House Judiciary Committee

Bill for forty eight. Yes the bills coming to you. Represent guess what you're recognized. Session I mean you may present your bill thank you madam chair or representative Jimmy Gazaway district thirty one. Member center bill for forty eight actually was. A bill that came to the attention of the code revision commission during our one of our meetings co division determined that there was. A conflicting definitions in this area of the code the human trafficking section of the code we're serious harm had been defined and represented Penzo it passed a bill that has a definition of serious harm the conflicted with the existing definition of serious harm and there was a question about whether we should just correct that it the code revision as a technical correction but because the definitions deferred and what we felt were more substantive ways we felt like there was really a substantive difference between the two definitions we contacted senator Penzo and asked him which definition it was he preferred and so this bill. Set forth the definition which senator Penzo intended and will resolve the conflict between the two definitions that were in the code of serious harm so that's all the bill does is really just correcting a definition that can conflicted based on the bill the senator Penzo passed last session so that's all the bill does And I'm happy to answer any questions members are there any questions. Seeing the questions we have no one who signed up to speak for against the bill representative guess what you're recognized close for your bill thank you manager and close for the bill make a motion to pass members who have a motion to do pass on the floor is there any discussion on the motion all in favor of the motion please say aye any opposed say no the ayes have it congratulations you have passed your bill. Members it's turn to Senate bill four fifty representative Cooper you're recognized code in the table and president Senate bill four fifty. Mr Robbins if you'd like to go into the table. Thank you for your recognized to put Senator Bill. Member Senate bill four fifty is a technical correction related to the definition of a journey so if you remember last session the legislature passed act nine fifty six which updated the definition of a journey. The definition of a Johnny was traveling outside your county of residence at nine fifty six changes definition to leaving your home or the curtilage of your home on foot horseback bicycle or automobile. It was discovered that this particular code address by SP four fifty still includes the old joining outside your county of residence definition says before fifty strikes county residents to make it consistent with the language of act nine fifty six that's a simple explanation of the bill members are there any questions representative plan you're recognized for a question thank you madam chair so anybody who was outside the house is on a journey this definition is that correct. We redefine journey last session at nine fifty six did that so when you leave your home with with that carrying a weapon you're considered on a journey that you're recognized for follow up so this would make it so that any person who is over the age of eighteen would be allowed to have a gun on school property. Well it it I don't I don't think so I mean we have the the federal gun free zones act that that prohibits that we have state law. Five thirteen five Senator one twenty two prohibits carrying guns and I'm in a public building so I don't I don't think this bill does that if you want to use that argument then it says now. you can carry a gun outside your county of residence so you could come to White County and carry a weapon in the schools and White County if if that's the are going to use on on that well my follow up you're recognized so does anyone hear the practical effect will be of this change. All of my subject matter expertise. If you are a dentist by yourself for the record before answering and if you need represent clinic would you repeat your question please. Yes I'm sure I'm just curious what the practical effect will be of this change who will be able to carry a gun. We are if the if the definition is changed as is proposed in this bill. Thank you madam chair my name is Tim Loggains I'm with gun owners of Arkansas thank you representative council for the question from a practical tent standpoint there is no change in who can carry or wear with this bill what it's doing is technical correction engine and honestly been done last session as me all we're normally whenever a statute is passed a bill is passed and becomes law it will take precedent over a prior version and basically this version and foster three one nineteen was passed in two thousand seventeen to say outside your county of residence. two thousand twenty one we put it in five seven three one oh one definitions where anytime you leave home or cartilage for any purpose or duration you're on a journey I would argue now that the courts will probably find that definition takes precedent over the one nineteen which wasn't changed more of a. Oversight this doesn't change you can Kerry where at all it's just just getting consistency across the statutes. Member center represent college you're recognized for a question so thank you senator I believe one of the arguments made for this bill is that it was illegal to back out of your five way with a gun in your car I don't understand that is that the case is that true or was that a misstatement. I've never made that argument up I don't know who did could you. Well I that if you tell me that's incorrect and that's that's all I need to I just was curious trying to figure out if that's true or not currently no it's not illegal to back out of your driveway with the weapon in your vehicle okay thank you members any other questions. I see no further questions we do have some who've signed up to speak for against the bill we have speak against the bill and the bush Shetty we're sorry. She may not have. Okay. We have the next is signed up to speak for the bill Gerry a person. But do you wish to speak Mr president. Sure what we can only become the table identify yourself for the record. What you do for yourself you're recognized thank you madam chair committee like the shortest possible I'm tired I know darn well you all or tired to reference your question all journey. Under the current version of journey you have to break the law to be able under the journey definition you have to break the law to get be lawful no words in your own county under journey here your unlawful. What you leave that county you are lawful does that make sense recalling. And if your driveway is on the. State or county line that for that reference come from now the biggest advantage to this bill as Tell me as explained the biggest benefit that this bill is farmers in your district in rule areas that are carrying a farming or truck. For Predators OR whatever which is quite common. And those older farmers do not have a concealed handgun or anything of that nature they are breaking the law every day in these THOUSANDFOOT gun free zones the long the highways we cannot drive by one without going through them is not carrying in the schools is just down the major highways. So all this while the it's never been really enforced is still on the books but technically if they wanted force the bill every hundred every farmer in this state would be charged with carrying a firearm. But it has nothing to do with the school itself is just that thousand foot exclusions on all that federals have on that. You're recognized for a question thank you madam chair so the testimony that I just heard was that federal law supersedes state law and that's why we can't have that that's right carrying a gun and school establishments that have different understand your argument that that thousand the it is but one of the defenses to carrying through that gun free zone that thousand foot I'm not talking about old school is through the journey and the journey is all the law it's been on the books since then the the eighteen seventies. in it multiple states have journey as protection for people that are traveling multiple states in Arkansas for those states that has a journey law. Follow that you're recognized so that that defense under Arkansas law is it is it the fence against the federal prohibition the fed at nine twenty two U. S. C. provides a provision for safe travels okay what Germany does I hope that answers your question. Member center represent college you're recognized for a question. So thank you I'm sure so the the federal law your representative didn't we pass notification laws on sessions and the federal law that apply with respect to guns I mean I I'm concerned don't you agree that there could be confusion if we're saying that someone eighteen or over to carry a gun on school property and the only reason they couldn't is federal law which were saying doesn't apply to guns. Help me understand me Wade through what that's not going to because inclusion understanding question I'm not trying to Dodge it but just answer your best you can thanks I'm trying to digest it. I think you're referencing I think it was H. B. nineteen fifty seven we passed like yes it midnight the last last night of the session and Act number that is but that that was exempting federal law on firearms from I believe January first twenty twenty to twenty twenty two forward. So it wouldn't cover the gun free zones act which was passed I believe in nineteen ninety. Members any other questions. Thank you Mr president for your testimony thank you all for all their permit all put in thank you members we have no one else who is signed up to speak for against the bill. Representative could put you're recognized close for the bill thank you Committee on close for the bill I make a motion to pass members represent Cooper is cause for the bill we have a motion to do pass on the floor is there any discussion of the motion. All all in favor of the motion please say aye. The opposing the. The ayes have it congratulations to pass the bill. Richmond if you like to go into the table we will turn our attention to Senate bill four eighty Senate bill four ACT. Madam chair with your permission I'd like to ask for Mr Loggains come join me at the table stridency Majorian represent Richmond at the table. Thank you. Represent Richmond district fifty two presenting. SB four eighty. If this looks familiar to you it's because one that was exactly the same was presented here are hot on last week who who knows when we did it all this is run to get a little bit by representative Duffield and it was stop with that a procedural thing. This is senator king same deal what it is trying to do is clarify what it means to have. Let me see make sure I read this correctly what it means when when that we are a a state that allows. Constitutional carry. Permit less carry concealed whether you have a permit or not in other words we don't have to have a permission slip in order to carry a weapon in the state of Arkansas and this is been up held in some of the courts of things I know there's arguments for that and then the last time there was an argument about you know what this is going to preempt the you know these places a restricted where you have the enhanced concealed carry and and there's nothing in this bill that that that supersedes that or removes that particular requirement to have enhanced concealed carry to going to whether since football games or you know come in the capital those type of things as well so I don't consider that a valid argument I'm gonna stop there we've heard all this before and and I guess we can re hash it all again and that's fine with me you know but I'll stop there and if there's any questions then I'll try to answer more Mr logs will try to answer them it. Members are there any questions represent clammy you're recognized for a question thank you madam chair representative Richmond I appreciate you saying that there's nothing in there that says that this does away with enhanced concealed carry license need but. What does away with concealed carry licensees page one line thirty three can you explain to me why this sentence this subchapter does not require a person to obtain a license does not impact enhanced concealed Kerry what enhanced concealed carry in quote unquote this subchapter. Hi Michelle is want to have Mister Arkansas if you'll identify yourself for the record then you may answer the question. Thank you manager my name is Tim long as an executive board member of gun owners Arkansas Thank you representive cloudy for the question I would refer you to possibly three one nineteen and five seven three one twenty to an actual statute which states except as provided in 5-73-322 and then so in other words except as allowed by an enhanced permit which this did not address and also this statute does not in any way repeal or striking the language from possibly three three twenty two. You're recognized for a follow up thank you madam chair I appreciate your reference to other portions of the law but if the goal of this bill is to clarify what this bill does is confuse because we are now we now have two sections of route one says you're not able to carry in these places without enhanced permit without enhanced license the other section now says you don't need a license so we have to two sections of code that are in direct conflict with each other what you're trying to do is clarify this won't do it and I would be really interested if there's any one person in the room who could let us know if this isn't that providing clarity because I do not know what happens to the metal detectors in the front of the capitol when this bill says this subchapter does not require a person to obtain a license and I don't know if there's anybody who's going to speak to that but this feels very confusing to me and I think just taking it on on somebody's way I believe that you are not confused I am confused and I don't know how law enforcement courts would feel so I'm just curious. I don't think I see any law enforcement represent Collins you're recognized for a question thank you and that it was my procedural the but is a legitimate question I mean I I think that we are going to see an impact here on on the State Police I'm curious what the impact is even if we can't get a fiscal impact statement would anyone from the department of public safety be able to address this is in the room to anyone from department public safety in the room. Do you have an estimate of eighteen at this point it's it's late in the session late in the evening but given this I do feel like this is it's one really drilling down on what kind of revenue impact we're going to see to state police I you know it's not an insignificant question I obviously prefer a little bit more objective but if you guys want to hazard a guess at mount I'll take it I don't have an exact number I do know that the Department public safety and and the colonel himself expressed they were neutral on this bill with no adverse impact against somebody they. what other for nor against it again we're neutral I also know the representative Clowney is mentioned that the clarity. And we have been permit was Kerry since two thousand thirteen with ACT seven forty six and one two thousand nineteen that was reinforced with the Taff the Arkansas in the US use me tabby Montgomery County in the pitch of the Arkansas cases and we've seen a steady decline of permit since two thousand nineteen for sure and and and I would argue since two thousand thirteen what is the actual loss going to be with this bill provides some clarity in