California SB 1373: Dogs and cats: registration and microchipping.

Bill Text

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 
 Bill Text - SB-1373 Diversion.

• 

• skip to content

• home

• accessibility

• FAQ

• feedback

• sitemap

• login

• x

 Quick Search:

 Bill Number
 Bill Keyword

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• Home

• Bill Information

• California Law

• Publications

• Other Resources

• My Subscriptions

• My Favorites

• Bill Information
 >>

• Bill Search
 >>

• Text

 Bill Text

 PDF2
 Bill PDF

 |Add To My Favorites |Track Bill | Version: 07/02/26 - Amended Assembly
 06/16/26 - Amended Assembly
 04/15/26 - Amended Senate
 02/20/26 - Introduced

 SB-1373 Diversion.(2025-2026)

 Text

 >>

 Votes

 >>

 History
 >>

 Bill Analysis
 >>

 Today's Law As Amended
 >>

 Compare Versions
 >>

 Status
 >>

 Comments To Author

 >>

 Track Bill
 >>

 Add To My Favorites
 >>

 SHARE THIS:

 Date Published: 07/02/2026 09:00 PM

SB1373:v96#DOCUMENTBill Start

 Amended
 IN 
 Assembly
 July 02, 2026

 Amended
 IN 
 Assembly
 June 16, 2026

 Amended
 IN 
 Senate
 April 15, 2026

 CALIFORNIA LEGISLATURE—
 2025–2026 REGULAR SESSION

 Senate Bill

No. 1373

Introduced by Senator Grove
(Coauthors: Senators Niello, Rubio, and Stern)
(Coauthor: Assembly Member Krell)

February 20, 2026

 An act to amend Section 1001.36 of the Penal Code, relating to criminal procedure. diversion.

LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST

SB 1373, as amended, Grove.
 Mental health diversion. Diversion.

Existing law authorizes the court to grant pretrial diversion to a defendant diagnosed with a mental disorder if the defendant satisfies certain eligibility requirements and if the court determines that the defendant is suitable for diversion. Existing law provides that a defendant is eligible for diversion if they have been diagnosed with certain mental disorders and the court finds that the mental disorder was a significant factor in the commission of the charged offense, unless there is clear and convincing evidence that the disorder was not a motivating, causal, or contributing factor to the defendant’s involvement in the alleged offense. Existing law excludes a defendant from diversion for specified charged offenses, including, among others, murder, voluntary manslaughter, rape, or continuous sexual abuse of a child, as specified.

This
 bill would require the court to find that the defendant’s mental disorder was a significant factor in the commission of the offense only if the mental disorder had been diagnosed or rediagnosed within 5 years of the current offense. The bill would add to the list of crimes for which a defendant is prohibited from being placed into a diversion program to include, among other things, human trafficking and child abuse, as specified.

Existing law makes a defendant suitable for this diversion program if, among other criteria, the defendant will not pose an unreasonable risk of danger to public safety if treated in the community, as specified.

The bill would instead make the defendant suitable for diversion if they do not pose a substantial and undue risk to the physical safety of another person and would add to the list of
 things the court may specifically consider in making that determination, including the defendant’s prior history in a pretrial diversion plan and the severity of injury to the victim.

Existing law authorizes a court to grant pretrial diversion to a defendant suffering from a mental disorder, on an accusatory pleading alleging the commission of a misdemeanor or felony offense, to allow the defendant to undergo mental health treatment. Existing law prescribes specified criteria for a defendant to be eligible for pretrial diversion and for a court to consider whether the defendant is suitable for pretrial diversion. Existing law authorizes a court to require the defendant to make a prima facie showing that they will meet the minimum requirements of eligibility for diversion and that the defendant and the offense are suitable for diversion and
 authorizes the court, if that showing is not made, to summarily deny diversion and grant alternate relief.

This bill, if the court intends to summarily grant diversion or any other relief, would require the court to conduct an additional hearing if requested by either party. By increasing the duties on local prosecutors, this 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.

Digest Key

 Vote:
 MAJORITY 
 Appropriation:
 NO 
 Fiscal Committee:
 YES 
 Local Program:
 YES 

Bill Text

The people of the State of California do enact as follows:

SECTION 1.Section 1001.36 of the Penal Code is amended to read:

1001.36.(a)On an accu