BILL ANALYSIS
------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | SB 720|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 445-6614 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: SB 720
Author: Kuehl (D)
Amended: 4/12/05
Vote: 21
SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE : 5-1, 4/5/05
AYES: Dunn, Cedillo, Escutia, Figueroa, Kuehl
NOES: Ackerman
NO VOTE RECORDED: Morrow
SENATE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE : 4-0, 4/19/05
AYES: Alquist, Margett, Migden, Perata
NO VOTE RECORDED: Poochigian, Cedillo, Romero
SUBJECT : Domestic violence: protective orders:
contempt
SOURCE : Office of the Attorney General
DIGEST : This bill (1) authorizes the district attorney
or city attorney to initiate and pursue a court action for
contempt against a person for failing to comply with a
domestic violence protective order issued by a court, (2)
requires, with respect to domestic violence protective
orders, the court or the court's designee to transmit all
data filed with the court to law enforcement personnel, in
the same manner that criminal court protective orders are
transmitted, and (3) clarifies that an order protecting
victims of violent crime applies to all contact by the
defendant, thereby ensuring the court's authority to issue
CONTINUED
SB 720
Page
2
stay-away orders in addition to criminal protective orders.
ANALYSIS : Existing law provides the procedure for
initiating and pursuing contempt proceedings against a
person in violation of an order of the court. The court
may order the person found guilty of contempt to pay up to
a $1,000 fine and/or to be imprisoned for no more than five
days, and to pay reasonable attorney's fees and costs
incurred in connection with the contempt proceeding.
Existing law also provides specified penalties that may be
imposed on a person found in contempt of a court order
issued by the family court. The penalty for a first
violation is community service or imprisonment of up to 120
hours for each count of contempt. The penalty for a second
violation is up to 120 hours of community service in
addition to up to 120 hours of imprisonment for each count
of contempt. For a third or any subsequent violation, the
penalty is up to 240 hours of community service and up to
240 hours of imprisonment, plus an administrative fee for
the period of community service imposed, as specified.
This bill authorizes a district attorney or city attorney
to initiate and pursue a court action for contempt against
a party for failing to comply with a domestic violence
protective order issued by a court. The penalty for
contempt under these prosecutions would be the same as in
existing law.
This bill additionally provides that any attorney's fees
and costs ordered by the court for contempt under the
bill's provisions "shall be paid to the Office of Emergency
Services' account established for the purpose of funding
domestic violence shelter service providers pursuant to
subdivision (f) of Section 13823.15 of the Penal Code."
Existing law requires the courts to transmit to the
Department of Justice (DOJ) specified data relating to
criminal protective orders electronically through the
California Law Enforcement Telecommunications System
(CLETS).
Existing law requires the DOJ to maintain a database of
domestic violence protective orders [referred to as the
SB 720
Page
3
Domestic Violence Restraining Order System (DVROS)] that is
available to law enforcement connected to the CLETS.
This bill requires the court or the court's designee to
transmit to the DOJ all data filed with the court with
respect to protective orders issued under the Family Code
(domestic violence protective orders), including their
issuance, modification, extension, or termination, using
the same CLETS system now used for criminal protective
orders, as specified.
Existing law provides for the issuance of protective orders
by a criminal court to protect victims or witnesses and
their families from contact by a defendant.
This bill clarifies that the protective orders the court
may issue under this provision may include a protective
order prohibiting all contact by the defendant, as
specified.
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: No
Local: No
SUPPORT : (Verified 4/21/05)
Office of the Attorney General (source)
Alameda County District Attorney's Office
California Alliance Against Domestic Violence
City and County of San Francisco, Adult Probation
Department
Family Justice Center Foundation, San Diego
Gray Panthers
Haven House, Inc.
Judge Pamela Iles, Superior Court of California, County of
Orange
San Diego County Sheriff's Department
Statewide California Coalition for Battered Women
Women's Center of San Joaquin County
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : According to the Office of the
Attorney General (AG), studies confirm that batterers who
are the subject of domestic violence protective orders are
generally more dangerous than other defendants against whom
SB 720
Page
4
criminal protective orders are issued. Thus, any
information gleaned from the DVROS on a batterer who is
already the subject of a restraining order, also assists
the officer in being prepared when entering the scene of
reported domestic violence and in handling a potentially
dangerous situation.
According to the AG, there are 19 counties that already
treat family court-issued restraining orders as if they
were issued by a criminal court: courts of four of the
counties (Sonoma, Riverside, Orange and San Bernardino)
enter the information directly into DVROS through CLETS,
while the remaining counties send the orders to a
designated law enforcement agency for entry into DVROS,
also through CLETS. This bill makes this practice uniform
across the state.
RJG:mel 4/21/05 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****