AB 560

Under current law, a circuit court generally may allow the use of

videoconferencing technology during pretrial, trial or fact-finding, or post-trial

proceedings, subject to certain technical standards and criteria. However, current

law provides that a defendant in a criminal case (defendant) or a respondent in

certain civil actions that could result in loss of liberty or fundamental rights with

respect to the respondent's children (respondent) is entitled to be physically present

in the courtroom during his or her trial and at his or her sentencing or other

dispositional hearing. Currently, if a defendant or respondent objects to the use of

videoconferencing technology regarding a proceeding that the defendant or

respondent has a right to attend in person, the court must sustain the objection. If

a defendant or respondent objects to the use of videoconferencing technology

regarding any other proceeding, current law allows the court to exercise its

discretion in determining the objection.

This bill provides that the court is only required to sustain an objection to the

use of videoconferencing technology that is made by a defendant, but not by a

respondent, regarding a proceeding the defendant is entitled to attend in person.

Under the bill, the court may exercise its discretion in determining any objection by

a respondent to the use of videoconferencing technology regarding any proceeding,

even if the respondent is entitled to attend the proceeding in person.