California 2023-2024 Regular Session Status: In Committee 1 D cosponsors

SB 912 — Colorimetric field drug tests.

Last action — May 16 hearing: Held in committee and under submission.

Track this bill free

No card. One bill, free forever — alerts when it moves.

  1. ✓
    Introduced
  2. 2
    In Committee
  3. 3
    Passed Senate
  4. 4
    Passed Assembly
  5. 5
    To Executive
  6. 6
    Enacted

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This bill is no longer active — its legislative session has ended, so there is no live prognosis.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 prohibits the possession of certain controlled substances. The California Constitution provides for the Right to Truth-in-Evidence, which requires a 23 vote of the Legislature to exclude any relevant evidence from any criminal proceeding, as specified. This bill would require law enforcement agencies and prosecutorial entities to adopt policies for the arrest and prosecution of drug possession charges to ensure reliable and accurate identifications of controlled substances and to maintain the integrity of convictions, as specified. Unless a test from a crime laboratory confirms the presence of a controlled substance in the sample, the bill would prohibit the use of a colorimetric field drug test, as defined, by law enforcement for a determination of probable cause for an arrest, by a prosecutor when deciding whether to charge a person, by a prosecutor as evidence against a defendant in an arraignment or preliminary hearing, or by a court for a conviction or sentencing, as specified. By excluding relevant evidence from a criminal proceeding, this bill would require a 23 vote of the Legislature. The bill would, when a colorimetric field drug test is used for any reason, allow an individual who pleads guilty to a charge of drug possession to withdraw the plea and move for dismissal of charges in the event of a confirmatory laboratory test that finds that there was no controlled substance in the sample. The bill would allow a defendant to request a confirmatory test at any time during the pendency of the case or, subsequent to the entry of the plea, up to a year after the adjudication of the case. By increasing the duties of local law enforcement, 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

Action History

  1. May 16 hearing: Held in committee and under submission.

  2. Set for hearing May 16.

  3. April 8 hearing: Placed on APPR suspense file.

  4. Set for hearing April 8.

  5. From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 4. Noes 1. Page 3283.) (March 12). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.

  6. From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on PUB S.

  7. From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on PUB S.

  8. Set for hearing March 12.

  9. Referred to Com. on PUB S.

  10. From printer. May be acted upon on or after February 8.

  11. Introduced. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment. To print.

Sponsors

Sponsorship breakdown

Export CSV (upgrade) →

1 sponsors · 0 co-sponsors · 121 not signed on · 1 voted No

Sponsors (1)

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.

Whip count is in markup. Polling the chamber and every recorded vote this session. Only the first open is slow. It’s instant for you after this. Calling the roll · Tallying · Engrossing

Votes

Subjects

public-safety civil-rights
Cross-referencing the record. Reading this bill against every other bill in the corpus by meaning, not keywords. Only the first open is slow. It’s instant for you after this. Matching · Ranking · Engrossing

Frequently asked questions

What does SB 912 do?
Existing law prohibits the possession of certain controlled substances. The California Constitution provides for the Right to Truth-in-Evidence, which requires a 23 vote of the Legislature to exclude any relevant evidence from any criminal proceeding, as specified. This bill would require law enforcement agencies and prosecutorial entities to adopt policies for the arrest and prosecution of drug possession charges to ensure reliable and accurate identifications of controlled substances and to maintain the integrity of convictions, as specified. Unless a test from a crime laboratory confirms the presence of a controlled substance in the sample, the bill would prohibit the use of a colorimetric field drug test, as defined, by law enforcement for a determination of probable cause for an arrest, by a prosecutor when deciding whether to charge a person, by a prosecutor as evidence against a defendant in an arraignment or preliminary hearing, or by a court for a conviction or sentencing, as specified. By excluding relevant evidence from a criminal proceeding, this bill would require a 23 vote of the Legislature. The bill would, when a colorimetric field drug test is used for any reason, allow an individual who pleads guilty to a charge of drug possession to withdraw the plea and move for dismissal of charges in the event of a confirmatory laboratory test that finds that there was no controlled substance in the sample. The bill would allow a defendant to request a confirmatory test at any time during the pendency of the case or, subsequent to the entry of the plea, up to a year after the adjudication of the case. By increasing the duties of local law enforcement, 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 SB 912?
SB 912 is sponsored by Wiener, Scott D. (Democratic).
What is the current status of SB 912?
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 SB 912?
Track SB 912 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.

Make your voice heard on SB 912

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.

Find my representatives → Run a campaign

Stay ahead of SB 912

Last checked for changes 3 months ago · updated continuously

One Click Politics tracks every bill in Congress and all 50 states.

Track this bill →