California 2023-2024 Regular Session

California Assembly Bill AB709

Introduced
2/13/23  
Refer
2/23/23  
Introduced
2/13/23  
Report Pass
4/12/23  
Refer
2/23/23  
Report Pass
4/12/23  
Engrossed
4/20/23  
Engrossed
4/20/23  
Refer
5/3/23  
Refer
4/20/23  
Report Pass
5/15/23  
Refer
5/3/23  
Report Pass
5/15/23  
Report Pass
5/31/23  
Refer
5/15/23  
Report Pass
5/31/23  
Report Pass
6/14/23  
Refer
5/31/23  
Refer
6/15/23  
Report Pass
6/14/23  
Refer
6/15/23  
Report Pass
7/6/23  
Report Pass
7/6/23  
Refer
7/6/23  
Refer
9/12/23  
Refer
9/12/23  
Enrolled
9/13/23  
Chaptered
10/8/23  
Enrolled
9/13/23  
Chaptered
10/8/23  

Caption

Criminal history information.

Impact

The bill's enactment is expected to have significant implications for law enforcement and public defenders. By ensuring that defense teams receive timely access to pertinent information about law enforcement officers, the bill is positioned to strengthen the integrity of the judicial process. Furthermore, it modifies the existing legal framework by broadening the circumstances under which local criminal justice agencies can share criminal history details, ultimately enhancing the efficiency of legal proceedings, particularly in cases where police testimony could impact outcomes.

Summary

Assembly Bill 709, introduced by McKinnor, amends Section 13300 of the Penal Code regarding local summary criminal history information. This legislation seeks to enhance the transparency and efficiency of the criminal justice process by allowing a public prosecutor to provide opposing counsel a list containing only the names of peace officers and defendants involved in cases where the officer's testimony may be relevant. This establishes a more formalized mechanism for notifying defense attorneys about potential exculpatory or impeachment evidence related to those officers, thereby aiming to protect defendants' rights to a fair trial.

Sentiment

The general sentiment around AB 709 appears to be positive, especially among proponents of reform within the criminal justice system. Supporters argue that this bill is a critical step toward acknowledging the importance of exculpatory evidence in criminal proceedings and fostering accountability among law enforcement. Nevertheless, concerns have been raised regarding how this expansion of agency capabilities might lead to potential misuse or overreach in information dissemination, underscoring the need for clear guidelines and constraints.

Contention

There are points of contention regarding the implications of expanding the public prosecutor's ability to disclose sensitive records. While advocates celebrate the move toward greater accountability and transparency, critics worry about the potential for misuse of the information shared. The balance between protecting defendants' rights and safeguarding the privacy of criminal justice entities will be a critical area for further legislative and judicial scrutiny as the bill is implemented.

Companion Bills

No companion bills found.

Similar Bills

CA SB987

Pretrial release: pretrial assessment agencies.

CA AB2354

Pretrial release: pretrial assessment agencies.

CA AB2917

Firearms: restraining orders.

CA SB1298

The Increasing Access to Employment Act.

CA AB2715

Employers: prohibited disclosure of information: arrest or detention.

CA AB1480

Employers: prohibited disclosure of information: arrest or detention.

CA AB1372

Bar pilots: pilotage rates.

CA AB1076

Criminal records: automatic relief.