AB 1917 requires prosecutors to explain their reasoning to the court when adding back criminal charges that were dismissed by a judge at a preliminary hearing for insufficient evidence. This narrow but important procedural change will increase fairness and court efficiency by respecting judicial decisions. AB 1917 (Schultz) Respect Judicial Decisions Act was sponsored by S.F. Public Defender’s Office, Californians for Safety and Justice, and California Attorneys for Criminal Justice.
Governor Signs Bill Closing a Loophole on Unfair Criminal Charging Practices
CALIFORNIA—On Sept. 20, Governor Gavin Newsom announced that he signed Assembly Bill 1917 into law. The Respect Judicial Decisions Act was authored by Assemblymember Nick Schultz (CA-44) and co-sponsored by the San Francisco Public Defender’s Office, Californians for Safety and Justice, and California Attorneys for Criminal Justice. AB 1917 requires prosecutors to explain their reasoning to the court when adding back criminal charges that were dismissed by a judge at a preliminary hearing for insufficient evidence. This narrow but important procedural change will increase fairness and court efficiency by respecting judicial decisions.
“This bill is built on a basic principle: people should not face criminal charges that are not supported by evidence. If a judge determines there isn’t enough evidence to support a charge, that charge shouldn’t continue to hang over a person’s head,” said Assemblymember Schultz, Chair of the Assembly Public Safety Committee and a former prosecutor.
“A preliminary hearing is the first chance defense attorneys get to substantially scrutinize the felony charges against our clients. To go through that process, have a charge dismissed by a judge, and then see the prosecutor simply add the charge back without any process or rationale, is a wasteful and unjust practice that ends now,” said San Francisco’s elected Public Defender Mano Raju, whose office sponsored this bill. “I thank Governor Newsom and Assemblymember Schultz for understanding that justice must be fair and not arbitrary.”
How it is now: In California, when prosecutors file felony charges against a person, the case first goes to a preliminary hearing. The point of a preliminary hearing is for the prosecutor to present evidence to support the charges a district attorney has filed, the defense to scrutinize it, and the judge to determine whether there is sufficient evidence for a charge to proceed. The standard of proof needed for a charge to move forward at a preliminary hearing is much lower than the standard of proof required in a jury trial. When a judge removes a charge at the preliminary hearing due to insufficient evidence, a prosecutor can simply add that charge back to the case without providing any reason or explanation. That’s problematic because it can defeat the purpose of a preliminary hearing, and it subjects people who are accused of those crimes to the whims of the district attorney rather than evidence and the rulings of a judge.
What AB 1917 will change: Going forward, prosecutors must provide legal arguments by filing a motion with the court to show why they think a charge should be added back after a judge has dismissed it at a preliminary hearing for insufficient evidence. A judge may grant or deny the motion to reinstate the charges.
“When a judge reviews evidence, hears testimony, and determines there is insufficient evidence to continue a case, that decision should stand unless there is sufficient justification to reverse it. This measure establishes a balanced protocol to protect the integrity of the legal process,” California Attorneys for Criminal Justice.
“A fair justice system that respects judicial decisions and evidence is an essential component of public safety,” said Tinisch Hollins, Executive Director of Californians for Safety and Justice. “AB 1917 restores balance to a process that has let charges resurface without explanation. We thank Governor Newsom and Assemblymember Schultz for standing up for a justice system rooted in evidence, not arbitrary power.”
AB 1917 was co-sponsored by the San Francisco Public Defender’s Office, California Attorneys for Criminal Justice, and Californians for Safety and Justice. It was supported by nearly 40 organizations throughout the state.
##