a public defender


First drafts of crim justice reform bills unveiled

Posted on November 06, 2007 by Gideon

If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to my RSS feed. Thanks for visiting!

Yesterday, the Judiciary Committee made available the 14 proposals submitted by various lawmakers to reform the criminal justice system. I’ll go through each one in later posts. First up, though, is the proposal submitted [pdf] by the Judiciary Committee co-chairs, which has already received some press coverage.

First, Burglary in the First Degree is amended to include an element called “home invasion”. Home invasion is defined as:

a person “commits a home invasion” when such person enters a dwelling while a person other than a participant in the crime is actually present in the dwelling with intent to commit a crime therein and such dwelling, at the time of such entry, is not open to the public and the actor is not otherwise licensed or privileged to enter such dwelling.

So basically, with this amendment, a burglary would be a home invasion, which is a burglary, unless no one is actually present in which case it is a burglary.

This bill also removes the “at night” requirement for a burglary in the second degree. It also makes burglary in the first degree a persistent felony offense and removes judicial discretion in sentencing the defendant under that statute.

The bill then requires that judges put their reasons for setting bail on the record “and the findings that it made as to the danger, if any, that the arrested person might pose to the safety of any other person upon the arrested person’s release that caused the court to impose the specific conditions of release that it imposed.” I hope there’s funding for more beds at the local jails, because you’re going to see higher bonds.

Strangely, this proposal also permits the DOC, the Board of Parole of Court Support Services to apply for a sentence modification on behalf of a non-violent defendant. This would be rendered moot if they just legislated that prosecutors shouldn’t be so bull-headed about agreeing to modifications.

There’s also a proposal in there to create a new “SHIELD” electronic information system that will provide state-of-the-art communication between all criminal justice agencies. This system will allow all front line state criminal justice officials to have instant electronic access to police reports; pre-sentence investigations; sentencing transcripts; and prison, parole, and probation files.”

There’s also $260 million in funding for two news prisons: a medium security prison and a mental health prison.

Finally, there’s a requirement that probation make available on the internet all outstanding warrant information. The New Haven Register article above has this quote:

Lawlor said if the law passes, people will be able to access an individual’s conviction information online, including criminal records and police reports

but I don’t see it in the proposal. If that is the case, there are severe problems with that.

All in all, I don’t care either way about most of the proposals, except building new prisons and the whole “burglary = home invasion = burglary (-person) = burglary” bit.

Sphere: Related Content

RSS feed | Trackback URI

6 Comments »

Comment by SaucyVixen
2007-11-06 08:01:21

I’m having difficulty understanding why you have such a distaste for the burglary = home invasion = burglary (-person) = burglary” bit. Unless it’s just because it’s stupid.

Ah, but wait and see. I guarantee you that with this new home invasion definition, a bit o’ legislation mandating longer sentences for home invasion will be forthcoming.

 
Comment by Gideon
2007-11-06 13:03:38

[quote comment="7801"]I’m having difficulty understanding why you have such a distaste for the burglary = home invasion = burglary (-person) = burglary” bit. Unless it’s just because it’s stupid.

Ah, but wait and see. I guarantee you that with this new home invasion definition, a bit o’ legislation mandating longer sentences for home invasion will be forthcoming.[/quote]

Yeah, that’s my main opposition to this definition.

 
Comment by SPO
2007-11-06 19:09:19

So let me ask you, Gideon, what situation is more dangerous to law-abiding folks, a break-in while the people are home or when they are not? The question answers itself, and given the obvious increased danger to the innocent, shouldn’t the law have a gradation of punishment? After all, wouldn’t that disincentivize the more dangerous types of break-ins?

 
Comment by Malum Subscribed to comments via email
2007-11-07 00:38:36

I would be more comfortable with a distinction that speaks to the intent of the breaking. If the breaking is done with the intent to commit a crime against a person in the dwelling, then it should be considered a home invasion. If the breaking is made with the intent to commit another crime then the original definition and sentencing guidelines should apply.

 
Comment by SPO
2007-11-07 22:10:00

Sorry Malum, the law should impose the risk on the burglars to ensure that no one is home. And violating people in their homes should bring truly draconian penalties.

Somehow burglars often manage to figure out when no one is home in states or localities with high incidence of gun ownership. There are not too many home invaders in vast swaths of Texas. Why, because home invaders often wind up dead (good riddance). The old man in Dallas sure proved that.

 
Attention: Before you comment, please read the disclaimer/privacy policy and the comment policy. By commenting here, you agree to abide by the terms and conditions of this blog and you take full responsibility for your comments and any consequences thereof.

Name (required)
E-mail (required - never shown publicly)
URI
Subscribe to comments via email
Your Comment (smaller size | larger size)
You may use <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong> in your comment.

Readers who viewed this page, also viewed:

By submitting a comment here you grant this site a perpetual license to reproduce your words and name/web site in attribution. You have also read and agreed to the disclaimer, privacy policy and comment terms of use, linked to in the sidebar. Comments may be edited and deleted without notice at the will of the owner/author of this blog.

Trackback responses to this post