This law says that judges can only acknowledge certain facts as true without evidence if the law specifically allows or requires it. Otherwise, facts need to be proven in the usual way during a case.

Courts in California are required to automatically recognize certain types of information as true, without needing evidence to prove them. This includes the laws and important government documents of California and the U.S., professional rules for lawyers, and rules governing the functioning of courts. It also covers basic English language meanings, widely known facts, and specific legal terms.

Under this law, courts can take judicial notice, which means they can accept certain facts as true without requiring evidence, in various specific situations. These include laws from any U.S. state, and official actions by U.S. or state government bodies. They can also recognize regulations and other legal enactments made by legitimate public entities. Courts can accept official court records, rules, and acts from the U.S. and other states. Additionally, they can acknowledge laws from international organizations and foreign countries. Commonly known facts or indisputable, easily verifiable facts can also be noticed judicially.

This law outlines that official court records regarding criminal convictions can be computer-generated and are valid if certified by a court clerk. An officially certified conviction record, or its electronic copy, can be used as evidence in court to prove past crimes or related events. If the record is digitized, it must be an exact copy with a unique electronic signature or watermark, ensuring its authenticity. Records transmitted by court clerks, showing official court seals or signatures, meet this requirement.

In court, if someone asks for the judge to take official notice of certain facts (as outlined in another section), they must tell the other side in advance. This gives the other side a chance to respond. Additionally, the person making the request needs to provide enough details to the judge to support their request.

When a court considers whether to officially recognize a fact as true without evidence (known as judicial notice), it can use any relevant source of information, even advice from experts, regardless of who provides it.

Normal rules that exclude certain evidence don't apply here, though rules about evidence being more prejudicial than probative and privilege rules still do. If the court is determining foreign or international laws and gets expert advice outside of court, that advice must be provided in writing.

This section ensures fairness when a court decides to take judicial notice of certain facts without proof, which can impact a case significantly. If the court is asked to or plans to acknowledge these facts officially, both parties must be given an opportunity to argue whether it's appropriate and what those facts mean before the jury is instructed or a decision is made.

Additionally, if the court uses information not presented in court, such as expert advice, it must disclose this information and its source to both parties. This allows them to address it before the court accepts it as a fact, ensuring transparency and fairness in the judicial process.

If a court decides not to recognize a matter as indisputable fact without evidence, it must promptly inform the involved parties and record this decision.

This law section states that if the court officially recognizes a fact that a jury would typically decide on, the judge must inform the jury to accept it as true if requested.

This law states that if a trial court doesn't initially recognize or inform the jury about a particular fact without evidence, known as 'judicial notice', it can still decide to acknowledge that fact in later proceedings of the same case using the appropriate procedure.

This section explains how a higher court, known as the reviewing court, can take judicial notice of certain facts and legal materials during an appeal. First, it must recognize anything the trial court officially noticed or was required to acknowledge. It can also notice new matters if specified in other sections of the law. If it considers something important for the case that wasn't noticed before, the reviewing court must follow specific procedures and let parties respond to new information.

This law allows a court to bring in experts who understand a specific subject if their advice is needed for the court to recognize certain facts officially (a process known as judicial notice). If the court decides an expert is necessary, these experts are chosen and paid according to specific guidelines mentioned in another part of the law (beginning with Section 730).