1709.HBR [Bill Report]

HOUSE BILL REPORT

HB 1709

As Passed House:

March 9, 1995

Title: An act relating to earned early release.

Brief Description: Limiting certain offenses to no more than fifteen percent good time credits.

Sponsors: Representatives Carrell, Padden, Campbell, Backlund, Costa, Conway, Delvin, Robertson, Thompson, McMahan, Benton and Elliot.

Brief History:

Committee Activity:

Law & Justice: 2/15/95, 2/17/95 [DP];

Corrections: 2/15/94, 2/22/95 [DP];

Appropriations: 3/3/95 [DP].

Floor Activity:

Passed House: 3/9/95, 95-0.

HOUSE COMMITTEE ON LAW & JUSTICE

Majority Report: Do pass. Signed by 16 members: Representatives Padden, Chairman; Delvin, Vice Chairman; Hickel, Vice Chairman; Appelwick, Ranking Minority Member; Costa, Assistant Ranking Minority Member; Campbell; Carrell; Chappell; Cody; Lambert; McMahan; Morris; Sheahan; Smith; Thibaudeau and Veloria.

Staff: Pat Shelledy (786-7149).

HOUSE COMMITTEE ON CORRECTIONS

Majority Report: Do pass. Signed by 9 members: Representatives Ballasiotes, Chairman; Blanton, Vice Chairman; Sherstad, Vice Chairman; Quall, Ranking Minority Member; Dickerson; Koster; Radcliff; K. Schmidt and Schoesler.

Minority Report: Do not pass. Signed by 2 members: Representatives Tokuda, Assistant Ranking Minority Member; and Cole.

Staff: Rick Neidhardt (786-7841).

HOUSE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS

Majority Report: Do pass. Signed by 27 members: Representatives Silver, Chairman; Clements, Vice Chairman; Huff, Vice Chairman; Pelesky, Vice Chairman; Sommers, Ranking Minority Member; Valle, Assistant Ranking Minority Member; Basich; Beeksma; Brumsickle; Carlson; Cooke; Crouse; G. Fisher; Foreman; Grant; Jacobsen; Lambert; Lisk; McMorris; Poulsen; Reams; Rust; Sehlin; Sheahan; Talcott; Thibaudeau and Wolfe.

Staff: John Woolley (786-7154).

Background: Under the Sentencing Reform Act, felony offenders receive determinate sentences. A determinate sentence is one where the length of confinement is determined at the time of sentencing; the sentence length generally is not subject to alteration based on events occurring after the sentence is imposed.

Earned early release programs. The primary exception to this system of determinate sentencing involves the operation of earned early release programs.

Earned early release programs allow inmates to shorten their sentence length if they display positive behavior during confinement. Washington law authorizes these programs to be operated both in local jails and state prisons.

An inmate earns early release by either engaging in good behavior (not violating the rules of the prison or jail) or participating in work, education, or treatment programs.

Limitations on earned early release. Current law limits how much a sentence can be reduced through earned early release. The maximum amount that a sentence can be reduced varies depending on the inmate's offense:

!No reduction is allowed during the mandatory minimum sentence for first-degree murder, first- degree rape, first-degree assault, or first-degree assault of a child;

!No more than 15 percent of the sentence may be reduced for serious violent offenses and for class A sex offenses; and

!No more than one-third (33 percent) of the sentence may be reduced for all other felonies.

These limitations apply for all felony inmates, whether they are confined in local jails or state prisons.

Federal crime bill. In 1994, the U.S. Congress passed legislation funding prevention and punishment of crime. The legislation addressed many different aspects of the crime problem.

The federal crime bill created two programs to fund costs of constructing state and local correctional facilities. One program is called "Violent Offender Incarceration Grants" and the other is called "Truth in Sentencing Incentive Grants."

The "violent offender" grant program has a number of eligibility requirements. The state must make a number of assurances. For example, the state must assure the federal government that the state: (1) is adopting truth-in-sentencing laws; (2) is implementing policies on victim rights; (3) will use these funds for correctional facilities to ensure violent offenders are confined; (4) has developed or is developing, in conjunction with local jurisdictions, a comprehensive correctional plan; and (5) has involved local jurisdictions in funding and building correctional facilities to ensure violent offenders are confined.

