vania-janet/multiturn-rag-retrieval-data huggingface dataset:
The 2024-25 Budget: Child Welfare
Potential for Additional Savings: Given the program’s delayed implementation, if the Legislature chooses to move forward with this budget solution, are there additional General Fund savings that could help address the budget problem in the current year?
Funding Source: Given the state’s implementation of the Family First Prevention Services program and increased focus on child welfare system prevention and early intervention—including the $222 million General Fund block grants to counties to develop comprehensive prevention plans—could the public health nurse pilot be funded as part the county’s broader prevention efforts? Alternatively, are there other local funding streams that could replace state General Fund dollars for this program?
Alternative Programs: Are there other programs that could prioritize and tailor services to this population in the absence of funding for the public health nurse early intervention pilot?

BFH Funding Delay:

Impacts of Proposed Delay on Grantees/Beneficiaries: Would the proposed delay cause any disruption to program implementation? How quickly have counties been expending their 2021-22 and 2022-23 allocations?
Implementation Challenges: For counties that have not been spending down their allocations as quickly, are there implementation challenges preventing them from using their full annual funding within the intended timeframe?

Many Details Yet to Be Finalized for Permanent CCR Rates Structure. Based on the administration’s proposed framework, implementing the permanent CCR rates structure will entail numerous significant changes compared to the current interim structure, because the proposed framework seems to present a fundamentally new approach to foster care rates. Conceptually, the proposed framework seems to align with stakeholder feedback that rates should not be tied to placement type but rather depend on a child’s individual needs and strengths. At the same time, many details for the permanent rates—including what the actual rates and ongoing General Fund cost will be—have yet to be finalized.
Forthcoming Trailer Bill Language Will Provide Opportunity for Legislature to Weigh In. The scope of the forthcoming trailer bill language is yet unknown. Depending on the information provided via the language, questions for the Legislature to consider to help guide its review of the proposal could include:

Are CANS Assessments Completed Consistently?
Self-Help Glossary - selfhelp
burden of proof: When one person in the case has the responsibility to give more evidence than the other person.

burglary: When someone unlawfully breaks into or enters a building or home, and they intend to or do commit a theft or other serious crime.
[ Top of Page ]
| A | B | C | D | E | F | G | H | I | J | K | L |
| M | N | O | P | Q | R | S | T | U | V | W |

C

calendar: A list, in alphabetical order, of all the cases in each courtroom every day. "To calendar" something means to give a day, time, and courtroom to a case.

California Department of Fair Employment and Housing: The state agency that investigates complaints of unlawful discrimination in housing and employment.

California Rules of Court: The rules for practices and procedures in California’s state courts.

CALJIC: California Jury Instructions, Criminal.

capital case: A criminal case where the defendant can get the death penalty.

capital offense: A crime that you can get the death penalty for committing.

caption: What is written at the top of all papers (called "pleadings") given to the court. It says things like the case name, court, and case number.

C.A.S.A.: Stands for Court-Appointed Special Advocates. These are trained court-appointed volunteers that advocate on behalf of abused and neglected children involved with dependency court.

case: A lawsuit. Or a complaint filed in criminal, traffic, or civil court.

case file: The folder that has the official court papers for a case.

caseflow management: How a case is managed from the first paper filed to the final decision.

case ID: Identification number given to a case by the court.

case law: Law made by earlier decisions in similar cases.

caseload: The number of cases a judge has in a specific time.

case number: Identification number that the court clerk’s office gives a case. This number is on all papers filed in the case. Also called "case ID."
Prior Reforms - criminal_justice_prior_reforms
, Retired Judge of the Superior Court of California, County of Santa Barbara
Hon. Scott M. Gordon, Judge of the Superior Court of California,County of Los Angeles
Hon. Teri L. Jackson, Presiding Judge of the Superior Court of California,County of San Francisco
Hon. Brian L. McCabe, Judge of the Superior Court of California,County of Merced
Hon. Serena R. Murillo, Judge of the Superior Court of California,County of Los Angeles
Hon. Risë Jones Pichon, Judge of the Superior Court of California, County of Santa Clara

 

Proposition 57: The Public Safety and Rehabilitation Act of 2016

Effective November 9, 2016 Proposition 57 changed the law governing parole and the granting of custody credits to persons in state prison, as well as the law governing determinations of whether juveniles may be tried as adults. This memorandum provides an explanation of the proposition.

