(a)Notwithstanding the provisions of this chapter, and in accordance with federal law, upon the request of a victim of domestic violence who is seeking a domestic violence restraining order, a judge issuing the order may include a provision in the order that permits the victim to record any prohibited communication made to him or her by the perpetrator.
(b)Notwithstanding the provisions of this chapter, and in accordance with federal law, a victim of domestic violence who is seeking a domestic violence restraining order from a court, and who reasonably believes that a confidential communication made to him or her by the perpetrator may contain
evidence germane to that restraining order, may record that communication for the exclusive purpose and use of providing that evidence to the court.
(c)The Judicial Council shall amend its domestic violence prevention application and order forms to incorporate the provisions of this section.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
4
cases (
4 in the last 5 years), 2022–2026 · leading case:
Malinowski v. Martin (Cal. Ct. App. 2024).
Malinowski v. Martin (Cal. Ct. App. 2024).
· cites it 2× “” As indicated, these statutes require a reasonable belief the recordings will result in evidence that is “germane” to an anticipated DVRO9 (Pen. Code, § 633.6, subd. (b)) or that “relate[s]” to felony domestic violence (Pen.”
Breja v. Breja CA1/5 (Cal. Ct. App. 2023).
“(Pen. Code, § 633.6, subd. (b).) Under those circumstances, the victim may record a confidential communication with the perpetrator to use in court.”
Andrea M. v. Paul M. CA2/3 (Cal. Ct. App. 2026).
“” (Pen. Code, § 633.6, subd. (b).) Below, Andrea testified that she made the recordings because knew that she “at some point, might need to report [Paul] for child abuse.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.