SB1220 amends Penal Code section 29805 to make it a crime for people convicted of many enumerated misdemeanor offenses to own, purchase, receive, or possess a firearm within a specified period (generally 10 years after conviction). The measure also treats possession by someone with knowledge of an outstanding warrant for a listed misdemeanor as a separate offense and phases in additional misdemeanor categories with effective dates through 2027.
The bill adds a predictable penalty (up to one year county jail or state prison, and a fine up to $1,000), requires courts to notify the Department of Justice on DOJ-prescribed forms, and keeps existing statutory relief pathways intact (Sections 29855 and 29860). For courts, prosecutors, defense counsel, and the DOJ, SB1220 creates new compliance, reporting, and screening responsibilities and expands the pool of people subject to firearms disabilities for a limited period after conviction.
At a Glance
What It Does
SB1220 makes it a public offense for individuals convicted of specified misdemeanors to possess, buy, receive, or control a firearm within a 10‑year window (or from specific effective dates tied to groups of offenses). It separately criminalizes firearm possession by a person who knows they have an outstanding warrant for a listed misdemeanor.
Who It Affects
The law applies to people with recent convictions for the enumerated misdemeanors and to anyone who knowingly possesses a firearm while subject to an outstanding warrant for those misdemeanors. Courts, county jails, prosecutors, defense attorneys, and the California Department of Justice will need to adjust intake, recordkeeping, and notification practices.
Why It Matters
SB1220 shifts several misdemeanor convictions from being collateral to directly disqualifying for firearm possession for a fixed period, creating operational requirements for criminal justice actors and expanding enforcement opportunities for prosecutors while preserving existing relief mechanisms.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
SB1220 rewrites how California treats firearm possession after specified misdemeanor convictions. Instead of relying on a patchwork of disability rules, the bill specifies that anyone convicted of the enumerated misdemeanors who, within a defined period (generally ten years), owns, purchases, receives, or has a firearm in their custody or control commits a public offense.
The statute sets uniform penalties and frames the disability as time‑limited rather than permanent, though the bill preserves existing statutes that allow courts to reduce, eliminate, or condition the prohibition.
The bill does not stop at convictions. It also creates an offense for a person who knows they have an outstanding warrant for one of the listed misdemeanors and who possesses a firearm.
That clause targets individuals who may evade final conviction but remain the subject of active enforcement actions and creates an evidentiary challenge because it requires proof the person knew about the warrant.SB1220 phases new misdemeanor categories into the prohibition on a rolling schedule: certain offenses are targeted for convictions occurring on or after January 1, 2019, 2020, 2023, 2024, 2025, 2026, and 2027, rather than all taking effect the same day. This creates staggered coverage that can catch people whose convictions fall after those dates.
The statute instructs courts to notify the Department of Justice using DOJ forms the names of persons subject to the section, integrating court records with the state’s firearms database and background‑check infrastructure.Finally, SB1220 retains cross‑references to Sections 29855 and 29860, which provide the statutory mechanism for courts to modify or remove firearms disabilities. That preserves judicial discretion and a relief pathway, but it also places pressure on court calendars and the DOJ’s processes because notification and record updates are required when a relief application succeeds.
The Five Things You Need to Know
SB1220 makes firearm possession, purchase, receipt, or control a crime for people convicted of a long list of enumerated misdemeanors when it occurs within 10 years of conviction (unless another effective date is specified for a subgroup).
The bill separately criminalizes firearm possession by a person who has knowledge of an outstanding warrant for any listed misdemeanor (proof of 'knowledge' is required).
Penalties are uniform: up to one year in county jail or imprisonment in state prison, a fine up to $1,000, or both.
The statute phases in additional categories of misdemeanors with conviction-date thresholds (groups with effective dates in 2019, 2020, 2023, 2024, 2025, 2026, and 2027), expanding the scope incrementally.
Courts must notify the California Department of Justice on DOJ-prescribed forms when a person becomes subject to the prohibition; relief remains available under Sections 29855 and 29860.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Core 10-year firearms disability for enumerated misdemeanors
This subsection establishes the main rule: a person convicted of the listed misdemeanors who owns, purchases, receives, or has a firearm in their possession or control within 10 years of the conviction commits a public offense. Practically, this converts a wide set of misdemeanor convictions into time‑limited firearms disabilities and supplies a clear look‑back window that prosecutors and background‑check systems can apply.
