BILL NUMBER: S6840

SPONSOR: SERINO
 
TITLE OF BILL:

An act to amend the criminal procedure law, in relation to setting bail
for defendants that pose a threat to public safety

 
PURPOSE:

To allow greater judicial discretion in setting a securing order with
respect to the dangerousness of a defendant.

 
SUMMARY OF PROVISIONS:

Section 1: Amends subdivision 1 of section 510.10 of the criminal proce-
dure law to allow a court to make an individualized determination
regarding the danger a defendant poses to the safety of any crime
victim, person or community

Section 2: Establishes the effective date.
              

 
EXISTING LAW:

Currently, except for certain qualifying offenses, courts must release
defendants on their own recognizance pending trial, unless it is demon-
strated and the court makes an individualized determination that the
defendant poses a risk of flight to avoid prosecution, however the court
may not consider the dangerousness of such defendant.

 
JUSTIFICATION:

In United State v. Salerno, the Supreme Court ruled that federal courts
could detain arrestees pretrial if said individual could be proved to be
a threat to others in the community. Including New York, only four
states do not allow judges to consider the dangerousness of a defendant
when setting a securing order. In light of recent reforms that eliminate
the ability of judges to establish securing orders for most offenses, it
is critical that judges be allowed to weigh the threat a defendant poses
to victims or others in the community. Once these bail reforms go into
effect, crimes such as assault in the third degree, manslaughter in the
second degree, criminal possession of a weapon on school grounds,
promoting a sexual performance by a child, failure to register as a sex
offender, and other heinous acts will no longer qualify for bail in the
state and the defendant will be released back into the community to
await their trial date.

When California became the first state in the country to eliminate cash
bail, they provided for safeguards to ensure the protection of the
community, including allowing courts to order defendants to report to a
court officer or consent to monitoring such as ankle bracelets, as well
as allowing preventive detention for those the court deems too dangerous
to release.

Unfortunately, the reforms passed in the 2019-2020 New York State Budget
did not include any such safeguards. This legislation would rectify this
troubling issue and grant New York courts the ability to better protect
our communities by allowing them to consider the dangerousness of a
defendant when setting a securing order.
 
LEGISLATIVE HISTORY:

New bill.

 
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

None.

 
EFFECTIVE DATE:
This act shall take effect on the same date and in the same manner as
section 2 of part JJJ of chapter 59 of the laws of 2019, takes effect.