some cover that the there is a purpose for the for the CHL which is reciprocity traveling out of state of Arkansas this state to require a permit and I would argue that good handgun instructors would would you know good business people would take advantage of that and market that accordingly so that the you know they're they're still people requiring their service and seeking their service I don't have an actual dollar figure in a in a but again we've been undergoing this since two thousand nineteen when. And in the sky hasn't fallen yet. Representive Crawford you're recognized for a question thank you madam chair. would you agree that this legislation this bill does not and does not affect enhance and Kerry this is only for concealing Kerry not enhance is that correct yes ma'am that is correct this this does not address the immense carried and it says that no permit required to carry a concealed weapon but the prohibited place is still in effect which are found in five seven three one not seen in Boston three one twenty two you're prohibited from paying their when you have a permit or not in less as an enhanced permit that's the status of a law currently that will be the status of the law once this bill is passed and signed in that's not going to change this bill in effect that all right I think that was part of the. All up at yes okay you're recognized I think that was part of that question earlier from representative Clowney she was asking about that enhance part about going into the capital with this does not affect enhance it is only conceal and carry. Yes that is correct five seven three three twenty two is still in effect the capital was off limits to to any weapons in less you have the in house payment right thank you represent Clowney you're recognized for a question thank you madam chair please just a yes or no is the enhanced concealed carry and subchapter three. Seventy three three twenty two is found in thousand two three three one eight seconds ma'am. Okay follow up you're recognized does this bill say this subchapter does not require a person to obtain a license this subchapter might not but five seventy three one nineteen in Boston three one twenty two to require them has permit to carry that you're recognized. Obviously we're not gonna be on that and if the language is very clear that one will have to agree to disagree and I guess that on on again lack of clarity that my follow up is You keep talking about this is that this has been established clearly established license two thousand thirteen would law enforcement agree with you and and and I would like to state before you answer that I have heard from many law enforcement officers who do not agree with you so can you please speak to why you think it is so clear from forcing this time the something different. Thank you for the question ma'am accent forty six of two thousand thirteen establish permit less carry now there was some arguing about that it might affect we've had three different attorney general's opinion the last one being two thousand nineteen don't want to buy Attorney General Leslie Rutledge so that three different attorney general's opinions we finally got to court cases in two thousand nineteen I would argue and give you a definitive answer that since two thousand nineteen October two thousand nineteen since the patriots have cases we have been permit was care yes ma'am with without any argument no what we did to further cement that last session this body passed the Johnny definition which said anytime you leave your home or car lease for any purpose or duration you're on a journey which is an offense to a carrying weapons Georgetown impossibly three one twenty so no person can argue since two years ago last session we are absolutely permit less carry without argument now the timing your question. I believe will it was established in two thousand thirteen I believe was reinforced in two thousand nineteen it was absolutely absolutely cemented in two thousand twenty one. Thank you madam chair I have done placement officers tell me as recently as a few days ago that the law remains unclear but it is not establish not that we are permit was carrying out this body may decide to make a payment with Kerry but why would law enforcement still be making that claim if it is in fact clearly established awesome twenty twenty one with no question. Thank you ma'am I do know what the law enforcement training academy at Pocahontas Black River was teaching since two thousand nineteen they were teaching we were permit was Kerrey I can't answer one an individual officer might or might not believe it would baseball twenty. Graduate academy in any follow up training that he may have had since that point I do know that prosecutor Daniel she was that was in two thousand thirteen with a letter from his district that in order to approve a person guilty of carrying a weapon that you would have to establish that they intended to unlawfully employed against person and generally since two thousand thirteen we have more and more prosecutors one more law enforcement I have adopted that policy in into like I said two thousand eighteen and two thousand twenty one when it was submitted. Members any other questions. Seeing no further questions we have no one else signed up to speak for against the bill the president Richmond you're recognized to close for the bill thank you colleagues and and I appreciate all the different questions is important to discuss this is important tried to make sure that we do not pass something bad out here however I do believe like we said represent because it we will simply agree to disagree I know that I have law enforcement that is also told me that this would be helpful to have clarification about what what the law actually means and says I I think that we've had many opportunities to to discuss this I think it's time for us to go ahead and an instance come on the side of the second amendment and once again our rights as citizens to be able to exercise our second amendment rights without having to get somebody's permission. And that's one of the what I really think is is the important part of this and so with that I would close and ask for a do pass and a good vote from the committee thank you he said a motion to do pass. Members who have a motion to do pass on the floor as a discussion of the motion represent County you're recognized for discussion on the motion thank you madam chair I'll keep this brief colleagues but I think that you what we are doing here is establishing Arkansas as a permit was K. state without clarifying it we are not just doing a little technical correction to make sure that the code says what is established this is not establish your establishing that today and I actually think that I probably would to the Committee wouldn't voting differently if the bill just said we are making Arkansas permit less carry state I think the majority of the I would probably agree with that we're just gonna have to disagree as a matter of policy about whether that smart or not I do not but why I am voting no for this particular bill is not only that but it is this is going to cause huge amounts of confusion with respect to the enhanced concealed carry I understand the I don't want it to the language of the bill does impact enhanced concealed carry I think that's going to be a problem maybe it will slip under the radar but under the language of this bill this causes huge problems of where one can and cannot enhance conceal carry and for that reason because I think this doesnt clarify this confuses I'll be and I'll. Members any other discussion on the motion seeing a further discussion all in favor of the motion please say aye. All opposed say no. The ayes have it congratulations you've passed your bill members were going to be in recess for ten minutes. Members go eat District ten minute eating time. All right members we can kind of start gathering up. dressing many of the issues that have been ignored for years our criminal justice system and the governor again I think and evidence of her leadership really coming out strong to address many of these issues that have persisted in our criminal justice justice system for decades and gone on a trip unaddressed and so I think per leadership I think the Attorney General who has been instrumental in driving the conversation on these issues and his staff who were it was very helpful in the drafting of this bill particularly Mr Ryan Cooper who's here with us today who can help explain more the specifics Mr Cooper was it just an integral part of the drafting of this bill and and much of the language that you see in it And then missed on the route from the sentencing commission I can't say thank you enough to her. four. The her input and her work on this bill she the very technical portions of the bill were drafted in large part by ms round she just did a fantastic job I can't again thank her enough for her good work on this and I don't I don't say all of that and also Kelly Eichler who's here from the governor's office Kelly. offered her input and insight throughout this process and it again just can't thank her enough for that I don't say all of that at the outset of this bill to presume that is going to pass but I felt like those those things needed to be said before we started because this bill is to link the bill it contains what's the provisions and again as a complete overhaul essentially of sentencing and parole law in our state so I think all that's very important so as we begin. With an introduction to the bill what you'll see at the beginning of the bill. Here's what I would call the truth in sentencing portion of the bill you'll see that in. Beginning in section two on page two. And I'm sure as many of you have heard Attorney General Griffin talk about repeatedly our current system with respect to parole in Arkansas is deceptive we have people who were sentenced in Arkansas courts every day sometimes for violent crimes for many of the non violent crimes. only serve a fraction of their sentence much of what you see in the newspapers when you see someone was sentenced to twenty years in the department of corrections of forty years in the department of corrections the fact is is in many cases they're only serving a fraction of that sentence some of these on very serious offenses they're being released after having only served in some cases up to as much as only one six of their sentence and some of the crimes that we have are set up on the system I give you one example a prince in sexual assault in the second degree which is a very serious crime is our under our current system a one six parole eligibility crime that means that even if you're given the maximum of twenty years under our current system you're going to be eligible to be released after having served only one six that your sentence or a little maybe a little over three years is what that comes out to and these are many times cases involving sexual abuse of children in the system that we have is Attorney General Griffin has detailed many times the system that we have is deceptive and it's broken the people of Arkansas deserved to know the truth when they read in the newspaper what someone who sentenced for a violent or sexual offense they deserve to know how much time they're actually going to do and that twenty years doesn't mean three years forty years doesn't mean five years. And so that's what we do at the beginning of this bill what you'll see in section two beginning on page two a we define. what I would call one hundred percent crimes those are defined as specifically felonies in eligible to receive foreign release credits and eighteen crimes that are listed under that definition felony in eligible for release credits means you're going to do one hundred percent of the time that you're given whether that's by a judge or by a jury in some of those crimes include Capital murder murder in the first degree kidnapping aggravated robbery rate trafficking of persons engaging children in sexually explicit conduct for use in visual print medium pandering or possessing visual or print media depicting sexually explicit explicit conduct involving a child transportation of minors for prohibited sexual activity sexually grooming a child internet stalking of a child to aggravated residential burglary I could go on but they're eighteen of them and those are the worst of the worst. It's the most serious murder offenses is the most serious sexual offenses involving children it's activated again residential burglary aggravated robbery these are people these are the trigger pullers in the people who are running up in convenience stores and robbing them at gunpoint right up in people's homes and robbing them at gunpoint it's the worst of the worst and if this is a sea change it means in Arkansas if you do one of those crimes and you're convicted you're going to serve a hundred percent of your time. Day for day and that's what the people of Arkansas expect that's what they think is happening but it's not. And so for those crimes a hundred percent next on page three you'll see we defined. What's called restricted release felony under fifty three crimes that are listed under the restricted release felony. For these particular crimes a person who sentenced for one of these crimes will have to serve eighty five percent of their sentence before they're eligible to be released. Out what that is is that is the equivalent of the federal system that mirrors the federal system federal system many years ago eliminated Paul there is no problem the federal system if you're sentenced in the federal system you have to do eighty five percent of your time before you're eligible for release and so under the restricted release felony again there fifty three crimes that fall under that definition again these are things murder in the seconds are crimes murder in the second degree manslaughter negligent homicide I'm just gonna I'm not gonna name them all but I just give you a few battery in the first degree kidnapping if it's a if it's a B. felony terroristic act sexual indecency with a child sexual it's extortion sexual assault in the first degree grooming a minor for future sex trafficking. Permitting the abuse of a minor. Aggravated residential burglary if it's in a felony arson if it's a lot the only which is over a hundred thousand dollars worth of damage making a terrorist threat these are just a you know just to name a few. in engaging in a criminal enterprise. And I could I could go on and on but these are again some of the most serious violent felonies that we recognize in Arkansas law and sexual offenses involving children again this would be the eighty five percent category that a person would have to serve before the eligible to release police which is a measure of how the federal system operates and is true truth in sentencing so that is what I would call the truth in sentencing portion of the bill. Now there are a couple other things that you need to understand there are two more buckets if you will that we create with respect to the felony criminal offenses in Arkansas. And those are what I would call the fifty percent bucket and the twenty five percent bucket. And. We talked about the hundred percent we talk about eighty five percent there over a thousand felony criminal offenses in the Arkansas criminal code we've got eighteen on the hundred percent less we got fifty three on the. eighty five percent list the remainder of those offenses because it would not have been practical to take all of the remaining thousand plus offenses recognized in Arkansas law and try to classify into a fifty percent twenty five percent bucket if