California 2011-2012 Regular Session Status: Passed Senate

SB 210 — Criminal procedure: release on defendant's own recognizance.

Last action — Ordered to third reading.

Track this bill free

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

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

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This bill is no longer active — its legislative session has ended, so there is no live prognosis.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

(1) Existing law provides that a defendant who is in custody and arraigned for a misdemeanor offense, or who has been arrested upon an out-of-county warrant arising from a case involving only misdemeanors, is entitled to be released on his or her own recognizance unless the court finds that the release will compromise public safety or will not reasonably ensure the appearance of the defendant, in which case the court is required to set bail and specify conditions, if any, for release. This bill would authorize a court to determine, at the time of arraignment in any case that is before a court concerning the commission of a felony punishable by imprisonment in a county jail, whether a defendant who is still in custody may be released on his or her own recognizance. In making this decision, the bill would require the court to determine whether the release will compromise public safety. The bill would authorize the court to consider, in its discretion, imposing on the defendant any reasonable conditions it deems appropriate, and would authorize the court to require supervision by any designated local agency, to ensure public safety and to ensure the defendant's appearance. The bill, if release will compromise public safety or will not reasonably ensure the appearance of the defendant, would require the court to set bail. (2) Existing law requires a judge or magistrate, in setting, reducing, or denying bail, to take into consideration the protection of the public, the seriousness of the offense, the defendant's previous criminal record, and the probability of the defendant appearing at trial or a hearing. This bill would revise the factors that the judge or magistrate would be required to consider to, among other things, require the judge or magistrate to consider the history and characteristics of the defendant, and to consider the nature and circumstances of the offense. The bill would require a judge or magistrate to also consider those factors when determining conditions for pretrial release. (3) Existing law authorizes a court, with the concurrence of the county board of supervisors, to employ an investigative staff for the purpose of recommending whether a defendant should be released on his or her own recognizance. In cases involving certain crimes, including violent felonies, an investigative report is required to be prepared that includes specified information, including outstanding warrants against the defendant and prior incidents where the defendant has failed to make a court appearance. This bill would also authorize a sheriff, county probation department, or other local governmental agency, with the concurrence of the board of supervisors, to employ an investigative staff for those purposes, and would require a pretrial investigative report to be prepared before a court may order a defendant released on his or her own recognizance in any case involving specified crimes, including a violent felony. The bill would authorize the preparation of a pretrial investigation report in all other cases in which a court, sheriff, county probation department, or other local governmental agency has employed an investigative staff to recommend whether the defendant should be released on his or her own recognizance. The bill would require any pretrial investigative report to include the results of an evidence-based pretrial risk assessment, as defined, evaluating the defendant's probability of appearing at trial and potential risk to public safety. The bill would prohibit, for purposes of preparing the report, a defendant from being interviewed about the facts and circumstances of the defendant's current offense, and would limit the use and availability of the information in the report. The bill would authorize a court, sheriff, county probation department, or other local governmental agency, with the concurrence of the board of supervisors, to employ supervision staff to monitor a defendant's compliance with release conditions ordered by the court, as specified. (4) Existing constitutional provisions require that a statute that limits the right of access to meetings of public bodies or the writings of public officials and agencies be adopted with findings demonstrating the interest protected by that limitation and the need for protecting that interest. This bill would make legislative findings and declarations relating to, among other things, the necessity of treating pretrial investigation reports as confidential in order for pretrial programs to function properly.

Bill Text

Action History

  1. Ordered to third reading.

  2. Read third time and amended. (Page 6086.)

  3. Read second time. Ordered to third reading.

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

  5. From committee: Do pass as amended. (Ayes 4. Noes 1.) (July 3).

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

  7. Set, first hearing. Hearing canceled at the request of author.

  8. Referred to Com. on PUB. S.

  9. In Assembly. Read first time. Held at Desk.

  10. Read third time. Passed. (Ayes 32. Noes 5. Page 2718.) Ordered to the Assembly.

  11. Read second time. Ordered to third reading.

  12. From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 6. Noes 2. Page 2685.) (January 19).

  13. Set for hearing January 19.

  14. Placed on APPR. suspense file.

  15. Set for hearing January 17.

  16. From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 6. Noes 0. Page 2624.) (January 10). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.

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

  18. Set for hearing January 10.

  19. Referred to Com. on PUB. S.

  20. From printer. May be acted upon on or after March 11.

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

Sponsors

  • Hancock · Primary

Sponsorship breakdown

Export CSV (upgrade) →

1 sponsors · 0 co-sponsors · 121 not signed on · 2 voted No

Sponsors (1)

  • Hancock

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

Do pass as amended.

