Meetings
Transcript: Select text below to play or share a clip
[Committee Assistant (unidentified)]: Clear your left.
[Senator Nader Hashim (Chair)]: Alright. We're back in senate judiciary for s one eighty one. It's March 13. We made some minor changes and we have Legis Council here to remind us of those changes and then we will most likely have a vote.
[Michelle Childs (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: Okay. Thanks for having me in. For the record, Michelle Childs, Office of Legislative Council. And we're looking at draft 1.1, committee amendment. It is a strike all. So you recall, there's kind of two buckets for for getting a deferred. There's the one where you have the prosecutor and the defense are in agreement with respect to seeking a deferred from the court. And then you have another circumstance where in certain conditions the court can on its own motion, even if there's not an agreement between the parties, proceed with ordering a deferred sentence. Right now, when there is agreement between the two parties, it could be a non listed crime or a listed crime. If the court's gonna be doing it on its own motion, they are not permitted to do that for listed crime. So there's kind of two difference differences there. You're removing the requirements for pre sentence investigation for when the court does it for non listed crimes. And so what you're doing is doing a parallel here in subdivision A2, which is that if the offense is a listed crime, and then subsection A is where you're dealing with the prosecutor and defense agreement. So if it's a listed crime, a pre sentence investigation shall be conducted unless the state's attorney and the respondent agree to waive a pre sentence investigation. So I think your testimony that you received from DSAS was that sometimes they will do that for various reasons. And so if they agree on that, then you don't have to do a PSI. Otherwise a PSI would be required across the board for a list of crimes. And then the only other change was that I just fixed a scrivener's error on the second page. Because you removed the language in Subdivision five on pre sentence investigation, then it would have just, the strike through has gone too far. I just corrected that. So five will still require that the court reviews the victim's impact statement prior to sentence. And that's it. Okay.
[Senator Nader Hashim (Chair)]: Thank you committee. Any questions? Thoughts? To vote S one eighty one out favor me. Bill's a second. So, any further discussions? Fantastic. Take it away.
[Committee Assistant (unidentified)]: Senator North? Yes. Senator Baruth? Yes. Senator Matos? Yes. Senator Vyhovsky? Yes. Senator Hashim? Yes.
[Senator Nader Hashim (Chair)]: Five zero zero.
[Senator Nader Hashim (Chair)]: Could report this out unless somebody has a burning desire. That's what you want.
[Michelle Childs (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: So you certainly don't need any help, but if you would like and need support in getting ready for approval, let me know. Thank you. Appreciate it. Yeah.
[Senator Nader Hashim (Chair)]: Alright. And that is our last bill, last Senate bill for crossover. We got through most of the things that we could reasonably get next week to dive into all the House bills and The madness associated with them. Yeah. Yeah. It's interesting. Alrighty. We