BILL ANALYSIS Ó
SENATE COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC SAFETY
Senator Loni Hancock, Chair A
2013-2014 Regular Session B
7
0
3
AB 703 (Hall)
As Amended May 8, 2013
Hearing date: June 18, 2013
Penal Code
SM:jr
CONCEALED WEAPONS PERMITS:
RETIRED PEACE OFFICER RESERVISTS
HISTORY
Source: California Peace Officers Association
Prior Legislation: AB 829 (Knight), (2012) - failed passage in
Assembly Public Safety
Support: Association of Los Angeles Deputy Sheriffs'; California
Correctional Peace
Officers Association (CCPOA); Los Angeles Police
Protective League;
Los Angeles County Sheriff; Riverside Sheriff's
Association; San Bernardino
County Sheriff; San Francisco District Attorney
Opposition:None
Assembly Floor Vote: Ayes 71 - Noes 0
(THIS ANALYSIS REFLECTS AMENDMENTS TO BE OFFERED BY THE AUTHOR
IN COMMITTEE)
KEY ISSUES
(More)
AB 703 (Hall)
Page 2
SHOULD A RETIRED LEVEL I RESERVE PEACE OFFICER BE ENTITLED TO AN
ENDORSEMENT FOR A CONCEALED WEAPONS PERMIT IF HE OR SHE CARRIED
A FIREARM DURING THE COURSE AND SCOPE OF HIS OR HER APPOINTMENT
AND HE OR SHE SERVED IN THE AGGREGATE THE MINIMUM AMOUNT OF TIME
SPECIFIED BY THE RETIREE'S AGENCY'S POLICY, AS SPECIFIED?
PURPOSE
The purpose of this bill is to provide that a retired Level I
reserve peace officer is entitled to an endorsement for a
concealed weapons (CCW) permit if he or she carried a firearm
during the course and scope of his or her appointment and he or
she served in the aggregate the minimum amount of time specified
by the retiree's agency's policy. This policy may not set an
aggregate term requirement that is less than 10 years or more
than 20 years.
Current law states that the prohibitions on carrying a loaded
firearm in public and carrying a concealed firearm do not apply
to any peace officer listed in Section 830.1, or 830.2, or
subdivision (a) of Section 830.33, whether active or honorably
retired. (Penal Code §§ 25900, 25450.)
Current law provides that any peace officer described in Section
25450 who has been honorably retired shall be issued an
identification certificate by the law enforcement agency from
which the officer retired.
The issuing agency may charge a fee necessary to cover
any reasonable expenses incurred by the agency in issuing
certificates pursuant to this article.
Any officer, except an officer listed in Section 830.1
or 830.2, subdivision (a) of Section 830.33, or subdivision
(c) of Section 830.5 who retired prior to January 1, 1981,
shall have an endorsement on the identification certificate
(More)
AB 703 (Hall)
Page 3
stating that the issuing agency approves the officer's
carrying of a concealed firearm.
An honorably retired peace officer listed in Section
830.1 or 830.2, subdivision (a) of Section 830.33, or
subdivision (c) of Section 830.5 who retired prior to
January 1, 1981, shall not be required to obtain an
endorsement from the issuing agency to carry a concealed
firearm.
(Penal Code § 25455.)
Current law states that any peace officer employed by an agency
listed in Penal Code section 830.1 or 830.2, or in Penal Code
section 830.5, who retired after January 1, 1981, shall have an
endorsement on the officer's identification certificate stating
that the issuing agency approves the officer's carrying of a
concealed weapon. (Penal Code § 26300(b).)
Current law defines "honorably retired" to include any peace
officer, who has qualified for, and has accepted, a service or
disability retirement. As used in these provisions, "honorably
retired" does not include a peace officer who has agreed to a
service retirement in lieu of termination. (Penal Code §
16690.)
Current law provides that any peace officer, as specified, who
has been honorably retired shall be issued an identification
certificate by the law enforcement agency from which the officer
retired. The issuing agency may charge a fee necessary to cover
any reasonable expenses incurred in issuing the certificate.
(Penal Code § 25455(a) and (b).)
