AB 2358 — Firearms: return of custody.
Last action — In committee: Hearing postponed by committee.
-
✓Introduced
-
2In Committee
-
3Passed Assembly
-
4Passed Senate
-
5To Executive
-
6Enacted
This bill died with 2019-2020 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This bill is no longer active — its legislative session has ended, so there is no live prognosis.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
(1) Existing law requires a person who claims title to a firearm that is in the custody of a court or law enforcement agency and wishes to have it returned to make an application for a determination by the Department of Justice as to whether the applicant is eligible to possess a firearm. Existing law requires the application to be submitted via the California Firearms Application Reporting System (CFARS) . Existing law requires the application to provide the firearm's make, model, caliber, barrel length, type, country of origin, and serial number, identification number, or identification mark. If the firearm is not a handgun and does not have a serial number, identification number, or identification mark, existing law requires that the application have a place to note that fact. This bill would delete the provisions for noting a firearm that is not a handgun and does not have a serial number, identification number, or identification mark, and would instead require the application to have a place to note that the firearm is an antique and does not have a serial number, identification number, or identification mark. The bill would require an applicant for the return of a firearm to establish a CFARS account and to advise the department whether the firearm is self-manufactured, self-assembled, an antique, or if the firearm was made or assembled prior to December 16, 1968, and is not a handgun. The bill would allow the department to request photos from the law enforcement agency that has custody of the firearm in an effort to assist in the evaluation of the weapons legality. By imposing additional duties on local law enforcement agencies, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (2) Existing law requires an agency or court that has direct access to the Automated Firearms System (AFS) to verify that a firearm subject to an application for return is not listed as stolen and that firearm has been recorded in the name of the individual who seeks its return. This bill would delete that provision and would instead prohibit the Department of Justice from processing an application to determine the applicant's eligibility to possess a firearm until the firearm has been accurately entered into the AFS by the law enforcement agency that has custody of the weapon. By imposing additional duties on local law enforcement agencies, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (3) If a law enforcement agency determines that an applicant is the legal owner of a firearm deposited with the agency and that the applicant is prohibited from possessing a firearm, existing law requires, if the firearm is otherwise legal, that the applicant be entitled to sell or transfer the firearm to a licensed dealer. This bill would prohibit a law enforcement agency from causing or allowing a firearm to be dismantled or altered so that the firearm is no longer an illegal firearm in order to release the firearm to the owner. (4) The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.
Bill Text
What changed in the latest version
1 added · 1 removed1 line(s) added, 1 removed.
Bill Number Bill Keyword Home Bill Information California Law Publications Other Resources My Subscriptions My Favorites Bill Information >> Bill Search >> Text Bill TextBillText Information PDF2 Bill PDF |Add To My Favorites | Version:
View plain text versions (2)
- Introduced 02/18/20 - Introduced Current pdf February 18, 2020
- AB2358 View text html
Action History
-
In committee: Hearing postponed by committee.
-
Referred to Com. on PUB. S.
-
From printer. May be heard in committee March 20.
-
Read first time. To print.
Sponsors
- Cottie Petrie-Norris · Primary
Sponsorship breakdown
Export CSV (upgrade) →1 sponsors · 0 co-sponsors · 121 not signed on
Sponsors (1)
- Petrie-Norris, Cottie Democratic
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.
Subjects
Frequently asked questions
- What does AB 2358 do?
- (1) Existing law requires a person who claims title to a firearm that is in the custody of a court or law enforcement agency and wishes to have it returned to make an application for a determination by the Department of Justice as to whether the applicant is eligible to possess a firearm. Existing law requires the application to be submitted via the California Firearms Application Reporting System (CFARS) . Existing law requires the application to provide the firearm's make, model, caliber, barrel length, type, country of origin, and serial number, identification number, or identification mark. If the firearm is not a handgun and does not have a serial number, identification number, or identification mark, existing law requires that the application have a place to note that fact. This bill would delete the provisions for noting a firearm that is not a handgun and does not have a serial number, identification number, or identification mark, and would instead require the application to have a place to note that the firearm is an antique and does not have a serial number, identification number, or identification mark. The bill would require an applicant for the return of a firearm to establish a CFARS account and to advise the department whether the firearm is self-manufactured, self-assembled, an antique, or if the firearm was made or assembled prior to December 16, 1968, and is not a handgun. The bill would allow the department to request photos from the law enforcement agency that has custody of the firearm in an effort to assist in the evaluation of the weapons legality. By imposing additional duties on local law enforcement agencies, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (2) Existing law requires an agency or court that has direct access to the Automated Firearms System (AFS) to verify that a firearm subject to an application for return is not listed as stolen and that firearm has been recorded in the name of the individual who seeks its return. This bill would delete that provision and would instead prohibit the Department of Justice from processing an application to determine the applicant's eligibility to possess a firearm until the firearm has been accurately entered into the AFS by the law enforcement agency that has custody of the weapon. By imposing additional duties on local law enforcement agencies, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (3) If a law enforcement agency determines that an applicant is the legal owner of a firearm deposited with the agency and that the applicant is prohibited from possessing a firearm, existing law requires, if the firearm is otherwise legal, that the applicant be entitled to sell or transfer the firearm to a licensed dealer. This bill would prohibit a law enforcement agency from causing or allowing a firearm to be dismantled or altered so that the firearm is no longer an illegal firearm in order to release the firearm to the owner. (4) The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.
- Who sponsors AB 2358?
- AB 2358 is sponsored by Petrie-Norris, Cottie (Democratic).
- What is the current status of AB 2358?
- This bill died with 2019-2020 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 2358?
- Track AB 2358 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.
Make your voice heard on AB 2358
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.
Stay ahead of AB 2358
Last checked for changes 2 months ago · updated continuously
One Click Politics tracks every bill in Congress and all 50 states.
Track this bill →