BILL ANALYSIS
SB 188
Page 1
SENATE THIRD READING
SB 188 (George Runner)
As Amended September 10, 2009
Majority vote
SENATE VOTE :39-0
JUDICIARY 10-0 APPROPRIATIONS 17-0
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Ayes:|Feuer, Tran, Brownley, |Ayes:|De Leon, Conway, Ammiano, |
| |Evans, Jones, Knight, | | |
| |Krekorian, Lieu, Monning, | |Charles Calderon, Coto, |
| |Silva | |Davis, Duvall, Fuentes, |
| | | |Hall, Harkey, Miller, |
| | | |John A. Perez, Skinner, |
| | | |Solorio, Audra |
| | | |Strickland, Torlakson, |
| | | |Hill |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
JUDICIARY 10-0
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Ayes:|Feuer, Tran, Brownley, | | |
| |Evans, Jones, Knight, | | |
| |Krekorian, Lieu, Monning, | | |
| |Silva | | |
|-----+--------------------------+-----+--------------------------|
| | | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY : Permits educational institutions to seek a restraining
order on behalf of a student, as specified. Specifically, this
bill :
1)Authorizes a designated officer of postsecondary educational
institution, a student of which has suffered a specified
threat of violence from any individual which can be reasonably
construed to be carried out at the campus or facility, to seek
a temporary restraining order and an injunction, on behalf of
the student and, at the court's discretion, any number of
other students at the campus or facility.
2)Provides that a temporary restraining order may be granted ex
parte, at the court's discretion, for up to 15 days, upon the
SB 188
Page 2
plaintiff filing a petition for an injunction and an affidavit
that shows reasonable proof that a student has suffered a
credible threat of violence by the defendant, and that great
or irreparable harm would result to the student.
3)Requires the court, within 15 days of the filing of the
petition, to hold a hearing on the petition for the
injunction, where the defendant may file a response or file a
cross-complaint.
4)Provides that if the defendant is a current student of the
entity requesting the injunction, the judge shall receive
evidence concerning the decision of the postsecondary
educational institution decision to retain, terminate, or
otherwise discipline the defendant.
5)Provides that if the judge finds by clear and convincing
evidence that the defendant made a credible threat of
violence, an injunction shall be issued prohibiting further
threats of violence with a duration of not more than three
years.
6)Provides that any intentional and knowing violation of the
temporary restraining order is a misdemeanor punishable by a
fine of not more than $1000, or by imprisonment in a county
jail for not more than one year, or both.
FISCAL EFFECT : According to the Assembly Appropriations:
1)Minor non-reimbursable costs to local governments for
enforcing restraining orders, violations of which are
misdemeanors, subject to a fine of up to $1,000 and/or one
year in county jail.
2)Minor absorbable costs to the courts for additional hearings
and services of process regarding restraining orders.
COMMENTS : The author relates that the idea for this bill arises
from an incident that occurred at an adult beauty institute in
Lancaster, California. According to the author, the Western
Beauty Institute (WBI) expelled a student who was making threats
to other students and staff members. After being expelled, the
student proceeded to attack one of her classmates with a set of
keys, inflicting a serious head injury. In response to this
SB 188
Page 3
incident, the administrators of WBI asked the court for a
restraining order but discovered that educational facilities are
not covered by current law. Therefore, there is currently no
mechanism to issue a blanket restraining order to protect all
individuals on a campus at any given time. This bill is
therefore appropriately limited to the private postsecondary
schools whose students are the subject of off-campus threats
that are understood to be carried out on campus because law
enforcement officials advise that these threats are not covered
by existing criminal and civil protections, and excludes minors
and public schools and where serious and countervailing
constitutional, educational, parental, due-process and other
important legal rights and concerns are implicated. In order to
avoid undue safety risks, the bill also appropriately requires
the consent of the student.
Analysis Prepared by : Kevin G. Baker / JUD. / (916) 319-2334
FN: 0003179