California 2013-2014 Regular Session Status: Enacted

SB 939 — Criminal jurisdiction.

Last action — Chaptered by Secretary of State. Chapter 246, Statutes of 2014.

Track this bill free

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

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

This bill has been enacted into law. Introduced February 03, 2014. Enacted.

Prognosis

Likely to advance 78% · moderate confidence

Where this bill stands today.

Odds of enactment

High

How often bills like it became law.

  • Enacted

    Current position in the legislative process.

  • 5 sponsors

    1 primary, 4 co-sponsors signed on.

  • Cleared a recorded vote

    Passed 5 recorded votes so far.

Prognosis reads this bill's own signals — stage, sponsorship breadth, committee status, recorded votes and cross-state momentum. Odds come from a model trained on which bills have become law.

Summary

Existing law defines human trafficking as the deprivation of the personal liberty of another person with the intent to effect a violation of certain specified sex crimes, to obtain forced labor or services, or to cause a minor to engage in a commercial sex act with the intent to effect a violation of certain specified sex crimes. Existing law requires, when more than one violation of certain specified provisions of law occurs in more than one jurisdictional territory, that jurisdiction for any of those offenses is in any jurisdiction where at least one of the offenses occurred if all district attorneys in counties with jurisdiction of the offenses agree to the venue. This bill would add human trafficking, pimping, and pandering to the specified offenses to which the above jurisdictional requirements apply. Existing law, when charges alleging multiple incidences of human trafficking that involve the same victim or victims in multiple territorial jurisdictions are filed in one county, requires the court to hold a hearing to consider whether the matter should proceed in the county of filing or whether one or more counts should be severed and to consider specified factors in making this decision, including the location and complexity of the likely evidence and where the majority of the offenses occurred. Existing law requires the district attorney in the filing county to present evidence to the court that the district attorney in each county where any of the charges could have been filed has agreed that the matter should proceed in the county of filing. This bill would reorganize these provisions.

Bill Text

Action History

  1. Chaptered by Secretary of State. Chapter 246, Statutes of 2014.

  2. Approved by the Governor.

  3. Enrolled and presented to the Governor at 2 p.m.

  4. Assembly amendments concurred in. (Ayes 35. Noes 0. Page 4397.) Ordered to engrossing and enrolling.

  5. In Senate. Concurrence in Assembly amendments pending.

  6. Read third time. Passed. (Ayes 76. Noes 0. Page 5706.) Ordered to the Senate.

  7. Read second time. Ordered to consent calendar.

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

  9. From committee: Do pass as amended. Ordered to consent calendar. (Ayes 7. Noes 0.) (June 17).

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

  11. Referred to Com. on PUB. S.

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

  13. Read third time. Passed. (Ayes 33. Noes 0. Page 3187.) Ordered to the Assembly.

  14. Read second time. Ordered to third reading.

  15. From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 7. Noes 0. Page 3093.) (April 8).

  16. (Corrected April 9.)

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

  18. Set for hearing April 8.

  19. Referred to Com. on PUB. S.

  20. From printer. May be acted upon on or after March 6.

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

Sponsors

  • Anderson · Cosponsor
  • Block · Primary
  • Bonta · Cosponsor
  • Corbett · Cosponsor
  • Correa · Cosponsor

Sponsorship breakdown

Export CSV (upgrade) →

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

Sponsors (1)

  • Block

Co-sponsors (4)

  • Anderson
  • Bonta
  • Corbett
  • Correa

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

Votes

Unfinished Business SB939 Block Concurrence

Passed 35 Yea · 0 Nay · 5 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 33004
Democratic 2001
Total 35005
% of votes cast 88%0%0%13%
How each member voted (40)
Member Party Vote
Anderson — Yea
Beall — Yea
Block — Yea
Hernandez — Yea
Hueso — Yea
Lieu — Yea
Liu — Yea
Morrell — Yea
Roth — Yea
Torres — Yea
Walters — Yea
Wolk — Yea
Cannella — Not Voting
Galgiani — Yea
Huff — Yea
Leno — Yea
Nielsen — Yea
Correa — Yea
Mitchell — Yea
Wyland — Yea
De León — Yea
Corbett — Yea
Knight — Yea
Lara — Yea
Monning — Yea
Pavley — Yea
Steinberg — Yea
Vidak — Yea
Hill — Yea
Wright — Not Voting
Evans — Yea
DeSaulnier — Yea
Fuller — Yea
Yee — Not Voting
Hancock — Not Voting
Beth Gaines — Yea
Bill Berryhill — Yea
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Not Voting
Jackson, Corey A. Democratic Yea
Padilla, Stephen C. Democratic Yea

