BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    �



                                                                  AB 238
                                                                  Page  1

          CONCURRENCE IN SENATE AMENDMENTS
          AB 238 (Gomez)
          As Amended May 29, 2013
          Majority vote
           
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |ASSEMBLY:  |76-0 |(April 18,      |SENATE: |33-0 |(July 8, 2013) |
          |           |     |2013)           |        |     |               |
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
            
           Original Committee Reference:    JUD.  

           SUMMARY  :  Requires law enforcement to enter emergency protective  
          orders (EPOs) into the California Restraining and Protective  
          Order System (CARPOS).  Specifically,  this bill , for both civil  
          and criminal EPOs:  

           1)Requires the law enforcement officer requesting an EPO to  
            enter the order into CARPOS.

          2)Deletes the requirement that the officer who requests the EPO  
            carry copies of the order while on duty.

           The Senate amendments  delete the requirement that the order be  
          entered into CARPOS within two hours of issuance.

           EXISTING LAW  :  

             1)    Allows a law enforcement officer to seek an EPO from a  
             court, 24 hours a day, seven days a week, if any person or  
             child is in immediate and present danger of domestic violence  
             or abuse, or in imminent danger of abduction by a parent or  
             relative, or stalking.  The EPO may only be issued if the  
             judicial officer makes specified findings.    

             2)    Provides that an EPO expires in either five court days  
             or seven calendar days after issuance, whichever is shorter.   


             3)    Requires the law enforcement officer who requests an  
             EPO to serve the EPO on the restrained party, if that party  
             can reasonably be located; provide a copy to the protected  
             party; file a copy with the court as soon as practicable  
             after issuance; and carry a copy of the order while on duty.   









                                                                  AB 238
                                                                  Page  2


             4)    Requires whenever a protective order or restraining  
             order are issued, as provided, specified information about  
             the order be entered into the Department of Justice's  
             Domestic Violence Restraining Order System within one  
             business day by any law enforcement officer who served the  
             protective order and by the clerk of the court if someone  
             other than an officer served the order.  

           FISCAL EFFECT  :  According to the Senate Appropriations  
          Committee, annual state-reimbursable costs likely less than  
          $50,000 (General Fund).  Los Angeles County issued approximately  
          5,500 EPOs in 2012.  Assuming three to five minutes per EPO  
          entry, estimated statewide costs to enter 16,500 EPOs would be  
          in the range of $22,000 to $37,000 (General Fund).
           
          COMMENTS  :  EPOs are designed to protect victims of domestic  
          violence in emergency situations.  They may be requested by a  
          law enforcement officer when the officer has reasonable grounds  
          to believe that there is immediate danger of abuse, based on a  
          victim's allegation of abuse or threat of abuse, abduction or  
          stalking.  A judicial officer may issue the requested EPO only  
          if the judicial officer finds that reasonable grounds have been  
          asserted by the law enforcement officer that there is an  
          immediate and present danger of abuse and that the EPO is  
          necessary to prevent the abuse.  After the order is issued, the  
          requesting officer is required to serve the EPO on the  
          restrained party, if that party can reasonably be located;  
          provide a copy to the protected party; file a copy with the  
          court as soon as practicable after issuance; and carry a copy of  
          the order while on duty.  The order lasts for the lesser of five  
          court days or seven calendar days, and is issued immediately  
          without prior notice to the restrained party.    

          In order to better protect victims of abuse, restraining orders  
          must be entered into a statewide database of protective orders,  
          known as the California Restraining and Protective Order System,  
          so that the orders can more easily be tracked and enforced.   
          CARPOS, which is part of California Law Enforcement  
          Telecommunications System (CLETS), is maintained by the  
          Department of Justice.  Current law requires that information  
          contained in a civil or criminal domestic violence protective  
          order must be entered into CARPOS (previously known as the  
          Domestic Violence Restraining Order System).  The information  
          must be added to CARPOS within one business day by any law  








                                                                  AB 238
                                                                  Page  3

          enforcement officer who serves a covered protective order.  If  
          the protective order is served by someone other than a police  
          officer, the information must be added to CARPOS within one  
          business day by the court clerk that receives proof of service  
          of the order.  

          EPOs have not been required to be entered into CARPOS.  It is  
          believed that this is because order information is not always  
          entered into CARPOS in a timely manner and given the very short  
          life of an EPO, the order could well be expired before it is  
          even entered into the system.  Instead the police officer who  
          sought the EPO was required to provide a copy of the order to  
          the victim, serve the order on the restrained person, assuming  
          that person could be located, and carry a copy of the order  
          while on duty.  This bill requires that instead of the  
          requesting officer carrying around a copy of the order, the  
          order be entered into CARPOS by law enforcement.

          According to the author, this bill is necessary because the  
          current procedure, where the requesting officer carries around  
          the order is simply not workable:  "This procedure is not  
          workable because when the officer is off duty, what happens to  
          those orders?"

          Judicial Council has been developing its own protective order  
          registry, known as the California Courts Protective Order  
          Registry (CCPOR), which has now been deployed to 21 courts.   
          CCPOR is a statewide repository of restraining orders available  
          to judicial officers and law enforcement.  It provides courts  
          with an easier way to enter information into CARPOS.  It also  
          allows for greater accessibility of information by providing not  
          just data fields, but access to the entire protective order.   
          However, this system is not yet installed in all courts and, in  
          any event, is not meant as a replacement for CARPOS.   

          Law enforcement organizations write in support of the bill:

               The requirement that a law enforcement officer who  
               requests an [EPO] carry a copy of the order while on  
               duty in the happenstance that he/she encounters the  
               suspect at a later time is pure folly.  A far better  
               process that will serve the interests of public  
               safety, protect victims, be more effective and  
               efficient is to have the information entered into  
               [CARPOS] within two hours of issuance of the order so  








                                                                  AB 238
                                                                  Page  4

               that any officer who encounters the suspect can advise  
               the suspect regarding the order.  We believe AB 238  
               represents a common sense approach to improving law  
               enforcement protection to all victims of domestic  
               violence . . . .


           Analysis Prepared by  :    Leora Gershenzon / JUD. / (916)  
          319-2334 


                                                               FN: 0001358