BILL ANALYSIS �
AB 499
Page 1
ASSEMBLY THIRD READING
AB 499 (Ting)
As Amended April 16, 2013
Majority vote
JUDICIARY 10-0
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Ayes:|Wieckowski, Wagner, | | |
| |Alejo, Chau, Dickinson, | | |
| |Garcia, Gorell, | | |
| |Maienschein, Muratsuchi, | | |
| |Stone | | |
|-----+--------------------------+-----+--------------------------|
| | | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY : Extends the maximum duration period for injunctions
against harassment from three to five years, as specified.
Specifically, this bill :
1)Provides that an injunction prohibiting harassment may remain
in effect for a duration of up to five years and that, upon
request of a party, may be renewed for a duration of not more
than five additional years, without a showing of any further
harassment since the issuance of the original order, subject
to termination or modification by further order of the court
either by written stipulation or by motion of a party.
2)Provides that failure to state an expiration date on the face
of the form creates an order effective for five years from the
date of issuance.
EXISTING LAW :
1)Permits a person who has suffered harassment to seek a
temporary restraining order or an injunction prohibiting
harassment.
2)Defines "harassment" as unlawful violence, a credible threat
of violence, or a knowing and willful course of conduct
directed at a specific person that seriously alarms, annoys,
or harasses the person and serves no legitimate purpose. The
course of conduct must be such that it would cause a
reasonable person to suffer substantial emotional distress,
AB 499
Page 2
and must actually cause substantial emotional distress to the
petitioner.
3)Provides that upon filing for a petition, a person who has
suffered harassment may obtain a temporary restraining order
(TRO) for a period not to exceed 21 days of the filing of the
petition (or a period of 25 days if the court at its
discretion extends the time for hearing). Within 21 or 25
days, accordingly, from the date that the TRO was issued, a
hearing shall be held for an injunction. If issued, the
injunction shall be in effect for a period of not more than
three years and may be renewed for another period of not more
than three years. Failure to state an expiration date on the
face of the form creates an order effective for three years
from the date of issuance.
FISCAL EFFECT : None
COMMENTS : According to the author, this bill will afford
greater protection to victims of harassment, which includes
stalking and threats of violence, by simplifying "a victim's
ability to obtain an injunction that is commensurate in duration
with the unique dynamic of stalking behavior." Under existing
law a victim of harassment may seek a temporary restraining
order (TRO) or an injunction prohibiting the harassment. Upon
filing a petition for an injunction, the petitioner may obtain a
TRO until the injunction hearing, which usually must be held
within 21 days of the filing of the petition - although the
court at its discretion may extend to the hearing to 25 days.
If issued, an injunction order may be in effect for a period not
to exceed three years, and it may be renewed for an additional
period of not more than three years. If the injunction order
does not expressly state an expiration date, the statutory
default rule creates an order with a three-year duration period.
This bill would increase the maximum duration of an injunction
against harassment to a period of not more than five years,
instead of three years. It would similarly limit renewals to a
duration of not more than five years and provide that
injunctions that fail to state an expiration date shall be for a
duration of five years.
According to the author and sponsor, this extension is necessary
because the process of renewal requires that the harasser be
served and requires both the victim and harasser to attend an
AB 499
Page 3
injunction hearing. Groups that work with victims of stalking
and domestic violence report that three years is often not a
sufficient period of time in these cases, and that the renewal
process often ignites old hostilities and is akin to "waking the
sleeping giant." By extending the duration of the original
injunction, this bill will reduce the need to seek renewals that
require the victim to serve notice upon the harasser and the two
parties appear together at a hearing.
This bill as introduced provided for a duration of up to ten
years and obviated the need for renewal. In order to address
concerns raised by the California Public Defenders Association
(CPDA) that a ten year period was too long, the author agreed to
amend the bill to extend existing time frames from three to five
years. The bill is supported by groups that work with victims
of stalking and domestic violence, law enforcement groups, and
women's groups. CPDA remains opposed to the bill unless it is
amended to provide that an order cannot be removed if the
protected party has invited or otherwise consented to contact
with the party restrained by the order.
Analysis Prepared by : Thomas Clark / JUD. / (916) 319-2334
FN: 0000167