REPORT ON BILLS FAVORABLY REPORTED BY COMMITTEE

TITLE OF BILL:

AN ACT CONCERNING YOUTHFUL OFFENDER PROCEEDINGS.

SPONSORS OF BILL:

REASONS FOR BILL:

The court should have the discretion to decide a motion filed by the prosecutor regarding whether or not a youth gets transferred to the criminal court or remains in the juvenile court system. The prosecutor currently has the ability to transfer a youth at his or her discretion out of the youthful offender docket into the adult court docket.

SUBSTITUTE LANGUAGE:

Section 1(a) 2(A)(iii) and Section 2(a)(3) add to the exemptions of youthful offender status. They also add that the definition of crime does not include a motor vehicle violation.

RESPONSE FROM ADMINISTRATION/AGENCY:

Judge William J. Lavery, Chief Court Administrator, Judicial Branch – This bill addresses some aspects of Public Act 05-232 that are not workable. The most substantial change in this proposal is regarding the process for deciding whether a youth should be transferred to the regular criminal docket. The language currently in the statute is unclear. We propose a process whereby the prosecutor would request that a case be transferred to the regular criminal docket, a hearing would be held on the question, and a judge would make the final decision. This process would allow for the balancing of interests between prosecutors and defense attorneys, and will be more workable than what is currently in place.

The changes contained in Section 1 and in lines 34 – 40 of the proposal clarify that a failure to appear or a violation of a probation charge (arising out of a case that has been transferred from the youthful offender docket to the regular criminal docket) would also be handled on the regular criminal docket. Conversely, a failure to appear or a violation of a probation charge (arising out of a case that has remained on the youthful offender docket) would be handled on the youthful offender docket. I would like to respectfully request that the committee consider an amendment to this language to more accurately reflect this, which I have attached hereto for your consideration. (Addressed in the Substitute Language)

Deborah Del Prete Sullivan, Legal Counsel, Office of the Chief Public Defender – Supports this bill. Exercising such discretion is not new to the court. For years, until the adoption of P.A. No. 05-232, the court was clearly authorized to exercise its discretion in regard to whether to grant Youthful Offender Status. This bill would be one more step in trying to keep more individuals in the youthful offender system, as opposed to them acquiring criminal records in the adult court system.

NATURE AND SOURCES OF SUPPORT:

None expressed.

NATURE AND SOURCES OF OPPOSITION:

None expressed.