►
Description
This is the fifth meeting of the 2021-2022 Interim. Please see the agenda for details.
For agenda and additional meeting information: https://www.leg.state.nv.us/App/Calendar/A/
Videos of archived meetings are made available as a courtesy of the Nevada Legislature.
The videos are part of an ongoing effort to keep the public informed of and involved in the legislative process.
All videos are intended for personal use and are not intended for use in commercial ventures or political campaigns.
Closed Captioning is Auto-Generated and is not an official representation of what is being spoken.
A
All
right,
I'm
going
to
call
this
meeting
of
the
interim
judiciary
committee
to
order
I'm
going
to
make
my
remarks
first
before
we
get
to
the
role,
because
I
understand
we
are
having
some
technical
difficulties
connecting
with
all
of
our
members,
but
I
didn't
want
that
to
delay
us
any
more
than
it
already
has.
Our
hard-working
bps
staff
is
on
the
case.
It
is
entirely
the
fault
of
our
legislators.
A
No
I'm
kidding
it's
just
one
of
those
things
that
happens
so
for
those
of
you
who
are
new
to
the
interim
judiciary
committee.
Welcome
for
those
of
you
who
have
been
here
before
welcome
back.
I
do
want
to
mention
a
couple
of
things
that
those
of
you
who
have
been
here
before
already
know,
but
one
of
the
great
things
about
judiciary
is,
we
have
new
faces
and
new
people
here
every
time.
So
the
interim
judiciary
committee
has
a
lot
of
work
to
do
and
our
meetings
are
a
little
bit
long.
A
You
can
expect
that
we
will
be
here
into
the
early
afternoon,
so
there
will
be
a
lunch
break
sometime
around
noon,
we'll
kind
of
keep
an
eye
on
the
calendar
and
the
clock
and
find
a
time
between
presentations
that
make
sense
to
that
end.
If
any,
I
have
talked
to
some
of
the
presenters
already
who
asked
to
go
earlier
in
the
meeting,
so
they
can
make
it
to
other
commitments
that
they
have.
A
If
any
of
the
other
presenters
have
scheduling
issues,
please
feel
free
to
reach
out
to
me
or
to
the
staff
who
scheduled
you
today.
Even
while
presentations
are
going
on
and
we
can
shuffle
the
schedule,
even
if
you
want
to
come
later,
so
you
can
even
come
back
to
the
meeting
to
present.
We
can
absolutely
accommodate
that.
A
Also,
the
members
of
the
committee
know
this.
So
I
want
the
presenters
of
the
committee
to
know
that
we
don't
really
take
breaks
in
between,
which
is
why
members
are
absolutely
free
to
stand
up.
Take
a
break:
go
grab
a
snack
whatever
they
need
to
do,
and
I
ask
that
our
presenters,
please,
please
don't
take
offense
to
that,
realize
that
they
may
have
been
sitting
here
for
hours
without
a
break
and
when
they
come
back,
if
they
missed
just
a
portion
of
the
presentation,
they
might
ask
questions
to
catch
up.
A
A
After
the
presentation
from
each
organization
committee,
members
have
a
chance
to
ask
questions,
and
then
we
move
on
to
the
next
presentation,
and
we
also
have
two
opportunities
for
public
comment
during
the
senate.
Sorry,
the
joint
interim
judiciary
committee,
one
at
the
beginning
of
the
meeting
one
at
the
end
of
the
meeting
public
comments,
are
limited
to
three
minutes
per
person
and
we
also
have
the
opportunity
to
present
written
comments.
A
So
if
you
have
something
that
exceeds
three
minutes,
absolutely
submit
it
to
our
staff,
and
we
will
include
that
in
the
record
and
online,
and
I
encourage
all
of
the
members
of
the
committee
to
read
those
in
in
their
entirety.
I
always
do
which
reminds
me
if
you're,
following
along
at
home,
all
of
the
documents,
all
the
presentations
that
we're
looking
at
are
available
on
the
interim
judiciary
committee
website,
they're
listed
as
attachments
or
items
for
this
meeting.