Current law provides a county sheriff or municipal police chief
may issue a license to carry a handgun capable of being
concealed upon the person upon proof of all of the following:
The person applying is of good moral character (Penal
Code §§ 26150 and 26155(a)(1));
Good cause exists for the issuance (Penal Code §§ 26150
(More)
AB 703 (Hall)
Page 4
and 26155(a)(2));
The person applying meets the appropriate residency
requirements (Penal Code §§ 26150 and 26155(a)(3)); and,
The person has completed the appropriate training
course, as specified. (Penal Code §§ 26150 and
26155(a)(4).)
Current law states that a county sheriff or a chief of a
municipal police department may issue a license to carry a
concealed handgun in either of the following formats:
A license to carry a concealed handgun upon his or her
person (Penal Code Sections 26150 and 26155(b)(1)); or,
A license to carry a loaded and exposed handgun if the
population of the county, or the county in which the city
is located, is less than 200,000 persons according to the
most recent federal decennial census. (Penal Code §§ 26150
and 26155(b)(2).)
Current law provides that a chief of a municipal police
department shall not be precluded from entering into an
agreement with the sheriff of the county in which the city is
located for the sheriff to process all applications for
licenses, or renewal of licenses, to carry a concealed handgun
upon the person. (Penal Code § 26155(b)(3).)
Current law provides that a license to carry a concealed handgun
is valid for up to two years, three years for judicial officers,
or four years in the case of a reserve or auxiliary peace
officer. (Penal Code § 26220.)
Current law defines a "Level I reserve peace officer" as a
reserve officer deputized or appointed pursuant to specified
sections and assigned to the prevention and detection of crime
and the general enforcement of the laws of California, whether
or not working alone, and the person has completed the basic
training course for deputy sheriffs and police officers
prescribed by the Commission on Peace Officer Standards and
Training. (Penal Code § 832.6(a)(1).)
(More)
AB 703 (Hall)
Page 5
Current law states that the authority of a reserve peace officer
extends only for the duration of the person's specific
assignment. (Penal Code § 830.6(a).)
This bill would provide that a retired Level I reserve peace
officer is entitled to an endorsement for a concealed weapons
(CCW) permit if he or she carried a firearm during the course
and scope of his or her appointment and he or she served in the
aggregate the minimum amount of time specified by the retiree's
agency's policy. This policy may not set an aggregate term
requirement that is less than 10 years or more than 20 years.
RECEIVERSHIP/OVERCROWDING CRISIS AGGRAVATION
For the last several years, severe overcrowding in California's
prisons has been the focus of evolving and expensive litigation
relating to conditions of confinement. On May 23, 2011, the
United States Supreme Court ordered California to reduce its
prison population to 137.5 percent of design capacity within two
years from the date of its ruling, subject to the right of the
state to seek modifications in appropriate circumstances.
Beginning in early 2007, Senate leadership initiated a policy to
hold legislative proposals which could further aggravate the
prison overcrowding crisis through new or expanded felony
prosecutions. Under the resulting policy known as "ROCA" (which
stands for "Receivership/ Overcrowding Crisis Aggravation"), the
Committee held measures which created a new felony, expanded the
scope or penalty of an existing felony, or otherwise increased
the application of a felony in a manner which could exacerbate
the prison overcrowding crisis. Under these principles, ROCA
was applied as a content-neutral, provisional measure necessary
to ensure that the Legislature did not erode progress towards
reducing prison overcrowding by passing legislation which would
increase the prison population. ROCA necessitated many hard and
difficult decisions for the Committee.
In January of 2013, just over a year after the enactment of the
(More)
AB 703 (Hall)
Page 6
historic Public Safety Realignment Act of 2011, the State of
California filed court documents seeking to vacate or modify the
federal court order issued by the Three-Judge Court three years
earlier to reduce the state's prison population to 137.5 percent
of design capacity. The State submitted in part that the, ". .