you will so what we've done is we've set for those crimes. we've essentially delegated that to the sentencing commission with the approval of council so this will have to get legislative approval but we delegated that to the sentencing commission which already by its statutory duties has to rank crimes in what in terms of their seriousness level so they already assigned seriousness level to these offenses they rank now I'm in degrees of seriousness and separate all the remaining crimes they will propose whether they should be in the fifty percent back into the twenty five percent bucket and then that'll have to be approved by council but these are going to be mostly. If there are violent offenses that one included in the two days but the year low level violence fences and all of your non violent offenses what you won't see on eighty five percent of the hundred percent list are simple possession of marijuana drug paraphernalia the things that people believe mistakenly. That our prisons are filled with our prisons are not filled with non violent drug offenses or drug offenders stop filled with hot check writers it's not build with marijuana smokers our prisons are primarily filled with violent sexual offenders repeat offenders offenders who have committed aggravated burglary robbery and those types of fences those types offenses make up. When you add in the following gonna fences make up about three quarters of the prison population so this myth out there that we're incarcerating all these non violent offenders is just not true the data doesn't build out. But with respect to these lower level offenses those are gonna be delegated the sentencing commission. All right to assign so one of the other important things about the truth in sentencing before I move on from this because I think it's important yes we have essentially or we not essentially we have eliminated parole as we know it in Arkansas. So we're moving from a system where people are automatically eligible to be released they don't have to do anything but to earn anything they can just sit in their jail cell and one of these days without having done a thing the number will be called and they're gonna be eligible for release well this bill changes that. In order to be released early you have to earn your early release and that's through the opening of our bond release credits and I think that I think are voters would expect this I think is good public policy because it emphasizes personal responsibility. It emphasizes accountability it ensures that the inmates are in the department of corrections I actually have an incentive to complete the programming and to do the things that are necessary to help prevent rehabilitate themselves to be successful when they're released. we're talking about when we talk about earning the unreleased credits and eliminating this automatic eligibility for release we're talking about things like educational opportunities getting a GED getting a high school diploma earning work certifications learning a trade participating in the behavioral programming that the department of correction has and then also good behavior so we want to incentivize all of those things and. We incentivize that by saying you can be released early if you are in it And that incentivizes the prisoners actually in the inmates to actually do that as opposed to just expect one day that they're going to be released because their number's gonna be call. I think that's a very important policy. Part of this bill. the other thing that we address. In the truth in sentencing peace. If the person is revoked they violated the terms of early release and this is important in terms of repeat offenders if the part of a person is revoked and on a per hundred percent eighty five percent crime when the crimes that falls into those buckets they must do the entire ballot so there's sentence they were previous it previously sentenced to and then one hundred percent of the new sentence that they're given. And that's one of the things when you look at our current correctional system the thing that's plaguing the state of Arkansas are the repeat offenders it's the same people this isn't this is a fact it's the same people over and over who are committing the vast majority of crimes in Arkansas and it's a small group of people I mean when you think about it you think about the prison population current prison population is about seventeen thousand people what is over three million people in the state of Arkansas I mean is a west that's less than one percent of the population is currently incarcerated in the department of correction and sadly it's by and large the same people and so we're going to put an end to the revolving door if you're a repeat offender and you're committing one of these serious crimes that falls on a hundred percent list with eighty five percent last your and your revoked because you've committed a new offense you're gonna have to serve about the balance of your remaining sentence and then do a hundred percent of your any time and that ends the revolving door that Ms this the catch and release the same people who are being arrested incarcerated let out arrested incarcerated let out is that is that system and I think that's once again another very important piece of the. The truth in sentencing portion there are some provisions in there about offenders being transferred. to treatment based on community correction centers who transferred back to the Division of questions for disciplinary reasons in other words if you're if you've been in the department of community correction and you violate the terms you have to go back to the department of corrections to about the entire period of incarceration and then the last piece in section two of the bill which again is the truth in sentencing pace is there is a release eligibility exception which is if you're sixty years plus and you serve at least half your sentence and your recommended by the Director of the ADC and it's approved you can be released your you can be eligible for release that does not apply to the eighty five or one hundred percent crimes. Correct okay. And so that that's all in section two that's the truth in sentencing portion of the bill section three. This is the mental health piece of the bill this is the secured restoration the mental health pilot basically what we're working with county jails for dependents are not fit to proceed or suffering from a mental disease or defect and this is going to through a memorandum of understanding allowed DHS to go in and provide mental health treatment of these defendants to try to get them in a place where the fit to proceed and Help help move these folks who are suffering from mental illness to the system appropriately in some cases that will mean that they're not fit to proceed or not fit to stand trial there were not guilty by reason of mental disease or defect and they'll have to be dealt with accordingly for those who can be restored to fitness to proceed then they'll proceed through the system once they're restored but this will is an investment mental health that will hopefully help the system operate more efficiently we got a big problem at the state hospital that's something that's going to need to be addressed by this legislature some point it cost a tremendous amount of money to in court to not incarcerated to keep someone in the state hospital and. When you look at programs like this even though it it does take a fair amount of money it's far less than what it costs to keep someone the state hospital so this mental health pilot program I have a lot of hope that this is going to be something that yields good results so that we can expand upon the future section five. Moving on. Members of sure let's get page numbers that might be a little easier thank you absolutely so the secure restoration mental health pilot is on page twenty seven. And so I would be and I will say just at the one hundred ninety five percent pace the truth in sentencing pace. There are some who characterize that is being. Hard on crime and I think that it is but we have really sought to have a good balance in this bill by instituting mental health. Reforms by instituting reforms specifically for re entry workforce training and education. And that you will see that as we kind of go through the bill but we really try to have a very balanced bill not just a tough on crime bill the bill that. Was very comprehensive and. Addressing the criminal justice system as a whole so section five so this will be on page thirty what you'll see there is there's no probation or SAS for the one hundred percent offenses. Or permission prohibited articles that's pretty much consistent with existing law you can't give probation. on Class Y. felony is currently. you can give S. I. S. on a Class Y. felony I believe let miss Ralph comment on that and the only exception to know probation or SIS on class Y. felonies is gonna be for drug felonies you can give a stress I ask you also cannot get probation or S. I. S. for habitual offenders or murder in the second degree DWI or continuing criminal enterprise. Represent Richardson you have a recognized I'm sorry I'm not attorney can you guys tell me what SIS me some of the economic you guys user it I apologize that suspended imposition of sentence is essentially unsupervised probation. So you can't get probation or unsupervised probation if you will for those offenses listed in the one hundred percent. West or for furnishing prohibited articles. also in section five you'll see it authorizes the court to sentence to short periods of post release supervision. For the hundred percent offenses to ensure that the dependents don't flatten their sentence and just get released with no supervision I can witness we're all kind of expand upon that. And sure so effectively acknowledges that if you serve a hundred percent of your term of incarceration you're going to have no period of supervised release I think the. Kind of anecdotal term is a hundred dollars in a bus ticket the Bill sponsors didn't want to do that so there were some changes to structurally to ensure that there would be some some period of supervision after that term of incarceration so when you hear things like that can be revoked after they started a hundred percent that's because of that it does have to be assessed by the court so and it can't Twin aggregated with the term of imprisonment it cannot exceed the statutory maximum for the offense. So yeah that's right and I think this is where we set up the seven year on a Y. felony so the basically this is how this permit this part of the bill works post release supervision something that you see in the federal system but basically when someone is released from prison if they want sentenced to the maximum they'll be eligible for or they will be I suppose eligible for what we call post release supervision for a Y. felony that cannot exceed seven years now this is actually a positive change for our what are now going to be a separate all officers community supervision officers is actually positive change because you have instances now where people on supervision for twenty years well this is going to limit that is going to say if you're on a Whopper Y. felony you can only be on post release supervision for seven years if it's. It's an a a B. felony it's five years or a call an act an unclassified felony that has a statutory maximum of more than ten years old and everything else is three right so what the only seven years and a a B. felony is five years and the C. or D. felony run class but actually unclassified felony is ten years. Thank an unclassified felony is based on the statutory maximum if it's yours or more than it is it goes with the a and B. felonies okay not at all one page twenty eight right so you'll see all that on page twenty eight but anyway it basically we've defined periods of post release supervision and and the hope is is that we don't keep people on these extended post release supervision parents that really. The really create what appear to be huge caseloads for pro Paul officers because it in effect they're not supervising these people for twenty years so this is more in line with what's actually happening. Anything else on that. Okay. Moving on section seven was to be page thirty one. This delays the due dates on fines and fees not restitution to a hundred twenty days after least once again we want to have. We wanted to show some grace to people who were leaving the department of corrections so that they don't immediately start off in the whole you you know you have people who release from prison they're not able to find a job immediately they're not able to start making the payments immediately and so this will provide him with a hundred twenty day grace period for them to get back on their feet hopefully find employment before they have to start making the first payment because we don't want to set people up for failure currently you have to start making those payments immediately and I think this is a. A good measure section tends to be page thirty two. Of this also concerns probation SAS restrictions. We'll talk about that. all this section does is just duplicates the language those restrictions are in several places in the code. Section sixteen was to be paid just thirty four thirty five we had Capital murder and unlawful discharge. Of. A firearm while in the vehicle to the habit you'll offender list. Under the serious violent felonies. The same thing with section you'll see section seventeen pages thirty five and thirty seven we had Capital murder and unlawful discharge to the a **** offender list. And then we remove residential burglary from that list but we make changes to the aggravated residential burglary. Law to really sure up the kind of offense is that we want to be incarcerating people for versus the type of offenses that. don't maybe our our to serious the person's not armed if the person doesn't in our house and so on and so forth. For me one second. All right. So what you'll see there throughout the bill what with respect to some specific criminal offenses I'm a try to keep this short because I realize the hours getting late there's gonna be some questions that I try to go through this section by section we're gonna be here while so let me let me try to condense this down to the most serious well I think of the most impactful portions of the bill. So with respect to. Increasing penalties for existing crimes manslaughter and this is part of the prosecuting attorneys association's package so that. There are several pieces of this work that were part of the Arkansas prosecuting attorney associations legislative package with their in this bill so we're increasing manslaughter from a C. felony to a B. felony that means from three to ten years to five to twenty years so the point is the minimum doesn't go up much so you're just going from three to five but the maximum they'll be eligible there and which can be some pretty bad conduct or talk about a case where someone has died. the the maximum will go up from ten years to potential twenty years negligent homicide goes from a misdemeanor to a D. felony promoting prostitution of a child goes from a D. felony to a B. felony. Currently under existing law promoting prostitution of a child is zero to six years we're gonna make that five to twenty years in a more enhancing penalties for unlawful discharge of a firearm from a vehicle and terroristic Act committing committed in the presence of a child so those are enhanced penalties and again these are things that are part of prosecuting attorneys association's legislative package. Protecting law enforcement the public