California refines behavioral crisis transport and law enforcement access
Oct 4, 2026 edition · GC-2026-0236 · Published 2026-10-04 · Version 2 · Final
AB 2405 and AB 2318 address different parts of crisis response: appropriate transport destinations and safe, reasonable access to medical evaluation. The enacted provisions preserve local agreements and custody exceptions and assign the conditional 72-hour denial-documentation duty to law enforcement.
What happened
California enacted AB 2405 on September 30, adding Welfare and Institutions Code section 5150.3 under the ordinary January 1, 2027 effective-date rule. A peace officer transporting a person for a section 5150 assessment must use the closest appropriate designated facility, geographically or by travel time, or the closest appropriate emergency department when that is the appropriate destination. The officer may consider an affirmatively expressed patient preference if it does not unreasonably delay care or excessively deviate from the closest appropriate destination. Written local behavioral-health diversion, transportation and destination policies or agreements remain available, and the section excludes CDCR and California Correctional Health Care Services.
AB 2318, enacted September 29, separately adds Penal Code section 832.11. It prohibits law enforcement from denying, delaying, obstructing or failing to facilitate medical access for a person under its control when access is safe and reasonable and a qualified professional has been requested or is present and willing to care. It excludes specified CDCR custody. When a present and willing professional is denied or delayed, law enforcement must document the basis within 72 hours to the extent doing so does not compromise an ongoing investigation or officer safety, including the narrative and available evidence, and provide the report to the designated oversight route. This is an officer documentation duty, not a hospital’s 72-hour filing rule.
Scope and timing
- Authority status
- Final
- Applicability
- Potentially applicable
- Audience
- Health systems, Provider networks, Health-tech
- Jurisdiction
- California
Why it matters
Receiving facilities and outreach teams need a shared understanding of destination suitability, patient preference and clinician access. The two laws govern separate decisions and do not make every local diversion arrangement invalid or assign officer reporting to hospital staff.
Recommended action
Prepare coordinated protocols with law enforcement and local behavioral-health partners before January 2027. Review written destination agreements, safe access escalation and receiving-facility capabilities. Document clinical coordination while keeping the officer’s conditional 72-hour reporting duty and custody exceptions distinct.
Sources
- AB2405 enacted final textOfficial · California Legislature · 2026-09-30 · Source review 2026-10-05
- AB2318 enacted final textOfficial · California Legislature · 2026-09-29 · Source review 2026-10-05
- Official Assembly 2023-24 Constitution, Article IV section 8Official · California Legislature · Source review 2026-10-14
Complete edition and supplemental material
This finding in the complete approved report →Regulatory horizons, CIA trends and implementation trackers remain in the full report.
Read the entire Compliance Sweep report →