Skip to content

Bills · 2017-2018 Regular Session

SB 369

Died at session end Official bill text Atom feed

Relating to: the Uniform Recognition and Enforcement of Canadian Domestic Violence Protection Orders Act and providing a criminal penalty.

Children — Abuse and neglect Court — Procedure International relations Police Uniform legislation Women Wood county

  1. Introduced, stopped here
  2. Passes Senate, not reached
  3. Passes Assembly, not reached
  4. Governor signs, not reached
  5. Law, not reached

Unfamiliar terms? Glossary

What this bill does

Plain-language analysis by the nonpartisan Legislative Reference Bureau

This bill adopts the Uniform Recognition and Enforcement of Canadian

Domestic Violence Protection Orders Act, approved and recommended by the

National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws in 2015. This bill

requires the courts of this state to recognize and enforce civil domestic violence

protection orders issued by Canadian courts.

Current law incorporates the Uniform Interstate Enforcement of Domestic

Violence Protection Orders Act, which allows recognition and enforcement of

domestic violence protection orders from other states. This bill expands recognition

to civil domestic protection orders issued by Canadian courts. The bill does not

address recognition of Canadian criminal orders or custody issues. Under this bill,

a law enforcement officer or tribunal can recognize and enforce a civil order issued

by a Canadian court that requires no direct or indirect contact with an individual

protected by a Canadian domestic violence protection order. A Canadian domestic

violence protection order is defined in the bill to mean a judgment or part of a

judgment or order issued in a civil proceeding by a court of Canada that relates to

domestic violence and prohibits a person from 1) being in physical proximity to or

following a protected individual; 2) directly or indirectly contacting or

communicating with a protected individual; 3) being within a certain distance of a

place or location associated with a protected individual; or 4) molesting, annoying,

harassing, or engaging in threatening conduct directed at a protected individual.

The bill provides uniform procedures for enforcement of Canadian domestic

violence protection orders. Under the bill, law enforcement officers must determine

whether there is probable cause to believe that a valid order exists and has been

violated. The bill provides that if a protected individual can provide direct proof of

the existence of a facially valid order, for example, by presenting a paper copy or

accessing an electronic registry, the copy or registry conclusively establishes

probable cause. However, if there is no such direct proof, the bill allows law

enforcement to consider other information and make a determination whether there

is probable cause to believe that a valid protection order exists and has been violated.

If the officer determines that the order cannot be enforced because the person against

whom the order was issued has not received appropriate notice, the officer is required

to provide notice to the protected individual and then make a reasonable effort to

notify the person against whom the order was issued and allow that person an

opportunity to comply with the order.

A person against whom an order is enforced will have sufficient opportunity to

demonstrate that the order is invalid if and when the case is brought before the

enforcing tribunal. Under the bill, a tribunal, defined in the bill as a court, agency,

or other entity authorized to establish, enforce, or modify a domestic protection order,

may issue an order to enforce or refusing to enforce a Canadian domestic violence

protection order following the procedures set forth in current law for enforcement of

Sponsors

Introduced by: Johnson (D) , L. Taylor (D) , Olsen (R) , Risser (D) , Wanggaard (R)

19 cosponsors

Anderson (D) , Ballweg (R) , Berceau (D) , Brandtjen (R) , Brostoff (D) , Considine (D) , Fields (D) , Genrich (D) , Jacque (R) , Kulp (R) , Milroy (D) , Mursau (R) , Shankland (D) , Spiros (R) , Spreitzer (D) , Stuck (D) , Subeck (D) , Tusler (R) , Zepnick (D)

Votes

Senate: Report passage recommended by Committee on Judiciary and Public Safety, Ayes 5, Noes 0

Passed 5–0 Oct 24, 2017 official source full page

No individual roll call was recorded for this vote. Committee votes and some older sessions record totals only.

Full history

  1. Aug 3, 2017 · Senate

    Introduced by Senators Risser, Wanggaard, Johnson, Olsen and L. Taylor; cosponsored by Representatives Tusler, Stuck, Anderson, Ballweg, Brandtjen, Berceau, Brostoff, Considine, Fields, Genrich, Jacque, Kulp, Milroy, Mursau, Spiros, Spreitzer, Subeck and Zepnick

  2. Aug 3, 2017 · Senate

    Read first time and referred to Committee on Judiciary and Public Safety

  3. Oct 19, 2017 · Senate

    Public hearing held

  4. Oct 24, 2017 · Senate

    Executive action taken

  5. Oct 24, 2017 · Senate

    Report passage recommended by Committee on Judiciary and Public Safety, Ayes 5, Noes 0

  6. Oct 24, 2017 · Senate

    Available for scheduling

  7. Nov 9, 2017 · Senate

    Representative Shankland added as a cosponsor

  8. Mar 28, 2018 · Senate

    Failed to pass pursuant to Senate Joint Resolution 1