The "truth-in-sentencing" grant has stricter eligibility requirements. The state must meet all requirements described above for the "violent offender" grants, and the state must either:

(1)Have laws in place that require persons convicted of "violent crimes" to serve at least 85 percent of the sentence imposed; or

(2)Be able to show that since 1993 the state has increased: (a) the percentage of convicted violent offenders sentenced to prison, (b) the average prison time for convicted violent offenders, (c) the percentage of the prison sentence actually served by violent offenders, and have laws in place that require offenders who commit certain repeat violent crimes to serve at least 85 percent of the sentence.

Under the "truth-in-sentencing" grant program, funds are allocated to the eligible states according to a formula based on the number of "violent crimes" reported in the state. The "violent offender" grants will be distributed among eligible states, with 85 percent according to a formula based on the number of violent crimes that are reported in the state, and 15 percent as a discretionary allocation based on the states with the greatest need and the best ability to put the funds to effective use.

The amount of funding Washington could potentially receive under these grants, if eligible, cannot be exactly determined. Currently, the total authorized funds, for all states, for both grants, through the year 2000 is approximately $7.7 billion. Half of these funds are allocated under each grant program. Only a portion of these funds have actually been appropriated. For example, for fiscal year 1995, $175 million was authorized, but only $24.5 million was actually appropriated, and that amount was limited only to be used for building boot camps. How much of the funds authorized for future years will actually be appropriated is not clear. Additionally, Congress is currently considering changes to the federal crime bill. The House recently increased the authorized funding level.

Any funding received under these programs must be matched by non-federal funds. Federal funds cannot exceed 75 percent of the costs; state or local jurisdictions must obtain the other 25 percent elsewhere.

Washington's compliance with the truth-in-sentencing grants.

The interim final rule does not define "violent offender." The rule does define "violent offense" as the statutorily prescribed basis for the formula allocation for funding under the truth-in-sentencing grant program. Presumably the same definition applies to what constitutes a "violent offense" for purposes of compliance with the 15 percent earned early release limitation, but that is not entirely clear.

The "interim final" rules adopted for the federal crime bill recognize that "the vast majority of states will at present have difficulty in meeting the condition that violent offenders serve at least 85% of the sentences imposed." Because funding under this truth-in-sentencing grant program is not available until fiscal year 1996, the federal government is soliciting comments from the states on how compliance should be determined and on the pivotal definition of "violent offender." The federal government has not specifically requested comments on the definition of "violent offense." Comments are due March 7, 1995.

If the definition of "violent offense" remains the same as currently defined in the "interim final rule" the federal government could decide that Washington does not currently meet the requirement that for violent offenses 85 percent of the sentence length must actually be served.

Although, as noted above, Washington already requires that at least 85 percent of the sentence length be served for some crimes, the requirement in the federal crime bill could be construed so that our state would have to extend this requirement to additional crimes in order to meet this particular condition of the truth-in-sentencing grants. These additional offenses could potentially include:

$first-degree robbery;

$second-degree robbery;

$first-degree manslaughter;

$second-degree manslaughter;

$second-degree assault; and

$attempts, conspiracies, and solicitations to commit these offenses.

If inmates committing these offenses were required to serve at least 85 percent of the imposed sentence length, then the state would meet one of the more restrictive requirements of the truth-in-sentencing grants.

Summary of Bill: The maximum amount that a sentence can be reduced through the earned early release program is changed from 33 percent to 15 percent for the following offenses: first-degree robbery, second-degree robbery, first-degree manslaughter, second-degree manslaughter, second-degree assault, or any attempt, conspiracy, or solicitation to commit one of these offenses.

Accordingly, for these offenses at least 85 percent of the imposed sentence must be served.

Appropriation: None.

Fiscal Note: Available.

Effective Date: Ninety days after adjournment of session in which bill is passed.

Testimony For: (Law & Justice) The public and victims are entitled to truth in sentencing. This bill narrows the gap between the sentence imposed and the sentence served. The measure may assist Washington in obtaining federal funds.

Concern exists that reducing availability of earned early release will impair the Department of Corrections' and jails' abilities to manage inmates.

(Corrections) None.

(Appropriations) The public and victims are entitled to truth in sentencing. This bill narrows the gap between the sentence imposed and the sentence served.

Testimony Against: (Law & Justice) None.

(Corrections) None.

(Appropriations) None.

Testified: (Law & Justice) Tom Rolfs, Department of Corrections; Tom McBride, Washington Association of Prosecuting Attorneys (pro); and Dick Van Wagenen, Sentencing Guidelines Commission.

(Corrections) None.

(Appropriations) Representative Carrell, prime sponsor.