CaliforniaCalifornia bars undercover information gathering from some young people in custody
California law bars undercover officers and their collaborators from seeking statements or information from certain people under 26 who are in custody for crimes committed as minors.
What it does
Officers may not seek statements or information from a person in custody through undercover work or people working with law enforcement if the person was 17 or younger when the crime happened and under 26 at custody. A separate rule limits when emergency questioning can be considered in court.
Courts must consider a willful violation of the ban when deciding how credible a law enforcement officer is.
Argument forYoung people in custody could face fewer undercover attempts to get statements or information about crimes they committed as minors.
Argument againstStrict limits on emergency questioning could make it harder for officers to get information needed to address a threat to life, especially after delays.
More detail
Law enforcement officers may not seek statements or information from a covered person through undercover work or people working with or for law enforcement. The person must have been 17 or younger when the crime was committed and under 26 when taken into custody. For statements or information sought to protect against an imminent threat to life, this section does not govern whether they can be admitted in court if officers reasonably believed the information was needed and limited questions to what was reasonably needed. Questioning begun more than 24 hours but less than 48 hours after credible threat information is presumed unnecessary unless there is good cause and the emergency continues. Questioning begun more than 48 hours later is presumed unnecessary. An operation for an imminent threat must stop once the threat is resolved or enough information has been gathered to address it. It cannot continue to investigate another crime. The ban applies when a covered person is in custody. The court rules in this section apply to statements obtained on or after January 1, 2027.
When deciding whether to admit a statement obtained in violation of the ban, a court must consider any willful violation when judging an officer’s credibility. The court considers willful violations when judging a law enforcement officer’s credibility. This applies to statements obtained in violation of the ban. This rule applies to statements obtained on or after January 1, 2027.
Where do you stand?
Choose your position
Tell your reps
Take a position to see your representatives and ways to contact them.
Where it stands
- Introduced
- Passed Assembly
- Passed Senate
- To Governor
- Became Law
Looking ahead
No hearings or votes scheduled.
History
- 2026
- Sep 27Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 559, Statutes of 2026.Latest
- Sep 27Approved by the Governor Gavin Newsom.Became Law
- Aug 31Enrolled and presented to the Governor at 4 p.m.To Governor
- Aug 25Senate amendments concurred in. To Engrossing and Enrolling. (Ayes 51. Noes 15. Page 6506.).Major
- Vote recorded AB 1905 Schultz Concurrence in Senate Amendments. Result: pass.Lower
- Vote recorded 3rd Reading AB1905 Schultz et al. By Wiener. Result: pass.Upper
- Aug 25In Assembly. Concurrence in Senate amendments pending.
- Aug 25Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Assembly. (Ayes 25. Noes 12.).Passed Senate
- Aug 5Read second time. Ordered to third reading.Minor
- Aug 4Read third time and amended. Ordered to second reading.Major
- Jul 2Read second time. Ordered to third reading.Minor
- Jul 1From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 5. Noes 1.) (June 30).Minor
- Jun 30
- Vote recorded Do pass. Result: pass.Upper
- Jun 10Referred to Com. on PUB. S.Minor
- May 28In Senate. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment.Minor
- May 27Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Senate. (Ayes 49. Noes 16. Page 5438.)Passed Assembly
- Vote recorded AB 1905 Schultz Assembly Third Reading. Result: pass.Lower
- May 22Read third time and amended. Ordered to third reading. (Page 5272.)Major
- Mar 19Read second time. Ordered to third reading.Minor
- Mar 18From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 7. Noes 0.) (March 17).Minor
- Mar 18Coauthors revised.
- Mar 17
- Vote recorded Do pass. Result: pass.Lower
- Mar 2Referred to Com. on PUB. S.Minor
- Feb 13From printer. May be heard in committee March 15.
- Feb 12Read first time. To print.Introduced
Criminal JusticeAI & Privacy