AB 2089, as amended, Quirk. Domestic violence: protective orders.
The Domestic Violence Prevention Act authorizes a judicial officer to issue a protective order after notice and a hearing for the purpose of preventing a recurrence of domestic violence and ensuring a period of separation of the persons involved, based on an affidavit showing reasonable proof of past abuse. The act defines domestic violence as abuse perpetrated against specified persons, and further defines abuse within that context. Under existing law, failure to state the expiration date of the order, as specified, creates an order with a duration of 3 years from the date of issuance. Existing law requires, under certain circumstances, the clerk of the court to submit the proof of service of a protective order directly into the Department of Justice Domestic Violation Restraining Order System.
This bill would instead authorize the issuance
of a protective order after notice and a hearing for the purpose of providing expeditious and effective protection from abuse to ensure that the lives of domestic violence victims and their children will be as safe, secure, and uninterrupted as possible. The bill would provide that these orders may be issued on the basis of evidence of past abuse, without any showing that the wrongful acts will be continued or repeated. The bill would prohibit the court from denying an orderbegin insert based in whole or in part on the length of time between the issuance of a certain ex parte order and a hearing on a certain order that may be issued, or on the absence of abuse during that time. The bill would also prohibit a court, if the last incidence of abuse occurred five years or less before the filing of a petition for an order, from denying the orderend insert solely because of the length of time betweenbegin delete an actend deletebegin insert
the last incidenceend insert of abuse and the filing of the petition for thebegin delete restrainingend delete order. The bill would also require the trial court to state its reasons for denying a protective order in writing or on thebegin delete record, if a statement of decision is not requested.end deletebegin insert record.end insert The bill would provide that failure to state the expiration date of the order creates an order with a duration of 5 years from the date of issuance.
Existing law authorizes the court to issue a mutual order enjoining the parties from specific acts of abuse if both parties personally appear, each party presents written evidence of abuse or domestic violence, and the court makes detailed findings of fact indicating that both parties acted primarily as aggressors and that neither party acted primarily in self-defense.
This bill would instead authorize the issuance of a mutual order ifbegin delete neither partyend deletebegin insert both partiesend insert acted asbegin delete theend deletebegin insert aend insert dominant aggressor. The bill wouldbegin delete direct the court, in identifying the dominant aggressor, to consider the intent of the law to protect victims of domestic violence from continuing abuse, the threats creating fear of physical injury, the history of domestic violence between the persons involved, and whether either person involved acted in self-defense.end deletebegin insert
provide that use of the term “dominant aggressor” is not intended to impact decisional law regarding these provisions and that decisional law should apply equally to these provisions as they refer to “dominant aggressor” in place of “primary aggressor.”end insert
Vote: majority. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: yes. State-mandated local program: no.
The people of the State of California do enact as follows:
The Legislature finds and declares all of the
2following:
3(a) Every person has a right to be safe and free from violence
4and abuse in his or her home and intimate relationships.
P3 1(b) Domestic violence is a pervasive public safety and public
2health problem that affects people of all income levels, cultures,
3religions, ages, ethnic backgrounds, sexual orientations, and
4neighborhoods.
5(c) Domestic violence is not limited to actual and threatened
6physical acts of violence, but also includes sexual abuse, stalking,
7psychological
and emotional abuse, financial control, property
8control, and other behaviors by the abuser that are designed to
9exert coercive control and power over the victim.
10(d) There is a positive correlation between domestic violence
11and child abuse, and children, even when they are not physically
12assaulted, suffer deep and lasting emotional, health, and behavioral
13effects from exposure to domestic violence.
14(e) Domestic violence victims face significant barriers to safely
15leaving an abusive relationship, including, but not limited to, a
16risk of retaliation and escalated violence by the abuser, concerns
17over the safety and custody of their children, an impending loss
18of financial support and housing, the responsibility for other
19household members and pets, and difficulties accessing legal and
20community
systems to seek protection from abuse.
