BILL ANALYSIS
------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | AB 118|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 445-6614 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: AB 118
Author: Cohn (D), et al.
Amended: 9/1/05 in Senate
Vote: 21
SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE : 6-0, 6/7/05
AYES: Dunn, Morrow, Ackerman, Cedillo, Figueroa, Kuehl
NO VOTE RECORDED: Escutia
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE : Senate Rule 28.8
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 71-0, 4/21/05 (Passed on Consent) See
last page for vote
SUBJECT : Protective orders: minor children
SOURCE : Author
DIGEST : This bill requires that, if a protective order
has been issued by a criminal court, the court shall make
reference to said protective order and acknowledge the
precedence of enforcement of said criminal protective
order. This bill also requires Judicial Council to modify
criminal and civil court forms consistent with the bill, by
July 1, 2006.
Senate Floor Amendments of 9/1/05 avoid chaptering out
provisions in three other bills: AB 112 (Cohn), AB 1288
(Chu), and SB 720 (Kuehl).
CONTINUED
AB 118
Page
2
ANALYSIS : Existing law authorizes the court to grant
reasonable visitation rights to a parent unless it is shown
that the visitation would be detrimental to the best
interest of the child. Existing law also authorizes the
court to impose conditions or limitations on such
visitations as necessary in the best interest of the child.
[Section 3100 of the Family Code]
Existing law authorizes the court to issue protective
orders governing personal conduct, stay-away orders, and
residence exclusion orders upon petition and a noticed
hearing.
Existing law also authorizes any court with jurisdiction
over criminal matters to issue protective orders and to
coordinate all orders against the same defendant and in
favor of the same victim or victims so that the different
protective orders may coexist and ensure the safety of the
children and the families involved. [Section 136.2 of
Penal Code]
This bill requires that if a criminal protective order has
been issued pursuant to Section 136.2of the Penal Code, a
visitation order shall make reference to and acknowledge
the precedence of enforcement of any appropriate criminal
protective order.
This bill requires the Judicial Council to modify forms
currently used to implement the protocol established
pursuant to Section 136 of the Penal Code 2 by January 1,
2006, to make them consistent with the requirements of this
bill. The modified forms would not only make the
coordination and cross-referencing of the protective orders
easier for the judges and the courts, but also for the law
enforcement who are often called on to enforce the orders.
This bill is part of a package of bills that also includes
AB 99 and AB 104 introduced by the author to improve the
state's laws on domestic violence prevention.
According to Department of Justice criminal justice
statistics, in 2002 there were 153 murders resulting from
intimate partner violence in California. Studies conducted
CONTINUED
AB 118
Page
3
on arrests and protective orders show that nearly half of
victims who obtained a protective order were re-abused
within two years, and that six percent of defendants in
domestic violence cases were convicted of violating the
order.
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes
Local: No
SUPPORT : (Verified 9/2/05)
Family Law Section of the State Bar
National Association of Social Workers, California Chapter
American of Federal, State, County and Municipal Employees,
AFL-CIO Peace Officers Research Association of California
ASSEMBLY FLOOR :
AYES: Aghazarian, Arambula, Baca, Benoit, Berg, Bermudez,
Blakeslee, Bogh, Calderon, Canciamilla, Chan, Chavez,
Chu, Cogdill, Cohn, Coto, Daucher, De La Torre, DeVore,
Dymally, Emmerson, Evans, Frommer, Garcia, Goldberg,
Hancock, Harman, Haynes, Jerome Horton, Shirley Horton,
Houston, Huff, Jones, Karnette, Keene, Klehs, Koretz, La
Malfa, Laird, Leno, Leslie, Levine, Lieber, Liu,
Matthews, Maze, McCarthy, Mountjoy, Mullin, Nakanishi,
Nava, Negrete McLeod, Niello, Parra, Plescia, Richman,
Ridley-Thomas, Sharon Runner, Ruskin, Saldana, Salinas,
Spitzer, Strickland, Torrico, Tran, Umberg, Vargas,
Villines, Wolk, Wyland, Yee
NO VOTE RECORDED: Bass, Gordon, La Suer, Montanez, Nation,
Oropeza, Pavley, Walters, Nunez
RJG:nl 9/2/05 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****
CONTINUED