A
A
Senator
pickard,
I
understand
senator
harris
is
present
and
experiencing
technical
difficulties
with
her
mic,
which
I
swear.
I
did
not
do
on
purpose.
We
will
get
it
fixed
before
we
get
to
questions
and
stuff,
but
marker
is
present.
Please
senator
pickard.
D
E
A
A
I
do
see
somebody
coming
up
to
the
table.
I
forgot
to
mention
in
case
you're
new
here
that
when
you
get
to
the
table,
you
have
to
press
the
microphone
button
in
order
for
your
comments
to
be
recorded,
and
please
just
state
your
name
at
the
beginning
of
any
comments
that
you
make
both
in
public
comment
and
during
presentations,
because
that's
how
we're
able
to
take
accurate
minutes
that
reflect
the
person
who
is
speaking.
F
This
public
comment
is
for
the
sentencing
commission
prison.
Re-Entry
services
are
vital
to
ensure
that
individuals
recently
released
from
prison
are
provided
with
resources
and
support
to
assist
with
stable
housing,
income,
social
skills
and
health.
Re-Entry
services
should
start
first
and
foremost
with
with
housing
under
ab236.
F
It
states
that
it's
expected
to
reduce
incarceration
rates
through
a
number
of
different
changes
to
sentencing
and
release
policies
to
avoid
640
million
in
correctional
costs
over
the
10
years.
Following
its
enactment,
one
of
the
things
that
ab236
states
it
will
do
is
minimize
barriers
to
successful
re-entry
under
nrs
176-01343.
F
National
research
states
that
15
percent
of
incarcerated
people
experience
homelessness
in
the
year
before
admission
to
prison
and
formerly
incarcerated
people
almost
10
times
more
likely
to
be
homeless
than
the
general
public,
so
tracking
the
housing
status
at
entry
and
exit
and
assessing
that
data
to
determine
how
homelessness
plays
a
role
in
recidivism
will
also
help
reach
this
goal
of
decreasing
prison
costs
and
minimizing.
F
Any
barriers
to
successful
re-entry,
so
I
suggest
creating
a
nevada,
re-entry
housing
work
group
which
I'm
actively
working
on
the
work
group,
will
be
responsible
for
constructing
guidance
around
how
nevada
should
properly
track
and
share
information.
In
order
to
gauge
the
statistics
of
how
many
homeless
individuals
enter
prison.
How
many
individuals
who
are
experiencing
homelessness
are
part
of
that
recidivism
number
and
to
ask
and
recommend
that
housing
status
is
added
as
a
data
point
to
be
collected
and
shared
with
the
sentencing
commission
under
ab236.
A
Thank
you.
Is
there
anybody
else
in
las
vegas
wishing
to
make
public
comment
in
person?
I
don't
see
any
so
we
will
move
to
the
phone
lines
and
the
internet.
Is
there
anybody
on
the
phone
wishing
to
make
public
comment.
C
C
C
C
According
to
the
american
community
survey,
in
2019,
almost
44
percent
of
nevada
households
were
renters
much
higher
than
the
national
average
of
36
percent.
Nevada
also
boasts
the
distinction
of
being
the
only
state
that
allows
for
summer
evictions.
This
is
a
provision
that
allows
landlords
to
entirely
sidestep
its
judicial
system
when
trying
to
evict
residents
from
their
homes
and
places
the
burden
on
tenants
to
initiate
a
court
case
should
they
hope
to
have
the
due
process
of
the
court
hearing
and
judicial
oversight
afforded
to
tenants
everywhere
else
in
this
country.
C
Evictions
and
economic
displacement
impact
us
all
by
putting
more
economic
burden
on
our
communities,
served
to
increase
demands
on
social
services,
shelters
and
hospitals
by
families
who
become
homeless
and
other
costs
associated
with
the
disruption
caused
by
housing.
Instability
by
contrast,
stable
homes,
promote
educational
opportunity
for
children
and
economic
opportunities
for
families,
allowing
nevadans
to
save
for
a
house
pursue
new
employment
and
open
new
businesses.
