NOTE: As provided in LFC policy, this report is
intended only for use by the standing finance committees of the
legislature. The Legislative Finance Committee does not assume
responsibility for the accuracy of the information in this report when used for
other purposes.
The most recent FIR
version (in HTML & Adobe PDF formats) is available on the Legislative
Website. The Adobe PDF version includes
all attachments, whereas the HTML version does not. Previously issued FIRs and attachments may be
obtained from the LFC in
SPONSOR: |
Ogle |
DATE TYPED: |
|
HB |
593 |
||
SHORT TITLE: |
Sentencing Youthful Offenders as Adults |
SB |
|
||||
|
ANALYST: |
Maloy |
|||||
APPROPRIATION
Appropriation
Contained |
Estimated
Additional Impact |
Recurring or
Non-Rec |
Fund Affected |
||
FY03 |
FY04 |
FY03 |
FY04 |
|
|
|
|
|
Indeterminate See Narrative |
|
|
(Parenthesis
( ) Indicate Expenditure Decreases)
Conflicts with HB507
Responses
Received From
Children,
Youth and Families Department
Corrections
Department
Attorney
General’s Office
Juvenile
Parole Board
Department
of Health
Administrative
Offices of the District Attorney
Administrative
Offices of the Courts
SUMMARY
Synopsis
of Bill
House Bill 593 proposes to amend the children’s
code to require that any youthful offender, having once been sentenced as an
adult for a prior offense, shall be sentenced as an adult for any subsequent
offense.
Significant
Issues
1.
The Administrative Offices of the Courts
raises the concern that this amendment to the children’s code seemingly
circumvents the dispositional considerations expected of the court. These considerations are set out in other
subsections of the children’s code, see Section 32A-2-20. They include such factors as:
·
seriousness,
premeditation, violent manner, use of a firearm, type of offense, maturity of
the child, previous history, and likelihood of rehabilitation.
2.
The Administrative Offices of the
District Attorney (AODA) raises concerns regarding the constitutionality of HB
593. Concerns are expressed regarding
“vagueness and ambiguity, due process, “status”, equal protection under the
law, and cruel and unusual punishment.
3.
The
AODA also raises concerns regarding impracticality and unfairness:
A) Consider
the situation of a child who at age 14 was sentenced as a “youthful offender”
to 30 days as an adult in the county jail as part of an adult suspended sentence
for the fourth degree felony of “shooting from a motor vehicle-(non-injury)”
under 30-3-8 as a part of a suspended sentence requiring 17 months of probation
thereafter. The child successfully completes
adult probation at age 15 years and 8 months, and now, as a 16 years and 5
months old person, is charged in a petition in Children’s Court with criminal
trespass, a misdemeanor. Why should he
not be eligible for supervision on juvenile probation?
B) Consider
the situation of the same a child, now, as a 17 years and 4 months old person,
is charged in a petition in Children’s Court with aggravated assault, a fourth
degree felony. Why should he not be
eligible for a hearing on “amenability to treatment” and supervision on
juvenile probation? Theoretically, his
prior offense and punishment as a 14 year old could have changed him and he may
now be “amenable to treatment. What
public purpose is served by NOT treating him as a child if he is now amenable
to treatment?
4. The
issue addressed by HB 593 arose from concerns about juveniles who had spent
time previously in an adult facility, returned to a juvenile facility, and then
impacted the therapeutic environment in a negative manner.
5. Opponents
of the provisions in HB 593 state that adult sentencing
results in unjustly oppressive and expensive treatment of juveniles in adult
facilities and, thus, more repeat offenses.
Additionally, the bill may conflict with the intent of the Children’s
Code, which aims to protect youthful offenders by allowing age and environmental
factors to be considered in sentencing.
6. Proponents
of the provisions in HB 593 state that some youthful offenders are not likely
to be rehabilitated and should be sentenced as adults. They contend that this would provide a higher
degree of protection to society through longer and more punishing sentences.
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS
HB 593 would increase
the number of juveniles sentenced to Department of Corrections facilities. Upon reaching the age of majority, child
prisoners sentenced under HB 593’s provisions will be transferred to adult
prisons. This will increase FTE and
budget costs for the Department. These
costs may also be increased for probation and parole supervision for these
youthful offenders.
In addition to the
potential increase in costs for the Department of Corrections, sentencing children
as adults (hence longer sentences) will likely result in a greater number of
appeals. This impacts the FTE and budget resources of the courts, public
defenders office and district attorneys office.
Finally, the
Department of Corrections did note in its analysis that if this stricter
sanction worked as a deterrent, many potential repeat offenders may avoid the
conduct that could lead to the adult sentence, and thus expenses for the state
would drop overall.
CONFLICT
Conflicts with HB 507 which seeks to create a rebuttable presumption for the youthful offender who may be sentenced as an adult to overcome by showing he is “amenable to treatment or rehabilitation as a child in available facilities”.
SJM/njw:yr