Proposition 47: The Safe Neighborhood and Schools Act

Overview 
Proposition 47 implemented three broad changes to felony sentencing laws. First, it reclassified certain theft and drug possession offenses from felonies to misdemeanors. Second, it authorized defendants currently serving sentences for felony offenses that would have qualified as misdemeanors under the proposition to petition courts for resentencing under the new misdemeanor provisions. Third, it authorize defendants who have completed their sentences for felony convictions that would have qualified as misdemeanors under the proposition to apply to reclassify those convictions to misdemeanors. 
Felony convictions resentenced or reclassified as misdemeanors under the proposition are considered misdemeanors for all purposes, except that such relief does not permit the person to own, possess, or have in his or her custody or control any firearm. 
Early Impacts of Proposition 47 on the Courts
California superior courts received more than 200,000 petitions for resentencing or applications for reclassification during the first 13 months after voters approved Proposition 47. A report prepared by Judicial Council staff, highlights the impacts of the ballot measure on the courts during the first year of implementation. 
For more information: Data Dashboards: Trends in Felony Court Case Processing
Reclassification of Theft and Drug Possession Offenses
Theft Offenses
If you can't pay your traffic ticket fine | California Courts | Self Help Guide
You can ask again if your financial situation changes
If your financial situation changes, you can make another request to lower the amount. You can use the same form. 

 

Was this helpful?

Yes

No

did this information help you with your case?

Great! Anything you can share about what made it helpful?

Sorry to hear that! What would make this more helpful?

Any Additional Feedback?

Email (optional)

 CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.

Leave this field blank

 Was this helpful?

success alert banner:
Have a question about Traffic?
Look for a "Chat Now" button in the right bottom corner of your screen. If you don’t see it, disable any pop-up/ad blockers on your browser.

CALIFORNIA COURTS | SELF HELP GUIDE

 

 

 Judicial Branch of California

Terms of Use

Privacy Policy

 ©
 2024
Prior Reforms - criminal_justice_prior_reforms
A Reentry Court Summit titled "Court Programs and Practices for Working with Reentry, PRCS, and Mandatory Supervision Populations" was held on APRIL 21, 2014 in San Francisco, CA at the offices of the Judicial Council. Invitations were sent to existing programs and to courts interested in starting up a reentry court program. 
Topics covered included: 

Parolee Reentry Courts 
Reentry Courts for the Mandatory Supervision and PRCS populations 
Affordable Care Act 
Harlem Reentry Court: National Prospective 
Innovative Programs that Serve Reentry Populations 
Probation and Parole Staff 
Service Providers 

Quick Links 

Parolee Reentry Court Program Evaluation: Final Report (December 2014) 

California's Three Strikes Sentencing Law (Prop 36)

California's Three Strikes sentencing law was originally enacted in 1994. The essence of the Three Strikes law was to require a defendant convicted of any new felony, having suffered one prior conviction of a serious felony to be sentenced to state prison for twice the term otherwise provided for the crime. If the defendant was convicted of any felony with two or more prior strikes, the law mandated a state prison term of at least 25 years to life. 

On November 6, 2012 the voters approved Proposition 36 which substantially amended the law with two primary provisions: 

The requirements for sentencing a defendant as a third strike offender were changed to 25 years to life by requiring the new felony to be a serious or violent felony with two or more prior strikes to qualify for the 25 year-to-life sentence as a third strike offender; and 

The addition of a means by which designated defendants currently serving a third strike sentence may petition the court for reduction of their term to a second strike sentence, if they would have been eligible for second strike sentencing under the new law. 

