BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 1940
Page 1
ASSEMBLY THIRD READING
AB
1940 (Cooper)
As Amended May 3, 2016
Majority vote
------------------------------------------------------------------
|Committee |Votes|Ayes |Noes |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
|----------------+-----+----------------------+--------------------|
|Public Safety |6-0 |Jones-Sawyer, | |
| | |Melendez, Lackey, | |
| | |Lopez, Low, Santiago | |
| | | | |
|----------------+-----+----------------------+--------------------|
|Privacy |10-0 |Chau, Wilk, Calderon, | |
| | |Chang, Cooper, | |
| | |Dababneh, Gatto, | |
| | |Gordon, Low, Olsen | |
| | | | |
|----------------+-----+----------------------+--------------------|
|Appropriations |19-1 |Gonzalez, Bigelow, |Weber |
| | |Bloom, Bonilla, | |
| | |Bonta, Calderon, | |
| | |Patterson, Daly, | |
| | |Eggman, Gallagher, | |
| | |Eduardo Garcia, Roger | |
| | |Hernández, Holden, | |
| | |Jones, Obernolte, | |
| | |Quirk, Santiago, | |
AB 1940
Page 2
| | |Wagner, Wood | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Requires law enforcement agencies that employ peace
officers to develop body-worn camera policies and that these
policies are subject to collective bargaining. Specifically,
this bill:
1)Requires a law enforcement agency, department, or entity that
employs peace officers that use body-worn cameras to develop a
policy related to the use of body worn cameras, and requires
that any policy be developed in accordance with state and
local collective bargaining procedures.
2)States that the policy shall allow a peace officer to review
his or her body-worn camera video and audio recordings before
he or she makes a report, is ordered to give an internal
affairs statement, or before any criminal or civil proceeding,
and an officer is not required to review his or her body-worn
camera video and audio recordings before making a report,
giving an internal affairs statement, or before any civil or
criminal proceeding.
3)Provides that a peace officer involved in an incident
involving a serious use of force shall not review his or her
body-worn camera recording until accompanied by an assigned
independent investigator or supervisor. The separating and
monitoring of the peace officer involved in a serious use of
force shall be maintained during the review of the body-worn
camera video and audio recordings and this review shall not
jointly among involved employees. Once the recordings are
approved as to the validity of the body-worn camera recordings
and any other relevant recordings are also approved as to
their validity, an officer may have a legal representative
present during the review of the recording without the
independently assigned investigator or supervisor present,
before the peace officer makes a report, is ordered to give an
AB 1940
Page 3
internal affairs statement, or before any criminal or civil
proceeding.
4)The policy shall be available to all peace officers in a
written form, and shall be available to the public for
viewing.
5)Provides that in developing the policy, law enforcement
agencies, departments, or entities are encouraged to include
the following in the policy:
a) The time, place, circumstances, and duration in which
the body-worn camera shall be operational;
b) Which peace officers shall wear the body-worn camera and
when they shall wear it;
c) Prohibitions against the use of body-worn camera
equipment and footage in specified circumstances, such as
when the peace officer is off-duty.
d) The type of training and length of training required for
body-worn camera usage;
e) Public notification of field use of body-worn cameras,
including the circumstances in which citizens are to be
notified that they are being recorded;
f) The manner in which to document a citizen's refusal from
being recorded under certain circumstances;
g) The use of body-worn camera video and audio recordings
AB 1940
Page 4
in internal affairs cases;
h) The use of body-worn camera video and audio recordings
in criminal and civil case preparation and testimony;
i) The transfer and use of body-worn camera video and audio
recordings to other law enforcement agencies, including
establishing what constitutes a need-to-know basis and what
constitutes a right-to-know basis; and,
j) A peace officer shall not use a personal device to make
an unauthorized recording of the video or audio taken from
a body-worn camera.
