SECTION I: GENERAL INFORMATION {Indicate if analysis is on an original bill, amendment, substitute or a correction of a previous bill}

Similar documents
SECTION I: GENERAL INFORMATION {Indicate if analysis is on an original bill, amendment, substitute or a correction of a previous bill}

SECTION I: GENERAL INFORMATION {Indicate if analysis is on an original bill, amendment, substitute or a correction of a previous bill}

AGENCY BILL ANALYSIS 2017 REGULAR SESSION WITHIN 24 HOURS OF BILL POSTING, ANALYSIS TO: and

Date Jan. 7, 2016 Original X Amendment Prepared: Bill No: HB 056 Correction Substitute. Agency Code: 264. APPROPRIATION (dollars in thousands)

Date Jan. 5, 2016 Original X Amendment Prepared: Bill No: HB 037 Correction Substitute. APPROPRIATION (dollars in thousands)

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES COMMITTEE ON CRIME PREVENTION, CORRECTIONS & SAFETY ANALYSIS

CONFERENCE COMMITTEE REPORT BRIEF HOUSE BILL NO HB 2490 would amend various statutes related to criminal sentencing.

Overview of Current Sentencing Laws and Data Presentation to the Task Force on Sentencing Reforms for Opioid Drug Convictions.

GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF NORTH CAROLINA Session 2017 Legislative Incarceration Fiscal Note

Families Against Mandatory Minimums 1612 K Street, N.W., Suite 700 Washington, D.C

The defendant has been charged with first degree murder.

Florida Jury Instructions. 7.2 MURDER FIRST DEGREE (1)(a), Fla. Stat.

GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF NORTH CAROLINA Session 2017 Legislative Incarceration Fiscal Note

GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF NORTH CAROLINA Session 2017 Legislative Incarceration Fiscal Note

Arkansas Sentencing Commission

State Court Processing of Domestic Violence Cases

GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF NORTH CAROLINA Session 2017 Legislative Incarceration Fiscal Note

A CITIZEN S GUIDE TO STRUCTURED SENTENCING

(Reprinted with amendments adopted on May 6, 2003) SECOND REPRINT A.B. 15. Referred to Committee on Judiciary

SENATE, Nos. 171 and 2471 STATE OF NEW JERSEY 212th LEGISLATURE

HOUSE BILL NO. HB0094. Sponsored by: Joint Judiciary Interim Committee A BILL. for. AN ACT relating to criminal justice; amending provisions

v. Record No OPINION BY JUSTICE BARBARA MILANO KEENAN June 6, 2008 COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA FROM THE COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA

1 SB By Senators Ward, Fielding, Keahey, Bedford, Whatley, Marsh, 4 Waggoner and Sanford. 5 RFD: Judiciary. 6 First Read: 14-FEB-13

Possibility Of Parole For A Conviction Of Conspiracy To Commit First Degree Murder]

) NOTICE OF INTENT TO SEEK THE DEATH PENALTY

I. Limits of Criminal law a. Due process b. Principle of legality c. Void for vagueness II. Mental State a. Traditional law i.

QUESTION What charges can reasonably be brought against Steve? Discuss. 2. What charges can reasonably be brought against Will? Discuss.

Special Report October 2, 2018

CONFERENCE COMMITTEE REPORT BRIEF HOUSE SUBSTITUTE FOR SENATE BILL NO. 40

Section 20 Mistake as to a Justification 631. Chapter 4. Offenses Against the Person Article 1. Homicide Section Murder in the First Degree

STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS

Determinate Sentencing: Time Served December 30, 2015

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES COMMITTEE ON CRIME PREVENTION, CORRECTIONS & SAFETY FINAL ANALYSIS

80th OREGON LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Regular Session. Senate Bill 1007 SUMMARY

Session Law Creating the New Mexico Sentencing Commission, 2003 New Mexico Laws ch. 75

ERRATA SHEET FOR ROBINSON, CRIMINAL LAW: CASE STUDIES & CONTROVERSIES, THIRD EDITION (as of March 25, 2013)

New Mexico Sentencing Commission

Colorado Legislative Council Staff

Correctional Population Forecasts

CHAPTER Committee Substitute for Senate Bill No. 1282

(a) Except as provided in K.S.A Supp and , and amendments thereto, if a

Case 4:04-cr WRW Document 416 Filed 10/31/2007 Page 1 of 11 U S. DIS i iilc I C(;CII?.I EAST LtiN I11S I t<i(; I i\l<k!

DETENTION PERIODS. This document is provided as general guidelines only.