21(f) Studies have shown that obtaining a civil protective order
22
against an abuser can increase a victim’s safety, decrease a victim’s
23fear of future harm, and improve a victim’s overall sense of well
24being and self-esteem.
25(g) Because the issuance of civil protective orders often results
26in declines in domestic violence, public money spent on protective
27order intervention produces significant cost savings to society,
28including decreasing victims’ time off from work, property loss,
29use of health services, and use of community, legal, and criminal
30justice interventions.
31(h) Civil protective orders are most effective when they offer
32comprehensive relief to address the various barriers victims face
33when safely separating from an abuser, are specific in their terms,
34and are consistently enforced.
35(i) For these reasons, the effective issuance and enforcement of
36civil protective orders are of paramount importance in the State
37of California as a means for promoting safety, reducing violence
38and abuse, and preventing serious injury and death.
Section 6203 of the Family Code is amended to read:
(a) For purposes of this act, “abuse” means any of the
2following:
3(1) Intentionally or recklessly to cause or attempt to cause bodily
4injury.
5(2) Sexual assault.
6(3) To place a person in reasonable apprehension of imminent
7serious bodily injury to that person or to another.
8(4) To engage in any behavior that has been or could be enjoined
9pursuant to Section 6320.
10(b) Abuse is not limited to the
actual infliction of physical injury
11or assault.
Section 6220 of the Family Code is repealed.
Section 6220 is added to the Family Code, to read:
The purpose of this division is to provide expeditious
15and effective protection from abuse to ensure that the lives of
16domestic violence victims and their children will be as safe, secure,
17and uninterrupted as possible.
Section 6300 of the Family Code is amended to read:
(a) An order may be issued under this part, with or
20without notice, to restrain any person for the purpose specified in
21Section 6220, if an affidavit or, if necessary, an affidavit and any
22additional information provided to the court pursuant to Section
236306, shows, to the satisfaction of the court, reasonable proof of
24a past act or acts of abuse. The court may issue an order under this
25part based solely on the affidavit or testimony of the person
26requesting the restraining order.
27(b) An order under this part may be issued on the basis of
28evidence of past abuse, without any showing that the wrongful
29acts will be continued or
repeated.
Section 6301 of the Family Code is amended to read:
(a) An order under this part may be granted to any person
32described in Section 6211, including a minor pursuant to
33subdivision (b) of Section 372 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
34(b) The right to petition for relief shall not be denied because
35the petitioner has vacated the household to avoid abuse, and in the
36case of a marital relationship, notwithstanding that a petition for
37dissolution of marriage, for nullity of marriage, or for legal
38separation of the parties has not been filed.
39(c) The court shall not deny an order under this partbegin delete solely
40because of the length of time between
an act of abuse and the filing
P5 1of the petition for the restraining order.end delete
2on the length of time between the issuance of an ex parte order
3pursuant to Article 1 (commencing with Section 6320) of Chapter
42 and a hearing on an order that may be issued pursuant to Article
52 (commencing with Section 6340) of Chapter 2, or on the absence
6of abuse during that time.end insert
7(d) (1) If the last incidence of abuse occurred five years or less
8before the filing of a petition for an order under this part, a court
9shall not deny the order solely because of the length of time
10between the last incidence of abuse and the filing of the petition
11for the order.
12(2) If the last incidence of abuse occurred more than five years
13before the filing of a petition for an order under this part, a court
14may issue the order for the purposes specified in Section 6220.
Section 6305 of the Family Code is amended to read:
(a) The court shall not issue a mutual order enjoining
17the parties from specific acts of abuse described in Section 6320
18unless both of the following apply:
19(1) Both parties personally appear and each party presents
20written evidence of abuse or domestic violence.
21(2) The court makes detailed findings of fact indicating thatbegin delete22
neither partyend delete
23neither party acted primarily in self-defense.
