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 Suite 101 of the State Capitol Building North.
|
SPONSOR: |
Sanchez |
DATE TYPED: |
02/04/03 |
HB |
|
||
|
SHORT TITLE: |
Treatment Programs As Parole Condition |
SB |
313 |
||||
|
|
ANALYST: |
Fox-Young |
|||||
APPROPRIATION
|
Appropriation
Contained |
Estimated
Additional Impact |
Recurring or
Non-Rec |
Fund Affected |
||
|
FY03 |
FY04 |
FY03 |
FY04 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$0.1 Unknown |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Parenthesis
( ) Indicate Expenditure Decreases)
Responses
Received From
Corrections
Department (CD)
Adult
Parole Board (APB)
Administrative
Office of the Courts (AOC)
SUMMARY
Synopsis
of Bill
Senate Bill 313
amends NMSA 1978 §
31-21-14 regarding action upon return of a parole violator. The bill authorizes the parole board, when
it finds the parolee violated a condition of his release regarding use of drugs
or alcohol, to refer him to drug or alcohol treatment as a new condition of
parole. The bill also makes
technical changes to the language in the statute.
Significant
Issues
The Adult Parole Board’s (APB) authority to
refer the prisoner to treatment appears to exist now in the authority to “enter
any other order as it sees fit.” NMSA
1978 § 31-21-14 (C). The bill would
make that authority explicit.
The
Adult Parole Board (APB) reports that it currently refers parolees to treatment
programs when they are accepted into those programs. APB further indicates that many treatment facilities run
six-month programs, meaning that a parolee must have at least six months
remaining on parole to complete those programs. Additionally, APB notes that many drug treatment programs will
not accept violent offenders, sex offenders, or arsonists.
APB
reports that while some inmates are willing to attend treatment, many elect to
have their parole revoked so that they may instead serve time with the
Corrections Department (CD). The Board
indicates that once an inmate’s parole is revoked, he begins earning good time
at CD and finishes his sentence in less time than he would parole.
CD
indicates that the department is working aggressively toward implementing
release mechanisms in its prisons. As
part of this effort, CD is focusing on reducing the number of prisoners who
finish their terms in prison, a direction that is in line with this bill. Action
by the parole board to redirect parolees to substance abuse treatment programs
would have a positive effect on the department’s success in this area.
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS
CD notes that this bill could result in a minimal decrease in costs to the department if APB elects to order treatment for more parolees, rather than return then returning them to prison.
Is substance abuse programming at the Department
of Health sufficient to meet the needs of the parolee population?
Do parolees have an incentive to return to
prison rather than attend treatment programs (based on administrative policy
currently in place)?