a post-conviction protective order throughout the duration of the order.
FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: No Local: No
SUPPORT: (Verified 6/6/23)
Santa Clara County District Attorney (source)
American Association of University Women - California
California Attorneys for Criminal Justice
Prosecutors Alliance of California
OPPOSITION: (Verified 6/6/23)
None received
ARGUMENT IN SUPPORT: The Prosecutors Alliance of California writes:
A domestic violence restraining order is a court order issued in a domestic violence case that mandates that the accused refrain from harming, threatening, or harassing the victim. These orders include provisions related to contact between the restrained person and the protected person which can either be a “peaceful contact order” (PCO) or a no contact order (NCO). Victims often seek to modify the order from PCO to NCO or vice versa.
Some courts have determined that if the defendant is no longer serving a sentence and is not on probation, they do not have the jurisdiction to modify the order, even if both the victim and defendant request it. This is detrimental to both victims and defendants. Victims who seek to modify a PCO to NCO cannot change the order, which can endanger their safety. Additionally, couples who reconcile and wish to have a PCO cannot change the order, thereby exposing the defendant to additional criminal protective order violations for consensual contact.
AB 467 will change the current statute to allow courts to modify the terms of a peaceful contact order or no contact order as long as the court is convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that the modification is in the best interest of the victim.
ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 80-0, 4/27/23
AYES: Addis, Aguiar-Curry, Alanis, Alvarez, Arambula, Bains, Bauer-Kahan, Bennett, Berman, Boerner, Bonta, Bryan, Calderon, Juan Carrillo, Wendy Carrillo, Cervantes, Chen, Connolly, Megan Dahle, Davies, Dixon, Essayli, Flora, Mike Fong, Vince Fong, Friedman, Gabriel, Gallagher, Garcia, Gipson, Grayson, Haney, Hart, Holden, Hoover, Irwin, Jackson, Jones-Sawyer, Kalra, Lackey, Lee, Low, Lowenthal, Maienschein, Mathis, McCarty, McKinnor, Muratsuchi, Stephanie Nguyen, Ortega, Pacheco, Papan, Jim Patterson, Joe Patterson, Pellerin, Petrie-Norris, Quirk-Silva, Ramos, Reyes, Luz Rivas, Robert
Rivas, Rodriguez, Blanca Rubio, Sanchez, Santiago, Schiavo, Soria, Ta, Ting, Valencia, Villapudua, Waldron, Wallis, Ward, Weber, Wicks, Wilson, Wood, Zbur, Rendon
Prepared by: Stephanie Jordan / PUB. S. /
6/7/23 15:04:37
**** END ****
SENATE COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC SAFETY
Senator Aisha Wahab, Chair
2023 - 2024 Regular
Bill No: AB 467 Hearing Date: June 6, 2023
Author: | Gabriel | ||
Version: | March 15, 2023 | ||
Urgency: | No | Fiscal: | No |
Consultant: | SJ | ||
Subject: Domestic violence: restraining orders
HISTORY
Source: Santa Clara County District Attorney
Prior Legislation: SB 352 (Block), Ch. 279, Stats. 2015
AB 307 (Campos), Ch. 291, Stats. 2013
SB 723 (Pavley), Ch. 155, Stats. 2011
AB 289 (Spitzer), Ch. 582, Stats. 2007
Support: California Attorneys for Criminal Justice; Prosecutors Alliance of California
Opposition: None known
Assembly Floor Vote: 80 - 0
PURPOSE
The purpose of this bill is to clarify that a court that sentenced a defendant and issued a post-conviction protective order may make modifications to the protective order throughout the duration of the order.
Existing law authorizes the trial court in a criminal case to issue protective orders when there is a good cause belief that harm to, or intimidation or dissuasion of, a victim or witness has occurred or is reasonably likely to occur. (Pen. Code, § 136.2, subd. (a).)
Existing law provides that a person violating a protective order may be punished for any substantive offense described in provisions of law related to intimidation of witnesses or victims, or for contempt of court. (Pen. Code, § 136.2, subd. (b).)
