BILL NUMBER: SB 751	INTRODUCED
	BILL TEXT


INTRODUCED BY   Senator Cogdill

                        FEBRUARY 23, 2007

   An act to amend Section 786 of the Penal Code, relating to crime.


	LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST


   SB 751, as introduced, Cogdill. Identity theft.
   Existing law provides that the jurisdiction of a criminal action
for unauthorized use of another's personal identifying information,
as defined, is the county where the theft occurred or where the
information was illegally used.
   This bill would expand that provision to specify that the
jurisdiction of a criminal action involving the unauthorized use of
another's personal identifying information, as defined, also includes
the county where the victim resides, regardless of whether the
personal information was used in that county.
   Vote: majority. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: no.
State-mandated local program: no.


THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS:

  SECTION 1.  Section 786 of the Penal Code is amended to read:
   786.  (a) When property taken in one jurisdictional territory by
burglary, carjacking, robbery, theft, or embezzlement has been
brought into another, or when property is received in one
jurisdictional territory with the knowledge that it has been stolen
or embezzled and the property was stolen or embezzled in another
jurisdictional territory, the jurisdiction of the offense is in any
competent court within either jurisdictional territory, or any
contiguous jurisdictional territory if the arrest is made within the
contiguous territory, the prosecution secures on the record the
defendant's knowing, voluntary, and intelligent waiver of the right
of vicinage, and the defendant is charged with one or more property
crimes in the arresting territory.
   (b) (1) The jurisdiction of a criminal action  for
  involving the  unauthorized use of personal
identifying information, as defined in  subdivision (b) of 
Section  530.5   530.55  of the Penal Code,
shall also include  the   : 
    (A)     The  county where the theft of
the personal identifying information occurred  , or the
  . 
    (B)     The  county where the
information was used for an illegal purpose.  If 
    (C)     The county where the victim
resides, regardless of whether the personal identifying information
was used in that county.   If  multiple offenses of
unauthorized use of personal identifying information, all involving
the same defendant or defendants and the same personal identifying
information belonging to the one person, occur in multiple
jurisdictions, any one of those jurisdictions is a proper
jurisdiction for all of the offenses.
   (2) When charges alleging multiple offenses of unauthorized use of
personal identifying information occurring in multiple territorial
jurisdictions are filed in one county pursuant to this section, the
court shall hold a hearing to consider whether the matter should
proceed in the county of filing, or whether one or more counts should
be severed. The district attorney filing the complaint shall 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. In determining whether
all counts in the complaint should be joined in one county for
prosecution, the court shall consider the location and complexity of
the likely evidence, where the majority of the offenses occurred, the
rights of the defendant and the people, and the convenience of, or
hardship to, the victim and witnesses.
   (c) This section shall not be interpreted to alter victims' rights
under Section 530.6.