Bill Commons

CA AB 2669

in committee

Pleas: immigration.

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 2669 pass?

Not yet. CA AB 2669 is in committee and has not come to a final vote. Latest recorded action (2026-04-21): In committee: Set, second hearing. Hearing canceled at the request of author.

What is CA AB 2669 about?

Existing law provides the pleas a defendant may make to an indictment, information, or complaint charging a misdemeanor or infraction. Existing law requires defense counsel to advise a defendant about the immigration consequences of a proposed disposition, as specified. Existing law requires the prosecution to consider the avoidance of adverse immigration consequences in the plea negotiation process, as specified. This bill would instead require the prosecution to meet and confer during the negotiation process with the defense in an effort to avoid the adverse immigration consequences of a plea, conviction, or sentence. The bill would establish a rebuttable presumption of a violation of the above-described requirement if the defendant asserts facts that provide a prima facie showing that during negotiations the defendant proposed an alternative plea or sentence that would avoid adverse immigration consequences, including, among other things, an offense of greater seriousness, and the prosecution declined the offer. Upon a prima facie showing of the above-described circumstances, the bill would require the court to order a hearing and would require the prosecution to demonstrate good cause for the failure to offer a plea that would avoid adverse immigration consequences. If the court finds that the prosecuting attorney failed to establish good cause at the above-described hearing, the bill would require the court to impose an appropriate remedy, as specified. By imposing additional duties on local prosecutors, the bill would impose 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 2669?

Gipson is the primary sponsor of CA AB 2669.

Description

Existing law provides the pleas a defendant may make to an indictment, information, or complaint charging a misdemeanor or infraction. Existing law requires defense counsel to advise a defendant about the immigration consequences of a proposed disposition, as specified. Existing law requires the prosecution to consider the avoidance of adverse immigration consequences in the plea negotiation process, as specified. This bill would instead require the prosecution to meet and confer during the negotiation process with the defense in an effort to avoid the adverse immigration consequences of a plea, conviction, or sentence. The bill would establish a rebuttable presumption of a violation of the above-described requirement if the defendant asserts facts that provide a prima facie showing that during negotiations the defendant proposed an alternative plea or sentence that would avoid adverse immigration consequences, including, among other things, an offense of greater seriousness, and the prosecution declined the offer. Upon a prima facie showing of the above-described circumstances, the bill would require the court to order a hearing and would require the prosecution to demonstrate good cause for the failure to offer a plea that would avoid adverse immigration consequences. If the court finds that the prosecuting attorney failed to establish good cause at the above-described hearing, the bill would require the court to impose an appropriate remedy, as specified. By imposing additional duties on local prosecutors, the bill would impose 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
2026-03-09
Latest action
2026-04-21 — In committee: Set, second hearing. Hearing canceled at the request of author.
Bill type
bill
Last updated
—

Subjects

Sponsors

  • Gipsonauthor

Committees

Not provided by source.

Action timeline

Newest first

  1. 2026-04-21

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

  2. 2026-04-14

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

  3. 2026-03-10

    Re-referred to Com. on PUB. S.

    referral-committee

  4. 2026-03-09

    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

  5. 2026-03-09

    Referred to Com. on PUB. S.

    referral-committee

  6. 2026-02-21

    From printer. May be heard in committee March 23.

  7. 2026-02-20

    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 2669. 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.