CaliforniaJudges would give great weight to assigned prosecutors’ other ongoing trials or specified hearings when deciding trafficking case delays
When deciding whether to delay a trafficking case, judges would give great weight to the assigned prosecutor’s other ongoing trial, preliminary hearing, or hearing to exclude evidence.
What it does
In trafficking cases, judges would give great weight to an assigned prosecutor’s other ongoing trial or specified hearing when deciding if a delay is justified. They could grant only one such delay per case, up to 10 court days.
Argument forA short delay could give the prosecutor assigned to a trafficking case time to finish another ongoing trial or specified hearing.
Argument againstEven one delay of up to 10 court days could leave defendants, victims, and witnesses waiting longer in a trafficking case.
More detail
Judges would give great weight to the assigned prosecutor’s other ongoing trial, preliminary hearing, or hearing on a request to exclude evidence when deciding whether to delay a trafficking case. This covers human trafficking cases when the assigned prosecutor has one of those proceedings underway in the same court or another court. The judge must still find a good reason to delay the case. The prosecution may receive only one delay per case under this rule. A delay under this rule may add no more than 10 court days.
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 30Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 832, Statutes of 2026.Latest
- Sep 30Approved by the Governor Gavin Newsom.Became Law
- Aug 25Enrolled and presented to the Governor at 4 p.m.To Governor
- Aug 19Senate amendments concurred in. To Engrossing and Enrolling. (Ayes 75. Noes 0. Page 6244.).Major
- Vote recorded AB 1656 Davies Concurrence in Senate Amendments. Result: pass.Lower
- Aug 17In Assembly. Concurrence in Senate amendments pending.
- Vote recorded 3rd Reading AB1656 Davies By Blakespear. Result: pass.Upper
- Aug 17Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Assembly. (Ayes 36. Noes 0. Page 5498.).Passed Senate
- Aug 5Read second time. Ordered to third reading.Minor
- Aug 4Read third time and amended. Ordered to second reading.Major
- Jun 11Read second time and amended. Ordered to third reading.Major
- Jun 10From committee: Amend, and do pass as amended. (Ayes 5. Noes 0.) (June 9).Major
- Jun 9
- Vote recorded Do pass as amended. Result: pass.Upper
- May 6Referred to Com. on PUB. S.Minor
- Mar 12In Senate. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment.Minor
- Vote recorded AB 1656 Davies Assembly Third Reading. Result: pass.Lower
- Mar 12Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Senate. (Ayes 68. Noes 0. Page 4228.)Passed Assembly
- Mar 9Read second time. Ordered to third reading.Minor
- Mar 5Read second time and amended. Ordered returned to second reading.Major
- Mar 4From committee: Amend, and do pass as amended. (Ayes 9. Noes 0.) (March 3).Major
- Mar 3
- Vote recorded Do pass as amended. Result: pass.Lower
- Feb 17Referred to Com. on PUB. S.Minor
- Jan 30From printer. May be heard in committee March 1.
- Jan 29Read first time. To print.Introduced
Criminal Justice