BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 1327
Page 1
ASSEMBLY THIRD READING
AB 1327 (Gorell, et al.)
As Amended January 23, 2014
Majority vote
PUBLIC SAFETY 4-2 LOCAL GOVERNMENT 8-0
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Ayes:|Melendez, Jones-Sawyer, |Ayes:|Achadjian, Levine, |
| |Quirk, Skinner | |Bradford, Gordon, |
| | | |Melendez, Mullin, |
| | | |Waldron, Frazier |
|-----+--------------------------+-----+--------------------------|
|Nays:|Ammiano, Mitchell | | |
| | | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
APPROPRIATIONS 16-0
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Ayes:|Gatto, Bigelow, Allen, | | |
| |Bocanegra, Bradford, Ian | | |
| |Calderon, Campos, Eggman, | | |
| |Gomez, Holden, Linder, | | |
| |Pan, Quirk, | | |
| |Ridley-Thomas, Wagner, | | |
| |Weber | | |
| | | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY : Establishes standards for the use of unmanned aircraft
systems (UAS). Specifically, this bill :
1)Prohibits a public agency, or any entity when contracting with
a public agency, to use UAS except as specified in this bill.
2)Authorizes a law enforcement agency to use UAS if it has
obtained a warrant based on probable cause.
3)Authorizes a law enforcement agency, without a warrant, to use
UAS in emergency situations if there is an imminent threat to
life or to help first responders in situations relating to
traffic accidents, to inspect state parks and wilderness areas
for "illegal vegetation," or fires. Provides that any data
collected pursuant to this use of UAS or any record,
including, but not limited to, usage logs or logs that
AB 1327
Page 2
identify any person or entity that subsequently obtains or
requests records of that system, is subject to disclosure.
4)Authorizes a public agency other than a law enforcement agency
to use UAS, or contract for its use, to achieve the core
mission of the agency so long as the purpose is unrelated to
the gathering of criminal intelligence. Prohibits the
dissemination of data collected by a non-law enforcement
public agency through the use of UAS to a law enforcement
agency unless the law enforcement agency has obtained a
warrant for the data based on probable cause or unless a law
enforcement agency is not required to obtain a warrant as
specified in this bill. Provides that any data collected
pursuant to this use of UAS or any record thereof is subject
to disclosure.
5)Requires a public agency that uses UAS, or contracts for its
use, to first provide reasonable notice to the public, which,
at a minimum, must consist of a one-time announcement
regarding the agency's intent to deploy UAS technology and a
description of the technology's capabilities.
6)Specifies that, except as permitted by this bill, data
obtained by a public agency through the use of UAS may not be
shared outside the collecting agency and may not be used by
the collecting agency for a purpose other than that for which
it was collected. Requires UAS-obtained data to be destroyed
within six months, except that the data may be retained for
training purposes for an agency's employees in matters related
to the mission of the agency and must be retained if its
collection was authorized by a warrant or if it is evidence in
any claim filed or any pending litigation.
7)Prohibits weaponizing UAS unless authorized by federal law.
8)Requires UAS to be operated so as to minimize the collection
of images, footage, or data of persons, places, or things not
specified with particularity in the warrant authorizing its
use, or, if no warrant was obtained, for purposes unrelated to
the justification for the operation.
9)Specifies that this bill is not intended to conflict with or
supersede federal law, including rules and regulations of the
Federal Aviation Administration and that nothing in this bill
AB 1327
Page 3
prohibits a local agency from adopting more restrictive
policies on the acquisition or use of UAS.
10)Defines a number of terms, including UAS as unmanned aircraft
and associated elements, including communication links and
components required to operate safely and efficiently in the
national airspace system.
11)Specifies that surveillance restrictions on electronic
devices in existing law apply to UAS.
EXISTING LAW :
1)States that a search warrant is an order in writing, in the
name of the people, signed by a magistrate, directed to a
peace officer, commanding him or her to search for a person or
persons, a thing or things, or personal property, and, in the
case of a thing or things or personal property, bring the same
before the magistrate.
2)Permits a search warrant to be issued for any of the following
grounds:
a) When the property subject to search was stolen or
embezzled;
b) When property or things were used as the means to commit
a felony;
c) When the property or things are in the possession of any
person with the intent to use them as a means of committing
a public offense, or in the possession of another to whom
he or she may have delivered them for the purpose of
concealing them or preventing them from being discovered;
d) When the property or things to be seized consist of any
item or constitute any evidence that tends to show a felony
has been committed, or tends to show that a particular
person has committed a felony;
e) When the property or things to be seized consist of
evidence that tends to show that sexual exploitation of a
child or possession of matter depicting sexual conduct of a
person under the age of 18 years has occurred or is
AB 1327
Page 4
occurring;
f) When there is a warrant to arrest a person;
g) When a provider of electronic communication service or
remote computing service has records or evidence, as
specified, showing that property was stolen or embezzled
constituting a misdemeanor, or that property or things are
in the possession of any person with the intent to use them
as a means of committing a misdemeanor public offense, or
in the possession of another to whom he or she may have
delivered them for the purpose of concealing them or
preventing their discovery;
h) When the property or things to be seized include an item
or any evidence that tends to show a violation of a
specified section of the Labor Code, or tends to show that
a particular person has violated that section;
i) When the property or things to be seized include a
firearm or any other deadly weapon at the scene of, or at
the premises occupied or under the control of the person
arrested in connection with, a domestic violence incident
involving a threat to human life or a physical assault, as
specified;
j) When the property or things to be seized include a
firearm or any other deadly weapon that is owned by, or in
the possession of, or in the custody or control of,
specified persons;
aa) When the property or things to be seized include a
firearm that is owned by, or in the possession of, or in
the custody or control of, a person who is subject to the
prohibitions regarding firearms, as specified, if a
prohibited firearm is possessed, owned, in the custody of,
or controlled by a person against whom a specified
protective order has been issued, the person has been
lawfully served with that order, and the person has failed
to relinquish the firearm as required by law; and,
bb) When the information to be received from the use of a
tracking device constitutes evidence that tends to show
that either a felony, a misdemeanor violation of the Fish
AB 1327
Page 5
and Game Code, or a misdemeanor violation of the Public
Resources Code has been committed or is being committed,
tends to show that a particular person has committed a
felony, a misdemeanor violation of the Fish and Game Code,
or a misdemeanor violation of the Public Resources Code, or
is committing a felony, a misdemeanor violation of the Fish
and Game Code, or a misdemeanor violation of the Public
Resources Code, or will assist in locating an individual
who has committed or is committing a felony, a misdemeanor
violation of the Fish and Game Code, or a misdemeanor
violation of the Public Resources Code.
