LO
ConstraintCognitive automation2013-01-01
Only limited civil, misdemeanor and infraction cases may be electronically recorded in California when no official reporter is available; recording is barred otherwise
Court reporteroccupation page →
Event date / reported
2013-01-01
Evidence stage
ConstraintFailure, rollback, regulation or cost is suppressing adoption. Can lower an assessment or widen its uncertainty.
Tasks this bears on
Recording court proceedings
Capturing every word of a hearing as it happens.
Automating✓ Evidence-backed
Where this applies
California. The statute says that if an official reporter is unavailable, a court may order that a limited civil, misdemeanor or infraction case be electronically recorded, and that a court shall not expend funds for or use electronic recording to make an unofficial record or to make the official record in circumstances not authorised by the section. It keeps the stenographic record in other case types; it is one state's law.
What this means
In the largest US state, the law — not the technology — keeps a person making the record in most case types.
What it does not yet show
One state's law; courts facing shortages sometimes have no record at all rather than a recording.
What you can check
Open California Government Code section 69957 and find "shall not expend funds for or use electronic recording technology".
Does it change the assessment?
No. The impact index is never moved by a single event. Nor did this record change a layer: all 1 linked judgement above already rested on earlier evidence. This one adds to them.
Source
California Government Code section 69957 (amended by Stats. 2012, Ch. 170, Sec. 1 (AB 2657), effective January 1, 2013) · verified 2026-09-30 · Claude (VOLO agent) · interpreted 2026-09-30 · Claude (VOLO agent)
Primary source — published by the party that did this, or the authority of record. No co-signature needed.