A CITIZEN S GUIDE TO STRUCTURED SENTENCING

WORKSHEET A OFFENSE LEVEL

CHAPTER. Criminal Law

SENATE SPONSORSHIP. Bill Summary

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES STAFF ANALYSIS REFERENCE ACTION ANALYST STAFF DIRECTOR

Determining the Defendant s Registration Obligations Under the Revised Sex Offender Laws October 2007

Texas Law & Due Process (Chapter 10) Dr. Michael Sullivan. Texas State Government GOVT

Glossary of Criminal Justice Sentencing Terms

Section 9 Causation 291

Sentencing Chronic Offenders

ASSEMBLY, No. 492 STATE OF NEW JERSEY. 215th LEGISLATURE PRE-FILED FOR INTRODUCTION IN THE 2012 SESSION

Testimony before the: Senate Judiciary Criminal Justice Committee

2014 Kansas Statutes

DONALD SCOTT TAYLOR, is convicted of one or both of the capital offenses relating

18 USC NB: This unofficial compilation of the U.S. Code is current as of Jan. 4, 2012 (see

OHIO HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES CRIMINAL JUSTICE COMMITTEE HOUSE BILL 141

Kansas Legislator Briefing Book 2014

1 California Criminal Law (4th), Crimes Against the Person

CRM 321 Mod 5 Lecture Notes

692 Part VI.b Excuse Defenses

THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF PENNSYLVANIA SENATE BILL INTRODUCED BY LEACH, HAYWOOD, HUGHES AND BLAKE, MAY 8, 2017 AN ACT

AN ACT RELATING TO DRIVING UNDER THE INFLUENCE OF INTOXICATING LIQUOR OR DRUGS; INCREASING THE PENALTY FOR HOMICIDE BY

Department of Legislative Services

SENATE BILL No February 14, 2017

CONFERENCE COMMITTEE REPORT BRIEF HOUSE BILL NO. 2579

CODIFICATION OF PUBLIC LAWS OF 2002

Statute of Limitations Guide: Prosecuting Older Sex Crimes Cases

RECOMMENDATION TO THE LEGISLATURE OF ALASKA FROM THE ALASKA CRIMINAL JUSTICE COMMISSION

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES STAFF ANALYSIS REFERENCE ACTION ANALYST STAFF DIRECTOR

IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF ALLEN COUNTY, OHIO

SENATE, No STATE OF NEW JERSEY. 209th LEGISLATURE INTRODUCED MARCH 26, 2001

Legislative Impact on State Responsible Bed Space. Tama S. Celi, Ph.D. Statistical Analysis & Forecast Manager Virginia Department of Corrections

CONFERENCE COMMITTEE REPORT BRIEF SENATE BILL NO. 18

VIRGINIA ACTS OF ASSEMBLY SESSION

Title 17-A: MAINE CRIMINAL CODE

FEDERAL STATUTES. 10 USC 921 Article Larceny and wrongful appropriation

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO

California Bar Examination

Criminal Justice: A Brief Introduction Twelfth Edition

STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS

Trafficking People and Involuntary Servitude

Criminal Law Outline intent crime

Criminal Justice Public Safety and Individual Rights

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO SAN BERNARDINO DISTRICT. Defendant COUNT 1

How the Federal Sentencing Guidelines Work: An Abridged Overview

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF IOWA EASTERN DIVISION

SENATE FILE NO. SF0042 A BILL. for. AN ACT relating to crimes and criminal procedure; providing

Nonpartisan Services for Colorado's Legislature. Date: Bill Status: Fiscal Analyst: CONCEALED HANDGUN CARRY WITH NO PERMIT

CHAPTER Committee Substitute for House Bill No. 7035

Colorado Commission on Criminal and Juvenile Justice Sex Offense/Offender Task Force Recommendations FY

STATE OF NEW JERSEY. ASSEMBLY, No th LEGISLATURE. Sponsored by: Assemblyman ANTHONY M. BUCCO District 25 (Morris and Somerset)

The defendant has been charged with second degree murder. 1

Selected Ohio Felony Sentencing Statutes Ohio Rev. Code Ann

MECKLENBURG COUNTY PRETRIAL RISK ASSESSMENT & PRAXIS. Instruction Manual

State Issue 1 The Neighborhood Safety, Drug Treatment, and Rehabilitation Amendment

Legislative Council, State of Michigan Courtesy of

SUPPLEMENTAL NOTE ON HOUSE SUBSTITUTE FOR SENATE BILL NO. 40

Transcription:

LFC Requester: AGENCY BILL ANALYSIS 2018 REGULAR SESSION WITHIN 24 HOURS OF BILL POSTING, EMAIL ANALYSIS TO: LFC@NMLEGIS.GOV and DFA@STATE.NM.US {Include the bill no. in the email subject line, e.g., HB2, and only attach one bill analysis and related documentation per email message} SECTION I: GENERAL INFORMATION {Indicate if analysis is on an original bill, amendment, substitute or a correction of a previous bill} Check all that apply: Date Jan. 12, 2019 Original X Amendment Bill No: HB104 Correction Substitute Sponsor: William Bill R. Rehm Agency Code: 264 Short Title: No Statute of Limitation on 2 nd Degree Murder Person Writing Phone: 466-0532 SECTION II: FISCAL IMPACT APPROPRIATION (dollars in thousands) Gail MacQuesten Email gailmacquesten@ gmail.com FY18 Appropriation FY19 Recurring or Nonrecurring 0 0 n/a n/a REVENUE (dollars in thousands) Estimated Revenue FY18 FY19 FY20 Recurring or Nonrecurring 0 0 0 n/a n/a

