BILL ANALYSIS �
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | AB 1698|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: AB 1698
Author: Wagner (R)
Amended: 6/18/14 in Senate
Vote: 21
SENATE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE : 7-0, 6/24/14
AYES: Hancock, Anderson, De Le�n, Knight, Liu, Mitchell,
Steinberg
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 74-2, 5/29/14 - See last page for vote
SUBJECT : Falsified public records
SOURCE : California District Attorneys Association
DIGEST : This bill provides a process to allow a judge to
declare an instrument void when there is a criminal action
finding that instrument forged or false.
ANALYSIS :
Existing law:
1.Provides that a person who, with intent to defraud, signs the
name of another person or of a fictitious person to specified
items, knowing that he/she has no authority to do so, is
guilty of forgery.
2.Defines grand theft generally as when the value of the money,
labor or real or personal property takes is more than $950.
CONTINUED
AB 1698
Page
2
3.Makes participation in a fraudulent conveyance a misdemeanor.
4.Defines mortgage fraud for the purpose of criminal
prosecution.
5.Permits a party to file a civil action, commonly known as a
"quiet title action," to establish title against adverse
claims to real or personal property or any interest therein.
6.Makes it a felony to knowingly procure, or offer any false or
forged document to be filed, registered, or recorded in any
public office within this state, which instrument, if genuine
might be filed, registered or recorded under any law of this
state or of the United States.
7.States that each instrument offered to be filed, registered,
or recorded is a separate violation.
This bill:
1.Provides that after a person is convicted of filing a forged
instrument, upon written motion of the prosecuting agency, the
court after a hearing shall issue a written order that the
false or forged instrument be adjudged void ab initio if the
court determines that an order is appropriate.
2.Provides that the order shall state whether the instrument is
false, forged or both and a copy of the instrument shall be
attached to the order at the time it is issued by the court
and a certified copy of the order shall be filed at the
appropriate public office by the prosecuting agency.
3.Provides if the false or forged instrument has been recorded
with a county recorder the order shall be recorded in the
county where the real property is located.
4.Sets forth procedures that the prosecuting agency shall use in
filing a motion.
5.Provides that the order shall be considered a judgment and
subject to appeal under the Code of Civil Procedure.
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: No Local:
AB 1698
Page
3
No
SUPPORT : (Verified 6/27/14)
California District Attorneys Association (source)
Judicial Council
Taxpayers for Improving Public Safety
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : The Judicial Council states, "The
[C]ouncil supports AB 1698 because it increases the efficiency
of the courts by avoiding costly quiet title actions. Under
case law, forged real estate instruments are void ab initio (see
Schiavo v Armando Brothers (2000) 85 Cal. App. 4th 374, 375);
that case law, however, does not extend to false real estate
instruments. Moreover, under existing law it is not clear that
a court may declare a forged or false instrument void in the
context of a criminal proceeding relating to that instrument.
Thus, even though a defendant may be convicted of a real estate
fraud for creating a false deed, that false deed still appears
as a cloud on the victim's title to the real estate. The
victim's only remedy under current law is to file a quite title
action to remove the cloud, a costly and time-consuming process.
By requiring a court to declare a forged or false real estate
instrument void in the context of a criminal proceeding, AB 1698
will eliminate the additional burden of a quite title action on
the victim and the court. As a result, we believe that AB 1698
increases the efficiency of courts."
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 74-2, 5/29/14
AYES: Achadjian, Alejo, Allen, Ammiano, Bigelow, Bloom,
Bonilla, Bonta, Bradford, Brown, Buchanan, Ian Calderon,
Campos, Chau, Ch�vez, Conway, Cooley, Dababneh, Dahle, Daly,
Dickinson, Eggman, Fong, Frazier, Beth Gaines, Garcia, Gatto,
Gomez, Gonzalez, Gordon, Gorell, Gray, Grove, Hagman, Hall,
Harkey, Roger Hern�ndez, Holden, Jones, Jones-Sawyer, Linder,
Logue, Lowenthal, Maienschein, Mansoor, Medina, Melendez,
Mullin, Muratsuchi, Nazarian, Nestande, Olsen, Pan, Patterson,
Perea, John A. P�rez, V. Manuel P�rez, Quirk, Quirk-Silva,
Rendon, Ridley-Thomas, Rodriguez, Salas, Skinner, Stone, Ting,
Wagner, Waldron, Weber, Wieckowski, Wilk, Williams, Yamada,
Atkins
NOES: Fox, Levine
NO VOTE RECORDED: Bocanegra, Chesbro, Donnelly, Vacancy
AB 1698
Page
4
JG:k 6/27/14 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****