Senate Bill S390

                                 
BILL NUMBER: S390

SPONSOR: PALUMBO
 
TITLE OF BILL:

An act to amend the criminal procedure law, in relation to permitting at
the discretion of the court certain family members of a victim who is
deceased to read statements in court during the sentencing of a defend-
ant

 
PURPOSE:

To correct an unintended flaw in the statute that effectively prohibits
any discretion of the judge to allow for more than one of the victims'
family members to address the court.

 
SUMMARY OF PROVISIONS:

This bill amends subparagraph 2 of paragraph (a) of subdivision 2 of
section 380.50 of the criminal procedure law, as separately amended by
chapters 173 and 198 of the laws of 1996, to allow a presiding judge the
discretion to allow statements on behalf of a victim by an immediate
              

family member or up to two members, on consultation with counsels for
the defense and the people.

 
JUSTIFICATION:

When violent criminal acts kill or maim any person, friends and family
are often victims due to the pain and trauma they must endure. In our
civilized society, families of victims must exercise restraint and bear
the pain of their loss while the wheels of justice turn and hopefully
lead to the conviction of the perpetrator of the crime. For the murdered
victims, surviving close relatives such as a spouse, mother, father or
children can often find some closure at the end of the trial through use
of the opportunity to address their loss to the court and make a state-
ment on behalf of the victim who can no longer speak for him or herself.
While current law provides this opportunity by allowing only "a member"
of the victim's family to make a statement, it effectively restricts the
judge's discretion. Current law prohibits the judge from considering the
appropriateness of more than one member addressing the court, even if
the victim is survived by close relatives such as a spouse and parents.

Certainly, good public policy would deem it appropriate to leave it to
the discretion of the judge to determine if both the spouse and a parent
should speak. The judge should not be forced to choose between the wife
and mother of a victim as it occurred in the recent case of police offi-
cer Anthony Sanchez.

This bill, if enacted, will correct the apparently unintended
restriction and give the discretion to the court where it appropriately
belongs.

 
LEGISLATIVE HISTORY:

2024. S.4698; 2002 S.3375A/A.6193; 2006 S.6276/A.3803; 2008
S.389/A.3973; 2010 S.3408/a.3525; 2012 S.751; 20014 S.3082; 5.2016
S.2993; S.2018 5.537; 2020 S.4774

 
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:
None

 
EFFECTIVE DATE:
Immediately.