BILL ANALYSIS
AB 225
Page 1
Date of Hearing: March 13, 2007
Counsel: Nicole J. Hanson
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC SAFETY
Jose Solorio, Chair
AB 225 (Beall) - As Amended: March 5, 2007
SUMMARY : Deletes the distinction between repeated telephone
calls and electronic communications made to a person's residence
and his or her place of work. Specifically, this bill :
1)Specifies that every person who makes five or more contacts
within a 24-hour period by telephone or by means of an
electronic communication device is guilty of a one-year
misdemeanor punishable by a fine not exceeding $1,000;
imprisonment in a county jail for not more than one year; or
by both fine and imprisonment.
2)Excludes annoying and repeated telephone calls or electronic
communications made during the ordinary course and scope of
business.
3)Deletes the requirement that contacts made by telephone or by
means of an electronic communication device be received at a
person's residence.
4)Eliminates the distinction between repeated telephone calls
and electronic communications received at a person's residence
and his or her place of work.
5)Implicates a person who sends electronic communications which
request a return electronic contact if the person sends such
communication with the intent to annoy as described in this
section.
6)Establishes that a person who knowingly permits any telephone
or electronic communication device under his or her control to
be used to make annoying or repeated phone calls or electronic
communications is guilty under this section.
EXISTING LAW :
AB 225
Page 2
1)Provides that every person who, with intent to annoy,
telephones or makes contact by means of an electronic
communication device with another and addresses to or about
the other person any obscene language or addresses to the
other person any threat to inflict injury to the person or
property of the person addressed or any member of his or her
family is guilty of a misdemeanor. Nothing in this
subdivision shall apply to telephone calls or electronic
contacts made in good faith. [Penal Code Section 653m(a).]
2)Provides that every person who makes repeated telephone calls
or makes repeated contact by means of an electronic
communication device with intent to annoy another person at
his or her residence is, whether or not conversation ensues
from making the telephone call or electronic contact, guilty
of a misdemeanor. Nothing in this subdivision shall apply to
telephone calls or electronic contacts made in good faith.
[Penal Code Section 653m(b).]
3)Provides that every person who makes repeated telephone calls
or makes repeated contact by means of an electronic
communication device with the intent to annoy another person
at his or her place of work is guilty of a misdemeanor
punishable by a fine of not more than $1,000; by imprisonment
in a county jail for not more than one year; or by both that
fine and imprisonment. Nothing in this subdivision shall
apply to telephone calls or electronic contacts made in good
faith. This subdivision applies only if one or both of the
following circumstances exist:
a) There is a temporary restraining order, an injunction,
any other court order, or any combination of these court
orders in effect prohibiting the behavior described in this
section.
b) The person makes repeated telephone calls or makes
repeated contact by means of an electronic communication
device with the intent to annoy another person at his or
her place of work, totaling more than 10 times in a 24-hour
period, whether or not conversation ensues from making the
telephone call or electronic contact, and the repeated
telephone calls or electronic contacts are made to the
workplace of an adult or fully emancipated minor who is a
spouse, former spouse, cohabitant, former cohabitant, or
person with whom the person has a child or has had a dating
AB 225
Page 3
or engagement relationship or is having a dating or
engagement relationship. [Penal Code Section 653m(c).]
4)Provides that any offense committed by use of a telephone may
be deemed to have been committed where the telephone call or
calls were made or received. Any offense committed by use of
an electronic communication device or medium, including the
Internet, may be deemed to have been committed when the
electronic communication or communications were originally
sent or first viewed by the recipient. [Penal Code Section
653m(d).]
5)Defines "electronic communication device" as including, but
not limited to, telephones, cellular phones, computers, video
recorders, fax machines, or pagers. [Penal Code Section
653m(g).]
6)Defines "electronic communication" as any transfer of signs,
signals, writing, images, sounds, data, or intelligence of any
nature transmitted in whole or in part by a wire, radio,
electromagnetic, photo-electronic or photo-optical system that
affects interstate or foreign commerce, but does not include
any wire or oral communication, any communication made through
a tone-only paging device, any communication from a tracking
device, or electronic funds transfer information stored by a
financial institution in a communications system used for the
electronic storage and transfer of funds. [Penal Code Section
653m(g).]
FISCAL EFFECT : Unknown
COMMENTS :
1)Author's Statement : According to the author, "Due to the
proliferation of mobile telephones and voice over Internet
communication, these types of harassing telephone contacts are
being received everywhere - on cell phones and other mobile
communication devices - other than simply on land lines at
home or work. Harassment is harassment, whether it is by land
line phone, cell phone, fax or e-mail, and we MUST send a
clear message to those who would participate in this behavior
that it will NOT be tolerated."
2)Background : According to information provided by the author,
this bill "removes disparate residential and workplace
AB 225
Page 4
limitations for prosecution of electronic harassment. As
introduced, this bill helps victims because 'batterer'
harassing conduct violates the statute regardless of where the
call was made or received. The punitive sanctions of this
bill would apply if more than five harassing contacts were
made to the victim in a 24-hour period, regardless of where
the contacts were made or received and regardless of the
conveyance with which the contacts were made."
3)Advancements in Technology have Increased Communication
Capabilities Beyond the Home and Workplace : Under existing
law, making repeated communications to a person at his or her
residence is punishable by up to six months in jail; a fine of
$1,000 fine; or both. The same statute provides that making
repeated communications to a workplace requires additional
elements, narrowing the scope of who may be prosecuted, and
also carries a penalty of up to one year in a county jail; a
fine of $1,000; or both. This bill provides that making
repeated telephone calls or electronic communication,
regardless of where they were received, is one offense
punishable by up to one year in county jail; a fine of $1,000;
or both. This bill recognizes and updates the protection
needed in a society that is becoming increasingly portable due
to technological advancements.
4)Prior Legislation : AB 167 (Cohn), of the 2005-06, Legislative
Session, contains provisions similar to this bill. AB 167
failed passage in the Senate Committee on Public Safety.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION :
Support
California State Sheriffs' Association
Lambda Letters Project
Peace Officers Research Association of California
Opposition
None
Analysis Prepared by : Nicole J. Hanson / PUB. S. / (916)
319-3744