3)Requires each application for an order authorizing or
approving the interception of a wire, oral, or electronic
communication be made in writing upon oath or affirmation to a
judge of competent jurisdiction, state the applicant's
authority to make such application, and include the following
information:
a) The identity of the investigative or law enforcement
officer making the application, and the officer authorizing
the application;
b) A full and complete statement of the facts and
circumstances relied upon by the applicant, to justify his
or her belief that an order should be issued, including:
i) Details as to the particular offense that has been,
is being, or is about to be committed;
ii) A particular description of the nature and location
of the facilities from which or the place where the
communication is to be intercepted, except as specified;
iii) A particular description of the type of
communications sought to be intercepted; and,
iv) The identity of the person, if known, committing the
offense and whose communications are to be intercepted.
c) A full and complete statement as to whether other
investigative procedures have been tried and failed or why
they reasonably appear to be unlikely to succeed if tried
or to be too dangerous;
AB 1327
Page 6
d) A statement of the period of time for which the
interception is required to be maintained. If the nature of
the investigation is such that the authorization for
interception should not automatically terminate when the
described type of communication has been first obtained, a
particular description of facts establishing probable cause
to believe that additional communications of the same type
will occur thereafter;
e) A full and complete statement of the facts concerning
all previous applications known to the individual
authorizing and making the application, made to any judge
for authorization to intercept, or for approval of
interceptions of, wire, oral, or electronic communications
involving any of the same persons, facilities or places
specified in the application, and the action taken by the
judge on each such application; and,
f) Where the application is for the extension of an order,
a statement setting forth the results thus far obtained
from the interception, or a reasonable explanation of the
failure to obtain such results.
4)Makes it a crime for a person, intentionally, and without
requisite consent, to eavesdrop on a confidential
communication by means of any electronic amplifying or
recording device.
5)Makes it a crime for a person to look through a hole or
opening or otherwise view, by means of any instrumentality,
the interior of bedrooms, bathrooms, and various other areas
in which an occupant has a reasonable expectation of privacy,
with the intent to invade the privacy of one or more persons
inside.
6)Makes it a crime for a person to use a concealed camcorder,
motion picture camera, or photographic camera to secretly
videotape, film, photograph, or record by electronic means,
without consent, another identifiable person, under or through
the clothing being worn by that person or if that person may
be in a state of full or partial undress, under circumstances
when that person has a reasonable expectation of privacy and
when there is an intent to invade the privacy of that person,
AB 1327
Page 7
as specified.
FISCAL EFFECT : According to the Assembly Appropriations
Committee, unknown, likely minor state trial court costs to the
extent that new requirements regarding warrants and court orders
occupy court time. For example, 100 hours of court time would
create new costs of less than $50,000.
While no local law enforcement agency is currently using drones,
(several have investigated and proposed usage), creating
prospective standards that restrict their uses, including making
acquisition subject to a vote of a city council or county board,
and requiring destruction of data, could reduce law enforcement
efficiency.
COMMENTS : According to the author, "The Commercial Unmanned
Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) market is expected to grow by 700% by
2018. While the potential benefits of UAVs in our communities
and state can be tremendous, there are privacy concerns that
must be acknowledged and addressed. AB 1327 establishes
boundaries and restrictions that protect the privacy rights of
Californians. When used responsibly, UAVs can benefit a number
of industries, some of which already use various forms of UAVs.
This legislation allows governmental entities to use drones in
non-intrusive ways, including agricultural purposes, traffic
accident investigation, detection of oil spills, fire
prevention, and search and rescue operations. Due to the
uncharted territory that will be created by the significant
increase of UAVs in the intermediate future, this bill provides
protections of the freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution (4th
amendment) and anticipates the potential privacy vulnerabilities
that can surface due to the continual advancement of UAV
technology. In summation, this bill recognizes UAVs as
beneficial tools, which can also be susceptible to abuse without
appropriate oversight."
Please see the policy committee analysis for a full discussion
of this bill.
Analysis Prepared by : Shaun Naidu / PUB. S. / (916) 319-3744
FN: 0003008
AB 1327
Page 8