Passed 4 Yea · 1 Nay · 1 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 4101
Total 4101
% of votes cast 67%17%0%17%
How each member voted (6)
Member Party Vote
Mitchell — Yea
Hagman — Not Voting
Ammiano — Yea
Knight — Nay
Skinner — Yea
Cedillo — Yea

Official roll call →

3rd Reading

Passed 32 Yea · 5 Nay · 3 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 29503
Republican 1000
Democratic 2000
Total 32503
% of votes cast 80%13%0%8%
How each member voted (40)
Member Party Vote
Yee — Yea
Cannella — Yea
Evans — Yea
Lowenthal — Yea
Corbett — Yea
De León — Yea
Hancock — Yea
Negrete McLeod — Yea
Harman — Yea
Hernandez — Yea
Rubio — Yea
Huff — Yea
Runner — Not Voting
Blakeslee — Yea
Dutton — Nay
Leno — Yea
Lieu — Yea
Liu — Yea
Price — Yea
Simitian — Yea
Steinberg — Yea
Walters — Nay
Wolk — Yea
Wright — Yea
Alquist — Yea
Anderson — Yea
Kehoe — Yea
Pavley — Yea
Vargas — Yea
Wyland — Not Voting
Correa — Yea
Emmerson — Not Voting
DeSaulnier — Yea
Fuller — Nay
Beth Gaines — Nay
Bill Berryhill — Yea
La Malfa — Nay
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Yea
Padilla, Stephen C. Democratic Yea
Strickland, Tony Republican Yea

Official roll call →

Do pass.

Passed 6 Yea · 2 Nay · 1 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 6201
Total 6201
% of votes cast 67%22%0%11%
How each member voted (9)
Member Party Vote
Price — Yea
Runner — Not Voting
Steinberg — Yea
Walters — Nay
Alquist — Yea
Kehoe — Yea
Lieu — Yea
Pavley — Yea
Emmerson — Nay

Official roll call →

Placed on Appropriations Suspense file.

Passed 8 Yea · 0 Nay · 1 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 8001
Total 8001
% of votes cast 89%0%0%11%
How each member voted (9)
Member Party Vote
Runner — Not Voting
Lieu — Yea
Pavley — Yea
Steinberg — Yea
Walters — Yea
Alquist — Yea
Kehoe — Yea
Price — Yea
Emmerson — Yea

Official roll call →

Subjects

public-safety labor
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 210 do?
(1) Existing law provides that a defendant who is in custody and arraigned for a misdemeanor offense, or who has been arrested upon an out-of-county warrant arising from a case involving only misdemeanors, is entitled to be released on his or her own recognizance unless the court finds that the release will compromise public safety or will not reasonably ensure the appearance of the defendant, in which case the court is required to set bail and specify conditions, if any, for release. This bill would authorize a court to determine, at the time of arraignment in any case that is before a court concerning the commission of a felony punishable by imprisonment in a county jail, whether a defendant who is still in custody may be released on his or her own recognizance. In making this decision, the bill would require the court to determine whether the release will compromise public safety. The bill would authorize the court to consider, in its discretion, imposing on the defendant any reasonable conditions it deems appropriate, and would authorize the court to require supervision by any designated local agency, to ensure public safety and to ensure the defendant's appearance. The bill, if release will compromise public safety or will not reasonably ensure the appearance of the defendant, would require the court to set bail. (2) Existing law requires a judge or magistrate, in setting, reducing, or denying bail, to take into consideration the protection of the public, the seriousness of the offense, the defendant's previous criminal record, and the probability of the defendant appearing at trial or a hearing. This bill would revise the factors that the judge or magistrate would be required to consider to, among other things, require the judge or magistrate to consider the history and characteristics of the defendant, and to consider the nature and circumstances of the offense. The bill would require a judge or magistrate to also consider those factors when determining conditions for pretrial release. (3) Existing law authorizes a court, with the concurrence of the county board of supervisors, to employ an investigative staff for the purpose of recommending whether a defendant should be released on his or her own recognizance. In cases involving certain crimes, including violent felonies, an investigative report is required to be prepared that includes specified information, including outstanding warrants against the defendant and prior incidents where the defendant has failed to make a court appearance. This bill would also authorize a sheriff, county probation department, or other local governmental agency, with the concurrence of the board of supervisors, to employ an investigative staff for those purposes, and would require a pretrial investigative report to be prepared before a court may order a defendant released on his or her own recognizance in any case involving specified crimes, including a violent felony. The bill would authorize the preparation of a pretrial investigation report in all other cases in which a court, sheriff, county probation department, or other local governmental agency has employed an investigative staff to recommend whether the defendant should be released on his or her own recognizance. The bill would require any pretrial investigative report to include the results of an evidence-based pretrial risk assessment, as defined, evaluating the defendant's probability of appearing at trial and potential risk to public safety. The bill would prohibit, for purposes of preparing the report, a defendant from being interviewed about the facts and circumstances of the defendant's current offense, and would limit the use and availability of the information in the report. The bill would authorize a court, sheriff, county probation department, or other local governmental agency, with the concurrence of the board of supervisors, to employ supervision staff to monitor a defendant's compliance with release conditions ordered by the court, as specified. (4) Existing constitutional provisions require that a statute that limits the right of access to meetings of public bodies or the writings of public officials and agencies be adopted with findings demonstrating the interest protected by that limitation and the need for protecting that interest. This bill would make legislative findings and declarations relating to, among other things, the necessity of treating pretrial investigation reports as confidential in order for pretrial programs to function properly.
Who sponsors SB 210?
SB 210 is sponsored by Hancock.
What is the current status of SB 210?
This bill died with 2011-2012 Regular Session. It reached “Passed Senate” 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 210?
Track SB 210 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.

Make your voice heard on SB 210

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 210

Last checked for changes 3 months ago · updated continuously

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

Track this bill →