24(b) For purposes of subdivision (a),begin delete the dominant aggressor is begin insert “dominant
25the person determined to be the most significant aggressor. In
26identifying the dominant aggressor, the court shall consider the
27intent of the law to protect victims of domestic violence from
28continuing abuse, the threats creating fear of physical injury, the
29history of domestic violence between the persons involved, and
30whether either person involved acted in self-defense.end delete
31
aggressor” has the same meaning as described in paragraph (3)
32of subdivision (c) of Section 836 of the Penal Code.end insert
33(c) The amendments made to this section by the act that added
34this subdivision are not intended to impact any existing decisional
35law regarding this section, and that decisional law should apply
36equally to this section as it refers to “dominant aggressor” in
37place of “primary aggressor.”
Section 6340 of the Family Code is amended to read:
(a) The court may issue any of the orders described in
40Article 1 (commencing with Section 6320) after notice and a
P6 1hearing. When determining whether to make any orders under this
2subdivision, the court shall consider whether failure to make any
3of these orders may jeopardize the safety of the petitioner and the
4children for whom the custody or visitation orders are sought. If
5the court makes any order for custody, visitation, or support, that
6order shall survive the termination of any protective order. The
7Judicial Council shall provide notice of this provision on any
8Judicial Council forms related to this subdivision.
9(b) The court shall, uponbegin delete the request of any party, issue a
10
statement of decision explaining the factual and legal basis for its
11decision under this part pursuant to Section 632 of the Code of
12Civil Procedure. If neither party requests a statement of decision,
13and the trial court deniesend delete
14this part,begin delete it shallend delete state its reasons in writing or on the record.
15(c) The court may issue an order described in Section 6321
16excluding a person from a dwelling if the court finds that physical
17or emotional harm would otherwise result to the other party, to a
18person under the care, custody, and control of the other party, or
19to a minor child of the parties or of the other
party.
Section 6345 of the Family Code is amended to read:
(a) In the discretion of the court, the personal conduct,
22stay-away, and residence exclusion orders contained in a court
23order issued after notice and a hearing under this article may have
24a duration of not more than five years, subject to termination or
25modification by further order of the court either on written
26stipulation filed with the court or on the motion of a party. These
27orders may be renewed, upon the request of a party, either for five
28years or permanently, without a showing of any further abuse since
29the issuance of the original order, subject to termination or
30modification by further order of the court either on written
31stipulation filed with the court or on the motion of a party. The
32request for renewal may be brought at any time within
the three
33months before the expiration of the orders.
34(b) Notwithstanding subdivision (a), the duration of any orders,
35other than the protective orders described in subdivision (a), that
36are also contained in a court order issued after notice and a hearing
37under this article, including, but not limited to, orders for custody,
38visitation, support, and disposition of property, shall be governed
39by the law relating to those specific subjects.
P7 1(c) The failure to state the expiration date on the face of the
2form creates an order with a duration of five years from the date
3of issuance.
4(d) If an action is filed for the purpose of terminating or
5modifying a protective order prior to the expiration date specified
6in the
order by a party other than the protected party, the party
7who is protected by the order shall be given notice, pursuant to
8subdivision (b) of Section 1005 of the Code of Civil Procedure,
9of the proceeding by personal service or, if the protected party has
10satisfied the requirements of Chapter 3.1 (commencing with
11Section 6205) of Division 7 of Title 1 of the Government Code,
12by service on the Secretary of State. If the party who is protected
13by the order cannot be notified prior to the hearing for modification
14or termination of the protective order, the court shall deny the
15motion to modify or terminate the order without prejudice or
16continue the hearing until the party who is protected can be
17properly noticed and may, upon a showing of good cause, specify
18another method for service of process that is reasonably designed
19to afford actual notice to the protected party. The protected party
20may
waive his or her right to notice if he or she is physically
21present in court and does not challenge the sufficiency of the notice.
O
98