we've increased penalties for fleeing when there's a risk serious risk of death or bodily injury present. And we've eliminated the automatic release. as we as I previously discussed we require the inmates to earn on released credits. There are specific provisions in the bill with regard to victims and I want to make that I want to emphasize this because everything that we do in the criminal justice system ultimately is to try to provide a sense of justice and to protect victims of crime and so there are measures in here that are designed to do that one victims will be notified before certain offenders are granted post release supervision and to be given the opportunity to offer input. And with respect to child victims we are expanding the availability of the court house dogs this was an initiative of the prosecuting attorney's association we passed in previous sessions. And so the hope is that we're going to and I believe we will we're gonna expand that program throughout the state these are. Children many times children who've been subjected to sexual abuse and these dogs one help them. Okay I'm sorry did you just second. Yeah. Twenty one. Page is seventy four and seventy five yeah section one twenty one. Yes I read fast. Okay thanks. So that you know this again will. Expand the availability of those dogs to the children who have suffered sexual abuse and those dogs are so important when children go in for an initial meeting with prosecutors I mean they're going in to meet with lawyers you've got a child who's experienced sexual abuse they're very uncomfortable and so it you know these are these are. These dogs provide them a good amount of comfort and then when they have to testify at trial which is just a. Really traumatic experience for a child imagine if you. You know it having supper that type of abuse have to go into a room full of strangers. For the judgment with a black robe with twelve strangers sitting in a jury box and having to related sexual experience to them and that's what we asked children to do in these cases. And I can't imagine how traumatic that must be how horrific that must be and so these dogs that are very highly trained accompany the child the jury never sees them into the court room the children of the dogs sets at the witness stand with the child out of out of you the jury and helps provide that child was some comfort hopefully allows them to be able to give their testimony more comfortably certainly than they would be otherwise expanding that program for to help child victims and then we change the law in sexual extortion to encompass a course of conduct me make sure I give you that Page forty one so you got to go back all this is not necessarily going to be in order but I just wanna get through it. page forty one amends or sexual extortion law to protect our children who have been the target of sexual extortion and so let me explain where this comes from. There was a rash of sexual extortion cases in south Arkansas specifically in elder radio. where these online predators were targeting young teenage boys and they were basically enticing them to. perform certain acts on video posing as two young teenage girls and then once they got a video of the teenage boy performing some terrible Act. The I'm sorry I'm not sure what you tell me. Yes. Once they get the recording they would then try to blackmail the boys and say. If you're if your parents don't wiress a certain amount of money we're going to release this video on the internet well when I read about that in the news I looked are sexual extortion law to see whether or not that course of conduct was covered in the way our sexual extortion law was written it did not cover that course of conduct so we had very specifically and and the FBI was involved in in looking at these cases I want to make sure that we had a covered in Arkansas law to and so we've covered that specific course of conduct to help protect children I think it around the country that was happening and there were young boys who committed suicide because they were so disturbed over these people attempting to blackmail and extort them. With this type of evidence and so and we do that once again to help child victims With regard to sex offenders so what pages are we gonna be on here. Which ones are you looking. The notifications those are kind of really scattered about yeah. I wanna make sure I give you Page numbers if you're trying to follow along. But basically we've enhanced protections from sex offenders and I don't have the page numbers immediately available to me but it expands notification requirements for sex offense victims upon early release of sex offenders that closes the early release loophole for certain sex offenders right and you have the specific information on that okay at another read read that earlier prohibiting sex offenders out on early release supervision from residing with matters. And that's on page twenty six. What we do there is we added so it's already. A prohibited for certain sex offenders those who have been convicted of a sex offense under 5-14-101 et seq the sex offender has been convicted of incest and what we have there are sex offenders who have been convicted of an offense under the Arkansas protection of children against exploitation act and what that is is internet crimes against children essentially all of those things that I read to you earlier involved internet crimes against children the child **** type offenses if a person has been convicted one of those offenses upon release they cannot reside. With a minor. we. Have provisions that address repeat offenders I've already discussed some of those but another one would be theft so there's a provision here do we have that page number. Okay well we get the page number basically this is how it works for someone who's been convicted of a felony who gets a second conviction so upon a second or subsequent conviction of Delft. That would be a felony offense. Windows that's on page forty two and forty three. And then I've already talked about the repeat offenders on post release supervision who violate the terms of the. The violate the terms of their release having to go back and serve out the remaining portion of their sentence plus. The New time so I've already discussed that and that's in a couple different sections of the bill. Now I will move on. To the what I would call I think the more. The softer part of the bill well we tried to address reentry for inmates we try to address issues related to the family for inmates and then diversion and rehabilitation so I'm a quickly touch on those and then I'll be ready for questions. So with regard to re entering workforce training so we talk about. People have been sentenced to serve their time and you're ready to be released we want to make sure that they are prepared to re integrate into society and we're gonna give them the best opportunity to be able to get a job in a move forward and be productive citizens productive members of society so one of the ways that we do that. Is we are going to provide upon release certain vital documents that these inmates need in order to apply for jobs so that's things like birth certificates social security cards at the work and training certificates they received while they're in prison another working training information prior to the release I'm gonna give you Page number here. That's on page sixty four. And sixty five. And so we're going to ensure that inmates upon release are provided with those documents so that they can make application for jobs and. to try to get established also other provisions that require the department of correction to coordinate with work work work work for services and other community organizations to help better prepare inmates for reentry the pages there that's sixty five and sixty six we're expanding the access to restricted driving permit schools that doesn't apply to everyone certainly if you're offense involved some type of driving offense DWI the other things that's not going to apply to you but for most offenses they're gonna be eligible for a restricted driving permit because we won't be able to get to places they need to go Work in other places I've already discussed but there's a hundred twenty day grace period before those release have to begin making payments of fines and fees that does not apply to restitution because if there is a victim to whom restitution is owed you have to start paying them immediately but as far as fines and fees go. There's a grace period and then we talked about incentivizing good behavior is for offenders and there are some specific provisions addressing that I think tonic and probably. Discuss more those. I think you're referencing the offender violation grid okay and so prior to a full revocation for individuals on probation parole or now post release supervision. There are or what we call intermediate sanctions primarily those are going to be increased reporting but there are options where you can get a short term of incarceration so the first thing is that the caps on the number of those short terms of incarceration are going to be reduced to keep it so that somebody is on a really long term those prior intermediate sanctions fall off in addition the offender violation grade is going to be revised so that there are additional incentives for positive behavior right now there's a lot of ways to have points for negative behavior that kind of count against you the law requires that ACC look at positive behavior and assign more points to that and then the meaningful place for that added is on page ninety seven and then one fifteen and one sixteen it's also in the provisions of the very beginning of the bill it really has to be in three places because it applies to post release supervision parole and probation. So those are some of the provisions that you'll see with regard to re entry and workforce training which we think are important already discussed the mental health pilot program. with regard to inmates and and attempting to. kind of increase family visitation and ensure that we try to keep families together where it's appropriate now it's not gonna be appropriate all instances if your offense involved a family member then visitation is probably not gonna be a good thing and may not in some instances would be absolutely band not allow that would be inappropriate to where it is appropriate that we're expanding visits with minor children. Six this is on page sixty nine through seventy one expanding visits for inmates with minor children that includes video business and there are also contact visits. there is and then another provision where we're trying to keep families close together about placing of the parents of minor children who are incarcerated and facilities within two hundred fifty miles of the of their children and the point is is you will want to separate people were. they can have access to the parents can act have access to the family we want that to we want to keep the family unit as close together as we can. Which I think is a positive change there is increased bonding time for incarcerated mothers to give birth while they're in prison this doesn't happen that often but when it does currently the only have twenty four hours and we're expanding that to a minimum of seventy two but it could be up to one month and that's their program with UAMS the correct. And. Then we are providing additional prenatal trainings including health and nutrition and parenting classes. That have. Previously not existence my understanding so out last thing I want to talk about men and women should be other things that I'll open it up for questions but the last thing is expanding the specialty court's. All right we currently have in Arkansas several specialty court's but particularly what we want to what we wanted to emphasize what the drug courts to try to divert people from going to the penitentiary on drug offenses not a lot of people go to the penitentiary on drug offenses has you likely have to be a repeat offender or have a really serious drug offense that was pled down to something much lower before you ever go to the penitentiary in Arkansas the drug offense as determined general reference said yet to try to get into Arkansas prison if you're drug offenders certainly not going to first time likely not going or second time it was it was something like trafficking of fentanyl maybe then you go your first time but per simple possession possession of drug paraphernalia extremely rare so what we want to do for those repeat offenders who are struggling clearly struggling with addiction is we want to divert them from prison from community corrections and one way that we can do that is to expanding our drug courts and so we got a proposal from the administrative office of the court is going to require about four point five million dollars in additional funding is going to expand allow them to expand the treatment teams that are available so that they can take on more people in the drug courts. and this would be around the state so that they can hire the attorney is necessary to represent the spokesman Drug Court that particularly the public defenders or will be public defenders but they'll be defense attorneys will be there to guide their clients along the way through the through the Specialty court process but it's not just drug court or other specialty court's of mental health court there's a veterans court and these are all products that we want to divert from incarceration these are folks if we can keep them out of the penitentiary we're all better served it's gonna it costs less money and hopefully you can trade in addiction as opposed to incarcerating someone to treat someone with mental health issues or treat a veteran who sacrificed so much for country so expanding the specialty court's I think is a another very important part of the bill so that is that's a very general overview of what the bill does I do want to go back and say one to other things. With regard to the implementation of this bill. And I think this is an important piece for a couple reasons but we talked about the hundred percent list that will not become effective until January one of twenty twenty four. And when we talk about the eighty five percent list and. I'm saying this correctly right you're looking at me as if I'm saying this right we look at that eighty five percent list and the fifty and twenty five percent that the additional changes to the. early release. System that we're creating those will not take effect until January one of twenty twenty five. Part of the reason for that is in a couple of reasons but one is. We're expanding present capacity not that's not in this particular bill so there are you know when you talk about the governor has said there's going to be finding to find an additional three thousand beds that's not in this bill there's not an appropriation for that in this bill and that's that's going to come about through other means this bill doesn't address that but we know that that is going to be expanded but if we make all these changes to. Early release time when people are eligible for early release you run the risk of overloading the system by these changes when the capacity has not been built out so by delaying the start date of the one hundred percent until January one twenty twenty four and the remainder defenses until January one twenty twenty five it gives time to build out that capacity before we really start seeing an impact from the changes made by the changes to the. Current release eligibility so that's one of the reasons. And then there was another good reason why we're doing that. another good reason is for our