CA AB 1036
enactedCriminal procedure: postconviction discovery.
California · 2025-2026 Regular Session · lower
Quick answers
Did CA AB 1036 pass?
Yes. CA AB 1036 has been enacted into law as of 2025-10-07. Latest recorded action (2025-10-07): Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 444, Statutes of 2025.
What is CA AB 1036 about?
Existing law requires the court, in a case involving a conviction of a serious or violent felony resulting in a sentence of 15 years or more, to order that the defendant be provided reasonable access to discovery materials upon the prosecution of a postconviction writ of habeas corpus or a motion to vacate judgment and a showing that good faith efforts to obtain discovery materials from trial counsel were made and were unsuccessful. Existing law defines "discovery materials" as materials in the possession of the prosecution and law enforcement authorities that the defendant would have been entitled to at the time of trial. Existing law requires trial counsel to retain copies of files for criminal convictions of serious or violent felonies resulting in a sentence greater than 15 years for the duration of the client's imprisonment. Existing law authorizes trial counsel to retain those copies digitally, if every item is preserved. This bill would authorize reasonable access, except as specified, to discovery materials for felonies resulting in a sentence of incarceration in the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation. The bill would broaden the definition of "discovery materials" to include, among other things, materials from any prosecutor who tried or worked on the case that tend to negate guilt, or mitigate the sentence or offense. The bill would clarify the definition of "the prosecution" to include the prosecuting agency and counsel for the respondent to a habeas corpus petition. The bill would require the prosecutor, in order to shield jury selection notes from disclosure, to make a foundational proffer describing how information in their file would bear on their case strategy. The bill would require the court, upon a showing of good cause by the prosecutor, to conduct an in camera review and order necessary redactions. The bill would clarify that good cause to shield jury selection notes from disclosure is shown when the prosecution did not exercise any peremptory challenges during jury selection. The bill would additionally require trial counsel, for all criminal convictions on or after July 1, 2026, that result in a sentence of incarceration in the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation to retain digital color copies of every item in the file. By increasing the duties of public defenders, this bill would create a state-mandated local program. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.
Who sponsors CA AB 1036?
Schultz is the primary sponsor of CA AB 1036.
Description
Existing law requires the court, in a case involving a conviction of a serious or violent felony resulting in a sentence of 15 years or more, to order that the defendant be provided reasonable access to discovery materials upon the prosecution of a postconviction writ of habeas corpus or a motion to vacate judgment and a showing that good faith efforts to obtain discovery materials from trial counsel were made and were unsuccessful. Existing law defines "discovery materials" as materials in the possession of the prosecution and law enforcement authorities that the defendant would have been entitled to at the time of trial. Existing law requires trial counsel to retain copies of files for criminal convictions of serious or violent felonies resulting in a sentence greater than 15 years for the duration of the client's imprisonment. Existing law authorizes trial counsel to retain those copies digitally, if every item is preserved. This bill would authorize reasonable access, except as specified, to discovery materials for felonies resulting in a sentence of incarceration in the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation. The bill would broaden the definition of "discovery materials" to include, among other things, materials from any prosecutor who tried or worked on the case that tend to negate guilt, or mitigate the sentence or offense. The bill would clarify the definition of "the prosecution" to include the prosecuting agency and counsel for the respondent to a habeas corpus petition. The bill would require the prosecutor, in order to shield jury selection notes from disclosure, to make a foundational proffer describing how information in their file would bear on their case strategy. The bill would require the court, upon a showing of good cause by the prosecutor, to conduct an in camera review and order necessary redactions. The bill would clarify that good cause to shield jury selection notes from disclosure is shown when the prosecution did not exercise any peremptory challenges during jury selection. The bill would additionally require trial counsel, for all criminal convictions on or after July 1, 2026, that result in a sentence of incarceration in the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation to retain digital color copies of every item in the file. By increasing the duties of public defenders, this bill would create a state-mandated local program. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.
- Introduced
- 2025-05-23
- Latest action
- 2025-10-07 — Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 444, Statutes of 2025.
- Bill type
- bill
- Last updated
- —
Subjects
Sponsors
- Schultzauthor
Committees
Not provided by source.
Action timeline
2025-02-20
Read first time. To print.
reading-1
2025-02-21
From printer. May be heard in committee March 23.
2025-03-10
Referred to Com. on PUB. S.
referral-committee
2025-04-02
From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 7. Noes 0.) (April 1). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
committee-passage,committee-passage-favorable,referral-committee
2025-04-09
In committee: Set, first hearing. Referred to APPR. suspense file.
referral-committee
2025-05-23
Read second time and amended. Ordered returned to second reading.
amendment-passage,reading-1,reading-2
2025-05-23
Assembly Rule 63 suspended. (Ayes 51. Noes 16. Page 1644.)
