Crimes: firearm enhancements.

Plain English Breakdown

The official source does not provide specific details about how much extra prison time a peace officer might receive under certain circumstances.

Firearm Enhancements and Threats Against Public Officials

This law changes how firearm enhancements are applied to peace officers and clarifies that threats against public officials can be made through electronic communication devices.

What This Bill Does

• Changes the rules for when a peace officer can receive additional prison time if they use or discharge a gun while on duty, unless it did not arise out of and was not in the course of employment.
• Requires prosecutors to prove that a peace officer's use of a firearm was unrelated to their job before applying extra penalties.
• Defines what it means for an action to 'arise out of and in the course of employment' when talking about peace officers using firearms.
• Clarifies that threats against public officials can be made through electronic devices like phones or computers.

Who It Names or Affects

• Peace officers who use firearms while on duty
• People who threaten public officials

Terms To Know

Firearm enhancements

Additional prison time given to someone who uses a gun during certain crimes.

Preponderance of the evidence

The amount of proof needed in court cases, meaning there is more than 50% chance that something is true.

Limits and Unknowns

• Does not specify how much extra prison time a peace officer might get if they use a gun outside of work.
• Only applies to public officials and does not cover threats against private citizens.

Official Summary Text

AB 1955, as amended, Alanis.
Public officials: threats.
Crimes: firearm enhancements.
Under existing law, anyone who personally uses a firearm in the commission of a specified felony offense shall be punished by an additional and consecutive term of imprisonment in the state prison for 10 years, or by 20 years if they discharge the firearm, or by imprisonment for 25 years to life if they discharge the firearm and proximately causes great bodily harm. Existing law prohibits the application of these firearm enhancements to the lawful use or discharge of a firearm by a peace officer, under specified circumstances, or by any person in lawful self-defense, lawful defense of another, or lawful defense of property.
This bill would, notwithstanding
the exemption above, prohibit the application of these firearm enhancements to a peace officer, as defined, unless the use or discharge of the firearm did not arise out of and was not in the course of employment. The bill would place the burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence on the prosecution that the firearm enhancements apply to a peace officer. The bill would define “arise out of and in the course of employment” for these purposes. By placing the burden of proof on, and thus imposing a new duty on, local prosecutors, the bill would create a state-mandated local program. The bill would make a technical, nonsubstantive change.
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 no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
Existing law makes it an offense for any person, with the intent to cause, attempts to cause or causes a public officer or employee, as specified, to do or refrain from doing any act in the performance of their duties, by means of a threat to inflict an unlawful injury that is directly communicated to the person, as specified.
This
bill would clarify that a threat can be directly communicated by means of an electronic communication device for the purposes of this section.

Current Bill Text

Download Bill PDF