BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    



                                                                       



           ------------------------------------------------------------ 
          |SENATE RULES COMMITTEE            |                   SB 585|
          |Office of Senate Floor Analyses   |                         |
          |1020 N Street, Suite 524          |                         |
          |(916) 445-6614         Fax: (916) |                         |
          |327-4478                          |                         |
           ------------------------------------------------------------ 
           
                                         
                              UNFINISHED BUSINESS


          Bill No:  SB 585
          Author:   Kehoe (D), et al
          Amended:  8/7/06
          Vote:     21

           
           SENATE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE  :  5-0, 4/19/05
          AYES:  Alquist, Poochigian, Cedillo, Margett, Perata
          NO VOTE RECORDED:  Migden, Romero

           SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE  :  12-0, 1/19/06
          AYES:  Murray, Aanestad, Alquist, Ashburn, Battin, Dutton,  
            Escutia, Florez, Ortiz, Poochigian, Romero, Torlakson
          NO VOTE RECORDED:  Alarcon

           SENATE FLOOR  :  37-0, 1/30/06
          AYES:  Aanestad, Ackerman, Alarcon, Alquist, Ashburn,  
            Battin, Bowen, Cedillo, Chesbro, Cox, Denham, Ducheny,  
            Dunn, Dutton, Figueroa, Florez, Kehoe, Kuehl, Lowenthal,  
            Machado, Maldonado, Margett, McClintock, Migden, Morrow,  
            Murray, Ortiz, Perata, Poochigian, Romero, Runner, Scott,  
            Simitian, Soto, Speier, Torlakson, Vincent
          NO VOTE RECORDED:  Escutia, Hollingsworth, Vacancy

           ASSEMBLY FLOOR :  78-0, 8/17/06 (Consent) - See last page  
            for vote


          SUBJECT  :    Protective orders:  firearms

           SOURCE  :     Author


                                                           CONTINUED





                                                                SB 585
                                                                Page  
          2

           DIGEST  :    This bill requires a person subject to a  
          protective order to immediately surrender a firearm and  
          file a receipt relative to the disposition of the firearm  
          with the court.  This bill also requires the petitioner for  
          a protective order to list and describe any described  
          firearms possessed by the respondent.

           Assembly Amendments  (1) deleted provisions authorizing the  
          Attorney general to work with local law enforcement to  
          develop model policies, and (2) added a co-author.

           ANALYSIS  :    Current law contains the "Domestic Violence  
          Prevention Act."  [Section 6200 et seq. of the Family Code]  
           "Domestic violence" under the Act is abuse perpetrated  
          against any of the following persons:

          1. A spouse or former spouse.

          2. A cohabitant or former cohabitant, as defined in Section  
             6209.

          3. A person with whom the respondent is having or has had a  
             dating or engagement relationship.

          4. A person with whom the respondent has had a child, where  
             the presumption applies that the male parent is the  
             father of the child of the female parent under the  
             Uniform Parentage Act [Part 3 (commencing with Section  
             7600) of Division 12].

          5. A child of a party or a child who is the subject of an  
             action under the Uniform Parentage Act, where the  
             presumption applies that the male parent is the father  
             of the child to be protected.

          6. Any other person related by consanguinity or affinity  
             within the second degree.  [Section 6212 of the Family  
             Code]

          "Protective order" under this Act means an order that  
          includes any of the following restraining orders, whether  
          issued ex parte, after notice and hearing, or in a  
          judgment:








                                                                SB 585
                                                                Page  
          3

          1. An order described in Section 6320 enjoining specific  
             acts of abuse.

          2. An order described in Section 6321 excluding a person  
             from a dwelling.

          3. An order described in Section 6322 enjoining other  
             specified behavior.  [Section 6218 of the Family Code]
          
          Current law prohibits a person subject to a protective  
          order under Family Code section 6218 from owning,  
          possessing, purchasing, or receiving a firearm while that  
          protective order is in effect.
           
          Current law further provides every person who owns,  
          possesses, purchases or receives, or attempts to purchase  
          or receive, a firearm while the protective order is in  
          effect is guilty of a public offense punishable by county  
          jail, state prison or a fine, as specified.
           
          Current law requires the Judicial Council of California  
          forms giving notice of a protective order to include  
          information to the respondent concerning their obligations  
          with respect to relinquishing and not acquiring firearms  
          while the order is in effect, as specified.  [Section  
          6389(b) of the Family Code]

          Each application for a protective order shall include a  
          space for the petitioner to identify all firearms known to  
          be in the possession of the respondent, the location of the  
          firearms, the basis for the petitioner's knowledge  
          regarding the existence and location of the firearms, and  
          why the respondent's possession of firearms subjects the  
          petitioner to an increased risk of harm.