chest. Administrative rule promulgation building in programming M. as the representative mentioned this is going to be a pretty substantial departure from what our current system is there's going to need to be some meaningful consideration about how old all the programming in the offender management system is built so that things are done correctly and the sponsors have been very accommodating in dealing with the department's request to give a little bit a lead time to deal with that so. So after nine o'clock and I meant to say that but absolutely one of the other important reasons why we need to delay the start date the capacity of course very important but judges prosecutors defense lawyers are going to have to be trained they're gonna have to get you know really up to speed on what these changes are because we don't need to be sentencing people to forty years when the approachability used to be one six and now that forty years may mean forty years or maybe an eighty five percent of forty years and people don't know that you know that has the ability to really work some injustice and you know to make the problem worse that we're trying to fix so we wanna make sure that we allow enough lead time that everybody gets up to speed in trying to appropriately so that the the raid implement this until at one that we stop right here and let's take any questions represent Collins you're recognized for a question. Thank you madam chair so representative Gazaway I mean I I I think that the ostensible reason for this bill is that we have crime in Arkansas that is not acceptable that crime rates are too high we want to reduce crime but the big part of the but the biggest part of this bill is the truth in sentencing bar which effectively extends senses and I just want to review a couple of statements and these statements are published by the US justice department the certainty being caught is a vastly more deterrent than the punishment sending an individual convicted of a crime to prison isn't a very effective way to deter crime increasing the severity of punishment does little to deter crime and it's totally separate study says a based on a meta analysis of a hundred and sixteen so as in this is from twenty twenty one very recent meta analysis means looks at all the other analyses it says incarceration cannot be justified on the grounds it affords public safety by decreasing recidivism the No effect of custodial compared with noncustodial sanctions is considered a criminological fact and this is borne out in in study after study I mean this is not something that hasn't been research has been researched extensively does do longer sentences especially on the on the hi I am like what you're talking about going from a moderate or severe sensory more service since does that reduce crime and in time after time it's shown the answer is no so in light of all that do you think that the truth in sentencing us but is it intended to reduce crime and what can you point to that shows that something like this would reduce crime. Thank you for your question I think that that's a good question it's one that we should ask as we approach a serious subject is this. So I just I think I disagree with the premise that incarceration doesn't reduce crime. the. And I understand that you there maybe studies that you point to that have come to that conclusion of course I've been around long enough and in the legal system know that you can find an expert witness to say anything that you want the same credentialed and everyone will say one thing the other person will say the exact opposite in the both testify in court with exemplary correct credentials so the fact that there's there are studies that suggest that I don't think necessarily mean that it's true but I think. What I would point to is incapacitation. Will reduce crime specifically for these repeat offenders because if you're locked up you can't commit a crime unless you're committing a crime in prison. but if you are locked away you can't continue to. Be a one man crime spree out in the community you can't continue to rape abuse molest rob steal murder you can't do those things inside a prison cell unless it's against a prison guard and part of what I would point to is you know you can look back at that the history of this country we've been through this before particularly in the I think late eighties and early nineties when there was uh skyrocketing violent crime. And beginning with I think George W. George H. W. bush and Bill Clinton and even George W. bush they. increase the prison population of the federal prison population by expanding of prison capacity and during those years you saw violent crime rates drop dramatically. And that is due to again incapacitating those. Those offenders and and many of which and I'm gonna go back to it's a small group of people who commit the vast majority of crime. And when you incapacitate those people who. commit dozens if not. Are you know over the course of a period of years dozens if not hundreds of crimes out here kind of spreading the gospel of crime to everybody else in their community getting them involved in criminal activity when you incarcerate those people you stop a lot of crimes and I think that that happened with the expansion of the I think you could say that in the numbers when they expanded the prison population in the nineties particularly with regard to violent crime you saw about crime rates go down. Thank you. The following so in thank you so I mean if incapacitation is the goal and these are you know and I think the turners no written reference these are people who would do you harm if if you saw them on the street these motion and rapists and on rehabilitation's impossible for many of them the how can you justify releasing them at all why are we releasing these murderers and rapists these people who cannot be rehabilitated back into society. Well I think that's why we have a one hundred percent list that includes things like capital murder first degree murder rape they're they're gonna do one hundred percent of their time so the I think the goal there is for those people to not be re released or not be released I think that same thing with those crimes upon eighty five percent list I mean these once again there's this is not simple drug possession that fall on those lists this is a hot check writing that falls on that list this isn't we were dealing with all serious felonies by and large involving violence or involving sexual offenses involving children. And as you point out there some of these offenders who some would say I think there's some research that suggests that particularly with sexual offenders that they're incapable of being rehabilitated. I'm not sure if that that those those studies have been conclusive but there are studies that certainly suggests that and that's what those offenses are the ones included on the one hundred percent eighty five percent list but it sorry. What is your question a clown and I'll circle back to you as but in answer questions represent County you're recognized for a question thank you madam chair representative Gazaway I want to Talk about this post release supervision a little bit so I guess I'll go back to questions I put them in one because I want you to see where I'm going with it so the first part of my question is are we not kind of double punishing people in other words if they're serving a hundred percent of their total term and then we're saying that the court has to impose an additional post a provision you know terms is that double punishment and my second question because I know that you mentioned right talking about that at that federal law and so my question is can you speak a little bit outcomes that we have seen from the federal system that that that indicate to us that we should adopt something similar in Arkansas. Yeah that's a great question thank you so in terms of post release supervision We're we are limiting the time that a person can be released on post release supervision and I think one of the things that's important is. Is the time on post release supervision cannot exceed the statutory maximum so the way it works in practice is if the statutory maximum for twenty years. person was sentenced to fifteen years they couldn't receive more than five or what five years post release supervision if that were a B. felony I think under the way we have a written. Well they could they would be eligible for five but if it were any anything less than that received felony that they're only eligible for three years post release supervision if it's a D. felony only three years post release supervision and it cannot exceed the statutory maximum so we're not imposing a punishment beyond that which the person would have been eligible to receive and I don't think that is right to look at poster Lee supervision as a punishment so to speak about the thanks specifically with these more violent offenses. and certainly the sexual offenses these are people who. The majority of our Kansans would want to know in what bill safe knowing that they are on some degree of supervision that in other words we don't just release him from prison with a bus ticket and say best of luck to you and they're out here not being supervised at all so. I understand your point about so with regard to double punishment I don't see it as double punishment I think so long as it doesn't exceed the statutory maximum. It's not double punishment and I think. For our communities and for most people Mostar Kansans would expect there to be some supervision period when someone is released. I think for community safety purposes and I'm not sure I fully answer your question because I think maybe your concern was about when someone is revoked. On post release supervision if that wasn't your question okay. You're recognized for a follow up follow at thank you madam chair so sorry to disturb my second the second time I question if we're modeling what we're doing after federal I do we have any evidence that what's happening in the federal system is working in other words if any evidence that this post supervision post release supervision is effective in accomplishing the goals that were aiming to accomplish with this bill. I personally don't have any any data on that or obscene any studies on that miss row may have something or Mister Cooper I'm not sure. I don't have anything but we have research people who can look into that for you. You're recognized for a question. Thank you madam chair and I kind of wanted to dig down and some of the one hundred percent eighty five percent at sentencing that that you've been talking about because you stress that in in both of those cases we're talking about sort of the worst the worst and sex crimes murder really kind of heinous stuff I mean I'm looking on the listeners even terrorism and trying to overthrow the government and things like that which is why eight I'm a little confused as to why negligent homicide appears on the eighty five percent less hi I am looking at what the code currently says five ten one five we're talking about people who may have been driving drunk which is probably the most common time and people who passed a stopped school bus someone who go file tired or fatigued. And a you know these are not it in my mind these don't rise to that worst of the worst type crimes and they don't necessarily have the intent to the presence of mind to commit these crimes so why is negligent homicide being treated the same as trying to overthrow the government. So I think you the raise a fair point I think that do you know with regard to. Most of the offenses that are included on those lists those are offenses that people commit purposely or knowingly you know with a very intentional mental state. when you I think the reason that you see negligent homicide on the eighty five percent list is because someone died and you know because of that the severity of it You know even though the offense may not be the mental state required to commit the offence may not be that great the harm caused someone has died is certainly great and so I think that's why you see on the list but but I think you make a fair point while you're recognized for a follow eight and and I and I don't mean at all to to minimize the fact that someone died if you tried my negligent homicide but I do worry that we're talking about someone who may have made and at a truly Innocent mistakes Hillman who fell asleep at the wheel someone who took the medication that they didn't know what to have a side effect that that cause them to to lose control of your vehicle not be able to drive I mean it's actually in the case of somebody who maybe was taking medication that they weren't aware was going to affect them you're talking about someone who didn't at all mean to hurt another person and who through no fault of their own may have been put into a situation that they they never would have intended it never would have done and they're being treated the same as someone who literally tried to overthrow the government eight and and to me I I I think that hi being this categorization within your eighty five percent really kind of takes away from the value of what you're doing with the rest of that crime centering eighty five percent less because I would agree with you that those do fall into this hands category but this one seems to stick out and and it to me these are the people that are that we want to rehabilitate these the people that again need to be punished because someone lost their life that are not hardened criminals and so I am concerned about its inclusion in this list. So the exam thank you for those comments thank you for your question I think you make a fair point and I I would go back to a you know I think to your point. The person's actions in those situations were not intentional they want to knowingly they weren't done purposefully they weren't done intentionally. These are people who many of the in many of the instances you mention we might deem as accidents now I will say for criminal negligence is different than civil negligence criminal negligence as a as requires a showing of gross negligence which is a gross deviation from the standard of care that a normal person would use under the circumstances. So that you know it is kind of a heightened level from what we think about in the civil context but still I think your point is well taken that this would kind of wrap up those folks who weren't acting intentionally but we're acting negligently I will say we. Under this bill that was homicide will become a D. felony does zero to six years so you're not looking at you know. Not looking at a really long term of imprisonment but you know any term of imprisonment is long if if if you should be there or or Or the you know for certain types of conduct so certainly I understand your point. Represent Crawford you're recognized for a question. Thank you madam chair. I have about three so I don't know what let's let's take to women to represent Collins to to I'm coming back to him so let's take her to and I'll circle back to you okay. Is this bill debatable at all. Or is it set in stone already. Well that's not really for me to say I'm done presenting the bill last day to get it passed so. Well in in this one even one of my questions but with what representive Hudson said you just kind of brushed her off of yes that you understood it but not that anything would be done with that so I'm wondering if we're wasting our time here or if there's any way that anything in this bill is going to be taxed. I guess the question is. Are we to that point where you could amend the bill. And. Get it to us and get it through and then