Legislature(1999 - 2000)
03/17/1999 01:45 PM Senate JUD
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
SB 1-NO MANDATORY PAROLE RELEASE WITHOUT GED
SENATOR DONLEY explained the proposed committee substitute
addresses SENATOR HALFORD's concern about people who may be unable
to attain educational requirements. The bill allows the
Commissioner of the Department of Corrections discretion to certify
that it is not reasonable for certain people to meet the standard.
Those people would then be excused from the requirements. The
committee substitute also includes a provision that makes a person
ineligible for the program where the program is not offered by the
Department.
Number 468
SENATOR HALFORD moved the adoption of the committee substitute for
SB 1. Without objection, the committee substitute was adopted.
MR. BRUCE RICHARDS, representing the Department of Corrections,
said the Department has a minor technical amendment to the
committee substitute. The Department would also like the committee
to consider making the GED a mandatory requirement of parole,
rather than a condition for receiving good time. This would remove
the burden of providing the program from the Department and put the
responsibility and cost of the program on the offender. MR.
RICHARDS said the Department would encourage people to start the
program while incarcerated and inform them that attaining a GED
would be a mandatory condition of parole. This would reduce the
Department of Corrections' fiscal note and is likely to also reduce
the fiscal note from the Department of Law, while still
accomplishing the goal of increasing the educational level of
inmates.
Number 427
MR. MICHAEL STARK, representing the Department of Law, testified
the Department supports MR. RICHARDS' idea as a less costly and
problematic way to accomplish the goals of SB 99.
MR. STARK suggested on page 2 of the bill, lines 1 and 25, the word
"certify" be replaced with the word "determine". He explained
certify connotes some kind of official action that does not exist.
He also suggested a change on page 3, line 10 and 11: make the
effective date apply to "persons whose crimes are committed on or
after the effective date. He explained the court now bases its
analysis on the date a person's crime is committed, not the date of
conviction.
Number 400
SENATOR DONLEY moved, as Amendment #1, to insert the word
"committed" after the word "crimes" on line 11, page 3. Without
objection, Amendment #1 was adopted.
SENATOR DONLEY moved, as Amendment #2, replacing the word
"certifies" on page 2, lines 1 and 25, with the word "determines".
Without objection, Amendment #2 was adopted.
Number 393
SENATOR ELLIS asked for an explanation of how the Commissioner
would excuse some people from educational requirements without
opening the Department to litigation based on unequal treatment of
some groups of prisoners. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR restated the same
question, asking "Is there an equal protection problem here?" MR.
STARK replied it is an issue, but he believes a "rational basis"
argument can be made against an equal protection challenge.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR commented, "There would at least be an objective
standard . . ." MR. STARK agreed.
Number 371
SENATOR HALFORD stated for the record, "This committee believes it
is an objective standard and it should be applied in an objective
manner . . . the Administration, if they have any problems doing
that, they should come back to us, as it is our expectation that it
be applied in a manner that is constitutional." CHAIRMAN TAYLOR
asked if there was objection to that statement. SENATOR ELLIS said
"We are making an attempt to make it an objective standard, but it
is by its nature subjective . . . that may be our opinion, but I
don't know that is fact." CHAIRMAN TAYLOR clarified, "It is the
intent of this committee . . . this would be an objective standard
applied without violating equal protection . . ."
MR. STARK assumed the committee had no interest in MR. RICHARDS'
proposal. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR said he'd prefer to see inmates attain
these educational requirements as early as possible, though he
realizes this will increase the cost to the State.
Number 346
SENATOR DONLEY noted that, if the bill was changed and an inmate
failed to attain their GED, a Public Defender would be required to
represent them at a parole revocation hearing. MR. STARK affirmed
this is true.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR asked if there was further testimony on CSSB
1(JUD). There was none.
Number 330
SENATOR DONLEY moved CSSB 1(JUD) with individual recommendations
and the accompanying fiscal notes. Without objection, CSSB 1(JUD)
moved from committee.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|