Existing law requires a court, at the time of sentencing, to consider issuing an order restraining the defendant from any contact with the victim, that may be valid for up to 10 years, for convictions for domestic violence, human trafficking, a crime in furtherance of a criminal street gang, and offenses requiring sex offender registration. (Pen. Code, § 136.2, subd. (i).)
Existing law provides that a post-conviction protective order may be issued by the court regardless of whether the defendant is sentenced to the state prison, or a county jail, or subject to mandatory supervision, or whether the defendant is placed on probation. Provides that the duration of a protective order issued by the court be based upon the seriousness of the facts before the court, the probability of future violations, and the safety of the victim and the victim’s immediate family. (Pen. Code, § 136.2, subd. (i)(1).)
Existing law requires a court to consider issuing an order restraining the defendant from any contact with a percipient witness, upon clear and convincing evidence of witness harassment, in cases in which the defendant has been convicted of domestic violence, specified sex crimes, a crime in furtherance of a criminal street gang, and sex registerable offenses. (Pen. Code, § 136.2, subd. (i)(2).)
Existing law authorizes a post-conviction protective order to include a condition of electronic monitoring for up to one year, as specified. (Pen. Code, § 136.2, subd. (i)(3).)
Existing law prohibits a person who is subject to a protective order from owning, possessing, purchasing, attempting to purchase or receive, a firearm while the protective order is in effect, and requires the court to order a person subject to the protective order to relinquish ownership or possession of any firearms. (Pen. Code, § 136.2, subd. (d).)
Existing law makes it a misdemeanor to willfully and knowingly violating a protective order. (Pen. Code, § 166.)
This bill clarifies that a court that sentenced a defendant and issued a post-conviction protective order may make modifications to the protective order throughout the duration of the order.
COMMENTS
- Need For This Bill
According to the author:
AB 467 is a common-sense measure that will change current statute to allow courts to modify the terms of a contact order as long as the court is convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that the modification is in the best interest of the victim. In doing so, this bill will not only strengthen protections for victims of domestic violence—who cannot change the order themselves, thereby endangering their safety—but also prevent punitive practices and overly-harsh punishments in our criminal legal system for couples who reconcile and wish to have the order changed.
- Protective Orders
As a general matter, a court can issue a restraining order in any criminal proceeding pursuant to Penal Code section 136.2, subdivision (a)(1), upon a good cause belief that harm to, or intimidation or dissuasion of, a victim or witness has occurred or is reasonably likely to occur. Protective orders issued under this portion of the statute are valid only during the pendency of the criminal proceedings. (People v. Ponce (2009) 173 Cal.App.4th 378, 382.)
For certain types of convictions, including domestic violence, the court has the authority to issue a post-conviction protective order for up to ten years. (Pen. Code, § 136.2, subd. (i).)
- Criminal Contempt
Disobedience of a court order may be punished as criminal contempt. The crime of contempt is a general intent crime. It is proven by showing that the defendant intended to commit the prohibited act, without any additional showing that he or she intended “to do some further act or achieve some additional consequence.” (People v. Greenfield (1982) 134 Cal.App.3d Supp. 1, 4.) Nevertheless, a violation must also be willful, which in the case of a court order encompasses both intent to disobey the order, and disregard of the duty to obey the order.” (In re Karpf (1970) 10 Cal.App.3d 355, 372.)
Criminal contempt under Penal Code section 166 is a misdemeanor, and proceedings under the statute are conducted like any other misdemeanor offense. (In re McKinney (1968) 70 Cal.2d 8, 10; In re Kreitman (1995) 40 Cal.App.4th 750, 755.) The criminal contempt power is vested in the prosecution, and the trial court has no power to institute criminal contempt proceedings under the Penal Code. (In re McKinney, supra, 70 Cal.2d at p. 13.) A defendant charged with the crime of contempt is “entitled to the full panoply of substantive and due process rights.” (People v. Kalnoki (1992) 7 Cal.App.4t Supp. 8, 11.) Therefore, the defendant has the right to a jury trial, regardless of the sentence imposed. (People v. Earley (2004) 122 Cal.App.4th 542, 550.)
