California 2023-2024 Regular Session Status: In Committee 5 D cosponsors

AB 742 — Law enforcement: police canines.

Last action — Died on inactive file.

  1. ✓
    Introduced
  2. 2
    In Committee
  3. 3
    Passed Assembly
  4. 4
    Passed Senate
  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This bill is no longer active — its legislative session has ended, so there is no live prognosis.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 authorizes a peace officer to use reasonable force to effect the arrest, to prevent escape, or to overcome resistance of an individual. Existing law requires law enforcement agencies to maintain a policy on the use of force. Existing law prohibits the use of kinetic energy projectiles or chemical agents by any law enforcement agency to disperse any assembly, protest, or demonstration, except in compliance with specified standards. This bill would prohibit the use of an unleashed police canine by law enforcement to apprehend a person unless the person is being pursued for a felony that threatened or resulted in the death of or serious bodily injury to another person and the person poses an imminent danger of death or serious bodily injury to the officer or to another person and any use of a police canine for crowd control. The bill would prohibit a police canine from being used to bite unless there is an imminent threat of death or serious bodily injury to the officer or another person by the person against whom the canine is used. The bill would attribute the death of or serious bodily injury to a person caused by a police canine to the canine's handler as constituting deadly force. The bill would prohibit law enforcement agencies from authorizing any use or training of a police canine that is inconsistent with this bill.

Bill Text

Action History

  1. Died on inactive file.

  2. Ordered to inactive file at the request of Assembly Member Jackson.

  3. Read second time. Ordered to third reading.

  4. Read second time and amended. Ordered returned to second reading.

  5. From committee: Amend, and do pass as amended. (Ayes 11. Noes 4.) (May 18).

  6. In committee: Set, first hearing. Referred to APPR. suspense file.

  7. From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 6. Noes 2.) (March 21). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.

  8. Coauthors revised.

  9. Re-referred to Com. on PUB. S.

  10. From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to Com. on PUB. S. Read second time and amended.

  11. Referred to Com. on PUB. S.

  12. From printer. May be heard in committee March 16.

  13. Read first time. To print.

Sponsors

Sponsorship breakdown

Export CSV (upgrade) →

1 sponsors · 4 co-sponsors · 117 not signed on

Sponsors (1)

Co-sponsors (4)

Not signed on (117)

117 members have not signed on to this bill.

Show all 117 →

"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

Subjects

public-safety
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 AB 742 do?
Existing law authorizes a peace officer to use reasonable force to effect the arrest, to prevent escape, or to overcome resistance of an individual. Existing law requires law enforcement agencies to maintain a policy on the use of force. Existing law prohibits the use of kinetic energy projectiles or chemical agents by any law enforcement agency to disperse any assembly, protest, or demonstration, except in compliance with specified standards. This bill would prohibit the use of an unleashed police canine by law enforcement to apprehend a person unless the person is being pursued for a felony that threatened or resulted in the death of or serious bodily injury to another person and the person poses an imminent danger of death or serious bodily injury to the officer or to another person and any use of a police canine for crowd control. The bill would prohibit a police canine from being used to bite unless there is an imminent threat of death or serious bodily injury to the officer or another person by the person against whom the canine is used. The bill would attribute the death of or serious bodily injury to a person caused by a police canine to the canine's handler as constituting deadly force. The bill would prohibit law enforcement agencies from authorizing any use or training of a police canine that is inconsistent with this bill.
Who sponsors AB 742?
AB 742 is sponsored by Jackson, Corey A. (Democratic), Kalra, Ash (Democratic), Bryan, Isaac G. (Democratic), Lee, Alex (Democratic), and Rivas, Robert (Democratic).
What is the current status of AB 742?
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 742?
Track AB 742 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.

Make your voice heard on AB 742

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 AB 742

Last checked for changes 2 months ago · updated continuously

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

Track this bill →