Released May 14, 2026. Senate Budget Sub 5 (Corrections, Public Safety, Judiciary, Labor) held its May Revise hearing May 20, 2026 with a staff recommendation to 'Hold Open' the Judicial Branch / DOJ item (unresolved into June conference); Sub 5 reconvenes May 28, 2026. Conference Committee mid-June; June 15 budget vote deadline. Primary source: Senate Sub 5 Part B agenda, May 20, 2026 (sbud.senate.ca.gov).

Open details https://www.gov.ca.gov/2026/05/14/may-revise/ May Revise FY2026-27 · Proposed

HIGHLegislation·Apr 15, 2026
Right to Counsel: Public Defender Funding and Workforce Resolution
Adopted by Assembly unanimously May 4, 2026 (with Capitol rally of 18 chief public defenders May 5); transmitted to Senate May 5; referred to Senate Rules; ordered to Senate third reading May 13, 2026; on Senate third-reading file for floor adoption week of May 18, 2026.
ACR 159 · Passed one chamberhttps://www.dailyjournal.com/articles/391186-california-lawmakers-push-funding-boost-as-public-defense-system-nears-breaking-point
HIGHLegislation·Feb 21, 2026
State Public Defender: County Public Defenders: Data Collection
Amended May 18, 2026; read second time and ordered to third reading May 19, 2026 — now on the Assembly Third Reading File (item 385, file dated May 26, 2026) awaiting a floor passage vote. Previously cleared Assembly Appropriations 11-0 off suspense May 14. Re-amplified by May 13 CalMatters investigation (Anat Rubin) syndicated across 9+ outlets.
AB 2605 · Passed one chamberhttps://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202520260AB2605
HIGHLegislation·Feb 21, 2026
Public Safety Services Support Fund (Prop 36 Implementation Funding)
Placed on Senate Appropriations suspense May 11, 2026; held under submission May 14, 2026 — effectively stalling for the session. Newsom's May 14 May Revise contained zero new dedicated Prop 36 implementation funding; administration position: 'Prop 36 is an unfunded mandate, use Prop 47 leftover.' Joint statement from California DAA, State Sheriffs Assn, and Chief Probation Officers attacking omission.
SB 926 · In committeehttps://legiscan.com/CA/text/SB926
CRITICALCapacity & budget·Apr 24, 2026·Statewide
Prop 36 Year One: ~40K Filings, 17% Treatment, 0.3% Successful Dismissal
Judicial Council Annual Prop 36 Court Implementation Report (covering 2025) shows California prosecutors filed nearly 40,000 charges under Prop 36 in its first year. Only 17% of felony drug cases resulted in treatment orders; just 0.3% ended in dismissal after successful treatment. Of those who entered treatment: ~80% had judgments imposed, only 20% succeeded. ~900 state prison commitments Jan 2025–Jan 2026; jail populations rose +2,600 statewide (Nov 2024 → Nov 2025), driven by 3,100 additional nonsentenced felony bookings. County variation extreme: Stanislaus files Prop 36 at 8x SF's per-capita rate. In Alameda, only 1% of Prop 36 cases involve drugs; 63% are theft. For PD/conflict-panel workload modeling, treat Prop 36 as a felony-overflow driver, not a treatment-pipeline driver.
StatewideSource
CRITICALCapacity & budget·Apr 23, 2026·Bay Area
Alameda PD Woods: Right to Counsel 'Effectively Dead' — Felony Filings +44% (2023→2025)
Alameda County Chief Public Defender Brendon Woods told KQED on April 23, 2026 that new felony cases jumped from 3,266 in 2023 to 4,708 in 2025 — a +44% two-year increase. Woods estimates the office would need 104 additional deputy public defenders to meet 2023 RAND National Public Defense Workload Study benchmarks. He attributes pressure to chronic underfunding, DA misdemeanor overcharging, and Prop 36 implementation, and called the constitutional right to counsel 'effectively dead' when judges can dictate defender workloads. Office is actively considering refusing new indigent cases imminently. ACBA's CAAP conflict panel is recruiting a Director role explicitly framed for 'periods of high charging and panel shortages.'