ESTIMATED ADDITIONAL OPERATING BUDGET IMPACT (dollars in thousands) FY18 FY19 FY20 3 Year Total Cost Recurring or Nonrecurring Total 0 unknown unknown unknown recurring general Duplicates/Conflicts with/companion to/relates to: Duplicates/Relates to Appropriation in the General Appropriation Act SECTION III: NARRATIVE HB104 amends NMSA 1978, Section 30-1-8, Time Limitations for Commencing Prosecution, in four ways. 1. Second Degree Murder. HB104 amends subsection I (renumbered as subsection K) to add murder in the second degree to the list of offenses for which there is no time limitation for commencing prosecution. (Currently, the statute of limitations is 6 years.) HB104 also amends subsection A, which addresses the six year time limitation for second degree felonies, to clarify that it does not apply to second degree murder. 2. First Degree Felony Trafficking Controlled Substances. HB104 amends subsection A to add first degree felony trafficking controlled substances pursuant to Section 30-31-20 to the list of offenses with a six year time limitation. (Currently, as a non-violent first degree felony, this crime falls into the catch all provision, and has a three year statute of limitation.) 3. Conspiracy. HB104 adds new subsection E to provide that the crime of conspiracy will have the same statute of limitations as the highest crime with which the conspiracy is associated. 4. Tampering with Evidence. HB104 adds new subsection F to provide that the crime of tampering with evidence will have the same statute of limitations as the highest crime with which the tampering is associated. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS Note: major assumptions underlying fiscal impact should be documented. Note: if additional operating budget impact is estimated, assumptions and calculations should be reported in this section. HB104 extends or eliminates the statute of limitations for some crimes. To the extent these changes result in more prosecutions and convictions, there will be increased costs to the state for litigation and incarceration. SIGNIFICANT ISSUES 1. Second Degree Murder. HB104 removes time limits for prosecuting second degree murder.

Under the current statute, first degree murder has no statute of limitations, while second degree murder has the same statute of limitations as any other second degree felony: six years. HB104 amends the statute to include second degree murder in the category of crimes for which there is no statute of limitations. 2. First Degree Felony Trafficking Controlled Substances. Currently, only capital felonies and first degree violent felonies have no time limits on prosecution. The current statute makes no provision for first degree non-violent felonies, which presumably fall under the catch-all provision in subsection H (renumbered to subsection J) that imposes a three year limit. That means that under the current statute, a non-violent first degree felony has a shorter time limit for prosecution than a fourth degree felony. HB104 puts first degree felony trafficking controlled substances into the same category as a second degree felony, with a six year statute of limitations. 3. Conspiracy and Tampering. As currently written, Section 30-1-8 sets time limits for prosecuting most crimes based on the degree of the crime. For example, prosecution of a misdemeanor must begin within two years of the commission of the crime; prosecution of a third or fourth degree felony must begin within 5 years; and prosecution of a second degree felony must begin within six years. HB104 would amend Section 30-1-8 to add special time limits for prosecuting conspiracy and tampering with evidence, providing that these crimes will have the same statute of limitations as the highest crime with which they are associated. Currently, the conspiracy statute determines the degree of offense by looking at the highest crime conspired to be committed, and steps the degree down one level. So, if the highest crime conspired to be committed is a capital or first degree felony, the conspiracy is a second degree felony. The tampering statute has a similar structure, but in some cases the degree of the offense is not stepped down. For example, if the tampering is associated with a crime that is a third or fourth degree felony, the tampering offense is a fourth degree felony. Providing that conspiracy and tampering will have the same statute of limitations as the highest crime with which they are associated will in many situations have the effect of extending the current time limits for commencing prosecutions of conspiracy and tampering. The most significant time extension will be in murder cases. Under current law, conspiracy to commit murder is punished as a second degree felony (see NMSA 1978, Section 30-28-2), so the statute of limitations on conspiracy to commit murder is six years. Under HB104, conspiracy to commit murder will have the same time limit as the underlying crime of murder and there is no time limit on commencing a prosecution for murder. PERFORMANCE IMPLICATIONS 1. Removing the statute of limitations for second degree murder. From a prosecution/trial standpoint, it makes sense that first degree murder and second degree murder be treated the same way for statute of limitations purposes.

