HOUSE BILL REPORT

HB 1424

BYRepresentatives Dellwo, Brooks, Braddock, Grimm, Vekich, Bristow, D. Sommers, Ebersole, Cantwell, Belcher, Locke, Armstrong, Crane, Appelwick, Brough, Bumgarner, Sprenkle, Day, Holland, P. King, McLean, Butterfield, Fuhrman, Doty, Basich, Jesernig, Moyer, Wineberry, Unsoeld and Brekke; by request of Governor Gardner

Revising provisions on community custody.

House Committe on Health Care

Majority Report:  The substitute bill be substituted therefor and the substitute bill do pass.  (9)

      Signed by Representatives Braddock, Chair; Day, Vice Chair; Bristow, Brooks, Bumgarner, Cantwell, Lewis, Lux and D. Sommers.

House Staff:Bill Hagens (786-7131)

Rereferred House Committee on Ways & Means/Appropriations

Majority Report:  The substitute bill by Committee on Health Care as amended by Committee on Ways and Means/Appropriations do pass.  (16)

      Signed by Representatives Belcher, Braddock, Brough, Butterfield, Ebersole, Grant, Grimm, Hine, Nealey, Sayan, Silver, H. Sommers, Spanel, Sprenkle, Wang and B. Williams.

Minority Report:  Do not pass.  (1)

      Signed by Representative Locke, Chair.

House Staff:      Maureen Morris (786-7136)

AS REPORTED BY COMMITTEE ON WAYS & MEANS/APPROPRIATIONS

FEBRUARY 6, 1988

BACKGROUND:

The Department of Corrections (DOC) has identified several groups of offenders that may pose a potential danger to the public safety upon release, unless some form of community monitoring is provided.  The identified groups are persons convicted of a sex offense, a serious violent offense, an assault in the second degree, a crime against a person in which a deadly weapon was used, and certain drug offenses.

The Sentencing Reform Act (SRA), which went into effect on July 1, 1984, does not require or permit any community monitoring of person convicted of the above-mentioned crimes if the crime was committed after that effective date.

Also, current law is unclear regarding the priority for payment of restitution by offenders and the role of DOC in offender compliance with payment of monetary obligations.

SUMMARY:

SUBSTITUTE BILL: Effective July 1, 1988, the court is required to add one year of community placement to the sentence of any person convicted of a sex offense, a serious violent offense, assault in the second degree, any crime against a person where it is determined that the defendant or an accomplice was armed with a deadly weapon when the crime was committed, or any felony drug offense.

"Community placement" is defined as a one year period of community custody and/or post-release supervision.

"Community custody" is defined as that portion of the offender's sentence of confinement in lieu of earned early release time served in the community, subject to the controls of DOC. Violations of community custody will be handled administratively by DOC.

"Post release supervision" is defined as that portion of an offender's community placement that is in excess of the amount of time an inmate has served in community custody, again no more than one year.  Violations of post- release supervision will be handled judicially by the courts.

Immunity is provided for employees in community placement programs.

An evidentiary standard of "preponderance of the evidence" is established for a violation of a condition of a sentence.

The definition of the crime of escape is amended to reflect community custody.

Restitution to the victim is made the first priority in an offender's monetary obligation.  DOC is permitted to supervise monetary obligations and set the rate of payment, if not done so by the court.

The Secretary of DOC is given authority to issue arrest warrants for violators of community placements.

Tolling procedures are amended to reflect community placement.

The offender score matrix is amended to add one point for violation of community placement.

SUBSTITUTE BILL COMPARED TO ORIGINAL:  Language corrections and clarifications are added.

CHANGES PROPOSED BY COMMITTEE ON WAYS & MEANS/APPROPRIATIONS:  The Department will report to the Legislature on the implementation of this program.  The report will address the classification system used to determine supervision levels and the contact standards for monitoring offenders.

Fiscal Note:      Available.

House Committee ‑ Testified For:    (Health Care) David Boerner, University of Puget Sound Law School; Larry Fehr, Washington Council on Crime and Delinquency; Kris Backes, Washington Correctional Association; Roxanne Park, Sentencing Guidelines Commission; Jim Miller, Washington Association of Prosecuting Attorneys; Jim Metcalf, Community Action for the Mentally Ill Offender; Gary Moore, Washington Federation of State Employees; Joyce Hopson, DSHS; Judge Anne Ellington, Chair, Sentencing Guidelines Commission; Chase Riveland, Department of Corrections; Representative Dellwo, sponsor.

(Ways & Means/Appropriations) Mike Redman, Washington State Prosecutors Association.

House Committee - Testified Against:      (Health Care) Dave Richardson; Margaret Casey, Washington State Catholic Conferences.

(Ways & Means/Appropriations) None Presented.

House Committee - Testimony For:    (Health Care) Community placement is needed to protect the public safety.

(Ways & Means/Appropriations) This bill is needed and enjoys wide support.

House Committee - Testimony Against:      (Health Care) Community placement may violate the concept of presumptive sentencing.  Community placement approaches have not been proven effective in the past.

(Ways & Means/Appropriations) None Presented.