2025-05-23
From committee: Amend, and do pass as amended. (Ayes 12. Noes 2.) (May 23).
amendment-introduction,amendment-passage,committee-passage
2025-05-27
Read second time. Ordered to third reading.
reading-1,reading-2,reading-3
2025-06-02
Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Senate. (Ayes 53. Noes 13. Page 1913.)
passage,reading-1,reading-3
2025-06-03
In Senate. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment.
reading-1,referral-committee
2025-06-11
Referred to Com. on PUB. S.
referral-committee
2025-07-02
From committee: Amend, and do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 5. Noes 1.) (July 1).
amendment-introduction,amendment-passage,committee-passage,referral-committee
2025-07-03
Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
amendment-passage,reading-1,reading-2,referral-committee
2025-08-18
In committee: Referred to suspense file.
referral-committee
2025-08-29
From committee: Amend, and do pass as amended. (Ayes 5. Noes 2.) (August 29).
amendment-introduction,amendment-passage,committee-passage
2025-08-29
Read second time and amended. Ordered returned to second reading.
amendment-passage,reading-1,reading-2
2025-09-02
Read second time. Ordered to third reading.
reading-1,reading-2,reading-3
2025-09-12
Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Assembly. (Ayes 28. Noes 9. Page 2993.).
passage,reading-1,reading-3
2025-09-12
In Assembly. Concurrence in Senate amendments pending.
2025-09-13
Joint Rules 61(a)(14) and 51(a)(4) suspended. (Ayes 59. Noes 20. Page 3413.)
2025-09-13
Senate amendments concurred in. To Engrossing and Enrolling. (Ayes 54. Noes 18. Page 3466.).
amendment-passage,committee-passage,committee-passage-favorable
2025-09-24
Enrolled and presented to the Governor at 3 p.m.
executive-receipt
2025-10-07
Approved by the Governor.
executive-signature
2025-10-07
Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 444, Statutes of 2025.
became-law
Versions
Documents
- application/pdf
- application/pdf
- application/pdf
- application/pdf
- application/pdf
- application/pdf
- text/html
- application/pdf(no extracted text yet)
- application/pdf(no extracted text yet)
- application/pdf(no extracted text yet)
- application/pdf(no extracted text yet)
- application/pdf(no extracted text yet)
- application/pdf(no extracted text yet)
- application/pdf(no extracted text yet)
- application/pdf(no extracted text yet)
Votes
Do pass and be re-referred to the Committee on [Appropriations]
2025-04-01 · pass · 7-0
Member-level votes (9)
- Schultz: yes
- Nguyen: yes
- Sharp-Collins: yes
- Haney: yes
- Harabedian: yes
- Mark González: yes
- Ramos: yes
- Alanis: other
- Lackey: other
Do pass as amended.
2025-05-23 · pass · 12-2
Member-level votes (15)
- Calderon: yes
- Elhawary: yes
- Hart: yes
- Mark González: yes
- Arambula: yes
- Pacheco: yes
- Solache: yes
- Ta: yes
- Caloza: yes
- Wicks: yes
- Pellerin: yes
- Fong: yes
- Dixon: no
- Tangipa: no
- Sanchez: other
AB 1036 Schultz Assembly Third Reading
2025-06-03 · pass · 53-13
Member-level votes (79)
- Addis: yes
- Garcia: yes
- Lee: yes
- Rivas: yes
- Petrie-Norris: yes
- Bryan: yes
- Rogers: yes
- Wicks: yes
- Irwin: yes
- Arambula: yes
- Caloza: yes
- Ahrens: yes
- Harabedian: yes
- Mark González: yes
- Calderon: yes
- Nguyen: yes
- Ward: yes
- Carrillo: yes
- Patel: yes
- McKinnor: yes
- Bonta: yes
- Lowenthal: yes
- Papan: yes
- Schiavo: yes
- Gabriel: yes
- Ávila Farías: yes
- Aguiar-Curry: yes
- Ransom: yes
- Connolly: yes
- Celeste Rodriguez: yes
- Fong: yes
- Quirk-Silva: yes
- Ramos: yes
- Pellerin: yes
- Elhawary: yes
- Kalra: yes
- Haney: yes
- Gipson: yes
- Hart: yes
- Boerner: yes
- Alvarez: yes
- Bauer-Kahan: yes
- Schultz: yes
- Sharp-Collins: yes
- Berman: yes
- Jackson: yes
- Wilson: yes
- Ta: yes
- Zbur: yes
