SACRAMENTO — Governor Gavin Newsom this week signed new legislation aimed at protecting young people facing criminal allegations by limiting how law enforcement uses undercover agents in certain situations. The new law, Assembly Bill 1905, specifically prohibits law enforcement agencies from targeting individuals under the age of 26 in “Perkins operations” if they are suspected of having committed a crime when they were 17 years old or younger. An exception is made when authorities believe someone’s life could be in danger.
Authored by Democratic Assemblymember Nick Schultz of Burbank, the bill restricts operations where undercover agents pose as incarcerated people to elicit incriminating statements from suspects. The law will take effect on January 1.
District attorneys statewide have described Perkins operations as a powerful investigative tool for solving crimes. However, the practice has drawn increasing scrutiny from judges, lawmakers, and criminal defense attorneys. Critics argue that these operations can be coercive, risk false confessions, and disproportionately target Black and Latino individuals.
An analysis of cases in Santa Clara, Los Angeles, and San Diego counties revealed that these operations have included tactics such as presenting false evidence, utilizing jail cells outfitted with recording devices, and offering cash payments of up to $3,000 per day to undercover operatives, also known as Perkins agents.
Assemblymember Schultz, a former prosecutor, stated that the law will "do so much to protect our kids" from deceitful tactics. He expressed hope that the legislation would prompt further discussion and encourage future lawmakers to evaluate whether Perkins operations should be permitted against any individuals, regardless of age.
Details from various cases show that these agents are often described in court filings as older and physically larger than their targets, frequently presenting themselves as experienced gang members with histories of violence. In some instances, as many as five agents were placed in a cell with a single person.
Public defender Jessica Melikian remarked that children "should have always been protected from these operations." Melikian cited instances where Perkins agents allegedly encouraged her clients to waive their Miranda rights, discouraged them from asking for an attorney, and threatened them with violence if they did not confess to an alleged crime. She emphasized that the desired outcome of protecting youth from coercive tactics and deception is to ensure that any statements they make are truthful and fair.
Ten cases are currently before the California Supreme Court, where individuals targeted in Perkins operations are challenging their convictions. These cases include defendants who have consistently maintained their innocence. Among these defendants, four are Hispanic, four are Black, and two are White. The youngest individual was 18 at the time of the Perkins operation.
Groups including the California State Sheriffs’ Association and the Los Angeles County District Attorney’s Office formally opposed the legislation, arguing that it limits their investigative tools. The bill passed mostly along party lines, with most Democrats voting in favor, while Republicans and two Democratic state senators voted against it.
Democratic lawmakers who supported the bill underscored that children in custody are particularly vulnerable to falsely confessing or making unreliable statements during custodial interrogations. This new law builds on previous efforts to protect minors from law enforcement tactics involving trickery or deceit.
In 2017, California mandated that individuals under age 16 consult with an attorney before waiving their Miranda rights while in custody. Three years later, lawmakers raised this age to 17 years or younger. Further protections were enacted in 2022, when the state banned law enforcement from employing deceptive tactics on individuals under age 18 during a custodial interrogation. However, these past measures did not explicitly cover Perkins operations because a 1990 U.S. Supreme Court ruling held that such operations are not technically custodial interrogations. The new law is intended to close this specific gap in protection for young people.