Dangerous Dog Designations FAQ

Under California Food and Agricultural Code Section 31602, a dog is considered potentially dangerous if it meets any of three criteria. First, if the dog, when unprovoked, on two separate occasions within a 36-month period, engages in behavior that requires a defensive action by a person to prevent bodily injury when the person and dog are off the owner's property. Second, if the dog, when unprovoked, bites a person causing a less severe injury than a severe injury as defined in the code.

Third, if the dog, when unprovoked, on two separate occasions within a 36-month period, has killed, seriously bitten, inflicted injury, or otherwise caused injury attacking a domestic animal off the owner's property. The key elements are that the behavior must be unprovoked and must represent a genuine threat requiring defensive action or resulting in actual injury. Simple barking, growling, or minor aggressive displays without more would typically not qualify. Local animal control agencies are responsible for investigating complaints and initiating the designation process.

California Food and Agricultural Code Section 31603 defines a vicious dog as one that meets more serious criteria than a potentially dangerous dog. A dog is vicious if, when unprovoked, in an aggressive manner, inflicts severe injury on or kills a human being. Severe injury is specifically defined in Section 31604 as any physical injury to a human being that results in muscle tears or disfiguring lacerations or requires multiple sutures or corrective or cosmetic surgery.

A dog is also vicious if it was previously designated as potentially dangerous, and the owner failed to meet any of the conditions for keeping a potentially dangerous dog, and the dog engages in behavior that would have resulted in another potentially dangerous designation. The vicious designation carries much more serious consequences than the potentially dangerous designation, including mandatory court hearings, stricter containment requirements, and the possibility of euthanasia. The distinction between potentially dangerous and vicious turns primarily on the severity of the injury inflicted.

The dangerous dog hearing process in California begins when animal control files a petition with the court or local hearing authority seeking a potentially dangerous or vicious dog determination. The owner must receive written notice of the hearing, which must be mailed at least 10 business days before the hearing date. For vicious dog determinations, the hearing must be conducted by a court or local administrative hearing officer.

The notice must specify the behaviors that form the basis for the designation, the date, time, and location of the hearing, and the owner's rights. At the hearing, both animal control and the dog owner may present evidence, call witnesses, and make arguments. The standard of proof is preponderance of the evidence, meaning more likely than not. Evidence typically includes bite reports, medical records, witness statements, photographs, veterinary assessments of the dog's temperament, and the dog's prior history. The owner has the right to be represented by an attorney and cross-examine witnesses.

Once a dog is designated as potentially dangerous under California Food and Agricultural Code Section 31641, the owner must comply with several strict requirements to keep the dog. The owner must keep the dog indoors or in a securely fenced yard from which it cannot escape and into which children cannot trespass. The owner must post a clearly visible warning sign stating that a potentially dangerous dog is on the property, with the sign designed by the Department of Food and Agriculture.

When the dog is off the owner's property, it must be restrained by a substantial leash not exceeding six feet in length and under the control of a responsible adult. The owner must maintain a current dog license and rabies vaccination. Many jurisdictions also require owners to obtain liability insurance or a surety bond, typically for at least $50,000 to $100,000, specifically covering injuries caused by the dog. Some localities require microchipping, spaying or neutering, and periodic inspections of the enclosure. Failure to comply can result in seizure of the dog.

Yes, owners can appeal dangerous dog designations in California, though the process depends on whether the initial hearing was conducted by a local administrative body or a court. For administrative hearings, the owner typically has a limited time period, often 10 to 30 days depending on local ordinance, to file an appeal with the superior court. The appeal may be reviewed on the administrative record alone, or the court may allow new evidence depending on local procedures.

For designations made by a court in the first instance, appeal follows standard civil appellate procedures under the California Rules of Court, with a notice of appeal typically due within 60 days of the judgment. During the appeal, the designation usually remains in effect, meaning the owner must comply with all requirements for keeping a potentially dangerous or vicious dog. Common grounds for appeal include procedural errors, insufficient evidence to support the designation, errors in interpreting the statutory definitions, or new evidence that was not available at the original hearing.