- Effect of This Bill
According to the bill’s sponsor, some courts have interpreted Penal Code section 136.2 as not permitting the court to modify a post-conviction protective order once the defendant has completed their sentence or period of probation. This bill would clarify that a court is allowed to modify a post-conviction protective order throughout the duration of the order.
- Argument in Support
The Prosecutors Alliance of California writes:
A domestic violence restraining order is a court order issued in a domestic violence case that mandates that the accused refrain from harming, threatening, or harassing the victim. These orders include provisions related to contact between the restrained person and the protected person which can either be a “peaceful contact order” (PCO) or a no contact order (NCO). Victims often seek to modify the order from PCO to NCO or vice versa.
Some courts have determined that if the defendant is no longer serving a sentence and is not on probation, they do not have the jurisdiction to modify the order, even if both the victim and defendant request it. This is detrimental to both victims and defendants. Victims who seek to modify a PCO to NCO cannot change the order, which can endanger their safety. Additionally, couples who reconcile and wish to have a PCO cannot change the order, thereby exposing the defendant to additional criminal protective order violations for consensual contact.
AB 467 will change the current statute to allow courts to modify the terms of a peaceful contact order or no contact order as long as the court is convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that the modification is in the best interest of the victim.
-- END --
ASSEMBLY THIRD READING
ATR Bill Id:AB 467
Author:(Gabriel)
As Amended Ver:March 15, 2023
Majority vote
SUMMARY
Clarifies that a court that sentenced a defendant and issued a 10-year criminal protective order, may make modifications to it throughout the duration of the order.
Major Provisions
COMMENTS
Need for this Bill: According to background information provided by the author's office, some courts have decided that although Penal Code Section 136.2, enables them to issue a 10 year criminal protective order (CPO), the statute does not allow for them to modify the order past the period a defendant is serving their sentence or on probation.
The Legislature did not expressly state that a court can modify the protective order and so, some courts may feel they are unable to modify the statute because they no longer have jurisdiction over the case. For the courts that do modify the protective orders, they may feel they can do so under their inherent authority as a court. People v. Municipal Court (Ryan) (1978) 20 Cal.3d 523, 532 [opining that courts should decline to exercise their inherent powers to achieve a different result which would conflict with legislation]; People v. Trippet (1997) 56 Cal.App.4th 1532, 1550.)
This bill would clarify that a court is allowed to modify a 10-year protective order throughout the duration of the order. Doing so will provide courts that were hesitant to modify such a protective order greater guidance.
According to the Author
"AB 467 is a common-sense measure that will change current statute to allow courts to modify the terms of a contact order as long as the court is convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that the modification is in the best interest of the victim. In doing so, this bill will not only strengthen protections for victims of domestic violence – who cannot change the order themselves, thereby endangering their safety – but also prevent punitive practices and overly-harsh punishments in our criminal legal system for couples who reconcile and wish to have the order changed."
Arguments in Support
According to the California Partnership to End Domestic Violence, "A domestic violence restraining order is a court order issued in a domestic violence case that mandates that the accused refrain from harming, threatening, or harassing the victim. The specific terms and conditions of a restraining order will vary from case to case. However, all orders include provisions related to contact between the restrained person and the protected person. The order can either be a 'peaceful contact order' (PCO) or a no contact order (NCO). Victims often seek to modify the terms of the order from PCO to NCO or vice versa.
"Some courts have determined that if the defendant is no longer serving a sentence or is on probation, they do not have the jurisdiction to modify the order. Similarly, some judges have determined that if the defendant is no longer serving a sentence or on probation, they do not have jurisdiction to modify the order, even if the order is active and both the victim and defendant request it.
"This is detrimental to both victims and defendants. Victims who seek to modify a PCO or NCO cannot change the order, which can endanger their safety. Additionally, couples who reconcile and wish to have a PCO cannot change the order, thereby exposing the defendant to additional criminal protective order violations for consensual contact.
"AB 467 will change the current statute to allow courts to modify the terms of a peaceful contact order or no contact order as long as the court is convince beyond a reasonable doubt that the modification is in the best interest of the victim."
