Criminal procedure: arraignment.
Do you support it?
Want to know if it passes?
We'll email you when AB 61 moves — a committee vote, a floor vote, or a signature. Nothing else.
Free forever · unsubscribe in one click.
Your answer was recorded either way.
Which district are you in?
Your ZIP is all we need to match you to your own representatives — so we can tell you how they voted on AB 61.
You're tracking AB 61
We'll email you the moment it moves.
AB 61 — Criminal procedure: arraignment.
Last action — Died on inactive file.
No card. One bill, free forever — alerts when it moves.
-
✓Introduced
-
2In Committee
-
3Passed Assembly
-
4Passed Senate
-
5To Executive
-
6Enacted
This bill died with 2023-2024 Regular Session. It reached “In Committee” and never advanced before the session ended, so it can no longer move — a new version would have to be reintroduced in the current session.
This bill is no longer active — its legislative session has ended, so there is no live prognosis. It would have to be reintroduced in the current session to move again.
Summary
Existing law requires a person, once arrested, to be taken before a magistrate without delay and, in any event, within 48 hours after arrest, not including weekends and holidays, as specified. This bill would remove the weekends and holidays exemption, thereby requiring a person to be taken before the court within 48 hours of their arrest, or to be released, except that if the 48-hour period expires at a time that the court is in session, the arraignment can occur anytime that day. Existing law requires a person arrested without a warrant to be taken before the nearest magistrate in the county in which the offense is triable without delay. Existing law also authorizes a peace officer to release the arrested person from custody instead of taking them before a magistrate under certain specified circumstances, including if the person was arrested for intoxication only. This bill would require the person to be taken before the magistrate within 48 hours of their arrest. This bill would require that the court make an initial determination of probable cause, as specified, no more than 48 hours after the warrantless arrest. The bill would also require that if the court makes an initial finding of no probable cause, the court order the person to be released immediately. Existing law similarly requires a juvenile that has been arrested to be released with 48 hours, excluding judicial holidays, unless a petition has been filed to make the minor a ward of the court or charges have been filed charging the minor as an adult. This bill would remove the judicial holidays exemption and the petition exemption and would instead prohibit any juvenile from being held more than 48 hours if they did not receive an initial judicial determination of probable cause. By imposing a higher level of service on prosecutors, public defenders, police, jails, and courthouses, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.
Bill Text
- Amended 03/08/23 - Amended Assembly Current pdf March 08, 2023
- Amended 02/23/23 - Amended Assembly pdf February 23, 2023
- Introduced 12/06/22 - Introduced pdf December 06, 2022
- AB61 View text html
Action History
-
Died on inactive file.
-
Ordered to inactive file at the request of Assembly Member Bryan.
-
Read second time. Ordered to third reading.
-
From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 11. Noes 4.) (May 18).
-
In committee: Set, first hearing. Referred to APPR. suspense file.
-
In committee: Hearing postponed by committee.
-
Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
-
Read second time and amended.
-
From committee: Amend, and do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 6. Noes 1.) (March 7).
-
Re-referred to Com. on PUB. S.
-
From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to Com. on PUB. S. Read second time and amended.
-
Referred to Com. on PUB. S.
-
Read first time.
-
From printer. May be heard in committee January 6.
-
Introduced. To print.
Sponsors
- Isaac G. Bryan · Primary
Sponsorship breakdown
Export CSV (upgrade) →1 sponsors · 0 co-sponsors · 121 not signed on · 4 voted No
Sponsors (1)
- Bryan, Isaac G. Democratic
Co-sponsors (0)
None.
Not signed on (121)
121 members have not signed on to this bill.
Show all 121 →"Not signed on" means a member has not sponsored or co-sponsored this bill — it does not imply opposition. Members flagged Voted No have a recorded No vote on this bill.
Votes
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Democratic | 9 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Unaffiliated | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| Republican | 0 | 3 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 11 | 4 | 0 | 1 |
| % of votes cast | 69% | 25% | 0% | 6% |
How each member voted (16)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Holden | — | Yea |
| Mathis | — | Nay |
| Wendy Carrillo | — | Yea |
| Bryan, Isaac G. | Democratic | Yea |
| Calderon, Lisa | Democratic | Yea |
| Fong, Mike | Democratic | Yea |
| Hart, Gregg | Democratic | Yea |
| Lowenthal, Josh | Democratic | Yea |
| Ortega, Liz | Democratic | Yea |
| Papan, Diane | Democratic | Yea |
| Pellerin, Gail | Democratic | Yea |
| Rivas, Robert | Democratic | Not Voting |
| Weber Pierson, M.D., Akilah | Democratic | Yea |
| Dahle, Megan | Republican | Nay |
| Dixon, Diane | Republican | Nay |
| Sanchez, Kate | Republican | Nay |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Democratic | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Unaffiliated | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Republican | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| Total | 6 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| % of votes cast | 75% | 13% | 0% | 13% |
How each member voted (8)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Jones-Sawyer | — | Yea |
| Santiago | — | Yea |
| Bonta, Mia | Democratic | Yea |
| Bryan, Isaac G. | Democratic | Yea |
| Ortega, Liz | Democratic | Yea |
| Zbur, Rick Chavez | Democratic | Yea |
| Alanis, Juan | Republican | Not Voting |
| Lackey, Tom | Republican | Nay |
Subjects
Frequently asked questions
- What does AB 61 do?
- Existing law requires a person, once arrested, to be taken before a magistrate without delay and, in any event, within 48 hours after arrest, not including weekends and holidays, as specified. This bill would remove the weekends and holidays exemption, thereby requiring a person to be taken before the court within 48 hours of their arrest, or to be released, except that if the 48-hour period expires at a time that the court is in session, the arraignment can occur anytime that day. Existing law requires a person arrested without a warrant to be taken before the nearest magistrate in the county in which the offense is triable without delay. Existing law also authorizes a peace officer to release the arrested person from custody instead of taking them before a magistrate under certain specified circumstances, including if the person was arrested for intoxication only. This bill would require the person to be taken before the magistrate within 48 hours of their arrest. This bill would require that the court make an initial determination of probable cause, as specified, no more than 48 hours after the warrantless arrest. The bill would also require that if the court makes an initial finding of no probable cause, the court order the person to be released immediately. Existing law similarly requires a juvenile that has been arrested to be released with 48 hours, excluding judicial holidays, unless a petition has been filed to make the minor a ward of the court or charges have been filed charging the minor as an adult. This bill would remove the judicial holidays exemption and the petition exemption and would instead prohibit any juvenile from being held more than 48 hours if they did not receive an initial judicial determination of probable cause. By imposing a higher level of service on prosecutors, public defenders, police, jails, and courthouses, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.
- Who sponsors AB 61?
- AB 61 is sponsored by Bryan, Isaac G. (Democratic).
- What is the current status of AB 61?
- This bill died with 2023-2024 Regular Session. It reached “In Committee” and never advanced before the session ended, so it can no longer move — a new version would have to be reintroduced in the current session.
- Where can I track AB 61?
- Track AB 61 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.
Make your voice heard on AB 61
Find the representatives who decide this bill and tell them where you stand — for yourself, or mobilize your whole list in one click with One Click Politics advocacy software.
Stay ahead of AB 61
Last checked for changes 3 months ago · updated continuously
One Click Politics tracks every bill in Congress and all 50 states.
Track this bill →