C
C
C
Tanya
brown
advocates
for
the
inmates
and
the
innocent
good
morning,
chair
scheibel
the
members
of
the
committee
on
april
8
2022.
I
attempted
to
make
a
second
public
comment.
However,
for
some
unknown
reason
I
was
unable
to
participate,
even
though
I
had
pressed
nine
and
was
now
in
the
queue
I'd
like
to
give
my
public
comment
for
the
april's
public
comment.
C
Now
we
would
like
to
see
funding
set
aside
for
the
2023
legislation
to
go
towards
funding
ndoc
so
that
they
could
implement
a
mental
health
pts
program
prior
to
their
release,
to
allow
inmates
to
seek
programming
treatment
for
their
ptsd,
who
have
acquired
during
their
duration
of
incarceration
and
we'd,
also
like
to
see
ongoing
treatment
for
inmates
who
will
still
remain
incarcerated
and
are
not
able
to
be
paroled
or
whose
parole
will
be
coming
up
in
the
future.
C
C
Seven
I
have
concerns
when
it
comes
when
it
comes
to
evictions
when
it
is
out
of
control
of
the
renter,
but
it
falls
directly
on
to
the
owner
of
the
property
for
non-payment
of
taxes
and
unbeknownst
to
the
renter.
The
county
has
become
legal
action,
leaving
the
renter
with
no
place
to
go.
This
is
something
that
I
did
not
see,
but
it
has
come
up,
and
so
I
just
wanted
to
let
you
know
thank
you
and
have
a
great
day.
C
C
I
testified
that
I
had
relinquished
custody
of
my
children
because
I
did
not
have
housing
and
I
was
begging
all
of
the
legislators
to
please
listen
to
the
people
that
are
struggling
the
most
during
the
next
legislative
session.
I
am
once
again
begging
everyone
that
has
any
iota
of
power
to
please
consider
the
weight
of
consequences
when
talking
about
what
is
fair
in
law.
C
I
don't
know
of
any
landlord
or
any
developer
that
has
to
be
separated
from
their
children
or
any
land
owner
or
lenny
any
developer
who
has
had
to
go
hungry
because
of
rent
control
or
because
of
you
know,
not
having
to
go
through
evictions
so
quickly,
whereas
us
here
down
on
the
bottom,
we
are
suffering
major
major
trauma
because
of
what
is
happening
with
this
housing
crisis.
Please
think
about
us.
C
First,
we
are
the
ones
that
are
experiencing
the
heaviest
consequences
and
also
since
I
got
the
eviction,
I
would
like
to
say
that,
even
though
I
am
now
graduated
college
and
making
a
living
wage,
I
am
still
unable
to
find
housing
that
is
one-third
of
my
income
and
every
single
application
that
I
put
in
so
far
has
asked
whether
or
not
I
was
a
felon.
Personally
I
am
not,
but
had
I
made
one
mistake
in
my
life
I
would,
I
guess,
forever
be
permanently
banned
from
being
in
society
in
any
meaningful
way.
C
C
C
I
also
want
to
thank
senator
harris
for
her
question
to
judge
bishop
regarding
how
we
fix
some
of
these
problems.
Thank
you
senator
for
the
question
and
your
and
the
committee's
continued
work
on
finding
solutions.
We
do
support.
Judge
bishop's
comment
that
to
fix
the
problems,
we
need
to
change
the
statute
to
48
business
hours.
C
C
A
All
right,
thank
you
so
much
that
will
bring
us
then
to
agenda
item
number
three.
We
have
some
presentations,
I'm
very
excited
about,
and
they
come
right
on
time
on
the
heels
of
these
public
comments
about
our
implementation
of
bills.
From
the
2021
session,
I
think
up.
First,
we
have
amber
widgery
with
us
who's
the
program
principal
for
the
criminal
justice
program
with
the
national
conference
of
state
legislatures,
and
we're
so
excited
to
have
you
here
and
hear
more
about
ncsl's
work
in
the
criminal
justice
program
and
on
bail
reform.
G
Okay,
we
could
good
shape.