Outstanding warrant plus knowledge creates an offense
This provision makes it a crime for anyone who knows they have an outstanding warrant for a listed misdemeanor to possess a firearm. The statute raises two operational issues: (1) how prosecutors prove the defendant's actual knowledge of the warrant, and (2) how courts and defense counsel will document or contest that element. It intentionally targets persons who are subject to active enforcement but not yet convicted.
Phased expansion: misdemeanor groups and effective dates
Instead of a single effective list date, the bill phases in additional categories by tying subsets of misdemeanors to conviction‑date thresholds (for example, convictions on or after Jan 1, 2019; Jan 1, 2020; Jan 1, 2023; Jan 1, 2024; Jan 1, 2025; Jan 1, 2026; and Jan 1, 2027). That approach pushes the disability forward in time for different offense classes and creates a rolling coverage window. The practical effect is that two people with the same misdemeanor conviction could face different firearms rights depending on exactly when they were convicted.
Penalty structure and limited exceptions
The bill standardizes punishment for violations of the section: up to one year in county jail or possible state prison time, with fines capped at $1,000. Subsection language also points readers to statutory exceptions and relief mechanisms found in Sections 29855 and 29860, signaling that the legislature intends to preserve judicial discretion to alter or remove the disability in individual cases.
Court notification to DOJ and interaction with relief statutes
The statute requires the court to notify the Department of Justice on forms the DOJ prescribes when someone becomes subject to the prohibition. That creates a procedural pipeline: conviction or qualifying event → court notifies DOJ → DOJ updates records used for background checks. Because the text explicitly preserves Sections 29855 and 29860, courts must also manage petitions to reduce or remove the prohibition and ensure DOJ records reflect any relief granted.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on Criminal Justice across all five countries.
Explore Criminal Justice in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- Victims and survivors of violence: By expanding the range of convictions that trigger a firearms disability and by criminalizing possession with an outstanding warrant, the bill aims to reduce the likelihood that people with recent violent or dangerous misdemeanors will legally or illegally access firearms.
- Prosecutors and law enforcement: The statute gives prosecutors a clearer statutory basis to charge firearm possession tied to recent misdemeanors and provides law enforcement with a defined look‑back window to evaluate firearm‑related risk.
- Public-safety policymakers and regulators: DOJ will receive more structured notification of newly disqualified persons, improving the state’s ability to keep background‑check databases current and to measure the scope of firearm‑disqualifying convictions.
Who Bears the Cost
- Individuals with qualifying misdemeanor convictions: People convicted of listed misdemeanors face a new, time‑limited loss of firearm rights and potential criminal exposure if they possess firearms during the disability period, even if their offenses were nonviolent or remote in nature.
- County courts and clerks: Courts must collect conviction data, manage petitions under Sections 29855/29860, and submit DOJ‑prescribed notifications—work that increases administrative burdens without funding in the bill text.
- California Department of Justice: DOJ must process court notifications, update firearms records used for background checks, and coordinate forms and procedures, increasing operational workload and requiring reliable data feeds from many courts.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The bill balances public safety—reducing firearm access by people with recent problematic misdemeanor convictions—against the risks of broad, time‑limited collateral consequences for individuals and the administrative burdens on courts and DOJ; it answers the question of scope by expanding prohibitions, but doing so creates difficult implementation and proportionality trade‑offs without new funding or detailed procedural rules.
The statute trades clarity for complexity. A uniform 10‑year look‑back window simplifies some enforcement decisions, but the phased, conviction‑date‑based additions create uneven application across similarly situated defendants and complicate automated record checks.
Courts and DOJ must reconcile conviction dates, out‑of‑state records, juvenile adjudications, and sealing or expungement events to determine whether a person is currently disqualified. The bill’s outstanding‑warrant provision hinges on proving 'knowledge' of a warrant, an element that may be difficult to establish and that invites evidentiary disputes.
Operationally, the requirement that courts notify the DOJ on specified forms improves data flow in theory but places additional workload on understaffed clerks and requires reliable standards for what triggers notification. Relief remains available under Sections 29855 and 29860, but those processes are resource‑intensive; if they are not funded or streamlined, eligible individuals may face long waits to restore rights.
Finally, the statute expands disabilities into misdemeanor territory that can include non‑violent or property‑related offenses, raising constitutional and proportionality questions that could prompt legal challenges and demand careful tailoring in enforcement.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.