California 2009-2010 Regular Session Status: In Committee

SB 377 — Courts: judgeships.

Last action — Returned to Secretary of Senate pursuant to Joint Rule 56.

  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 2009-2010 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This bill is no longer active — its legislative session has ended, so there is no live prognosis.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 specifies the number of judges for the superior court of each county and for each division of each district of the court of appeal. This bill would, upon the Legislature's appropriation in the Budget Act of moneys expressly identified for the purpose of initially funding the costs of additional new judges, authorize 50 additional judges, to be allocated to the various superior courts pursuant to uniform criteria approved by the Judicial Council.

Bill Text

What changed in the latest version

1 added · 1 removed

Plain-language change summary

In the latest version of Bill SB 377, one line was added and one line was removed. This change makes the bill clearer and more straightforward by improving its language. Such adjustments are important because they help ensure that the intentions of the lawmakers are easily understood, making it easier for the public and other stakeholders to follow the discussion around the bill.

→
Previous
Latest
Bill Number Bill Keyword Home Bill Information California Law Publications Other Resources My Subscriptions My Favorites Bill Information >> Bill Search >> Text Bill TextBill Information PDF2 Add To My Favorites | Version:
Bill Number Bill Keyword Home Bill Information California Law Publications Other Resources My Subscriptions My Favorites Bill Information >> Bill Search >> Text Bill Text PDF2 Add To My Favorites | Version:
⬇ Download PDF
View plain text versions (2)

Action History

  1. Returned to Secretary of Senate pursuant to Joint Rule 56.

  2. Set, first hearing. Held in committee and under submission.

  3. (Suspense - for vote only.)

  4. Set for hearing May 28.

  5. Placed on APPR suspense file.

  6. Set for hearing April 27.

  7. From committee: Do pass, but first be re-referred to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 5. Noes 0. Page 497.) Re-referred to Com. on APPR.

  8. Set for hearing April 14.

  9. To Com. on JUD.

  10. From print. May be acted upon on or after March 28.

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

Sponsors

  • Corbett · Primary

Sponsorship breakdown

Export CSV (upgrade) →

1 sponsors · 0 co-sponsors · 121 not signed on

Sponsors (1)

  • Corbett

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

Placed on Appropriations Suspense file.

Passed 13 Yea · 0 Nay
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 13000
Total 13000
% of votes cast 100%0%0%0%
How each member voted (13)
Member Party Vote
Yee — Yea
Wyland — Yea
Runner — Yea
Hancock — Yea
Corbett — Yea
Kehoe — Yea
Leno — Yea
Oropeza — Yea
Walters — Yea
Wolk — Yea
Cox — Yea
DeSaulnier — Yea
Denham — Yea

Official roll call →

Subjects

public-safety elections
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 377 do?
Existing law specifies the number of judges for the superior court of each county and for each division of each district of the court of appeal. This bill would, upon the Legislature's appropriation in the Budget Act of moneys expressly identified for the purpose of initially funding the costs of additional new judges, authorize 50 additional judges, to be allocated to the various superior courts pursuant to uniform criteria approved by the Judicial Council.
Who sponsors SB 377?
SB 377 is sponsored by Corbett.
What is the current status of SB 377?
This bill died with 2009-2010 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 377?
Track SB 377 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.

Make your voice heard on SB 377

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 377

Last checked for changes 3 months ago · updated continuously

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

Track this bill →