back over to the Senate to concur in the amendment says with I think the question is I'm not trying to short change anybody's questions but we're at a quarter till ten and that may be the quickest way if there is a real appetite for an amendment. So let me make a couple points with regard to the negligent homicide I. At this because I want to come back to that because I felt like I certainly tried to address representative Hudson's questions bully I would never try to side step someone's questions or boredom or not address the questions police and if I did not apologize so when I come back to that because I do think there is at least one important thing to point out but with regard to your question and then the chair. you know I don't I don't know I mean we're really late in the game here I mean from what I'm being told we're going to have to adjourn the session on Friday. you know you make an amendment in this has to. What to Senate back to the Senate have they have to concur in the house amendment after. Rate as set on the calendar I don't know I just I don't know the answer to that thank you very. At I've got Marty Garrity coming down so we'll we'll ask in. Buddy Johnson if you're watching. Yeah. He's not retired yet Mr Johnson if you're watching we have a question in Judiciary. And that in the right let's move on with our questions will circle back to this issue because it's it's possible I think with the way we have amended the rules that you can be on a calendar in the onto calendars in one day so the one we can get an amendment. Run and adopted I don't know but we're gonna get those questions answered but I want to get to the substantive questions and so represent Crawford and then let you sit. It to go ahead and ask questions and then I've got. About three more people in the queue and so we need to get to those questions listed that we find a question if that is something that we come back to but let's move on with our questions thank you madam chair. One thing that concerns me is that hundred twenty days they have to pay fines unless it's restitution and then it has to be done immediately so if they're not working yet. am I saying that wrong if they're not working yet how do you expect them to pay immediately anything. And then just a statement this is too important. To push through if you would tell the leadership this is too important we've got to take time and get a ride thank. Next representative Scott it It and represent because I haven't forgotten you I'm not list representative Scott you're recognized for a question thank you madam chair Okay Mister Gazaway I think I'm confused and I'm trying to understand the new overhaul of the parole of the pro system so it's now called the community supervision officer. Kind of program or physician okay so I know in the three terms I've been here we've come to allocate it more may need to get more resources for parole officers I still think they had a case load of ninety to a hundred inmates park. Part for probation officer right and so I guess I'm trying to understand what the case file might look like going forward that might be something you can't tell me or have we ever thought about I heard you mention that sometimes it's just a few. Of the parolees of open saying this right who I like high risk who need to mean the more intrusive kind of supervision have we ever thought about how I just don't know what your new program looks like in if we still are going to have these officers community supervision officers caseloads at whatever they're at I mean are we going to make progress on the issues we've kind of been facing and there are many at for years. Yeah that's a great question I think I can answer it but miss row is really has more information about how that process currently works and how to work. with these changes so I'm a let her answer that. Okay so I think I kind of and you're understood your question have two parts first you kind of reference community supervision officers that's really just a remaining to account for the fact that they'll kind of be handling probation parole into this post release supervision so. Any changes to parole eligibility Larkin a based on the offense state and so we're going to kind of see this transition where for some period of time we have people on the old parole system and post release supervision their names are already getting pretty long so we had probation slash parole officer and then we have probation slash parole agent it seemed a little cleaner since they all supervise you know next case load to kind of just make one catch all term there and the second question had to do with caseloads and there are still provisions in the bill that say that that community correction will assess to risk based analysis figure out who kind of needs that more intense supervision it's not a meaningful change from existing law but I do think that that kind of addresses the question about how we're dealing with this and in addition I think that when you see the president stay length then that's going to necessarily result in a reduction of caseloads because people will be spending less time on supervision after they're released. Thank you so in the transition. There K. flow could actually increase beyond. Did I understand you are so I think that the probation and parole case load would actually go down because they'll be spending less time on supervision of course cost wise I think we know that that's going to be offset. You know and then some by the increase in the amount of presence today but it will decrease caseloads for probation and parole officers yeah and I'm going to jump in there on that real quick so we are redefining the term so you're used to hearing probation or parole officer that's just simply being redefined as community supervision officer there's a big portion of this bill that are really technical changes because when the from the effective date of this act there you will have people of this route mention who were sentenced under the existing scheme of parole if you will who will still operate according to the parole laws so we couldn't just. we can just strike all of the pro laws because those are going to still be applicable for the people who are sentenced under those laws and would be proud that we are changing the name to subcommittee supervision officer but then they'll be a whole new. Scheme set out under community supervision which miss route talked about and actually because of the the length of the post release supervision limits that we're putting in place of the seven year the five year and three year we actually believe those caseloads are going to go down because what you see under the old system are people that are on parole for twenty years now they're not being supervised but they still show up on that person's case load if you will as someone who knows on their on their docket or on their part of the case but they're not being supervise anymore they long since quit supervising but they show up as someone who. is you know still on their caseload which inflates the numbers and so if you limit these post release supervision period to something much more reasonable to a period of time when people are actually likely to commit a violation if you're going to violate the law after you've been released you're likely going to do it in the first seven years or five years or three years depending on the conduct. and so it just doesn't make sense to continue to keep these people on parole for twenty years or you know how long it is now so we actually think those caseloads will go down. And this route may have something to add to that. Mr call you have a. Question I do thank you Mr question yes you're recognized. I'm sorry were you finished. Okay you're recognized. Thank you Mr chair just a couple things I wanted head on but but one of the first things is we're doing a lot of enhancements I wanna follow up little bit on what representative heads and brought up in my head of Turner. Thank you. Okay I want to follow up a little bit on what representative Hudson brought up I wanted to talk about the the theft it's on page forty three classified as a D. felony fuera. The value of the properties one thousand dollars or less and the person has been previously convicted of a theft offense of any classification. Continue with your question okay thank you. I don't I don't know how much of that you heard it but I I was trying to draw your attention to page forty three on the theft That the property. Of the value properties one thousand dollars or less and persons been previously convicted of it that offense of any classification and I mean one thing I noticed that there are no time limits in between these convictions can can you speak to that a little bit. Well I think that you make a good point I think the purpose is to go back to this. The purpose is to deal with the repeat offender so We have a problem with repeat offenders and making making sure that they're. held accountable and one way that we did that without the is by kind of aggregating that used to be the law with the respect that they ought to think used to be able to aggregate after so many thefts they became a felony. there was some discussion about lowering the threshold. Four thousand one five hundred before it became a felony I certainly wasn't favored that but for the record this was to address repeat offenders but I think you make a good point in that your concern from what I hear is that a person can get a theft conviction thirty years ago. I even under a thousand dollars in any amount could be shoplifting and then you know get get that conviction thirty years later another shoplifting conviction conviction and now they're facing a felony You know there is some concern there we do place limits that there is a law DWI for instance in order to. Enhanced EW us has to be committed within a certain time period. I think we're used to be five years all the time I practiced it was five years but I think we just change that last legislative session of maybe ten years now and maybe even more years depending on. The conduct involved so. I think you make a good point that ultimately that's a policy decision that'll be up to. The members of this committee in the General Assembly as to whether or not they think that's a good idea to make it a felony on second offense. A follow up please you're you're recognized thank you I also want to make a point about. The drug crimes I understand you know we're not trying to put people in jail necessary for drug crimes or anything but a lot of crime is is drug driven I'm wondering if there's anything in here that addresses that because there are some folks that are addicted to drugs out there they're committing crimes that are necessarily drug crimes but there caused because of that addiction. Well so that I would go back to the expansion of the specially courts particularly the drug courts. So for those offenders here there are multiple times you know I can just tell you how and and you're absolutely right most of the people I I'll actually look to separately the statistic that I saw in this came from national institutes of health so I've ever reason to believe it's accurate eighty five percent of those are incarcerated supper with some substance use disorder so the vast majority of people who are in prison may not be there because of a drug crime. But they have a drug problem that is that is underlying the other criminal offenses that they're committing. And you're absolutely right that is an issue that needs to be addressed as you know partly what we were trying to do with the expansion of the specialty court's and the point there is and again I can just give you for my experience on how I personally handled drug offenses when they came through the court system and how I believe the vast majority of other prosecutors handle drug offenses the first time someone comes into court on drug offense of felony drug possession offense for instance it's likely going to be Some type of rehab available if they successfully complete the rehab maybe the charges are dismissed as devoted or they are sentence under the first offenders act so that they successfully complete a short probationary sentence that conviction is never an ordinance as if they don't have a conviction that's probably the first time second time that they come in you know once again they're likely going to rehab they're likely going to get some type of probationary sentence the third time they come in you know we're probably looking at drug court or something like that is probably going to be the fourth or fifth time that they come into court before you're looking at present and then that president if you will and I don't mean the department of corrections in that instance I'm talking about a community correction facility. which is a shorter term stay designed with treatment in mind is the ultimate goal so I you know go back to the point your point is very well taken there's no question that that drug abuse or drug use underlies. A large part of the criminal activity that people end up in prison for even though that may not be the crime that they're sentenced for. But you have to try hard to get into prison on a drug offense and likely that's not gonna happen to your you know fifth fourth fifth sixth time and so what we wanna do is expand the drug courts to allow them to totally try to treat the addiction and keep them out of community correction keep them out of prison because it's cheaper incarceration but that's not the real reason why I mean that that is an added benefit certainly we will see people break their addiction we will see people become productive members of society Health relationships with families if you I talked with judges who provide presided over drug court that's one of the you know that they have a lot of great success stories about people who have isolated a family because their drug use who got into the drug court got this supervision got the treatment and who repaired relationships with their families brought their addiction got jobs restore relationships with their children that they had broken. So I think investing in the drug courts is one way that we can do that. Representive Richmond you're recognized for a question. Thank you madam chair Going back to negligent homicide in the eighty five percent. How much discretion does a judge have now if if if this passes as it is are they still gonna have discretion to consider the mitigating circumstances and all the other things when it comes to actually sentencing and how long the sentence is going to be. Yeah that's a great question thank you for that absolutely not I want to come back and address. To some degree representative Hudson's question but it falls along the lines of your question to. One of the things that this bill. It doesn't it I don't think it necessarily contemplated miss one of the things that think about negligent homicide under existing law. So there a couple of versions of negligent homicide there's a B. felony negligent homicide and that that is when the is specifically someone is intoxicated and causes a death and that is A. B. felony so a drunk driver I personally prosecuted some of these people to juries highland pills you know one particular case I took to jury lady on pills crossed the center line By the way this bird it was a terrible case because the death of two people and she was sentenced to twenty years in the penitentiary by jury so you got the B. felony negligent homicide which very much in my opinion should be on the eighty five percent list if you're driving while intoxicated you kill someone then survey by peers eighty five percent of your time