Alameda · +44% caseloadSource
CRITICALCapacity & budget·Apr 23, 2026·Statewide
National Day of Action for Public Defense — Apr 23, 2026
Public defenders across California and the nation participated in a National Day of Action for Public Defense on April 23, 2026 — called by Alameda PD Brendon Woods after the Raju contempt order. Defenders, staff, and allies wore black in court, jails, and public settings to mark a 'constitutional breaking point: when public defenders are punished for refusing unconstitutional workloads, the right to counsel becomes a right in name only.' Yolo County PD Tracie Olson and her office participated; multiple other CA offices joined. Visibility action — not a work stoppage — but a clear signal that the Raju contempt order has galvanized the workforce statewide.
StatewideSource
CRITICALCapacity & budget·Apr 21, 2026·Statewide
AB 2605 (Arambula/Schultz) — Statewide PD Caseload Reporting — Clears Public Safety
California AB 2605, authored by Assembly Member Joaquin Arambula with Nick Schultz as coauthor, passed the Assembly Public Safety Committee on April 21, 2026 (cleared Local Government on April 15). The bill would require counties to report public defender systems, case-assignment methods, budget, staffed positions, and case counts to the State Public Defender every two years beginning January 1, 2029. OSPD will compile and publish a statewide summary report. Hearing testimony cited counties handling 'well over 400 to 500 cases' per attorney; 24 California counties still use flat-fee contracts. Closes the most-cited data gap in California indigent defense.
StatewideSource
CRITICALCapacity & budget·Apr 10, 2026·Bay Area
First DCA Stays Raju $26K Sanction Twice (Apr 8 + Apr 10) — Writ Premature, PD Need Not Pay
California's First District Court of Appeal halted enforcement of the $26,000 contempt sanction against SF Public Defender Mano Raju in two appellate actions: a stay on April 8, 2026, and a second action on April 10 (the day payment was due) after the Superior Court denied the PD's writ challenges. The Court of Appeal denied the writ petition without prejudice as premature, holding Raju must first exhaust his writ remedy in the superior court. Sanctions are not collectible while the stay holds. Raju represented by BraunHagey & Borden LLP. The novel workload-limits-as-Sixth-Amendment-defense question remains live statewide.
San FranciscoSource
HIGHPolicy·May 18, 2026·Statewide
Defender Bills on Floor This Week: ACR 159 Senate Adoption (Item 342) + AB 2605 Assembly Floor (Item 452)
Two of the four legislative pillars of the California indigent-defense crisis response are on floor calendars in their second chambers the week of May 18, 2026. ACR 159 (Kalra) is Item 342 on the Senate third-reading file, advanced out of Senate Rules and ordered to third reading May 13, 2026; bicameral chamber-wide statement of indigent-defense crisis becomes complete on Senate adoption. AB 2605 (Arambula/Schultz) is Item 452 on the Assembly second-reading file after clearing Approps 11-0 off May 14 suspense; first statewide caseload-reporting requirement (effective 2029 if signed). Together they constitute the political record the June Budget Conference Committee can cite when negotiating the unfunded CPDA $15M/yr × 3yr ask. Note correction: there is NO May 23 Senate Appropriations hearing — the May 14 suspense was the load-bearing date for the spring cycle; AB 690 (flat-fee ban) remains held under submission from Aug 29, 2025 and saw no procedural action this window.
leginfo (CA Legislature daily files)
HIGHPolicy·May 15, 2026·Statewide
SB 524 Draft One AI-Police-Report Regime Live Since Jan 1, 2026 — Defense Discovery Motion Gap Open
Five months into SB 524's January 1, 2026 effective date, California police agencies using Axon Draft One or comparable generative-AI tools must attach per-page disclosures, retain the initial AI draft for the life of the report, and maintain an audit trail linking the draft to source body-worn-camera audio. CPDA was the bill sponsor. In practice, defense counsel are not automatically receiving the AI draft or audit trail — only the final report and BWC. EFF and CPDA are pressing for discovery production; San Diego Police banned generative AI in reports rather than comply, while other CA agencies (LAPD, SFPD, OPD) vary. Direct opportunity for every CA PD office and conflict panel attorney: file standing-order motions for SB 524 draft + audit-trail production in every case where a Draft One-style tool was used, and challenge any final report whose underlying AI draft was destroyed or never produced. Brady/due-process exposure exists in every jurisdiction. Pairs with CPDA's new 5-session 'AI for Indigent Defense: Sword and Shield' training (see mi-068).
EFF + KQED + CBS 8 San Diego