Materials: 
The Amendment of the Three Strikes Sentencing Law (May 2017) by J. Richard Couzens, Judge of the Superior Court of Placer County (Ret.) and Presiding Justice Tricia A. Bigelow, Court of Appeal, 2nd Appellate District, Div. 8 

Video: Prop 36 Amendments to California's Three-Strikes Sentencing

 
	

Playlist Index:

	Part 1: Introduction
	Part 2: Use of a Firearm
	Part 3: Prior Offenses
	Part 4: Consecutive Sentencing
California’s Child Welfare System: Addressing Disproportionalities and Disparities
To evaluate the pilot, the county partnered with the University of California, Los Angeles’ Pritzker Center for Strengthening Children and Families. The evaluation, published in March 2024, found some limitations of the pilot including data limitations and that other simultaneous initiatives with similar goals made identifying the specific impacts of the pilot challenging. That said, the evaluation noted some promising qualitative outcomes, such as changes to case worker practices based on an increased awareness of the role that race may play in decision‑making. Furthermore, the evaluation highlighted some lessons learned that could be applied to future blind removal efforts in other counties, such as the importance of dedicated staffing resources and consistent data management. 
Beyond the child welfare system, other types of blind review and decision‑making also have been piloted in the criminal justice system. For example, in 2022, the Legislature unanimously approved Chapter 806 of 2022 (AB 2778, McCarty), which requires the Department of Justice to develop “Race‑Blind Charging” guidelines beginning January 1, 2024, with implementation by local law enforcement agencies slated to begin January 1, 2025. According to the legislation, race‑blind charging refers to processes whereby prosecuting agencies review cases for charging based on information from which all means of identifying the race of the suspect, victim, or witness have been removed or redacted. This legislation follows race‑blind charging pilot programs in certain jurisdictions, including San Francisco and Yolo Counties.

Training Around Recognizing and Mitigating Biases. While a specific implicit bias training is not required by state statute or regulations, recognizing and mitigating bias is intertwined throughout the mandated statewide curriculum that all new child welfare social workers complete to ensure they have the foundational training necessary for competence in the field. DSS contracts with the California Social Work Education Center and the statewide Regional Training Academies to provide this initial training and continuing education to child welfare social workers. Various optional trainings—such as those provided by different DSS‑contracted vendors—are also available and may address topics related to implicit bias and uniform decision‑making. Previous budgets also have provided funding for implicit bias training for certain program staff, such as for CalWORKs social workers. 
Prevention 
Availability of Prevention Services Within the Child Welfare System Is Limited.
Pay Traffic Ticket/Criminal Fine Online | Superior Court of California | County of Tuolumne


Pay Traffic Ticket/Criminal Fine Online | Superior Court of California | County of Tuolumne

 Skip to main content
 

 

Skip to main content.

Judicial Branch of California

Supreme Court

Courts of Appeal

Superior Court

Judicial Council

County of Tuolumne

 

 

Home

Online Services
 

Court Calendar

Tentative Rulings

Check Your Juror Status

Probate Notes

Pay Traffic Ticket/Criminal Fine Online

Justice Links

Online Services
 

Forms, Filings, Rules
 

Fax Filing

Local Forms

Assembly Bill 1950

Evictions

Local Rules

Forms, Filings, Rules
 

Self Help
 

Family Law

Adjudicated Newspaper

Adoption

Cooperative Parenting Workshop

Divorce, Separation, Nullity, ETC.

