Legislature(2005 - 2006)BUTROVICH 205
04/25/2005 08:30 AM Senate JUDICIARY
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| SB101 | |
| HB54 | |
| HB219 | |
| HB116 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | SB 101 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | HB 54 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | HB 219 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | HB 116 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
CSHB 54(FIN)-BAIL REVIEW/ CRIME VICTIMS
8:51:27 AM
CHAIR RALPH SEEKINS announced HB 54 to be up for consideration.
REPRESENTATIVE RALPH SAMUELS introduced HB 54. Currently a
person charged with an unclassified crime or a class A felony
may apply for a bail hearing every 24 hours. HB 54 proposes to
change the timeframe to every 48 hours in order to give victims
time to attend the hearing. The bill would also allow for a
victim to be introduced during the opening statement at a trial
or at jury selection.
8:53:59 AM
The bill cleans up language in the Violent Crimes Compensation
Board statute to allow a retired attorney or physician to serve
on the Board. The bill also allows a crime victim the ability to
petition for a review of a defendant's sentence if it falls
below the sentencing range. Convicted criminals have a right to
appeal sentences. Victims should also have that right.
8:57:48 AM
SENATOR HOLLIS FRENCH asked whether it was after the arraignment
in district court that HB 54 would kick in.
REPRESENTATIVE SAMUELS said yes, unless there has been a change
in conditions.
Senator Gretchen Guess joined the committee.
SENATOR FRENCH clarified by the time lawyers get the facts, it
would be 48 hours before the bail review.
REPRESENTATIVE SAMUELS answered correct.
9:00:31 AM
SENATOR CHARLIE HUGGINS asked whether the introduction provision
was for the family.
REPRESENTATIVE SAMUELS advised "victim" is defined in the
statutes. The intent is to have either a representative or the
actual victim being introduced.
CHAIR RALPH SEEKINS asserted the term "victim" could include a
corporation.
9:02:28 AM
CHAIR SEEKINS communicated a petition of review paid for by the
victim could have other ramifications.
REPRESENTATIVE SAMUELS agreed and said if a person were to lose
that appeal there would be case law backing it. It would produce
the opposite result from which the victim aspired.
9:06:49 AM
MR. DEAN GUANELI, chief assistant attorney general, Department
of Law (DOL) expressed support for HB 54. It is difficult to
keep victims notified of all the defendant's court proceedings.
HB 54 would allow the defendant a bail review hearing every 48
hours. This provides an opportunity for the defendant to see the
judge and to acquire an attorney. It also accommodates the
victims and allows them time to attend the bail review hearing.
Additionally, it makes sense to require the defendants to submit
new information that the court has not considered in order to
request another bail review.
9:09:41 AM
MR. GUANELI continued this is intended to stop the daily bail
review request.
Chair Seekins announced a brief recess at 9:13:12 AM.
Chair Seekins reconvened the meeting at 9:15:13 AM.
9:15:13 AM
MR. GUANELI continued he is concerned with regards to Section 4,
which allows for the victim to file a petition for a sentencing
review. If a lenient sentence were to be upheld it sets a
precedent. Other judges may look at that opinion and adopt a
lower sentencing pattern.
9:18:17 AM
There would be very little for a victim to gain by petitioning
for a sentencing review, but there is potentially much to be
lost. The concern is whether the state wants to allow a private
party to challenge sentences.
9:21:54 AM
REPRESENTATIVE SAMUELS maintained his preference to keep Section
4 in HB 54.
SENATOR CHARLIE HUGGINS asked the alternative to ensure proper
sentencing by the judge.
9:23:45 AM
MR. GUANELI detailed under the existing system, judges stand for
reelection and very few judges have not been retained. The
process the Legislature did this year in looking at the Blakely
vs. Washington decision was a good exercise in examining
sentencing ranges.
9:25:40 AM
CHAIR SEEKINS asked Mr. Guaneli whether it was possible for a
sentence to be passed without a trial.
MR. GUANELI responded 95 percent of sentences are imposed
without trial. Prosecutors are not involved in setting
sentences.
CHAIR SEEKINS asked whether prosecutors discuss mitigators with
the defendant's attorney.
MR. GUANELI said yes. Aggravators are discussed as well.
SENATOR FRENCH asked whether the provision would apply to
misdemeanor sentences.
REPRESENTATIVE SAMUELS replied that was not the intent.
SENATOR FRENCH asked whether it was standard for the state to
petition for a review when they felt the sentence handed down
was inadequate.
MR. GUANELI said yes. The state has a right to appeal the
sentence, which forces the court of appeals to issue an opinion.
SENATOR FRENCH posed a scenario of a class C felony assault with
a maximum of five years where the judge imposed 6 months. If the
state were to appeal the sentence and the court of appeals were
to agree, he asked how the re-sentencing would occur.
9:28:45 AM
MR. GUANELI responded the sentence would be disapproved as too
lenient. The opinion would be written and published. There is no
re-sentencing due to the double jeopardy clause.
9:30:33 AM
CHAIR SEEKINS asked Mr. Guaneli to estimate the cost of a review
by the appellate court.
MR. GUANELI estimated 20-30 attorney hours at $150 an hour.
9:33:43 AM
CHAIR SEEKINS held HB 54 in committee.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|