California 2011-2012 Regular Session Status: Passed Assembly

AB 2473 — Court security.

Last action — Re-referred to Com. on RLS.

Track this bill free

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

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

This bill died with 2011-2012 Regular Session. It reached “Passed Assembly” 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This bill is no longer active — its legislative session has ended, so there is no live prognosis.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

The Superior Court Law Enforcement Act of 2002 authorizes the presiding judge of each superior court to contract with a sheriff or marshal for the necessary level of law enforcement services in the courts. Existing law requires the sheriff or marshal and presiding judge of any county to develop a court security plan to be utilized by the court, as specified, and requires the Judicial Council to establish a process for its review of court security plans in the California Rules of Court. Existing law requires the superior court and the sheriff or marshal to enter into a memorandum of understanding specifying the agreed upon level of court security services and their cost and terms of payment, and requires the sheriff or marshal to provide specified information to the courts by April 30 of each year, with actual court security allocations subject to the approval of the Judicial Council and the funding provided by the Legislature. This bill would state that the court security services provided by the sheriff, as agreed upon by the superior court and the sheriff, may include, but shall not be limited to, among other things, performing bailiff functions, escorting prisoners to and from holding cells, and providing security in areas adjacent to a courthouse facility, as specified.

Bill Text

Action History

  1. Re-referred to Com. on RLS.

  2. Ordered to third reading.

  3. From consent calendar.

  4. Read second time. Ordered to consent calendar.

  5. From committee: Do pass. To consent calendar. (Ayes 4. Noes 0.) (June 26).

  6. Referred to Com. on JUD.

  7. In Senate. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment.

  8. Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Senate. (Ayes 74. Noes 0. Page 4874.)

  9. Read second time. Ordered to third reading.

  10. From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 10. Noes 0.) (May 8).

  11. Re-referred to Com. on JUD.

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

  13. Referred to Com. on JUD.

  14. Read first time.

  15. From printer. May be heard in committee March 27.

  16. Introduced. To print.

Sponsors

  • Atkins · Primary

Sponsorship breakdown

Export CSV (upgrade) →

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

Sponsors (1)

  • Atkins

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

AB 2473 ATKINS Assembly Third Reading

Passed 74 Yea · 0 Nay · 6 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 71006
Democratic 1000
Republican 2000
Total 74006
% of votes cast 93%0%0%8%
How each member voted (80)
Member Party Vote
Gorell — Yea
Halderman — Yea
Fletcher — Not Voting
Yamada — Not Voting
Campos — Yea
Donnelly — Yea
Morrell — Yea
Solorio — Yea
Butler — Yea
Feuer — Yea
Furutani — Yea
Fong — Yea
Carter — Yea
Garrick — Yea
Allen — Yea
Gatto — Yea
Gordon — Yea
Hagman — Yea
Cedillo — Yea
Portantino — Yea
John A. Pérez — Yea
Mitchell — Yea
Hall — Yea
Harkey — Yea
Hill — Yea
Chesbro — Yea
Huber — Yea
Bonilla — Yea
Atkins — Yea
Ammiano — Yea
Beall — Yea
Conway — Yea
Cook — Yea
Davis — Yea
Dickinson — Yea
Huffman — Yea
Jeffries — Yea
Lara — Yea
Logue — Yea
Mendoza — Yea
Miller — Yea
Monning — Yea
Nestande — Yea
Nielsen — Yea
Olsen — Yea
Silva — Yea
Swanson — Yea
Valadao — Yea
Wagner — Yea
Williams — Yea
Achadjian — Yea
Alejo — Yea
Block — Yea
Blumenfield — Yea
Bradford — Yea
Brownley — Yea
Buchanan — Yea
Hayashi — Yea
Hueso — Yea
Knight — Yea
Ma — Yea
Mansoor — Yea
Norby — Not Voting
Pan — Yea
Perea — Not Voting
Skinner — Not Voting
Smyth — Yea
Torres — Yea
Wieckowski — Yea
Eng — Yea
Fuentes — Yea
Galgiani — Yea
Beth Gaines — Yea
Bill Berryhill — Yea
Bonnie Lowenthal — Not Voting
Roger Hernández — Yea
V. Manuel Pérez — Yea
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Yea
Grove, Shannon Republican Yea
Jones, Brian W. Republican Yea

Official roll call →

Do pass.

Passed 10 Yea · 0 Nay
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 9000
Republican 1000
Total 10000
% of votes cast 100%0%0%0%
How each member voted (10)
Member Party Vote
Monning — Yea
Atkins — Yea
Gorell — Yea
Huber — Yea
Wagner — Yea
Wieckowski — Yea
Feuer — Yea
Dickinson — Yea
Bonnie Lowenthal — Yea
Jones, Brian W. Republican Yea

Official roll call →

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 2473 do?
The Superior Court Law Enforcement Act of 2002 authorizes the presiding judge of each superior court to contract with a sheriff or marshal for the necessary level of law enforcement services in the courts. Existing law requires the sheriff or marshal and presiding judge of any county to develop a court security plan to be utilized by the court, as specified, and requires the Judicial Council to establish a process for its review of court security plans in the California Rules of Court. Existing law requires the superior court and the sheriff or marshal to enter into a memorandum of understanding specifying the agreed upon level of court security services and their cost and terms of payment, and requires the sheriff or marshal to provide specified information to the courts by April 30 of each year, with actual court security allocations subject to the approval of the Judicial Council and the funding provided by the Legislature. This bill would state that the court security services provided by the sheriff, as agreed upon by the superior court and the sheriff, may include, but shall not be limited to, among other things, performing bailiff functions, escorting prisoners to and from holding cells, and providing security in areas adjacent to a courthouse facility, as specified.
Who sponsors AB 2473?
AB 2473 is sponsored by Atkins.
What is the current status of AB 2473?
This bill died with 2011-2012 Regular Session. It reached “Passed Assembly” 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 2473?
Track AB 2473 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.

Make your voice heard on AB 2473

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 2473

Last checked for changes 3 months ago · updated continuously

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

Track this bill →