BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    Ó


          |SENATE RULES COMMITTEE            |                        AB 307|
          |Office of Senate Floor Analyses   |                              |
          |1020 N Street, Suite 524          |                              |
          |(916) 651-1520         Fax: (916) |                              |
          |327-4478                          |                              |
                                    THIRD READING

          Bill No:  AB 307
          Author:   Campos (D)
          Amended:  4/4/13 in Assembly
          Vote:     21

           SENATE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE  :  6-0, 6/18/13
          AYES:  Hancock, Block, De León, Knight, Liu, Steinberg
          NO VOTE RECORDED:  Anderson

           SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE  :  Senate Rule 28.8

           ASSEMBLY FLOOR  :  76-0, 4/25/13 (Consent) - See last page for  

           SUBJECT  :    Protective orders

           SOURCE  :     Alameda County District Attorney
                      California District Attorneys Association

           DIGEST  :    This bill allows a court to issue a protective order  
          up to 10 years when a defendant is convicted of specified sex  
          crimes, regardless of the sentence imposed.

           ANALYSIS  :    

          Existing law:
           1.Authorizes the trial court in a criminal case to issue  
            protective orders when there is a good cause belief that harm  
            to, or intimidation or dissuasion of a victim or witness has  


                                                                     AB 307

            occurred or is reasonably likely to occur.  (Penal Code  
            Section 136.2.)

          2.Requires the court to consider issuing a protective order in  
            any case in which a crime of "domestic violence" has been  
            charged.  (Penal Code Section 136.2[e][1].)

          3.Authorizes the court to issue an order restraining the  
            defendant from "contact with the victim" upon a conviction for  
            domestic violence where the defendant is sentenced to state  
            prison, county jail, or if imposition of sentence is suspended  
            and the defendant is placed on probation.

          4.Requires a defendant who is granted probation for committing a  
            crime in which the victim is a person defined in the Family  
            Code to comply with a mandatory order protecting the victim  
            from further acts of violence, threats, stalking, sexual  
            abuse, and harassment, and, if appropriate, containing  
            residence exclusion or stay-away conditions.  (Penal Code  
            Section 1203.097[a][2].)

          5.Allows the court to issue a protective order for up to 10  
            years when a defendant is convicted for an offense involving  
            "domestic violence" regardless of the sentence imposed.   
            (Penal Code Section 136.2[i][1].)

          6.Authorizes the court to issue protective orders for up to 10  
            years in stalking cases regardless of the sentence imposed.

          7.Authorizes the court to issue a protective order for up to 10  
            years in sex cases involving a minor victim.

          This bill:
           1.Authorizes a court to issue a protective order for up to 10  
            years when a defendant is convicted of any of the following  

             A.   Rape.

             B.   Spousal rape.

             C.   Statutory rape.



                                                                     AB 307

             D.   Any crime that requires the defendant to register as a  
               sex offender as specified.

          1.Clarifies that this section apply to the following types of  

             A.   An order issued pursuant to Penal Code Section 136.2.

             B.   An order issued as a condition of probation in a  
               domestic-violence-related offense.

             C.   An order issued as a condition of probation in an elder  
               or dependent abuse case.

             D.   An order issued in a sex case involving a minor victim.

             E.   Specified family court orders.

          1.Makes additional non-substantive changes to this section. 

           FISCAL EFFECT  :    Appropriation:  No   Fiscal Com.:  Yes    
          Local:  Yes

           SUPPORT  :   (Verified  7/2/13)

          Alameda County District Attorney (co-source)
          California District Attorneys Association (co-source)
          California Coalition Against Sexual Assault
          California Communities United Institute
          California Partnership to End Domestic Violence
          California Police Chiefs' Association
          Crime Victims United of California
          San Diego County District Attorney
          State Public Affairs Committee of the Junior Leagues of  

           OPPOSITION  :    (Verified  7/2/13)

          California Public Defenders Association

           ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT  :    The California District Attorneys  
          Association (CDAA), a co-sponsor of this bill, submits in part:



                                                                     AB 307

               In 2011, CDAA sponsored SB 723, (Pavley, Chapter 155) which  
               closed the loophole that formerly kept victims of  
               misdemeanor domestic violence offenses from being able to  
               get the 10-year protective order described above.  As this  
               statute has evolved, it has also become clear that victims  
               of sexual assault offenses should also enjoy the same  
               ability to obtain a meaningful protective order, subject to  
               the court's discretion.

               While a victim may obtain a criminal protective order that  
               is valid for the pendency of any court proceedings or go to  
               family court to get a longer-term order, the current  
               process can be burdensome to a victim, especially if he/she  
               has to relive the trauma underlying criminal act that was  
               committed against him/her.  AB 307 expands the availability  
               of the 10-year protective order to a sexual assault victim  
               if the defendant is convicted and ensures that the victim  
               can get a long-term order in criminal court without having  
               to negotiate the family court process.

           ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION  :    The California Public Defenders  
          Association, states in part, this bill is unnecessary, as the  
          court already has broad discretion to consider the defendant's  
          background and issue a protective order if the circumstances  
          warrant the same.

          Furthermore, the class that AB 307 proposes to protect is  
          already protected under existing law.  It's a crime to dissuade  
          a witness, and it's a crime to contact any party in violation of  
          a protective order.  If the perpetrator's actions are more  
          egregious than dissuading or violation of the protective orders,  
          other existing statutes, such as the prohibition against  
          stalking and terrorist threats already address that behavior.   
          There's no need for a new statute or new class of crime.

          ASSEMBLY FLOOR  :  76-0, 4/25/13
          AYES:  Achadjian, Alejo, Allen, Ammiano, Atkins, Bigelow, Bloom,  
            Blumenfield, Bocanegra, Bonilla, Bonta, Bradford, Brown,  
            Buchanan, Ian Calderon, Campos, Chau, Chávez, Chesbro, Conway,  
            Dahle, Daly, Dickinson, Donnelly, Eggman, Fong, Fox, Frazier,  
            Beth Gaines, Garcia, Gatto, Gomez, Gordon, Gorell, Gray,  
            Grove, Hagman, Hall, Harkey, Roger Hernández, Holden, Jones,  
            Jones-Sawyer, Levine, Linder, Logue, Maienschein, Mansoor,  



                                                                     AB 307

            Medina, Melendez, Mitchell, Morrell, Mullin, Muratsuchi,  
            Nestande, Olsen, Pan, Patterson, Perea, V. Manuel Pérez,  
            Quirk, Quirk-Silva, Rendon, Salas, Skinner, Stone, Ting,  
            Torres, Wagner, Waldron, Weber, Wieckowski, Wilk, Williams,  
            Yamada, John A. Pérez
          NO VOTE RECORDED:  Cooley, Lowenthal, Nazarian, Vacancy

          JG:ej  7/2/13   Senate Floor Analyses 

                           SUPPORT/OPPOSITION:  SEE ABOVE

                                   ****  END  ****