I
think
you
can
see
the
slides
and
I
think
you
can
hear
me
so
I'll
go
ahead
and
get
started.
Cher
schreibel
members
of
the
committee.
Thank
you
so
much
for
inviting
me
to
be
here
today.
My
name
is
amber.
Ridgery
is
said,
and
I
work
with
the
national
conference
of
state
legislatures
here
in
denver
for
those
who
might
not
be
familiar
with
ncsl.
G
We
are
the
nation's
bipartisan
nonprofit
organization
for
all
7,
383
state
lawmakers
and
more
than
30
thousand
legislative
staff
across
the
country.
We
have
offices
in
denver
and
d.c
and
among
our
goals,
is
to
provide
legislatures
with
information
on
public
policy,
and
so
today
I'm
going
to
be
talking
a
little
bit
about
the
pre-trial
release
process
and
specifically
timelines
for
that
process
across
the
50
states.
G
I'm
going
to
cover
the
current
status
of
this
issue
in
the
states,
and
I'm
also
going
to
be
talking
about
some
recent
state
actions
focused
on
efficiency
and
ensuring
the
pre-trial
release
process
happens
in
a
timely
manner.
I'm
also
going
to
sort
of
cross-reference
in
my
presentation.
In
a
couple
of
areas
we
have
angela
darcy
with
us
today
from
kentucky
pre-trial
services
and
so
she's
going
to
be
adding
some
information
in
context
as
well.
G
So
first,
I
just
want
to
note
that
there
are
various
sources
of
law
that
impact
pretrial,
processing
and
timelines.
We
have
u.s
supreme
court
case
interpretation
of
the
basic
constitutional
requirements
in
terms
of
prompt
pre-trial
procedures,
but
I'm
going
to
leave
that
for
angela
darcy
to
cover
in
just
a
little
bit
and
what
I'm
really
going
to
cover
today
are
those
state
timelines
set
out
in
state
law
where
they
are
specified
and
also
what
happens
at
initial
appearances
impacted
by
those
timelines.
G
D
G
So
the
first
thing
I
want
to
point
out
is
that
procedures
provided
for
in
state
law
really
vary
from
state
to
state.
The
source
of
law
also
varies
in
some
states.
It's
court
ruled
it's
determinative,
and
so
state
supreme
courts
are
often
in
charge
of
making
those
determinations
and
in
other
states
it's
state
legislation
and
statute.
G
That
really
is
determinative
and
the
key
source
of
law
there's
also
a
lot
of
variation
in
the
terminology
that
is
used
in
state
law,
the
first
interference
of
a
defendant
before
court
after
arrest
goes
by
many
names,
including
some
of
those
listed
here
on
the
screen,
including
arraignment,
presentment,
first
appearance,
initial
48-hour
hearings,
preliminary
appearance
and
more
the
list
goes
on
also.
What
happens
at
those
hearings
really
varies
by
state.
G
So
big
picture:
what
does
it
look
like
across
the
50
states?
Almost
half
the
states
don't
actually
provide
any
sort
of
specifics
timeline
in
statute
or
in
court
rule
for
that
initial
appearance.
Instead,
they
use
much
broader
and
more
generic
timelines,
such
as
prompt
without
delay
within
a
reasonable
time
frame
or
as
soon
as
it's
practicable
states
that
do
specify
a
timeline
for
that
initial
appearance
and
setting
of
release
conditions
have
adopted
time
frames
anywhere
between
24
hours
and
72
hours.
G
I
should
also
note
that
in
a
number
of
states,
those
timelines
that
48
hour
timeline
or
24-hour
timeline
include
polling
or
exclusions
for
either
holidays
or
weekends
as
well,
so
that
there's
some
variety
across
the
states
there
as
to
whether
or
not
they're,
including
holidays
or
weekends,
within
their
specified
timeline,
and
then
we
also
have
a
handful
of
states
sort
of
the
very
small
minority
of
states
that
specify
their
timeline
based
on
sessions
of
court.
G
G
So
across
the
states
there
are
a
variety
of
ways
that
defendants
can
be
released
before
that
initial
appearance.