Arguments in Opposition
According to the California Public Defenders Association, "CPDA sympathizes with crime victims and understands that modifications to restraining orders may become necessary over time but is concerned that the bill provides no notice requirements or opportunities to be heard by the individuals who are the ones that will be subject to any modifications made to the restraining orders and who will be penalized if they violate the new terms of said orders.
"Moreover, requiring a standard of proof "beyond a reasonable doubt that the modification is in the best interest of the victim" robs victims of their agency by patronizing them. It combines the standard to determine the deprivation of liberty, beyond a reasonable doubt, with the standard for determining child custody 'in the best interest'… "
FISCAL COMMENTS
Unknown. This bill is keyed non-fiscal by the Legislative Counsel.
VOTES
ASM PUBLIC SAFETY: 8-0-0
YES: Jones-Sawyer, Alanis, Bonta, Bryan, Lackey, Ortega, Santiago, Zbur
UPDATED
VERSION: March 15, 2023
CONSULTANT: Mureed Rasool / PUB. S. / (916) 319-3744 FN: 0000028
Date of Hearing: March 14, 2023
Counsel: Mureed Rasool
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON
Reginald Byron Jones-Sawyer, Sr., Chair
ABPCA Bill Id:
Author:() – As Ver:
As Proposed to Be Amended in Committee
SUMMARY: Clarifies that a court that sentenced a defendant and issued a 10 year criminal protective order, may make modifications to it throughout the duration of the order.
EXISTING LAW:
- Authorizes the trial court in a criminal case to issue protective orders when there is a good cause belief that harm to, or intimidation or dissuasion of, a victim or witness has occurred or is reasonably likely to occur. (Pen. Code, § 136.2, subd. (a).)
- Provides that a person violating a protective order may be punished for any substantive offense described in provisions of law related to intimidation of witnesses or victims, or for contempt of court. (Pen. Code, § 136.2, subd. (b).)
- Requires a court to consider issuing up to a 10 year restraining order protecting victims for convictions including, but not limited to domestic violence, certain types of human trafficking, gang activity, statutory rape, pimping of a minor, and offenses requiring sex offender registration. (Pen. Code, §§ 136.2, subd. (i)(1); 273.5, subd. (j); 368, subd. (l); 646.9, subd. (k); 1201.3, subd. (a).)
- Provides that a post-conviction protective order may be issued by the court regardless of whether the defendant is sentenced to the state prison, or a county jail, or subject to mandatory supervision, or whether the defendant is placed on probation. The duration of a protective order issued by the court should be based upon the seriousness of the facts before the court, the probability of future violations, and the safety of the victim and the victim’s immediate family. (Pen. Code, § 136.2, subd. (i)(1).)
- Requires a court to consider issuing up to a 10 year restraining order protecting percipient witness, upon clear and convicing evidence of witness harassment, in cases with convictions including, but not limited to domestic violence, statutory rape, gang activity, and sex registerable offenses. (Pen. Code, § 136.2, subd. (i)(2).)
- Authorizes a court to place conditions on a 10 year restraining order that can include electronic monitoring for up to one year, as specified. (Pen. Code, § 136.2, subd. (i)(3).)
- Prohibits a person who is subject to a protective order from owning, possessing, purchasing, attempting to purchase or receive, a firearm while the protective order is in effect, and the court shall order a person subject to the protective order to relinquish ownership or possession of any firearms. (Pen. Code, § 136.2, subd. (d).)
- Authorizes courts to issue civil harassment restraining orders, as specified. (Code Civ. Proc. § 527 et seq.)
- Authorizes court to issue domestic violence restraining orders, as specified. (Fam. Code, § 6300 et seq.)
- Punishes an individual for willful disobedience of, among other things, a lawful restraining order. (Pen. Code, §§ 166 & 273.6.)