before the eligible for release is not unreasonable and the other version of that was set is a misdemeanor currently. Version of negligent homicide and those are the instances I think the type of conduct that represented Hudson described those but under this bill or making that a D. felony. That's zero to six years so to your point about discretion that judges have and also the discretion that prosecutors have. You're absolutely correct the judges will maintain discretion the juries will have discretion on how to impose the sentence. They will be instructed ahead of time that this offense is an eighty five percent early release offense the person I have to serve eighty five percent or cents and then the judge or jury can fashion and the prosecutor if it's by playing along with their with the defense attorney if they can come to an agreement will be able to fashion a sentence that would be appropriate given that that underlying assumption that they're gonna have to serve eighty five percent of their Senate so for instance eighty five percent of one year is in a The calculation but there will be around nine months and so the point is. It ultimately the goal does this but the justice system is to try to do justice and that may mean that you have to fashion what appear to be shorter sentences. With the with the knowledge that how the eighty five percent affects that so you're absolutely right I mean they're still going to be discretion they are to say if you think the person's conduct wasn't egregious that they fell asleep that they were trying to pick up something that they dropped on the floor board and took their eyes off the road and caused Iraq consent when someone died back in the that could be fashion in such a way that the term of years would be low even though it's eighty five percent so the person doesn't actually have to serve much time all of that will still be within the discretion of the judge the jury in the prosecutors handling the case who may work out a plea represent Richardson you're recognized for a question. Thank you madam chair of the representative added Gazaway looking at the at the bill in. in honor of Mister Wardlaw how much you love task force I'm looking at the back of the bill we would this task force's here we and we talk about the things that it that it addresses and we know some of those. Education behavior all of those things we know we can work of the one I just moved to to just completely Fund that piece of it before we look at you know expanding. Buzz words the prisons in started what what that. Let that be a primary focus first. Okay so I are you referring to recidivism task force yes Sir but. Okay. So thank you for the question so I am not entirely sure I understand are you asking why don't we just refund the recidivism task force and not to be in any of the sentencing reform. What I'm asking is is what I make that the priority. Instead of. How the bill is going on right now. Does that make sense what I'm what I'm asking yeah I think so okay it you know again I'm addressing recidivism is very important and we are forming the recidivism task force in this bill to study that further to look at ways that we can reduce recidivism but with regard to the offenses that are on the hundred percent eighty five percent list if you will means will have a representative Collins kind of set it may be by accident that we're a lot of the folks that we're talking about on that hundred percent eighty five percent list again which is a yeah these are people who committed the heinous acts and maybe it may not be the type of people who could. Who are likely candidates for rehabilitation and who who may be very likely to re offend. So it is it I totally agree. With your idea your premise of your question that we should absolutely focus on recidivism I think that we're going to do that going forward but I don't think that that means that we should address those crimes on a hundred percent or eighty five percent list things mutually exclusive. And that so it for recognized so the. You know earlier you talked about it was just a small percentage of people that come out they that are creating the majority of these crimes that are repeat offenders do you know what percentage that is of people that are released that are actually repeat offenders. I know we have a very high recidivism rate in Arkansas I think it's somewhere around forty to fifty percent of the folks who leave prison we have been I don't have that exact number Mr brown Mr Cooper might have more information on that. I told Joe ten o'clock and you only. Collins you're recognized for a question. Madam chair I think we were trying to respond to well I'm sorry I apologize. I thank you madam chair representative I cannot give you a specific number I can tell you that we look at those numbers as we were going through this and the the overwhelming number of people that were going into the department of corrections were either on on some for supervision either parole probation or a size but I can't give you a specific number. Represent college you're recognized for a question thank you madam chair so you know for months we've been hearing about people doing one six of their sense that example is is given so often as to why the sentences are not long enough. Can you tell me of the fifty three of these sentences review nope I'm going to process process okay so there's fifty three on the eighty five percent of a hundred percent list can you tell me of those how many are we how many other crimes reading it one six of your sense and for those that aren't what can you get on on the other ones what what's the minimum for all of these fifty three crimes I imagine it's not burying you're gonna say fifty three things but what are the different. Types of minimums that you can get under current law okay so without flipping through so I might be off on one or two of these murder in the second degree is eligible for one half minus a half so quarter I'm just gonna say a quarter going forward manslaughter is a six the negligent homicide is the sixth encouraging suicide another person is a six kidnapping is a six the battery in the first degree is a quarter terroristic act as a quarter sexual indecency with a child is a one six sexual extortion depends on the exact course of conduct which no sexual extortion is below the line that's going to be one six exposing others to HIV is a quarter sexual assault in the first degree is a quarter unlawful female genital mutilation of a minor is almost always a quarter I believe there's one course of conduct that's below the line video voyeurism voyeurism about the below the line patronizing a victim of human trafficking I believe it's still above the line. I'm sorry we feel thank you I have I have slipped in the lingo and when I say about the line I mean it's eligible after a quarter and below the line is one six I'm really sorry about that. And grooming a minor for future sex trafficking is a six the troubling for the purpose of an unlawful sex sex sex act with a minor I believe is also one six. Domestic battering in the first degree is one fourth aggravated assault on a family or household member is one six permitting abuse of a minor I believe it's also one six exposing a child to a chemical substance is one quarter. I do not know what employer consenting to the use of a child in a sexual performance Class Y. felony arson is one for I related residential burglary is one fourth advocating assassination or overthrow the government I don't think I've ever seen convicted First degree estate is one fourth of the terrorist offenses I've never seen a conviction for it but I believe they are all above they are all one quarter. Exposing the public to toxic biological chemical or radioactive substances is this is this helping at all. I feel like I'm just monologue in going well I was wondering if they could be you know so it sounds like there's some quarter there's some said are there any that are higher than a quarter and no so there's no seventy percent minimum crimes or anything the only ones on there that are going to be the drug offenses that are currently on the seventy percent less they can do fifty percent with good time. And that's gonna be trafficking. So there's some fifty percent and seventy percent now mark quick follow up if I may have recognized okay so that is so so. But he didn't have. Well I did I did ask other other seventies I mean I said of the eighty and eighty five and a hundred other okay sorry seventy percent yes the seventy percent for all in a hundred percent with except for those two drugs to please those aren't that many you can read those out one of those seventy percent of the minimum that you serve on its right under current law under car that's going to be made in the first degree kidnapping Class Y. felony aggravated robbery rape trafficking of persons that's going to be aggravated residential burglary. Causing a catastrophe and then those two drug offenses trafficking of methamphetamine or manufacturing in methamphetamine in addition on the one hundred percent less right now it's possession of firearms by certain persons Class B. felony that is currently a hundred percent as of two thousand twenty one so those are never going to be one six they're never going to be one quarter there's going to be seventy but my my other question I saw a question is I think the Attorney General mentioned that your probation eligibility days affected effectively your release date so is that I mean now I'm asking you is that right so everyone gets out after one six or after one quarter representing percent. There is no. You know immediate and automatic there certainly offenses for which the transfer is non discretionary meaning that once they have reached out parole eligibility date which that of course can be reduced further by good time the parole board has only two options the first of which is to transfer them to community supervision and the other is to set a detailed course of programming that they have to complete as soon as they complete that and they are to be released. And that could be something like anger management finishing and educational program something like that. Represent clearly did you have a question on. Okay represent Richardson recognized for a question my questions to chair of I know that we're. Past what time we needed to is there a way that we can I don't know for some motion whatever to push to the mark because I think we've got more questions that need to go deeper before we vote on this he. Here are here's where we stand If. It It is represented Gazaway this bill. If represent Gazaway determines from the questioning this evening that there may be an amendment or amendments that he would like to bring. Then what we can do at that point is convene at the call of the chair tomorrow and I have been assured that we do have rooms and I know our staff goes to Senate Judiciary tomorrow but their staff that can cover us and so that's not gonna be an issue would be in a call of the chair for him to have whatever amendments if if that's the route he decides to go to get those amendments ready then we would hear the amendments adopted amendments to put him in the bill and the bill as amended out what I would like to do this evening. and you know I don't ever. We just question away in here and that doesn't bother me at all. Because I want everybody to get the questions to ask but what I would like to do is to be able to take up the individuals who have signed up to speak for against the bill this evening these individuals have been here since before ten o'clock this morning and we're now twelve hours down the road and so I would like to be able to take those up now it's the chair would not be opposed that we come back obviously if there are amendments. We're going to have questions on that and we could we can do that so what would happen is if we come back to the call of the chair in the morning. Let's just suppose that the bills get out gets a passed out of here. It can go to the house floor for the adopt to you may have to help me the adoption of the amendment. We have to get the amendments and grossed. The first thing I think there's a motion to amend I did that we did a motion to amend and then it comes back to a second supplemental calendar tomorrow so we'll all be wrapped up tomorrow and then it would be sent to the Senate for the Senate to then concur in the amendment have I gotten that correct Marty. So there is a way for us to do it now I've I've looked at the calendar I've discussed this with Mr Johnson discussed with ms Garrity. So there is that way of doing it it's called because it's representative Gazaway this bill us whether he wants to do that if not we can either forge ahead but now weather is coming but we can forge ahead or we can try to find confined to time to market outlook to origin I mean look at the calendar. Tomorrow we we know we can get a room we know we can get staff but. Here's what's on for Wednesday at eight o'clock you have was Senate meeting eight AM there's a joint meeting of house Senate education nine o'clock there any people in here budget. Okay so see we've got and that's important so we can't. What are folks got a budget. Anybody in here on revenue tax. state agencies meets at ten o'clock City so we are then coming up on. Who also. Who all those city county local you know we've got four five in here on city county local so with that being said we don't have a lot of time and less we come back. The New York would be on. We can come back at. Seven in the morning eight in the morning that's our time slot the because the other committees are doing important work and so that's what we are represent Crawford have a question. I do And maybe the speakers watching I don't know but. This is so important. And the governor wants us to get this through and I have I agree I would like to do that. But personally as much as I want to. I can't that we want in the right formulation is that what you're saying here let me see if I can get it out I'm so tired. Let's extend the session to win say Mister Speaker and let's let's take care of business properly for the state of Arkansas and then that way we would have more time to look at this in the tax one coming after this. Mr Speaker please thank you. I'm sure anybody that's watching this live stream is is wondering about our sanity at ten twenty. How would you deal with your constituents on that comment. So. At the end. At quite frankly what it doesn't. It doesn't have to be. One minute. All right members thank you for for your indulgence and It's also possible it we just we think we've got it all you know hammered out all the deals let's just let's assume and we all know what happens when we assume but let's assume that Fadi is our drop dead date and that we're going to get out Friday. And so here we on Tuesday night we have a cut I think we're still good we can come we can come in work on this bill we could even take this bill up on the house floor. On Thursday transmitted down if it was taken up the very first thing transmitted down to the Senate for them to concur if there are any amendments to concur or even you know if there are no amendments we couldn't do that but then we can send it down there to them they have suspended their rules that Senate Judiciary Committee could come in on Thursday to deal with it and even send it to their floor on Thursday or they can do it on Friday morning so we do have time but it up so that's what we are Richey Richmond you have a question. Is this going to be the. I am assured that the Senate is going to be there. They're not tonight but I have been assured. Hang on I'm getting