If your dog is declared vicious under California Food and Agricultural Code Section 31645, the consequences are severe. The court or hearing officer must order the dog removed from the jurisdiction, euthanized, or subject to conditions that protect public safety. If euthanasia is ordered, the owner has the right to appeal before the order is carried out.

If conditions are imposed instead of euthanasia or removal, they are significantly more stringent than those for potentially dangerous dogs. These conditions typically include keeping the dog indoors or in a locked, escape-proof enclosure with specific construction requirements, maintaining liability insurance of at least $100,000 to $300,000 or more, having the dog spayed or neutered, microchipping for permanent identification, muzzling the dog whenever it is outside the secure enclosure, and allowing periodic inspections by animal control. Any violation of these conditions can result in immediate seizure and euthanasia of the dog.

California imposes serious criminal penalties on owners of dangerous dogs who fail to control their animals. Under Penal Code Section 399, if the owner of a mischievous animal who knows of its dangerous propensities fails to exercise ordinary care and the animal kills someone, the owner is guilty of involuntary manslaughter, punishable by two to four years in state prison.

Under Penal Code Section 399.5, owners of potentially dangerous or vicious dogs who fail to take required precautions and the dog bites someone causing substantial injury may face a misdemeanor punishable by up to one year in county jail, a fine up to $1,000, or both. If the bite results in serious bodily injury, the owner faces a wobbler offense that can be charged as either a misdemeanor or felony. A felony conviction carries 16 months, two years, or three years in state prison. If a dog previously designated as potentially dangerous or vicious kills someone, the owner faces felony charges.

Several defenses may be available when contesting a dangerous dog designation in California. The most common defense is provocation, as the statutory definitions require that the dog's behavior be unprovoked. If the alleged victim was tormenting, teasing, poking, or otherwise provoking the dog, the designation may not be appropriate. Evidence of provocation can include witness testimony, video footage, the victim's own statements, and expert testimony about dog behavior.

Another defense challenges whether the behavior actually meets the statutory definitions. For a potentially dangerous designation, you can argue that the incidents did not require genuine defensive action or did not result in actual bites. Questioning the credibility of witnesses and the accuracy of incident reports is also important. Expert testimony from veterinary behaviorists can provide professional assessment of whether the dog poses a genuine threat. Evidence of the dog's general temperament, training history, and behavior with other people and animals can demonstrate the incidents were isolated or provoked.

Yes, under California Food and Agricultural Code Section 31642, a potentially dangerous dog designation may be removed if certain conditions are met. If there are no additional incidents within a 36-month period from the date of the designation, and the owner has not been found to be in violation of any conditions for keeping the dog, the owner may request that the designation be removed.

The request is submitted to the animal control department that imposed the designation. The agency will review the dog's record during the 36-month period, including any incidents, complaints, or violations. If the record is clean, the designation may be removed, and the owner will no longer be required to comply with the special conditions for potentially dangerous dogs. However, this removal process applies only to potentially dangerous designations, not vicious dog designations, which are generally permanent unless overturned on appeal. During the 36-month period, even minor violations can reset the clock or result in escalation.

California law provides dog owners with significant procedural rights in dangerous dog proceedings to ensure due process. You have the right to adequate notice of the hearing, including the specific behaviors alleged and the designation being sought, at least 10 business days before the hearing. You have the right to a hearing before an impartial decision-maker, which for vicious dog determinations must be a court or administrative hearing officer.

You have the right to be represented by an attorney at your own expense throughout the proceedings. You have the right to present evidence in your defense, including documents, photographs, videos, and physical evidence. You have the right to call witnesses to testify on your behalf, including expert witnesses such as veterinary behaviorists. You have the right to cross-examine witnesses called by animal control and challenge the evidence presented against you. You have the right to a written decision stating the findings of fact and the legal basis for the determination. You have the right to appeal an adverse decision.