Murder in the first degree is distinguished from second degree murder primarily by the intent or state of mind of the defendant. First degree murder requires a willful, deliberate and premeditated killing, a killing in the course of or attempt to commit any felony, or by an act greatly dangerous to the lives of others indicating a depraved mind regardless of human life. See NMSA 1978, Section 30-2-1(A). Second degree murder is defined as follows: Unless he is acting upon sufficient provocation, upon a sudden quarrel or in the heat of passion, a person who kills another human being without lawful justification or excuse commits murder in the second degree if in performing the acts which cause the death he knows that such acts create a strong probability of death or great bodily harm to that individual or another. NMSA 1978, Section 30-2-1(B). That difference in intent or state of mind is taken into account in sentencing. First degree murder is a capital offense, punishable by life in prison or life in prison without the possibility of release or parole. Second degree murder carries a basic sentence of 15 years. In cases where the identity of the killer is not in dispute, the trial will often center on the killer s intent, and the issue is whether the killing was a first degree murder or a second degree murder. The consequences of both crimes are serious: the death of a human being. Eliminating the statute of limitations for murder, whether it is first degree murder or second degree murder, recognizes the seriousness of the offense. The distinction between first and second degree murder is primarily a matter of the intent of the defendant, which may not become clear until trial when all the evidence is examined. Putting a six year time limit on prosecutions for second degree murder (but not first degree murder) will only eliminate murder trials in cases where more than six years have passed, and it is clear that the evidence would not support first degree murder. In many more cases, the trial will proceed in an all-or-nothing fashion: if the jury finds first degree murder, the defendant faces life in prison. But if the jury does not find first degree murder, there can be no conviction, and no penalty, because prosecution for second degree murder is timebarred. The distinction between first and second degree murder is better accounted for in sentencing, instead of legal time limits that absolutely bar prosecution. 2. Imposing a six year statute of limitations for first degree felony trafficking controlled substances. Under the current statute, there is no time limit on prosecuting first degree violent felonies. But the statute is silent on the time limit for prosecuting first degree felonies that are not violent. If the statute creating the non-violent first degree felony does not provide a specific time limit for commencing prosecution, presumably the three-year catch-all provision of Section 30-1-8 would apply. As a result, a first degree non-violent felony has a shorter statute of limitations than a fourth degree felony. First degree felony trafficking controlled substances is an offense that falls into the catch all provision. HB104 increases the time for prosecuting that crime from three years to six years. Note, however, that HB104 does not eliminate the gap in the existing statute, which contains no provision for first degree non-violent felonies. Those crimes will fall into the catch-all provision and be subject to a 3 year statute of limitations, unless the criminal statute itself contains its own statute of limitations. Addressing the issue on a piece-meal basis, by adding a statute of limitations into the criminal statute itself, or by adding the crime into Section 30-1-8 (as HB104 does), can create unnecessary confusion. An alternative approach would be to make all first degree non-violent felonies subject to the six year statute of limitations. 3. Linking the statutes of limitation for conspiracy and tampering to that carried by the

highest crime with which the conspiracy or tampering is associated. Currently, the statute of limitation for conspiracy or tampering is usually shorter than the statute of limitation for the associated crime. This can present problems in trying cases. For example, there may be a situation in which trial can proceed on the underlying crime, but time has run out for prosecuting tampering with evidence associated with that crime. HB104 gives conspiracy and tampering the same statute of limitations as the highest crime with which it is associated. ADMINISTRATIVE IMPLICATIONS See Significant Issues and Performance Implications, above. CONFLICT, DUPLICATION, COMPANIONSHIP, RELATIONSHIP TECHNICAL ISSUES The tampering with evidence statute, Section 30-22-5 NMSA 1978, includes the crime of tampering with evidence when the degree of the underlying crime is indeterminate. It specifies that tampering in that situation is a fourth degree felony. As such, the statute of limitations under current law would be five years. It is not clear whether HB104 would apply that statute of limitations. It could be argued that if the associated crime is indeterminate, it has no limitation provided for it, and that it falls into the catch-all provision of subsection H (re-numbered to subsection J), and has a three year statute of limitation. OTHER SUBSTANTIVE ISSUES ALTERNATIVES WHAT WILL BE THE CONSEQUENCES OF NOT ENACTING THIS BILL Second degree murder will have a six year statute of limitations. First degree felony trafficking controlled substances will fall under the catch-all provision, and be subject to a three year statute of limitations. The statutes of limitation for conspiracy and tampering will generally be shorter than the statutes of limitation for the offense to which it is related. AMENDMENTS To avoid a potential gap in the statute by not addressing first degree non-violent felonies, amend subsection A as follows: A. for a second degree felony, except for murder in the second degree, and for a first degree non-violent felony for which a limitation is not otherwise provided, and for first degree felony trafficking controlled substances pursuant to Section 30-31-20 NMSA 1978, within six years from the time the crime was committed;