Assembly Bill 340
Restricting access to and limiting information contained in the Consolidated Court Automation Programs and providing a penalty
Topics: Data processing, State Courts, Director of
Stopped in committee
It had a but no committee vote, so it never came up for a vote. To try again, a lawmaker would have to start a new bill.
-
Introduced, passed
Jul 8, 2009
-
Committee, stopped here
Stopped here. It had a hearing but no committee vote.
-
Assembly vote, not reached
-
Senate vote, not reached
-
Governor, not reached
-
Law, not reached
Latest entry in the official record, Apr 28, 2010: “Failed to pass pursuant to ”
It sat with the Assembly Committee on Criminal Justice.
Following saves it on this device. New actions show on your Following page. You can also get updates in a feed reader.
Terms on this page
Committee
A small group of lawmakers that looks at a bill first. Most bills never leave committee.
Public hearing
A meeting where anyone can speak to a committee about a bill, or send written comments.
Senate Joint Resolution 1
The session's calendar. Any bill not passed by its last voting day dies.
Official term: Failed to pass pursuant to SJR 1. More in the glossary
Legislative Reference Bureau
The Legislature's nonpartisan office that drafts bills and writes the summary at the top of each one.
Official term: LRB analysis. More in the glossary
Author
A lawmaker who formally puts a bill forward. The text itself is drafted by the Legislative Reference Bureau.
Official term: Author, coauthor. More in the glossary
Cost estimate
A state agency's estimate of what a bill would cost or save.
Official term: Fiscal estimate. More in the glossary
What it would have done
Summary by the , the Legislature's nonpartisan drafting office. It's their wording, not ours.
Under current law, the director of state courts established a consolidated electronic system. This system, known as the Consolidated Court Automation Programs (CCAP), contains information about civil and criminal cases filed in the circuit courts in this state, including information about the parties and their attorneys; documents filed; and deadlines, decisions, and outcomes of cases. CCAP also contains information on family court proceedings; probate proceedings; John Doe proceedings; reviews of certain administrative proceedings; tax warrants;
mechanics', construction, condominium, or other types of liens; civil lawsuits;
Read the full summary Show less
eviction proceedings; and domestic violence and other restraining orders and injunctions.
The information on CCAP is available for free on an Internet Web site. The Web site has no limitations on who has access to the information, although information in certain types of cases is not available to the public. CCAP allows a user to search for all civil and criminal cases in which a person or entity, who is the subject of the search, has been a party.
Currently, the initial CCAP Web page for each criminal and traffic or other civil forfeiture case contains the following statements: 1) for each criminal and traffic or other civil forfeiture case, a statement that employers may not discriminate against persons because of arrest and conviction records, except in certain circumstances; 2) for each criminal and traffic or other civil forfeiture case that did not result in a conviction or forfeiture, a statement that the charges were not proven and have no legal effect, and that the defendant is presumed innocent; and 3) for each traffic or other civil forfeiture case in which a forfeiture but no criminal conviction was imposed, a statement that the charge or charges in the case are not criminal offenses.
Under this bill, the director of state courts may only provide case information on CCAP after a court does one of the following: 1) makes a finding that a person is guilty of a criminal charge; 2) makes a finding that a person is liable in a civil matter;
3) orders a person to be evicted; or 4) issues a restraining order or an injunction against a person.
The bill allows free access to CCAP to Wisconsin judges or other court officials, law enforcement personnel, attorneys, and accredited journalists. The bill allows access to CCAP information to any other person who pays a $10 annual fee and registers his or her name and address with the director of state courts. The bill requires the director of state courts to keep a registry and log of each user who pays the annual fee that records the searches each user performs. Under the bill, if a user searches for a person's name on CCAP and subsequently denies the person employment, housing, or another public accommodation, the user must inform the person that he or she searched for the person's record on CCAP. A user who fails to do so may be fined $1,000.
Under the bill, upon the written request of a person whose case information is currently available on CCAP, the director of state courts must remove any information relating to a case that did not result in a finding of criminal guilt or civil liability, an order of eviction, or the issuance of a restraining order against the person.
Who's behind it
3 representatives are its . All 3 are Democrats.
See all 3 names Hide the names
Authors (3)
- Annette Williams · Democrat, Assembly
- Frederick Kessler · Democrat, Assembly
- Marlin Schneider · Democrat, Assembly
What it would cost
State agencies filed a . Each opens as a PDF from the Legislature.
Versions and amendments
Every text the Legislature printed for this bill, including proposed changes. Each opens on the Legislature's site.
What happened
-
Apr 28, 2010
The session ended, and the bill died with it.
-
Oct 1, 2009
The committee held a public hearing.
-
Sep 11, 2009
A state agency sent in its estimate of the cost.
-
Jul 8, 2009
Sent to the Assembly Committee on Criminal Justice.
-
Jul 8, 2009
Introduced in the Assembly.
See the official record, word for word Hide the official record
- Jul 8, 2009 · Assembly
Introduced by Representatives Schneider, Kessler and A. Williams
- Jul 8, 2009 · Assembly
Read first time and referred to committee on Criminal Justice
- Sep 10, 2009 · Assembly
Assembly amendment 1 offered by Representative Schneider
- Sep 11, 2009 · Assembly
Fiscal estimate received
- Oct 1, 2009 · Assembly
Public hearing held
- Dec 2, 2009 · Assembly
Assembly substitute amendment 1 offered by Representative Schneider
- Apr 28, 2010 · Assembly
Failed to pass pursuant to Senate Joint Resolution 1
Terms on this page
Committee
A small group of lawmakers that looks at a bill first. Most bills never leave committee.
Public hearing
A meeting where anyone can speak to a committee about a bill, or send written comments.
Senate Joint Resolution 1
The session's calendar. Any bill not passed by its last voting day dies.
Official term: Failed to pass pursuant to SJR 1. More in the glossary
Legislative Reference Bureau
The Legislature's nonpartisan office that drafts bills and writes the summary at the top of each one.
Official term: LRB analysis. More in the glossary
Author
A lawmaker who formally puts a bill forward. The text itself is drafted by the Legislative Reference Bureau.
Official term: Author, coauthor. More in the glossary
Cost estimate
A state agency's estimate of what a bill would cost or save.
Official term: Fiscal estimate. More in the glossary
From the Wisconsin Legislature's official record, checked Sep 15, 2026. See the source
Committee
A small group of lawmakers that looks at a bill first. Most bills never leave committee.
Public hearing
A meeting where anyone can speak to a committee about a bill, or send written comments.
Senate Joint Resolution 1
The session's calendar. Any bill not passed by its last voting day dies.
Official term: Failed to pass pursuant to SJR 1
Legislative Reference Bureau
The Legislature's nonpartisan office that drafts bills and writes the summary at the top of each one.
Official term: LRB analysis
Cost estimate
A state agency's estimate of what a bill would cost or save.
Official term: Fiscal estimate