Bill Commons

CA SB 448

dead

Trespassing: removal of trespassers on residential property.

California · 2025-2026 Regular Session · upper

Quick answers

Did CA SB 448 pass?

No. CA SB 448 did not pass — it was defeated or died in the legislative process (2026-02-02). Latest recorded action (2026-02-02): Returned to Secretary of Senate pursuant to Joint Rule 56.

What is CA SB 448 about?

Existing law prohibits the tenant of a property to remain on a property after the lawful termination of a lease agreement, as specified. Existing law prescribes a procedure for obtaining a judgment against such a tenant and for effecting the eviction of that tenant. Existing law prohibits entering or occupying real property or structures without the consent of the owner. This bill would define a squatter as somebody who unlawfully enters and remains in a residential property and, upon request, refuses to leave or falsely claims a legal right of possession. This bill would prescribe a procedure for the notice and removal of a squatter by a local law enforcement agency. The bill would authorize a property owner or their agent to serve a demand to vacate, as specified, upon a squatter. The bill would authorize the owner or agent, after service of the demand, to submit a request, signed under penalty of perjury, to the local law enforcement agency with primary jurisdiction where the property is located, as specified. By expanding the crime of perjury, this bill would impose a state-mandate local program. This bill would require the law enforcement agency, upon receipt of the request, to verify the request and, upon verification, to remove the unlawful occupants from the property without unreasonable delay, as specified. The bill would describe the duties of local law enforcement personnel during a removal. By imposing new duties on local law enforcement agencies, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill would authorize a local law enforcement agency to assess a fee for processing a request and conducting a removal. This bill would prohibit a person from fraudulently causing or attempting to cause the removal of another person pursuant to these provisions. A violation of this prohibition would be punishable as a misdemeanor or felony. By creating new crimes, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would also create a civil cause of action for damages and restoration of possession against a person who fraudulently causes the removal of a person pursuant to the provisions, by the person who was removed. This bill would state that, notwithstanding any other state or local law, it is intended to provide the remedy for unlawful occupation of a residential property by a squatter and would specify that it applies only to situations involving a squatter and not situations involving a tenant or other person with a bona fide claim to tenancy or title. 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, with regard to certain mandates, no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason. With regard to any other mandates, this bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs so mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.

Who sponsors CA SB 448?

Umberg is the primary sponsor of CA SB 448, joined by 6 cosponsors.

Description

Existing law prohibits the tenant of a property to remain on a property after the lawful termination of a lease agreement, as specified. Existing law prescribes a procedure for obtaining a judgment against such a tenant and for effecting the eviction of that tenant. Existing law prohibits entering or occupying real property or structures without the consent of the owner. This bill would define a squatter as somebody who unlawfully enters and remains in a residential property and, upon request, refuses to leave or falsely claims a legal right of possession. This bill would prescribe a procedure for the notice and removal of a squatter by a local law enforcement agency. The bill would authorize a property owner or their agent to serve a demand to vacate, as specified, upon a squatter. The bill would authorize the owner or agent, after service of the demand, to submit a request, signed under penalty of perjury, to the local law enforcement agency with primary jurisdiction where the property is located, as specified. By expanding the crime of perjury, this bill would impose a state-mandate local program. This bill would require the law enforcement agency, upon receipt of the request, to verify the request and, upon verification, to remove the unlawful occupants from the property without unreasonable delay, as specified. The bill would describe the duties of local law enforcement personnel during a removal. By imposing new duties on local law enforcement agencies, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill would authorize a local law enforcement agency to assess a fee for processing a request and conducting a removal. This bill would prohibit a person from fraudulently causing or attempting to cause the removal of another person pursuant to these provisions. A violation of this prohibition would be punishable as a misdemeanor or felony. By creating new crimes, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would also create a civil cause of action for damages and restoration of possession against a person who fraudulently causes the removal of a person pursuant to the provisions, by the person who was removed. This bill would state that, notwithstanding any other state or local law, it is intended to provide the remedy for unlawful occupation of a residential property by a squatter and would specify that it applies only to situations involving a squatter and not situations involving a tenant or other person with a bona fide claim to tenancy or title. 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, with regard to certain mandates, no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason. With regard to any other mandates, this bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs so mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.

Introduced
2025-02-18
Latest action
2026-02-02 — Returned to Secretary of Senate pursuant to Joint Rule 56.
Bill type
bill
Last updated

Subjects

Sponsors

  • Umbergauthor
  • Niellocoauthor
  • Pérezcoauthor
  • Seyartocoauthor
  • Ávila Faríascoauthor
  • Gallaghercoauthor
  • McKinnorcoauthor

Committees

Not provided by source.

Action timeline

  1. 2025-02-18

    Introduced. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment. To print.

    introduction,reading-1,referral-committee

  2. 2025-02-19

    From printer. May be acted upon on or after March 21.

  3. 2025-02-26

    Referred to Coms. on PUB. S. and JUD.

    referral-committee

  4. 2025-03-27

    Set for hearing April 8.

  5. 2025-04-08

    From committee: Do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on JUD. (Ayes 6. Noes 0. Page 709.) (April 8).

    amendment-passage,committee-passage,committee-passage-favorable,referral-committee

  6. 2025-04-09

    Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on JUD.

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

  7. 2025-04-11

    Set for hearing April 29.

  8. 2025-04-30

    From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 13. Noes 0. Page 940.) (April 29). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.

    committee-passage,committee-passage-favorable,referral-committee

  9. 2025-05-02

    Set for hearing May 12.

  10. 2025-05-12

    May 12 hearing: Placed on APPR. suspense file.

  11. 2025-05-16

    Set for hearing May 23.

  12. 2025-05-23

    May 23 hearing: Held in committee and under submission.

  13. 2026-02-02

    Returned to Secretary of Senate pursuant to Joint Rule 56.

    failure

Versions

Documents

Votes

  • Do pass as amended, but first amend, and re-refer to the Committee on [Judiciary]

    2025-04-08 · pass · 6-0

    Member-level votes (6)
    • Caballero: yes
    • Wiener: yes
    • Pérez: yes
    • Seyarto: yes
    • Arreguín: yes
    • Gonzalez: yes
  • Do pass, but first be re-referred to the Committee on [Appropriations]

    2025-04-29 · pass · 13-0

    Member-level votes (13)
    • Arreguín: yes
    • Niello: yes
    • Allen: yes
    • Durazo: yes
    • Laird: yes
    • Valladares: yes
    • Wahab: yes
    • Stern: yes
    • Caballero: yes
    • Weber Pierson: yes
    • Ashby: yes
    • Umberg: yes
    • Wiener: yes
  • Placed on suspense file

    2025-05-12 · pass · 7-0

    Member-level votes (7)
    • Wahab: yes
    • Seyarto: yes
    • Grayson: yes
    • Richardson: yes
    • Cabaldon: yes
    • Dahle: yes
    • Caballero: yes

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=SB 448. 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.