Page 10 - NCISS_Your_Advocate_March_Spring_2023

Legislative Update from NCISS Legislative Committee and Lobbyit

State Legislation

California
Title 1.81.5 Sealing Records & Data Scrubbing (shared by Kelly Cory – see related articles below)
We had a case in California where someone did just that; they used the new California legislation to scrub all of their
California data from databases. So when we were trying to investigate them, starting with a TLO report for instance,
they were a complete ghost. We did find their out of state information but there were obvious holes in the data where
they removed anything California related. This will start being an issue for CA investigations, but if companies like this
start getting traction, this may become a much bigger issue.

Colorado (shared by Ryan Johnston – see related articles below)
Be Award of Investigative Consequences of Sealed Records
The Colorado legislature recently made it very easy to seal court records and apparently this is already happening. We
were recently searching for a record that our client was aware of, but it was not showing up in any searches. In talking to
our PPIAC expert on background checks, Erica Davis, she informed us that it is likely that is what has happened.

If you are doing a general background search, you need to know that items might not show up for this reason and
express that to your clients. If you are looking for a specific incident (as we were) and don't find it, this could be the
reason.

Indiana (shared by Kim Ridding with INspi and IAPI)
SB 83 – GPS Tracking
Unlawful tracking of another individual. Provides that a person who, with the intent to track an individual, and without
the individual's knowledge, places a tracking device on an individual or the individual's property commits remote
criminal tracking, a Class C misdemeanor. Provides certain exceptions. Increases the penalty to a Class A misdemeanor if
the person is the subject of a protective order issued on behalf of the individual. Establishes a sentence enhancement if
a person uses a tracking device to commit or facilitate the commission of a felony.

SB 161- Unlawful Use of a Tracking Device
This bill passed the full Senate on 2/28/2023 with no exemption for private investigators. Jack Sandlin, David Shelton,
and I worked on an exemption. At Jack's request, I provided language from several States that have an exemption for
private investigators. There was an amendment put forward at the Committee hearing but it did not pass the Senate
committee. Chris Ridding, David Shelton, and I attended but there were no other private investigators present.
This bill has been referred to the House Committee on Courts and Criminal Code but has not yet been placed on the
https://iga.in.gov/legislative/2023/bills/senate/161#document-5dfdc5e2

Unlawful use of a tracking device. Adds a prohibition against using a tracking device to the list of conditions a court may
impose when issuing a protection order. Increases the penalty for stalking to a Level 5 felony if the offense is committed
by means of a tracking device. Provides that a person who, with the intent to track an individual, and without the
individual's knowledge, places a tracking device on an individual or the individual's property commits remote criminal
tracking, a Level 6 felony, unless certain exceptions apply. Makes it a Level 5 felony if a person who is the subject of a
protective order uses a tracking device to track the person protected by the protective order. Establishes sentence
enhancement if a person uses a tracking device to commit or facilitate the commission of a crime. There are other Bills
that may affect the private investigator profession and licensing. Please review these bills as it is up to all of us to follow
and determine if they are of concern to us.

SB 5-Consumer Data Protection
Consumer data protection. Establishes a new article in the Indiana Code concerning consumer data protection, to take
effect January 1, 2026. Sets forth the following within the new article: (1) Definitions of various terms that apply
throughout the article. (2) Exemptions from the bill's requirements concerning the responsibilities of controllers of

10