6)Defines "serious use of force" to mean any of the following:
a) Force resulting in death;
b) Force resulting in loss of consciousness;
c) Force resulting in protracted loss, impairment, serious
disfigurement, or function of any body part or organ;
d) A weapon strike to the head; and,
e) Intentional firearm discharge at a person, regardless of
injury.
7)Defines "body-worn camera" to mean a device attached to the
uniform or body of a peace officer that records video, audio,
or both, in a digital or analog format.
8)Defines "peace officer" to mean any person designated as a
peace officer pursuant to existing law.
AB 1940
Page 5
EXISTING LAW:
1)Provides that it is a an alternate felony/misdemeanor for any
person who, by means of any machine, instrument, or
contrivance, or in any other manner, intentionally taps, or
makes any unauthorized connection, whether physically,
electrically, acoustically, inductively, or otherwise, with
any telegraph or telephone wire, line, cable, or instrument,
including the wire, line, cable, or instrument of any internal
telephonic communication system, or who willfully and without
the consent of all parties to the communication, or in any
unauthorized manner, reads, or attempts to read, or to learn
the contents or meaning of any message, report, or
communication while the same is in transit or passing over any
wire, line, or cable, or is being sent from, or received at
any place within this state; or who uses, or attempts to use,
in any manner, or for any purpose, or to communicate in any
way, any information so obtained, or who aids, agrees with,
employs, or conspires with any person or persons to unlawfully
do, or permit, or cause to be done any of the acts or things
mentioned above in this section, is punishable by a fine not
exceeding $2,500, or by imprisonment in the county jail not
exceeding one year, or by imprisonment in the county jail for
16 months, or two or three years, or by both a fine and
imprisonment.
2)States that every person who, intentionally and without the
consent of all parties to a confidential communication, by
means of any electronic amplifying or recording device,
eavesdrops upon or records the confidential communication,
whether the communication is carried on among the parties in
the presence of one another or by means of a telegraph,
telephone, or other device, except a radio, shall be punished
by a fine not exceeding $2,500, or imprisonment in the county
AB 1940
Page 6
jail not exceeding one year, or in the state prison, or by
both that fine and imprisonment.
3)Defines "confidential communication" to include any
communication carried on in circumstances as may reasonably
indicate that any party to the communication desires it to be
confined to the parties thereto, but excludes a communication
made in a public gathering or any legislative, judicial,
executive or administrative proceeding open to the public, or
in any circumstance that the parties may reasonably expect
that the communication may be overheard or recorded.
4)Provides that nothing in the sections prohibiting
eavesdropping or wiretapping prohibits specified law
enforcement officers or their assistants or deputies acting
within the scope of his or her authority, from overhearing or
recording any communication that they could lawfully overhear
or record.
FISCAL EFFECT: According to the Assembly Appropriations
Committee, no state cost. Significant nonreimbursable cost to
local agencies that provide body-worn cameras to their peace
officers. These requirements apply only if the agency uses
body-worn cameras.
COMMENTS: According to the author, "There is currently no law
requiring law enforcement agencies that use body worn cameras
(BWC) to develop policies and procedures around their use. AB
1940 will ensure that the acquisition and deployment of BWC
equipment is codified for each agency and may be available for
administrative review, legal proceedings and public and peace
officer review. AB 1940 will ensure that law enforcement
management and labor work in concert to develop BWC policy so
that mission of the department is met as well as the working
conditions of the employee.
AB 1940
Page 7
"AB 1940 will also set a statewide policy that peace officers
can access BWC footage prior to writing reports, preparing for
criminal or civil court testimony and preparing for orders to
appear in internal affairs investigations. This access ensures
accuracy in memory recall and serves the best interest of public
and law enforcement relations and the judicial processes.
"The discussion of the release of BWC data to the public vs.
individual privacy, as well as the preservation evidence, and
how those issues interface with the California Public Records
Act must be addressed. AB 1940 strikes a balance that in
consistent with current law that exempts most evidence from
public view, but allows for its release by a third party,
judicial determination."
Analysis Prepared by:
Gregory Pagan / PUB. S. / (916) 319-3744 FN:
0003005