a text. I'm being reminded that that It despite our maybe a plea for us to go on the Senate would have to agree to to extend so that you know it's not bank on that pathways. And I don't want us to get so punch drunk in here that we're not paying attention I think that no matter what side of the issue. What side issue your honor I think everybody understands the gravity of this build the importance of this bill that we do want to get it right so. We can. I will I really it It I will do it if there is no objection. I would really like for us to hear from the people who have come to speak for or against. And then at that point when we come back to some questions I mean I'm not I I do not want to cut the Committee off but I don't want to hold folks. Much longer and if need be we will find the time tomorrow. If it set. Hello if it set twelve o'clock to one o'clock we'll come in and work that our and then if we need to come back after session will come in and work that hour or two or whatever but it will be my commitment whichever way we go. To the bill sponsor of that we will not we are not going to let this bill die in this committee one way or the other you know you're gonna voted out are you going to vote it down but we're not gonna let it die for inaction that makes sense. Okay so. Is there any objection that we take up the people who are here to speak for against the bill I know it's kind of unusual that I can do that can I can I do that. I can I can take up the people who have come to speak for against the bill at this point and then come back I think I can. You don't know. Yeah okay yes but the real quick please. I guess we could suspend the rules everybody else does but I want to get it in the right posture because I think that is that if we don't get it I don't want anybody to ever say that this bill was not in the right posture. When it either. Got out of here got to the house for I want everybody to feel good that we have done. The right procedure done the right thing. And if I'm if I'm wrong about that your. Also been reminded we cannot render over until twelve o'clock. To put this into a holy day. I let you go what I know good and well once I say we'll take a recess I may never see some of you again so I'm holding here. All right members. Without objection. We're going to take the testimony for those who have come to speak for against the bill is seventy objection seeing the objection the first individual is signed up to speak against the bill Binney madness Mr Magnus you still there. Sir Magnus if you go to the end of the table identify yourself and you're recognized to speak against the bill membership will turn our attention to Mr Magnus thank you. Thank you does yep okay there we go thank you madam chair of the committee my name is B. Magness a member of the Arkansas border corrections and I want to Sturch office and I will be brief because I got a three hour drive to get home in a live set at home in the country. Hello so welcome to be able to advocate could come back to mall of first of all when when you sign in to speak on a bill I have a little bit of an issue they have to say for against because there's so much of this bill that we have needed over years it's very very important. That especially with repeat offenders repeat offenders is what's clogging our system up the question was asked while ago what the recidivism rate for Arkansas is fifty two percent so fifty two percent of people to come to this. Eighty two percent fifty two percent come back. So there's a lot of issues of of this bill that I could comment on or ask questions about but like I say again for the the time of the night it isn't and I will be brief a good example is several years ago the residential burglary was made a violent offense it's only a violent offense under this provision and there was a lot brought up at the time about well it's only should be about an offense if you're not if you're only if you're home. What I have a little bit of a problem because I am a victim of crime and some. A lot of areas. But I stopped to three people from regular my house one night at twelve o'clock and. They didn't reach inside. They just got outside to park behind the house I happen to notify us about like say about eleven twelve not relate and I was able to stop before they ever got in house of the individuals want out of Florida had ninety nine pages of criminal history it's got to be yes fortunately just like tonight. I'm not at home. And I said I'm not there if they think you're you know and he had a belief that I wasn't home that me and my wife that's one point that's that that's one of the points of the bill that that that I want to comment on of there's a lot of others and I can say for the sake of of time tonight I'm not going to to bring a lot of those issues up. But there is one issue that that I want to comment on to that that affects the board of corrections. And. It's on page fifty four a line thirty two. And fifty seven line six and it basically says. The director shall serve at the pleasure of the secretary of the department of corrections same way with the on line fifty seven line six the director will serve at the pleasure of the secretary of department of corrections. I don't know how long the amendment thirty three was passed and how long the board of corrections is I know at least thirty five years. And the board of corrections. Has had the forty two foreign farther directors. And I think it's I think it's important I will like three one other of. Remarks about the transformation act that started the of US secretary of corrections which I'm supportive of the of correction of the secretary and and the the informing of it a sale was seeing a lot of reason for that but it says in the transformation bill the transformation and efficiency act of two thousand nineteen shall not abridge diminish our continual in any respect the authority or responsibility vested in a state entity that is subject to the Arkansas constitution Amendment thirty three. And affiliated with the cabinet level department under the transformation efficiencies Act of two thousand nineteen I understand as two thousand nineteen but we didn't have we had a board of corrections that overseen the of. The supervision of the directors for probably thirty five years this bill changes that and we want to have a secretary and I don't mean this to anything against our secretary now I don't know that how much it would change our directors now of because of served with them so long. But as we all know home fast wall sometimes they last for a long time. And that is the major Strive for the board of corrections that is such an. Has problems with the The so how we supervise our directors and the agency as a constitutional board and with that I'll. Members are there any questions. Seeing the questions thank you Mr Magness for your for testifying today thank you for staying all the way through. Next we have to speak. For the bill. Mr Smith Mr. Third I'm sorry Mr Xu. Yeah I will come to the end of the table identify yourselves and you're recognized to speak for the bill. My name is Nathan Smith the prosecuting attorney been County. I matter read prosecuting attorney for watching Madison counties and president of the Arkansas prosecutors Association. Daniel shoe I am the elected prosecuting attorney Sebastian County twelve judicial district and I am the chair for the Arkansas prosecuting attorneys association. We are our sociais Haitian is in favor of this bill we think it does a lot of good things there are many good things about it we've of said it's not it's not perfect but no bill this size is perfect and when is a perfect incident and that we love every single thing about it but we think it does a whole lot of good we're not gonna blame the point that that the points have been made on that long and it's ten past ten thirty don't want to stick my up or poke the bear stick my headlights male who were willing to take questions but AIR okay. One be careful what you as though that you're recognized thank you madam chair and I'll keep it brief representative Gazaway mentioned that he thought prosecutors would use their prosecuting prosecutorial discretion being aware of one hundred percent eighty five percent sentences mandatory so do you concur with that do you think that the prosecutors will modify their behavior in a way that I mean I guess I'm wondering are we actually going to see much of a difference in practice as far as the length of sentences do you think that the exercise of prosecutorial discretion will be such that we end up in the same place where an hour do you think that will in fact see much longer sentences well I think it depends I think that it's certainly going to change the way we do business I think that and obviously I can't speak for twenty eight elected prosecutor these offices but it's it's into the with the way that most prosecutors operate is we we have a number of of what we feel is appropriate for a person to serve for any particular event and it's usually based on what we have seen jury's date and so we fashion right now we fashion a and offer based on that whether to six a quarter whatever we multiplied times six times for whatever to get to that number to serve that added I don't think that's going to change in terms of we're still going to have a number that we think is appropriate and that's probably going to be based on on what juries do but I think we are for the most part prosecutors are going to have to alter their practice when the when the parole eligibility shoots way up then our offers are going to have to come down considerably I don't think you're gonna see. Many people say in the and like I said I can't speak for everybody but I don't think you're going to see a whole lot of people taking advantage of the situation I think what you are going to see is a lot of prosecutors following the leech of juries and we're gonna have to try a lot of cases I think at the beginning and we're gonna see what juries would do in a particular situation because that's kind of that's kind of our That's that's what got this essentially is the will of the people of any of our districts go ahead Senator no I was just gonna say so did I think a thing about it if I understand your question so now say a thirty year offers based on in some cases it's one six or one quarter or whatever the case may be my intention would be to say if the parole eligibility changes and that number's going to change too because you're trying to get a certain amount of time that a person you can guarantee a person's going to do in the department of corrections and that is based on what a jury tells you you know aggregate over the aggregate and so I do think that number necessarily comes down because it juries are obviously told about parole eligibility as well so I don't think under this scenario you're gonna see offers at the exact same level they are now because now they're based on a much lower parole eligibility date if that makes sense you may have some people disagree but for the most part I think would say that the prosecutors are reasonable and and practical people and you know what it's simple because the parole eligibility change we're still trying to get to the same result that we've got before. Recognized for a follow up follow up so then I guess if that's the case then why even to the bill then after the sample well set so here here's what I'd say that is one I think the bill does a lot of good things on on the back and they were testified about earlier in terms of no automatic no automatic really someone works up to that and also you give you give transparency with the public because I think a lot of is not only with juries say but what the public thinks when they say well somebody got twenty years or thirty years or ten years whatever the case may be saying that they serve you know what and what what in my opinion is a more transparent Senate so it's more than about what the actual parole eligibility is in it but I do think that's a positive thing going for there's always in one building just that members any other questions. See no further questions gentleman thank you thank you for sticking with this and thank you for being with us all the way through the session with him appreciated your input throughout the session. Next we have on our list Greg parish Mr perish are you wanting to speak. Okay thank you. And the last person we have signed up to sell more this more are you in the room. Okay members that concludes everyone that we have signed up to speak for or against the bill. We're back to you. Thank you madam chair I think we were at the we were in the questioning portion and there if there were more questions I don't know we're miss row or miss Mister Cooper are but I'm certainly here to answer any questions until till everybody's hearts desires build so. All right members we have any additional questions. J. Scott you're recognized for a question thank you madam chair. Okay Gazaway Thirty eight AM. Okay on page sixty seven the earned release credits so I see that. Western offenders must serve a hundred percent of their sentences with no opportunity or incentive to participate in programs such as. Work practices job responsibilities good behavior or involvement and rehabilitation activities right these are people that are at the hundred percent in my understanding that right that they're not going to get those opportunities. Page sixty seven seven. so if I can answer the question just because okay. These offenders are still going to have the opportunity to participate in all the programming they'll still have the opportunity to engage in any education they just won't be able to earn the credits against their time because they'll be statutorily prohibited from doing so because they'll be at the one hundred percent. Yes I presented if. Follows. You're recognized for a follow up okay so. We're talking about the one hundred percent I know we have the. If we're not keeping in that them in their file a life sentence I know some of them might have whatever the hundred percent is like we're not doing anything to invest in making them better citizens for when they ever do return to society do you I mean is it yachts at paying and that these people will never return to society I don't I don't understand that's not investing any kind of. What we're trying to do for the other folks absolutely not and I think that most people who are in prison will eventually return to society and that's why the bill contemplates that there's going to be in you know additional investment in these workforce training opportunities there is going to be meaningful consideration by the secretary of corrections working with community partnerships and the Division of work for services to make sure that the training and the education they're providing inside the units is meaningful and provides real opportunity once the individuals are released and as I said they'll still have the opportunity to participate they just won't earn credits against their time for their participation. Okay. Get your question answered. Members we're now at a quarter to eleven. Here's a plan. We are going to adjourn and come back at eight o'clock in the morning room one thirty and we will be in the questioning we're still questioning is not but I think at this point in time and we've been at this for a long time and I think people are probably getting tired not not limit maybe I know I'm not listening as well as I should be a time set with that members house judiciary is going to be adjourned until eight o'clock in the morning room one thirty eight o'clock in the morning room one thirty we are adjourned.