WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

AB 622

Relating to: various changes to the unemployment insurance law. (FE)

2025-2026 Regular Session Introduced by Clint Anderson and 23 co-sponsors

AB 622 requires applying custody credits when setting the minimum time before parole for life-sentenced prisoners and broadens the board’s consideration of pre-parole reports.

Fiscal estimate received
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · AB 622

AB 622 — Summary (Kalra)

Relating to parole: minimum eligible date (Penal Code §3046)
Introduced: February 13, 2025. Coauthors added: Representatives Johnson and Sinicki (Nov. 11, 2025).

Purpose / Intent

AB 622 clarifies and modifies how minimum parole eligibility dates are set for persons serving life sentences. It (1) requires application of constitutionally authorized custody credits when calculating the minimum term or minimum period of confinement for life-sentenced prisoners, and (2) expands which pre‑parole submissions the Board of Parole Hearings must consider.

Key provisions

  • Amends Penal Code section 3046.
  • Parole eligibility baseline retained: an inmate serving a life sentence is not eligible for parole until they have served the greater of (a) at least 7 calendar years, or (b) any other minimum term or minimum period of confinement established by law.
  • Consecutive life terms: where multiple life sentences run consecutively (Pen. Code §669), the inmate must serve the applicable terms on each consecutive sentence before parole eligibility.
  • Exceptions preserved: inmates found suitable via youth‑offender parole hearings (§3051) or elderly parole hearings (§3055) remain eligible regardless of how the board previously set release dates.
  • Board of Parole Hearings duties expanded: when considering parole, the board must consider all statements/recommendations submitted by the judge, district attorney, and sheriff and additionally any reports filed by the probation officer (pursuant to §1203.01 or in response to §3042 notices). The board must note on its order that these documents were considered.
  • Credits applied to minimum term: when setting the minimum term/period of confinement for life sentences, the Secretary of the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) must apply all applicable custody credits authorized under the Secretary’s constitutional authority (Article I, §32(b) — e.g., credits for good behavior, approved rehabilitative or educational achievements).

Who is affected

  • Persons imprisoned under life sentences in California (including those serving consecutive life terms).
  • CDCR and the Secretary (must apply applicable constitutional credits when setting minimum confinement periods).
  • Board of Parole Hearings (expanded consideration duties).
  • Probation officers (their reports are explicitly required to be considered).
  • Victims, prosecutors, judges, sheriffs, and victim‑advocate stakeholders (whose prior submissions remain part of the record).

Procedural / timeline notes

  • Introduced: Feb 13, 2025.
  • Referred to committees (Public Safety; later Appropriations). Committee approvals occurred in April 2025; read second and third times in April–May 2025. On May 22, 2025 the bill was read third time, amended, and re‑referred to Rules pursuant to Assembly Rule 77.2.
  • Digest key: Majority vote; no appropriation; referred to fiscal committee (fiscal committee: YES); local program: NO.
  • Author listed as Kalra; coauthors Johnson and Sinicki added Nov. 11, 2025.

Potential impacts

  • Parole eligibility: applying constitutional credits could reduce the minimum period before parole consideration for some persons serving life terms, potentially increasing the number eligible for parole earlier than under prior statutory practices that excluded certain credits.
  • Administrative: CDCR must ensure application of appropriate credit calculations to life‑term minimums; Parole Board procedures updated to ensure probation reports are solicited/considered and recorded.
  • Fiscal/legal: the bill was reviewed by the fiscal committee (potential fiscal implications), though it contains no appropriation. Changes could result in workload shifts for CDCR, the Parole Board, and probation departments and may prompt legal interpretation regarding interplay with existing statutory credit exclusions for certain murder convictions.

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.