Domestic Violence

Elder Abuse

Emancipation

Family Law Facilitator

Guardianship

Eviction/Unlawful Detainer

Law Library

Mediation

Name Change

Probate & Conservatorship

Restraining Orders

Self-Help Small Claims

Spanish Link

Workplace Violence

Self Help
 

Divisions
 

Appeals

Civil

Alternative Dispute Resolution

Civil Harassment

Minor's Compromised Claims

Criminal

Jury Services

Jury Services FAQs

Juvenile

Small Claims

Small Claims Advisor

Traffic

Collaborative Courts

Adult Drug Court

CARE Court

Dependency Drug Court

Divisions
 

General Information
 

ADA Information

Administration

Court Holidays

Court Reporter

Court Technology Services

Courthouse History

Courthouse Security

Employment/Human Resources

Employment Opportunities & Employment Application

Grand Jury

Airports Grand Jury Report

Elections Grand Jury Report

Jail and Prison Facilities Grand Jury Report

School Safety Grand Jury Report

Judicial Assignments

Judge Kevin M. Seibert Biography

Judge Laura L. Krieg Biography

Judge Hallie Gorman Campbell Biography

Judge David C. Beyersdorf Biography

Commissioner Steven S. Streger Biography

Justice Partners

Location & Contact Info

Visiting the Courthouse

Media Relations

News & Events

Procurement & Bids

Request an Interpreter

Revenue Recovery

Set a Hearing

Telephonic Appearances

Trial Court Allocations

General Information
 

 Translate
 

English

Español

 Translate
 

English

Español

Search

 Search

 

Online Services

Pay Traffic Ticket/Criminal Fine Online

 Pay Traffic Ticket/Criminal Fine Online
 

In this section

Justice Links

Pay Traffic Ticket Online

Lookup case by:
• Case Number
• Driver's License
• Citation Number

Pay Criminal Fine Online

Look up case by:
• Case Number
• Driver's License Number

 

 Was this helpful?
 

Yes

No

Yes

No

Any additional feedback?

Email (optional)

This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.

Leave this field blank

Was this helpful?
 

Administrative

ADA Information

Employment

Location & Contact Info

Attorney Resources

Local Forms

Local Rules

California Court

CA Courts Self-Help Center

Judicial Council

Public Resources

Court Holidays

Courthouse Security

Tentative Rulings

Superior Court of California
County of Tuolumne

Judicial Branch of California

Privacy

Terms of Use

© 2024
California’s Child Welfare System: Addressing Disproportionalities and Disparities
DSS contracts with the California Social Work Education Center and the statewide Regional Training Academies to provide this initial training and continuing education to child welfare social workers. Various optional trainings—such as those provided by different DSS‑contracted vendors—are also available and may address topics related to implicit bias and uniform decision‑making. Previous budgets also have provided funding for implicit bias training for certain program staff, such as for CalWORKs social workers. 
Prevention 
Availability of Prevention Services Within the Child Welfare System Is Limited. As noted earlier, some recent legislative actions and budget augmentations focus on preventing child maltreatment and the associated trauma. While FFPSA presents a significant potential expansion of Title IV‑E dollars, certain key limitations exist. In particular, FFPSA allows Title IV‑E funds to be used only for prevention services provided to eligible “candidates”—children and families assessed by child welfare agencies as at risk of child maltreatment and who meet specific eligibility criteria—not for broader implementation of programs that could help reduce the risks of child maltreatment for whole communities. In addition, currently there are limited culturally relevant federally approved services that are specifically designed to serve the families/communities who are most overrepresented in California’s child welfare system. State block grant dollars included in the 2021‑22 budget to help counties begin implementing their CPPs may be used more broadly, although these are one‑time funds. 
Access to Prevention Services Within the Child Welfare System Is Uneven. In addition, the state gave counties flexibility over whether and how to implement prevention services. This means access for California’s youth, families, and communities to Title IV‑E prevention services and other supports will vary depending on geography and participating counties’ CPPs. For example, for the 50 counties and 2 tribes that have opted into prevention services under FFPSA, the Title IV‑E eligible prevention services that child welfare agencies most commonly selected to implement include:

Motivational Interviewing (25 agencies), a method of counseling designed to promote behavior change and improve physiological, psychological, and lifestyle outcomes.
Parents as Teachers (21 agencies), a home‑visiting parent education program that teaches new and expectant parents skills intended to promote positive child development and prevent child maltreatment.
Prior Reforms - criminal_justice_prior_reforms
Senate Bill 731 extended the ability to petition for dismissal of a conviction under Penal Code section 1203.41 to felony defendants who completed a state prison sentence.  
Provided for automatic record clearance relief to be carried out by the California Department of Justice (DOJ) and the courts.  
Traditionally, defendants seeking record clearance relief have been required to affirmatively petition for such relief. But in recent years, the Legislature has created various statutory mechanisms that automate this relief and eliminate the need for defendants to file a petition. Assembly Bill 1793 set out procedures and timelines for the automatic resentencing, redesignation, or dismissal of eligible marijuana-related convictions in the DOJ’s state summary criminal history information database. Assembly Bill 1706 added a timeframe to the procedure established by AB 1793 to require courts to process record relief for qualifying marijuana convictions by March 1, 2023. Assembly Bill 1076 established DOJ-initiated record clearance relief for most convictions and arrests and prohibited courts from disclosing information on convictions granted relief, Assembly Bill 145 made this bill retroactive, and Senate Bill 731 further extended this automatic relief to previously excluded classes of felony defendants. 
 

