Bill Commons

CA AB 1118

dead

Criminal procedure: search warrants.

California · 2025-2026 Regular Session · lower

Follow this bill’s action updates (Atom)

Subscribe in a feed reader. The feed covers recorded actions from the last 30 days; Bill Commons may record an action after it happened at the legislature.

Quick answers

Did CA AB 1118 pass?

No. CA AB 1118 did not pass — it was defeated or died in the legislative process. Latest recorded action (2026-02-02): From committee: Filed with the Chief Clerk pursuant to Joint Rule 56.

What is CA AB 1118 about?

Existing law allows a search warrant to be issued upon probable cause, supported by affidavit, naming or describing the person to be searched or searched for, and particularly describing the property, thing, or things and the place to be searched. Existing law describes search warrants and enumerates the grounds upon which a search warrant may be issued, including, without limitation, for property that was stolen or embezzled, or for property or things that were used to commit a felony. Existing law authorizes a defendant to move for the return of property or to suppress evidence obtained as a result of a search and seizure if the search or seizure was without a warrant and was unreasonable or, the search and seizure was with a warrant and certain criteria apply. Existing law provides for a hearing on the defendant's motion where the court receives evidence and determines whether the evidence is inadmissible at any trial or other hearing, except as specified, or returns the property. This bill would allow a search warrant for stolen or embezzled currency, as specified, to include an order for such currency to be returned to a lawful owner identified in the warrant pursuant to specified procedures including a hearing, if requested, to determine that the currency was stolen or embezzled, before it is returned to its owner. The bill would require an independent hearing, where the agency seizing the currency would have the burden of proving, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the currency was stolen or embezzled. The bill would require the agency seizing the property, no less than 10 days before returning the currency to the lawful owner, to notify the prosecuting authority in the jurisdiction where the embezzlement or theft may reasonably be prosecuted.

Who sponsors CA AB 1118?

Chen is the primary sponsor of CA AB 1118.

Description

Existing law allows a search warrant to be issued upon probable cause, supported by affidavit, naming or describing the person to be searched or searched for, and particularly describing the property, thing, or things and the place to be searched. Existing law describes search warrants and enumerates the grounds upon which a search warrant may be issued, including, without limitation, for property that was stolen or embezzled, or for property or things that were used to commit a felony. Existing law authorizes a defendant to move for the return of property or to suppress evidence obtained as a result of a search and seizure if the search or seizure was without a warrant and was unreasonable or, the search and seizure was with a warrant and certain criteria apply. Existing law provides for a hearing on the defendant's motion where the court receives evidence and determines whether the evidence is inadmissible at any trial or other hearing, except as specified, or returns the property. This bill would allow a search warrant for stolen or embezzled currency, as specified, to include an order for such currency to be returned to a lawful owner identified in the warrant pursuant to specified procedures including a hearing, if requested, to determine that the currency was stolen or embezzled, before it is returned to its owner. The bill would require an independent hearing, where the agency seizing the currency would have the burden of proving, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the currency was stolen or embezzled. The bill would require the agency seizing the property, no less than 10 days before returning the currency to the lawful owner, to notify the prosecuting authority in the jurisdiction where the embezzlement or theft may reasonably be prosecuted.

Introduced
2025-03-27
Latest action
2026-02-02 — From committee: Filed with the Chief Clerk pursuant to Joint Rule 56.
Bill type
bill
Last updated
—

Subjects

Sponsors

  • Chenauthor

Committees

Not provided by source.

Action timeline

Newest first

  1. 2026-02-02

    From committee: Filed with the Chief Clerk pursuant to Joint Rule 56.

    committee-passage,failure

  2. 2026-01-31

    Died pursuant to Art. IV, Sec. 10(c) of the Constitution.

    failure

  3. 2026-01-30

    In committee: Set, second hearing. Hearing canceled at the request of author.

  4. 2025-04-08

    In committee: Set, first hearing. Hearing canceled at the request of author.

  5. 2025-03-28

    Re-referred to Com. on PUB. S.

    referral-committee

  6. 2025-03-27

    From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to Com. on PUB. S. Read second time and amended.

    amendment-introduction,amendment-passage,committee-passage,reading-1,reading-2,referral-committee

  7. 2025-03-10

    Referred to Com. on PUB. S.

    referral-committee

  8. 2025-02-21

    From printer. May be heard in committee March 23.

  9. 2025-02-20

    Read first time. To print.

    reading-1

Versions

Documents

Votes

Not provided by source.

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:

Session-wide evidence can include changes to other bills:

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 1118. 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.