. population in the State's 33 prisons has been reduced by over
24,000 inmates since October 2011 when public safety realignment
went into effect, by more than 36,000 inmates compared to the
2008 population . . . , and by nearly 42,000 inmates since 2006
. . . ." Plaintiffs, who opposed the state's motion, argue in
part that, "California prisons, which currently average 150% of
capacity, and reach as high as 185% of capacity at one prison,
continue to deliver health care that is constitutionally
deficient." In an order dated January 29, 2013, the federal
court granted the state a six-month extension to achieve the
137.5 % prisoner population cap by December 31st of this year.
In an order dated April 11, 2013, the Three-Judge Court denied
the state's motions, and ordered the state of California to
"immediately take all steps necessary to comply with this
Court's . . . Order . . . requiring defendants to reduce overall
prison population to 137.5% design capacity by December 31,
2013."
The ongoing litigation indicates that prison capacity and
related issues concerning conditions of confinement remain
unresolved. However, in light of the real gains in reducing the
prison population that have been made, although even greater
reductions are required by the court, the Committee will review
each ROCA bill with more flexible consideration. The following
questions will inform this consideration:
(More)
whether a measure erodes realignment;
whether a measure addresses a crime which is directly
dangerous to the physical safety of others for which there
is no other reasonably appropriate sanction;
whether a bill corrects a constitutional infirmity or
legislative drafting error;
whether a measure proposes penalties which are
proportionate, and cannot be achieved through any other
reasonably appropriate remedy; and
whether a bill addresses a major area of public safety
or criminal activity for which there is no other
reasonable, appropriate remedy.
COMMENTS
1. Need for the Bill
According to the author:
Peace officers often come into contact with former
arrestees, placing themselves and their loved ones in
potential harm. As a result, peace officers are
commonly issued a Concealed Carry Weapon (CCW) permit
upon their honorable retirement, allowing them to
carry a concealed weapon for their personal
protection.
Because reserve officers often face the same danger
that full time officers encounter, they should be
allowed the same protections upon retirement as those
granted to full time officers.
2. CCW Permits and Reserve Officers
Current law provides that any peace officer, as specified, who
has been honorably retired shall be issued an identification
certificate by the law enforcement agency from which the officer
retired and those who retired after January 1, 1981, shall have
an endorsement on the officer's identification certificate
(More)
AB 703 (Hall)
Page 8
stating that the issuing agency approves the officer's carrying
of a concealed weapon. (Penal Code § 25455.)
This bill requires law enforcement agencies to provide a CCW
endorsement on the identification of a retired Level I reserve
officer stating that the issuing agency approve the officer's
carrying of a concealed weapon if that officer carried a firearm
during the course and scope of his or her appointment, and he or
she has served the minimum service time set by the agency, which
must be more than 10 years, but less than 20 years. Level I
reserve peace officers have similar duties and training as a
non-reserve peace officers and are authorized to work without
immediate supervision.
3. Suggested Amendment
The California State Sheriffs' Association has taken a "support
if amended" position, and states:
In 1997, the law regarding reservists changed and
level II reservists were grandfathered into the level
I category. Consequently, we believe it would be
inappropriate to count the time a person served as a
level II reservist toward the time as a level I
reservist. In addition, we request that it be
clarified that a law enforcement agency has the
discretion to deny an endorsement for cause.
We recommend the following amendment to subdivision
(c) of section 26300 of the Penal Code:
(c) (1) Any peace officer not listed in
subdivision (a) or (b) who was authorized to, and
did, carry a firearm during the course and scope
of his or her appointment as a peace officer shall
have an endorsement on the officer's
identification certificate stating that the
issuing agency approves the officers carrying of a
concealed loaded firearm.
AB 703 (Hall)
Page 9
(2) This subdivision applies to a retired reserve
officer if the retired reserve officer satisfies
the requirements of paragraph (1), was a level I
reserve officer as described in paragraph (1) of
subdivision (a) of section 832.6, and he or she
served in the aggregate the minimum amount of time
as specified by the retirees agencies policy as a
level I reserve officer, provided that the policy
shall not set an aggregate term requirement that
is less than 10 years or more than 20 years.
Service as a reserve officer other than a level I
reserve officer prior to January 1, 1997, shall
not count towards the accrual of time required by
this section. A law enforcement agency shall have
the discretion to revoke or deny an endorsement
issued under this subdivision pursuant to section
26305.
***************