Official roll call →

SB 939 Block Consent Calendar Second Day

Passed 76 Yea · 0 Nay · 3 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 69003
Democratic 4000
Republican 3000
Total 76003
% of votes cast 96%0%0%4%
How each member voted (79)
Member Party Vote
Achadjian — Yea
Alejo — Yea
Ammiano — Yea
Bloom — Yea
Bradford — Yea
Brown — Yea
Buchanan — Yea
Levine — Yea
Linder — Yea
Maienschein — Yea
Nestande — Yea
Quirk — Yea
Skinner — Yea
Wagner — Yea
Gomez — Yea
Gordon — Yea
Allen — Yea
Lowenthal — Yea
Hagman — Yea
Hall — Yea
Garcia — Yea
Holden — Yea
Gray — Yea
Atkins — Yea
Mansoor — Yea
Fong — Yea
Bigelow — Yea
Dababneh — Yea
Daly — Yea
Nazarian — Yea
Olsen — Yea
Ridley-Thomas — Yea
Rodriguez — Yea
Waldron — Yea
Wilk — Yea
Bonilla — Yea
Gatto — Yea
Gorell — Not Voting
Bocanegra — Yea
Harkey — Yea
John A. Pérez — Yea
Salas — Yea
Jones-Sawyer — Yea
Campos — Yea
Logue — Not Voting
Medina — Yea
Chau — Yea
Melendez — Yea
Mullin — Yea
Pan — Yea
Chesbro — Yea
Chávez — Yea
Conway — Yea
Cooley — Yea
Dickinson — Yea
Donnelly — Yea
Eggman — Yea
Perea — Yea
Rendon — Not Voting
Ting — Yea
Weber — Yea
Wieckowski — Yea
Williams — Yea
Fox — Yea
Frazier — Yea
Yamada — Yea
Beth Gaines — Yea
Jim Patterson — Yea
Lorena Gonzalez — Yea
Mark Stone — Yea
Roger Hernández — Yea
V. Manuel Pérez — Yea
Bonta, Mia Democratic Yea
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Yea
Muratsuchi, Al Democratic Yea
Quirk-Silva, Sharon Democratic Yea
Dahle, Megan Republican Yea
Grove, Shannon Republican Yea
Jones, Brian W. Republican Yea

Official roll call →

3rd Reading

Passed 33 Yea · 0 Nay · 7 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 31006
Democratic 2001
Total 33007
% of votes cast 83%0%0%18%
How each member voted (40)
Member Party Vote
Anderson — Yea
Beall — Yea
Block — Yea
Hernandez — Yea
Lieu — Yea
Pavley — Yea
Torres — Yea
Vidak — Yea
Wolk — Yea
Galgiani — Yea
De León — Yea
Hueso — Yea
Huff — Yea
Lara — Yea
Leno — Yea
Liu — Yea
Nielsen — Yea
Steinberg — Yea
Walters — Yea
Wright — Not Voting
Mitchell — Not Voting
Hill — Yea
Cannella — Not Voting
Corbett — Yea
Knight — Yea
Monning — Yea
Morrell — Yea
Roth — Yea
Wyland — Yea
Correa — Yea
Evans — Not Voting
DeSaulnier — Yea
Fuller — Yea
Yee — Not Voting
Hancock — Not Voting
Beth Gaines — Yea
Bill Berryhill — Yea
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Not Voting
Jackson, Corey A. Democratic Yea
Padilla, Stephen C. Democratic Yea

Official roll call →

Do pass.

Passed 7 Yea · 0 Nay
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 7000
Total 7000
% of votes cast 100%0%0%0%
How each member voted (7)
Member Party Vote
Anderson — Yea
Liu — Yea
Steinberg — Yea
Mitchell — Yea
De León — Yea
Knight — Yea
Hancock — Yea

Official roll call →

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 939 do?
Existing law defines human trafficking as the deprivation of the personal liberty of another person with the intent to effect a violation of certain specified sex crimes, to obtain forced labor or services, or to cause a minor to engage in a commercial sex act with the intent to effect a violation of certain specified sex crimes. Existing law requires, when more than one violation of certain specified provisions of law occurs in more than one jurisdictional territory, that jurisdiction for any of those offenses is in any jurisdiction where at least one of the offenses occurred if all district attorneys in counties with jurisdiction of the offenses agree to the venue. This bill would add human trafficking, pimping, and pandering to the specified offenses to which the above jurisdictional requirements apply. Existing law, when charges alleging multiple incidences of human trafficking that involve the same victim or victims in multiple territorial jurisdictions are filed in one county, requires the court to hold a hearing to consider whether the matter should proceed in the county of filing or whether one or more counts should be severed and to consider specified factors in making this decision, including the location and complexity of the likely evidence and where the majority of the offenses occurred. Existing law requires the district attorney in the filing county to present evidence to the court that the district attorney in each county where any of the charges could have been filed has agreed that the matter should proceed in the county of filing. This bill would reorganize these provisions.
Who sponsors SB 939?
SB 939 is sponsored by Anderson, Block, Bonta, Corbett, and Correa.
What is the current status of SB 939?
This bill has been enacted into law. Introduced February 03, 2014. Enacted.
Where can I track SB 939?
Track SB 939 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.

Make your voice heard on SB 939

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 939

Last checked for changes 3 months ago · updated continuously

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

Track this bill →