California 2013-2014 Regular Session Status: In Committee

AB 765 — Sentencing.

Last action — From committee: Filed with the Chief Clerk pursuant to Joint Rule 56.

  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 2013-2014 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This bill is no longer active — its legislative session has ended, so there is no live prognosis.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, operative January 1, 2014, provides that when a judgment of imprisonment is to be imposed and the statute specifies 3 possible terms, the court shall order imposition of the middle term, unless there are circumstances in aggravation or mitigation of the crime. Existing law, operative January 1, 2014, provides that the court shall state the reasons for its sentence choice on the record at the time of sentencing. This bill would additionally provide that the court may not impose an upper term based on aggravating facts unless the facts were first presented to the factfinder and the factfinder found the facts to be true. The bill would require the court to include, at the time it makes its on the record statement of the reasons for its sentence choice, the specific facts in aggravation, if any, it relied upon in imposing an upper term. The bill would state findings and declarations of the Legislature in connection with imposing upper term sentences.

Bill Text

Action History

  1. From committee: Filed with the Chief Clerk pursuant to Joint Rule 56.

  2. Died pursuant to Art. IV, Sec. 10(c) of the Constitution.

  3. In committee: Set, second hearing. Held under submission.

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

  5. From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 5. Noes 2.) (April 9). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.

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

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

  8. Referred to Com. on PUB. S.

  9. From printer. May be heard in committee March 24.

  10. Read first time. To print.

Sponsors

  • Ammiano · Primary

Sponsorship breakdown

Export CSV (upgrade) →

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

Sponsors (1)

  • Ammiano

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

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 765 do?
Existing law, operative January 1, 2014, provides that when a judgment of imprisonment is to be imposed and the statute specifies 3 possible terms, the court shall order imposition of the middle term, unless there are circumstances in aggravation or mitigation of the crime. Existing law, operative January 1, 2014, provides that the court shall state the reasons for its sentence choice on the record at the time of sentencing. This bill would additionally provide that the court may not impose an upper term based on aggravating facts unless the facts were first presented to the factfinder and the factfinder found the facts to be true. The bill would require the court to include, at the time it makes its on the record statement of the reasons for its sentence choice, the specific facts in aggravation, if any, it relied upon in imposing an upper term. The bill would state findings and declarations of the Legislature in connection with imposing upper term sentences.
Who sponsors AB 765?
AB 765 is sponsored by Ammiano.
What is the current status of AB 765?
This bill died with 2013-2014 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 765?
Track AB 765 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.

Make your voice heard on AB 765

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 765

Last checked for changes 2 months ago · updated continuously

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

Track this bill →