California continues to expand its efforts to prevent gun violence. Governor Gavin Newsom recently signed Assembly Bill 1344, a new law that allows prosecutors in select counties to directly request Gun Violence Restraining Orders (GVROs), a legal tool that temporarily removes firearms from individuals who pose a danger to themselves or others.
What Is Assembly Bill 1344?
Assembly Bill 1344 (AB 1344) was introduced by Assemblymember Jacqui Irwin and sponsored by Ventura County District Attorney Erik Nasarenko. The bill creates a pilot program in several California counties, including Ventura, Santa Clara, Alameda, and El Dorado, granting district attorneys the authority to seek GVROs directly.
Under current California law, only law enforcement officers or family members can petition the court for a GVRO. Prosecutors, despite their close involvement in criminal cases and public safety efforts, haven’t had the power to do so. AB 1344 changes that.
What Are Gun Violence Restraining Orders (GVROs)?
GVROs, sometimes referred to as “red flag laws,” allow certain individuals to ask a judge to temporarily remove firearms from someone who is deemed a credible threat to themselves or others.
Typically, GVROs are sought when:
- A person exhibits violent or unstable behavior,
- Family members fear for their safety, or
- Law enforcement identifies warning signs of potential harm.
Once approved by a judge, a GVRO temporarily restricts that person’s access to firearms, providing an opportunity for intervention before violence occurs.
Why the Change?
The new pilot program reflects a shift in California’s approach to proactive gun violence prevention. Supporters of the bill argue that prosecutors are uniquely positioned to identify threats early through criminal investigations, charging decisions, and coordination with law enforcement.
“This is a significant law for community safety,” said Ventura County District Attorney Erik Nasarenko. “Prosecutors are uniquely positioned and qualified to seek these restraining orders to prevent gun violence.”
How the Pilot Program Will Work
The pilot program created by AB 1344 will begin in Ventura, Santa Clara, Alameda, and El Dorado Counties and will remain in effect until January 1, 2032.
Under the program, district attorneys in these counties will be able to:
- Directly file petitions for GVROs,
- Collaborate with local law enforcement to identify high-risk individuals, and
- Present evidence to judges showing why firearm restrictions are warranted.
The law also requires annual reports beginning in 2027, which will be submitted to the California Firearm Violence Research Center at UC Davis. These reports will track data on GVRO requests, approvals, and outcomes, helping state officials assess whether the program should be expanded statewide.
Similar Post: Can Law Enforcement Seize Your Guns? Understanding Search and Seizure Laws in CA
The Broader Goal of AB 1344
California already has some of the strongest gun safety laws in the nation, and GVROs have been part of that framework since 2016. By adding prosecutors to the list of those who can file for these orders, the state hopes to create a faster, more coordinated response to emerging threats.
This change also aligns with California’s broader efforts to balance Second Amendment rights with public safety concerns. Supporters believe that empowering prosecutors to act directly could prevent tragedies in cases where time and access to information are critical.
Looking Ahead
The AB 1344 pilot program will serve as a test for whether prosecutor-filed GVROs can reduce firearm-related violence more effectively. Over the next several years, data collected from the participating counties will help determine whether this model should be adopted statewide.
As California continues to refine its approach to gun safety, the success of this program could shape how future policies are implemented and how law enforcement and prosecutors work together to prevent violence before it occurs.
How the New Law Impacts Those Facing Gun & DUI-Related Charges in California
While AB 1344 focuses primarily on expanding prosecutorial authority to seek Gun Violence Restraining Order Law (GVRO) actions, the ripple effects for those already charged with DUI or other gun-related or violent offenses should not be overlooked. Here’s how the landscape is changing and what it means for individuals facing criminal charges.
Similar Post: Can a First-Time DUI in Los Angeles Still Lead to Jail Time?
1. Increased Scrutiny on Gun Possession After DUI Incidents
Under California’s GVRO regime, courts may temporarily remove firearms from individuals deemed a threat.
If you’re charged with a DUI involving a firearm, or with a gun-related offense after being overserved alcohol, prosecutors now have another tool (and a broader set of data and authority) to argue you pose an elevated risk. This means your legal team must not only defend the core charges but also anticipate potential GVRO filings.
2. Pressures of Parallel Proceedings
A felony DUI involving a firearm or violent enhancement could now trigger both a criminal prosecution and a civil GVRO petition simultaneously. The civil nature of a GVRO means you might face firearm restrictions even while your criminal case is pending. Defense strategy becomes more complex because the civil standard (“preponderance of the evidence”) differs from the criminal standard (“beyond a reasonable doubt”).
3. Enhanced Evidence Gathering by Prosecutors
Prosecutors are increasingly leveraging expanded authority and tracking requirements (like the annual reports mandated by AB 1344) to build more rigorous cases. If your arrest involves alcohol, firearms, or assaultive behavior, the prosecution may use prior incident data or patterns to support not only the criminal charges but also a GVRO request. Having a criminal defense attorney experienced in coordinating between criminal and civil gun-law matters is critical.
4. Higher Stakes on Expert and Documentation Strategy
Given the different types of legal exposure you might face, including criminal charges, a possible GVRO hearing, and even administrative penalties, your defense needs to cover every part of your case carefully. This means your attorney may need to review body-camera footage, question witnesses about alcohol use or firearm access, and prepare for any separate court hearings related to firearm restrictions.
If your lawyer doesn’t address all of these issues at once, it could affect your future rights. For example, you might avoid jail time but still lose your right to own or carry a firearm.
5. Future Expansion Beyond Pilot Program
While AB 1344 currently launches as a pilot in select counties, the annual reporting requirement means the state is evaluating potential expansion.
If this pilot leads to statewide adoption, prosecutors elsewhere may gain similar direct authority, making early legal representation all the more vital before your jurisdiction becomes “next” in line.
Protecting Your Rights After Gun or DUI Charges in California
At The Law Offices of Christopher Chaney, we understand how these developments affect not just your immediate criminal case but your broader rights, including firearm possession, employment, and civil exposure. If you’re contending with a DUI, gun-related offense, or overservice liability, contact us today and let our team craft a defense strategy that accounts for both criminal and civil dimensions.
Disclaimer: This blog is intended for informational purposes only and does not establish an attorney-client relationship. It should not be considered as legal advice. For personalized legal assistance, please consult our team directly.
