BILL ANALYSIS SB 188 Page 1 SENATE THIRD READING SB 188 (George Runner) As Amended September 10, 2009 Majority vote SENATE VOTE :39-0 JUDICIARY 10-0 APPROPRIATIONS 17-0 ----------------------------------------------------------------- |Ayes:|Feuer, Tran, Brownley, |Ayes:|De Leon, Conway, Ammiano, | | |Evans, Jones, Knight, | | | | |Krekorian, Lieu, Monning, | |Charles Calderon, Coto, | | |Silva | |Davis, Duvall, Fuentes, | | | | |Hall, Harkey, Miller, | | | | |John A. Perez, Skinner, | | | | |Solorio, Audra | | | | |Strickland, Torlakson, | | | | |Hill | ----------------------------------------------------------------- JUDICIARY 10-0 ----------------------------------------------------------------- |Ayes:|Feuer, Tran, Brownley, | | | | |Evans, Jones, Knight, | | | | |Krekorian, Lieu, Monning, | | | | |Silva | | | |-----+--------------------------+-----+--------------------------| | | | | | ----------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY : Permits educational institutions to seek a restraining order on behalf of a student, as specified. Specifically, this bill : 1)Authorizes a designated officer of postsecondary educational institution, a student of which has suffered a specified threat of violence from any individual which can be reasonably construed to be carried out at the campus or facility, to seek a temporary restraining order and an injunction, on behalf of the student and, at the court's discretion, any number of other students at the campus or facility. 2)Provides that a temporary restraining order may be granted ex parte, at the court's discretion, for up to 15 days, upon the SB 188 Page 2 plaintiff filing a petition for an injunction and an affidavit that shows reasonable proof that a student has suffered a credible threat of violence by the defendant, and that great or irreparable harm would result to the student. 3)Requires the court, within 15 days of the filing of the petition, to hold a hearing on the petition for the injunction, where the defendant may file a response or file a cross-complaint. 4)Provides that if the defendant is a current student of the entity requesting the injunction, the judge shall receive evidence concerning the decision of the postsecondary educational institution decision to retain, terminate, or otherwise discipline the defendant. 5)Provides that if the judge finds by clear and convincing evidence that the defendant made a credible threat of violence, an injunction shall be issued prohibiting further threats of violence with a duration of not more than three years. 6)Provides that any intentional and knowing violation of the temporary restraining order is a misdemeanor punishable by a fine of not more than $1000, or by imprisonment in a county jail for not more than one year, or both. FISCAL EFFECT : According to the Assembly Appropriations: 1)Minor non-reimbursable costs to local governments for enforcing restraining orders, violations of which are misdemeanors, subject to a fine of up to $1,000 and/or one year in county jail. 2)Minor absorbable costs to the courts for additional hearings and services of process regarding restraining orders. COMMENTS : The author relates that the idea for this bill arises from an incident that occurred at an adult beauty institute in Lancaster, California. According to the author, the Western Beauty Institute (WBI) expelled a student who was making threats to other students and staff members. After being expelled, the student proceeded to attack one of her classmates with a set of keys, inflicting a serious head injury. In response to this SB 188 Page 3 incident, the administrators of WBI asked the court for a restraining order but discovered that educational facilities are not covered by current law. Therefore, there is currently no mechanism to issue a blanket restraining order to protect all individuals on a campus at any given time. This bill is therefore appropriately limited to the private postsecondary schools whose students are the subject of off-campus threats that are understood to be carried out on campus because law enforcement officials advise that these threats are not covered by existing criminal and civil protections, and excludes minors and public schools and where serious and countervailing constitutional, educational, parental, due-process and other important legal rights and concerns are implicated. In order to avoid undue safety risks, the bill also appropriately requires the consent of the student. Analysis Prepared by : Kevin G. Baker / JUD. / (916) 319-2334 FN: 0003179