          Current law requires courts, upon issuance of a protective  
          order, to "order the respondent to relinquish any firearm  
          in that person's immediate possession or control, or  
          subject to that person's immediate possession or control,  
          within 24 hours of being served with the order, by either  
          surrendering the firearm to the control of local law  
          enforcement officials, or by selling the firearm to a  
          licensed gun dealer, as specified, and requires a person  
          ordered to relinquish any firearm to file with the court a  







                                                                SB 585
                                                                Page  
          4

          receipt showing the firearm was surrendered or sold within  
          72 hours after receiving the order."  

          This bill instead requires the person ordered to relinquish  
          a firearm to immediately surrender the firearm in a safe  
          manner, upon request of any law enforcement officer, or  
          within 24 hours as specified above.  This bill also  
          requires the person to file a receipt with the court within  
          48 hours after being served with the order and provides  
          that the failure to timely file a receipt constitutes a  
          violation of the protective order. 

          This bill also requires application forms for protective  
          orders adopted by the Judicial Council and approved by the  
          Department of Justice to be amended to require the  
          petitioner to describe the number, types, and locations of  
          any firearms presently known by the petitioner to be  
          possessed or controlled by the respondent.  This bill  
          additionally includes recommendations for written policies  
          and standards for law enforcement officers who request  
          relinquishment of firearms.
          
           FISCAL EFFECT  :    Appropriation:  No   Fiscal Com.:  Yes    
          Local:  Yes

          According to the Senate Appropriations Committee:

                          Fiscal Impact (in thousands)

            Major Provisions               2006-07     2007-08       
            2008-09              Fund  

           Misdemeanor        Unknown increase in incarcerationLocal
           expansion          costs, offset by increased fine  
           revenues

           Mandate (model     Unknown, potentially in excess of  
           $150General
           policies)

           Policies, forms              Minor, absorbable  
           costsGeneral

           SUPPORT  :   (Verified  8/17/06)







                                                                SB 585
                                                                Page  
          5


          American Federation of State, County and Municipal  
          Employees
          California Alliance Against Domestic Violence
          California Million Man March
          California State Sheriffs' Association
          Legal Community Against Violence
          San Bernardino County Sheriff's Department
          San Diego County District Attorney
          San Diego County Sheriff's Department
          Violence Prevention Coalition of Orange County
          Women Escaping a Violent Environment


           ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT  :    According to the author's office,  
          under existing law, individuals seeking protective orders  
          in domestic violence situations are asked to identify  
          firearms in the possession of the person who is the subject  
          of the order.  Individuals who are served with temporary  
          restraining orders then have twenty-four hours to surrender  
          or sell any firearms in their possession.
           
          Applicants who sought protective orders have, on occasion,  
          erroneously concluded that when they disclosed the firearms  
          in the possession of the respondent on the affidavit, it  
          meant that the firearms were confiscated.  In at least one  
          tragic case in the City of San Diego, a father shot and  
          killed his son while the 17-year old was training with his  
          high school's cross-country track team.  The shooting  
          occurred within 24 hours of the order being served, and was  
          done with one of the firearms that had been listed in the  
          mother's affidavit for the protective order.
           
          Unfortunately, the act of seeking a temporary restraining  
          order can escalate the tensions between the two parties.   
          While the person seeking the protection of the court  
          assumes that the act of identifying firearms in the  
          possession of the respondent ensures their prompt removal,  
          it does not.  

          This bill proposes to give the court and law enforcement  
          authorities the ability to order the immediate removal of  
          the identified firearms in those instances where the court  
          or law enforcement personnel believe that their continued  







                                                                SB 585
                                                                Page  
          6

          possession by the respondent would create an unsafe  
          situation.
           
          The purpose of this bill is to provide the maximum amount  
          of protection to individuals seeking protective orders in  
          domestic situations that are heated, volatile and dangerous  
          but up to that point may have been non-violent.  


           ASSEMBLY FLOOR  : 
          AYES:  Aghazarian, Arambula, Baca, Bass, 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, Haynes, Jerome Horton, Shirley Horton,  
            Houston, Huff, Jones, Karnette, Keene, Klehs, Koretz, La  
            Malfa, La Suer, Laird, Leno, Leslie, Levine, Lieber,  
            Lieu, Liu, Matthews, Maze, McCarthy, Montanez, Mountjoy,  
            Mullin, Nakanishi, Nation, Nava, Negrete McLeod, Niello,  
            Parra, Pavley, Plescia, Richman, Ridley-Thomas, Sharon  
            Runner, Ruskin, Saldana, Salinas, Spitzer, Strickland,  
            Torrico, Tran, Umberg, Vargas, Villines, Walters, Wolk,  
            Wyland, Yee, Nunez
          NO VOTE RECORDED:  Oropeza, Vacancy


          RJG:mel  8/18/06   Senate Floor Analyses 

                         SUPPORT/OPPOSITION:  SEE ABOVE

                                ****  END  ****