- Bennett: yes
- Ortega: yes
- Bains: yes
- Valencia: yes
- Hoover: no
- Gallagher: no
- Wallis: no
- Tangipa: no
- Davies: no
- Ellis: no
- Patterson: no
- Jeff Gonzalez: no
- Hadwick: no
- Macedo: no
- Dixon: no
- DeMaio: no
- Sanchez: no
- Blanca Rubio: other
- Muratsuchi: other
- Michelle Rodriguez: other
- Solache: other
- Soria: other
- Chen: other
- Lackey: other
- Krell: other
- Flora: other
- Alanis: other
- Stefani: other
- Castillo: other
- Pacheco: other
Do pass as amended, but first amend, and re-refer to the Committee on [Appropriations]
2025-07-01 · pass · 5-1
Member-level votes (6)
- Wiener: yes
- Gonzalez: yes
- Caballero: yes
- Arreguín: yes
- Pérez: yes
- Seyarto: no
Placed on suspense file
2025-08-18 · pass · 7-0
Member-level votes (7)
- Richardson: yes
- Seyarto: yes
- Caballero: yes
- Cabaldon: yes
- Dahle: yes
- Wahab: yes
- Grayson: yes
Do pass as amended
2025-08-29 · pass · 5-2
Member-level votes (7)
- Richardson: yes
- Grayson: yes
- Wahab: yes
- Caballero: yes
- Cabaldon: yes
- Dahle: no
- Seyarto: no
3rd Reading AB1036 Schultz By Arreguín
2025-09-12 · pass · 28-9
Member-level votes (40)
- McGuire: yes
- Becker: yes
- Cabaldon: yes
- Caballero: yes
- Weber Pierson: yes
- McNerney: yes
- Grayson: yes
- Umberg: yes
- Pérez: yes
- Padilla: yes
- Cervantes: yes
- Menjivar: yes
- Wiener: yes
- Wahab: yes
- Laird: yes
- Stern: yes
- Rubio: yes
- Richardson: yes
- Hurtado: yes
- Reyes: yes
- Blakespear: yes
- Arreguín: yes
- Ashby: yes
- Allen: yes
- Smallwood-Cuevas: yes
- Durazo: yes
- Limón: yes
- Cortese: yes
- Strickland: no
- Seyarto: no
- Niello: no
- Valladares: no
- Jones: no
- Ochoa Bogh: no
- Grove: no
- Dahle: no
- Alvarado-Gil: no
- Archuleta: other
- Choi: other
- Gonzalez: other
AB 1036 Schultz Concurrence in Senate Amendments
2025-09-13 · pass · 54-18
Member-level votes (80)
- Ahrens: yes
- Mark González: yes
- Quirk-Silva: yes
- Gipson: yes
- Rogers: yes
- Addis: yes
- Ward: yes
- Haney: yes
- Hart: yes
- Fong: yes
- Elhawary: yes
- Calderon: yes
- Wilson: yes
- Carrillo: yes
- Bains: yes
- Ransom: yes
- Soria: yes
- Michelle Rodriguez: yes
- Berman: yes
- Valencia: yes
- Wicks: yes
- Celeste Rodriguez: yes
- Arambula: yes
- Connolly: yes
- Schultz: yes
- Bauer-Kahan: yes
- Bennett: yes
- Papan: yes
- Schiavo: yes
- Bonta: yes
- Ávila Farías: yes
- Aguiar-Curry: yes
- Boerner: yes
- Alvarez: yes
- Lee: yes
- Caloza: yes
- Sharp-Collins: yes
- Nguyen: yes
- Ortega: yes
- Solache: yes
- Lowenthal: yes
- Jackson: yes
- Bryan: yes
- Petrie-Norris: yes
- Harabedian: yes
- Gabriel: yes
- Zbur: yes
- Pellerin: yes
- Irwin: yes
- Ramos: yes
- Patel: yes
- Kalra: yes
- Rivas: yes
- Garcia: yes
- Johnson: no
- Dixon: no
- Hoover: no
- Hadwick: no
- Tangipa: no
- Wallis: no
- Macedo: no
- Gallagher: no
- Jeff Gonzalez: no
- Sanchez: no
- Ta: no
- Chen: no
- Castillo: no
- Ellis: no
- Davies: no
- Flora: no
- Patterson: no
- DeMaio: no
- Muratsuchi: other
- Krell: other
- Lackey: other
- Blanca Rubio: other
- Pacheco: other
- McKinnor: other
- Alanis: other
- Stefani: other
Related bills
No related bills recorded for this bill.
Official source
Attribution
Data from openstates_bulk_csv, retrieved 2026-07-24T01:34:27.960412Z
Inspect retained evidence for changes recorded after evidence tracking began:
Use this data
Every field on this page is available from the free public API — no key or licence required. Fetch this bill as JSON: GET /api/v1/bills?jurisdiction=CA&identifier=AB 1036. See the API docs or the MCP server for AI assistants.
Known limitations
- Sponsor party and chamber affiliation are not yet captured by this API.
- Committee referrals are not yet captured.
- Some documents have no extracted text yet, so version comparison may be limited.
See the methodology page for data sources and limitations.