SENATE BILL 1254 (ALPERT – 2002)
CHAPTER 254, STATUTES OF 2002 - SB 1254
Some bill research does not include the Governor's file because at the time we researched the bill, the sitting Governor had not released his chaptered bill file. If the Governor's file is not included with this particular research, please contact our office (1-800-666-1917 or firstname.lastname@example.org) and we will be happy to provide this file at no charge if it is available.
As enacted, Senate Bill 1254 amended Penal Code sections 530.5 and 530.8, relating to identity theft. (See Exhibit #1h) Senator Dede Alpert introduced this bill on January 9, 2002 at the request of the Identity Theft Resource Center. (See Exhibits #1a and #3, page 1)
Senate Bill 1254 was assigned to the Senate Committee on Public Safety and the Assembly Committee on Public Safety where policy issues raised by the bill were considered. (See Exhibits #3 and #7) The fiscal ramifications of the bill were considered by the Senate Committee on Appropriations and the Assembly Committee on Appropriations. (See Exhibits #4 and #9) Six amendments were made to Senate Bill 1254. (See Exhibits #1b through #1g and #2) Subsequent to legislative approval, Governor Gray Davis signed Senate Bill 1254 on August 24, 2002, and it was recorded by the Secretary of State on August 26, 2002 as Chapter 254 of the Statutes of 2002. (See Exhibits #1h and #2)
As last amended, the Office of Senate Floor Analyses summarizes the provisions of Senate Bill 1254 in their Unfinished Business analysis as follows:
The purposes of this bill are to 1) expand the list of items and data constituting “personal identifying information” for purposes of identity theft, 2) make it a misdemeanor for the acquisition, possession, retention, or transfer of identifying information with the intent to defraud, and without an element of use of the information, 3) require wireless communication providers in addition to financial institutions and utilities covered by existing law, to give identity theft victims information about fraudulent accounts opened in their names, and 4) to place provisions requiring 10-day compliance with a victim’s request in the Penal Code, in addition to such requirements in existing Financial Code and Civil Code sections.
Assembly Amendments add clarifying language to the “personal identification information” definition and requires specified requests for identifying information be made in writing.
(See Exhibit #11, pages 1 and 2)