Past Criminal Justice Programs

 

expand all collapse all

Pretrial Pilot Program

 

Program Overview and Purpose 
The Budget Act of 2019 earmarked $75 million to the Judicial Council to launch and evaluate three-year pretrial projects in local trial courts. As directed by the Legislature, the projects aimed to increase the safe and efficient release of arrestees before trial; use the least restrictive monitoring practices possible while protecting public safety and ensuring court appearances; validate and expand the use of risk assessment tools; and assess any bias. 
On August 9, 2019, the Judicial Council awarded funds to 16 pretrial projects in trial courts throughout the state. 
Click here to learn more about the funded pilot programs. 
Pilot Projects 
Large Court Category 

Alameda 
Los Angeles 
Sacramento 

Medium Court Category 

San Joaquin 
San Mateo 
San Barbara 
Sonoma 
Tulare 
Ventura 

Medium/Small Court Category 

Kings 
Napa 
Nevada-Sierra 

Small Courts Category 

Calaveras 
Modoc 
Tuolumne 
Yuba 

Pilot Projects Map
Voluntary Declaration of Parentage | California Courts | Self Help Guide
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.

Leave this field blank

 Was this helpful?

success alert banner:
Have a question about Parentage?
Look for a "Chat Now" button in the right bottom corner of your screen. If you don’t see it, disable any pop-up/ad blockers on your browser.

CALIFORNIA COURTS | SELF HELP GUIDE

 

 

 Judicial Branch of California

Terms of Use

Privacy Policy

 ©
 2024
California Pretrial Release Program - criminal_justice
California Pretrial Release Program - criminal_justice

Skip to main content
Skip to topics menu
Skip to topics menu

Home

 Courts
 

 Self-Help
 

 Forms & Rules
 

 Opinions
 

 Programs
 

 Policy & Administration
 

 News & Reference
 

Cancel
Print

Advanced Search

Courts

Supreme Court
Courts of Appeal
Superior Courts
Jury Service
About California Courts 
Find Your Court
FAQs

Self-Help

Getting Started
Small Claims
Families & Children
Divorce or Separation
Abuse & Harassment
Eviction & Housing
Name Change
Traffic
Seniors & Conservatorship
Problems With Money
Criminal Law
Civil Appeals
Gender Change
Wills, Estates, and Probate
Test Feedback Form (formerly Self-Help Feedback Form)
Self Help A-Z Index

Forms & Rules

Find Your Court Forms
Rules of Court

Opinions

Published / Citable Opinions
Unpublished / Non-Citable Opinions

Programs

Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR)
Collaborative Justice Courts
Criminal Justice Services
Domestic Violence
Equal Access
Families and Children
Judicial Fellowship
JusticeCorps
Language Access Services
Tribal/State Programs

Policy & Administration

Chief Justice Patricia Guerrero
Judicial Council
Budget & Finance
Facilities
Invitations to Comment
Public Records
Governmental Affairs

News & Reference

Reports & Publications
Research & Statistics

Programs>Criminal Justice Services>California Pretrial Release Program
 

California Pretrial Release Program

	 Topics
	

Criminal Justice Services
Behavioral Health Education and Resources
California Pretrial Release Program

Pretrial Release: Risk Assessment Tools (SB 36)

Community Corrections Performance Incentives Act (SB 678)
Data Dashboards: Trends in Felony Court Case Processing
MyCitations – Can’t afford to pay your ticket?
Proposition 64: The Adult Use of Marijuana Act
Prior Reforms

Print

“Across California and the nation, pretrial release and detention primarily based on cash bail are slowly being replaced with safer and fairer alternatives.