FISCAL EFFECT:
Unknown
COMMENTS:
- Author's Statement: According to the author, “AB 467 is a common-sense measure that will change current statute to allow courts to modify the terms of a contact order as long as the court is convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that the modification is in the best interest of the victim. In doing so, this bill will not only strengthen protections for victims of domestic violence—who cannot change the order themselves, thereby endangering their safety—but also prevent punitive practices and overly-harsh punishments in our criminal legal system for couples who reconcile and wish to have the order changed.”
- Protective Orders, Generally: As a general matter, a court can issue a restraining order in any criminal proceeding pursuant to Penal Code Section 136.2, subdivision (a)(1), upon a good cause belief that harm to, or intimidation or dissuasion of, a victim or witness has occurred or is reasonably likely to occur. Protective orders issued under this portion of the statute are valid only during the pendency of the criminal proceedings. (People v. Ponce (2009) 173 Cal.App.4th 378, 382.)
Specific to domestic violence and offenses requiring sex offender registration, the case file must be clearly marked so that the court is aware of their nature for purposes of considering a protective order. (Pen. Code, § 136.2, subd. (e)(1).) The court has the authority to issue pre- and post-conviction protective orders. (Pen. Code, § 136.2.) When a defendant has been convicted of domestic violence, as defined, and rape, statutory rape, spousal rape, or any crime requiring sex offender registration, the court can issue a protective order lasting up to 10 years. (Pen. Code, § 136.2, subd. (i)(1).) The same is true of stalking and elder abuse cases. (Pen. Code, § 646.9, subd. (k); Pen. Code, § 368(l).) - Criminal Contempt: Disobedience of a court order may be punished as criminal contempt. The crime of contempt is a general intent crime. It is proven by showing that the defendant intended to commit the prohibited act, without any additional showing that he or she intended “to do some further act or achieve some additional consequence.” (People v. Greenfield (1982) 134 Cal.App.3d Supp. 1, 4.) Nevertheless, a violation must also be willful, which in the case of a court order encompasses both intent to disobey the order, and disregard of the duty to obey the order.” (In re Karpf (1970) 10 Cal.App.3d 355, 372.)
Criminal contempt under Penal Code Section 166 is a misdemeanor, and so proceedings under the statute are conducted like any other misdemeanor offense. (In re McKinney (1968) 70 Cal.2d 8, 10; In re Kreitman (1995) 40 Cal.App.4th 750, 755.) Therefore, the criminal contempt power is vested in the prosecution; the trial court has no power to institute criminal contempt proceedings under the Penal Code. (In re McKinney, supra, 70 Cal.2d at p. 13.) A defendant charged with the crime of contempt is “entitled to the full panoply of substantive and due process rights.” (People v. Kalnoki (1992) 7 Cal.App.4t Supp. 8, 11.) Therefore, the defendant has the right to a jury trial, regardless of the sentence imposed. (People v. Earley (2004) 122 Cal.App.4th 542, 550.) - Need for this Bill: According to background information provided by the author’s office, some courts have decided that although Penal Code section 136.2, enables them to issue a 10 year criminal protective order (CPO), the statute does not allow for them to modify the order past the period a defendant is serving their sentence or on probation.
The Legislature did not expressly state that a court can modify the protective order and so, some courts may feel they are unable to modify the statute because they no longer have jurisdiction over the case. For the courts that do modify the protective orders, they may feel they can do so under their inherent authority as a court. People v. Municipal Court (Ryan) (1978) 20 Cal.3d 523, 532 [opining that courts should decline to exercise their inherent powers to achieve a different result which would conflict with legislation]; People v. Trippet (1997) 56 Cal.App.4th 1532, 1550.)
This bill would clarify that a court is allowed to modify a 10 year protective order throughout the duration of the order. Doing so will provide courts that were hesitant to modify such a protective order greater guidance.
- Due Process: Critics of the bill have pointed out that the bill does not specify any notice requirement or provide for opportunities to be heard. Some California Courts of Appeal have ruled that under some circumstances due process requires a defendant be given notice and opportunity to be heard during a proceeding regarding a criminal protective order. (See Babalola v. Superior Court (2011) 192 Cal.App.4th 948, 965; In re Jonathan V. (2018) 19 Cal.App.5th 236, 242-243.) In both of those cases, the prosecution sought a protective order without previously notifying the defendant, and without presenting evidence that any emergency circumstances existed. Other statutes do outline certain procedural notice and hearing rules. (Code Civ. Proc., § 527 et seq.; Fam. Code, § 6300 et seq.)
