18
The intent was to preclude using the defense when the eviction was based on reasons
other than domestic violence, and to allow a tenant-victim to defend against grounds for actions
which relied on domestic violence acts to prove an unlawful detainer.
Required Documentation
For a tenant to be allowed to use the domestic violence defense, the statute requires that
acts of domestic violence “have been documented.” (§ 1161.3, subd. (a)(1).) In addition to
stating acts can be documented by a restraining or protective order (§ 1161.3, subd. (a)(1)(A)),
and by “[d]ocumentation from a qualified third party based on information received by that
third party while acting in [the party’s] professional capacity” (§ 1161.3, subd. (a)(1)(C)), a
tenant can provide, “[a] copy of a written report, written within the last 180 days, by a peace
officer employed by a state or local law enforcement agency acting in his or her official
capacity, stating that the tenant . . . has filed a report alleging that he or she . . . is a victim of
domestic violence . . . .” (§ 1161.3, subd. (a)(1)(B)).
We quickly dispense with the trial court’s reason to bar the domestic violence defense
due to Oscar’s acts because the May 5 and June 12 documents were “notices only” and “not
police reports.” The court appeared to distinguish between a report by a law enforcement
officer that memorializes the officer’s efforts in interviewing witnesses and investigating the
case, and when a report only narrates reporting parties “making the report, to let them obtain a
police report.” The May 5 document (as did the June 12 one which fell outside the pertinent
period and thus could not be used to support the defense) consisted of a single page stating, at
the top, “Los Angeles Police Department INVESTIGATIVE REPORT” (capitalization in
original), and documented a police officer going to the apartment complex and taking a report
based on what defendant said and then both the officer and defendant signing the report.
Contrary to the court’s conclusion, the plain words of the statute only require “a written report”
by a peace officer, and both an initial report based on a victim’s statements and a report
narrating further investigative efforts fit this requirement.
As to the court’s reason for precluding the defense, that “there is insufficient descriptive
information” in the report, it is true that neither Oscar nor any other perpetrator is named, and