- Argument in Support: According to the California Partnership to End Domestic Violence, “A domestic violence restraining order is a court order issued in a domestic violence case that mandates that the accused refrain from harming, threatening, or harassing the victim. The specific terms and conditions of a restraining order will vary from case to case. However, all orders include provisions related to contact between the restrained person and the protected person. The order can either be a ‘peaceful contact order’ (PCO) or a no contact order (NCO). Victims often seek to modify the terms of the order from PCO to NCO or vice versa.
“Some courts have determined that if the defendant is no longer serving a sentence or is on probation, they do not have the jurisdiction to modify the order. Similarly, some judges have determined that if the defendant is no longer serving a sentence or on probation, they do not have jurisdiction to modify the order, even if the order is active and both the victim and defendant request it.
“This is detrimental to both victims and defendants. Victims who seek to modify a PCO or NCO cannot change the order, which can endanger their safety. Additionally, couples who reconcile and wish to have a PCO cannot change the order, thereby exposing the defendant to additional criminal protective order violations for consensual contact.
“AB 467 will change the current statute to allow courts to modify the terms of a peaceful contact order or no contact order as long as the court is convince beyond a reasonable doubt that the modification is in the best interest of the victim.” - Argument in Opposition: According to the California Public Defenders Association, “CPDA sympathizes with crime victims and understands that modifications to restraining orders may become necessary over time but is concerned that the bill provides no notice requirements or opportunities to be heard by the individuals who are the ones that will be subject to any modifications made to the restraining orders and who will be penalized if they violate the new terms of said orders.
“Moreover, requiring a standard of proof “beyond a reasonable doubt that the modification is in the best interest of the victim” robs victims of their agency by patronizing them. It combines the standard to determine the deprivation of liberty, beyond a reasonable doubt, with the standard for determining child custody ‘in the best interest’… ” - Related Legislation:
- SB 459 (Rubio), would require a court to modify a specified protective order only if the court is convinced the modification is in the best interest of the protected person. SB 459 is pending hearing in the Senate Judiciary Committee.
- SB 741 (Min), would declare legislative intent to prohibit prehearing discovery in hearings governed by the Domestic Violence Prevention Act unless authorized by the court and outlines prehearing discovery rules. SB 741 is pending hearing in the Senate Judiciary Committee.
- SB 459 (Rubio), would require a court to modify a specified protective order only if the court is convinced the modification is in the best interest of the protected person. SB 459 is pending hearing in the Senate Judiciary Committee.
- Prior Legislation:
- SB 352 (Block) Chapter 279, Statutes of 2015, authorized courts to issue a 10 year protective order upon convictions of certain elder abuse offenses.
- AB 307 (Campos), Chapter 291, Statutes of 2013, allows a court to issue a protective order for up to 10 years when a defendant is convicted of specified sex crimes, regardless of the sentence imposed.
- SB 723 (Pavley), Chapter 155, Statutes of 2011, allows a court to issue a protective order for up to 10 years when a defendant is convicted for an offense involving "domestic violence."
- AB 289 (Spitzer), Chapter 582, Statutes of 2007, allows courts to issue a protective order for up to 10 years for a conviction stemming from a domestic violence causing corporal injury conviction.
- SB 352 (Block) Chapter 279, Statutes of 2015, authorized courts to issue a 10 year protective order upon convictions of certain elder abuse offenses.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:
Support
California Attorneys for Criminal Justice
California Catholic Conference
California Partnership to End Domestic Violence
California State Sheriffs' Association
Prosecutors Alliance California
Santa Clara County District Attorney's Office
Opposition
California Public Defenders Association (CPDA)
Analysis Prepared by:
Discussed in Hearing
1MIN
Assembly Floor
2MIN
Assembly Floor
7MIN
Assembly Standing Committee on Public Safety
Bill Author
Bill Co-Author(s):