Hearing
and
you'll
see
some
general
examples
on
this
slide,
but
I'm
going
to
mention
and
highlight
a
few
states
specifically,
and
I
can
certainly
follow
up
with
statutory
provisions
or
bill
numbers
if
that's
of
interest
and
I'm
also
happy
to
connect
you
to
colleagues
in
other
states.
G
So
some
of
these
release
mechanisms
like
you'll
see
bond
schedules
on
here
are
not
new
concepts,
but
they
have
been
retained
in
some
states
as
states
move
away
from
utilizing
financial
conditions
of
release
more
broadly
and
they've
been
retained
so
that
if
the
bond
schedule
results
in
a
defendant
being
released
more
quickly
than
if
they
were
to
go
through
that
individualized
hearing
and
consideration
of
release
conditions
by
a
court.
So
there's
sort
of
that
dichotomy
and
I'll
give
some
examples
of
that
here
in
a
minute.
So
first
I
just
wanted
to
mention.
G
The
first
example
is
nebraska,
where
nebraska's
state
law
requires
county
judges
by
a
majority
to
vote,
to
adopt
a
bail
schedule
and
the
focus
there
is
on
misdemeanor,
defenses
and
also
you
know,
other
offenses
determined
necessary
by
those
local
judges
that
same
state
law
provision
authorizes
the
sheriff
or
other
peace
officer
to
release
defendants
pursuant
to
that
schedule
before
a
defendant's
first
appearance.
G
G
California.
Law,
like
nebraska,
also
requires
the
adoption
of
a
bail
schedule
at
the
local
level
in
release
eligible
felony
cases,
and
also
certain
domestic
violence.
Misdemeanors
a
peace
officer
with
reasonable
cause
to
believe
the
scheduled
amount
of
bail
is
insufficient
to
ensure
appearance
or
safety
of
a
victim
can
petition.
The
court
to
increase
bail
and
inversely
defendants
through
council
or
even
the
statute
list.
G
Friends
and
family
can
apply
to
a
magistrate
to
lower
the
scheduled
amount
of
bail
or
authorize
release
on
recognizance
there's
no
order
making
the
change
either
to
increase
by
petition
or
reduce
by
petition
the
amount
of
fail
or
release
on
recognizance.
G
Then
the
defendant
is
then
you
know,
within
an
eight
hour
time
frame
entitled
to
the
scheduled
amount
and
able
to
be
released
on
that
schedule.
Amount
of
fail.
California,
the
sort
of
second
piece
this
beyond
schedules,
california,
is
also
authorizing.
Predetermined,
bail
amounts
that
attach
to
warrants,
and
then
authorizes
officers
in
charge
of
local
jails
to
accept
bail
amounts
that
are
specified
on
warrants.
G
G
So
for
certain
petty
traffic
and
municipal
cases,
colorado
law
allows
release
on
monetary
conditions,
but
only
prior
to
that
individual
first
hearing
and
consideration
of
release
by
either
a
court
or
a
bond.
Commissioner,
now
normally
financial
conditions
of
release
have
been
prohibited
in
these
cases,
so
if
a
defendant
is
not
released
prior
to
their
first
appearance
and
they
end
up
going
before
court
or
bond
commissioner,
the
court
and
the
bond
commissioner
are
not
actually
able
to
assign
financial
conditions
of
release
in
those
cases.
G
However,
if
being
released
on
the
bond
schedule
through
a
financial
condition
of
release
is
quicker,
then
defendants
are
able
to
bond
out
using
those
fiscal
bail
schedules.
Colorado
is
also
another
example
of
states
that
authorize
setting
a
fiscal
condition
where
we
have
arrest
with
a
warrant.
So
if
somebody
fails
to
appear,
they
can
set
specified
financial
conditions
of
release,
even
if
the
financial
conditions
wouldn't
be
authorized
in
that
sort
of
first
instance,
of
a
hearing
before
a
judicial
officer
or
that
bond
commissioner.
G
G
Non-Court
officials,
including
sheriffs
and
bomb
commissioners,
who've
been
empowered
to
make
release
determinations
in
a
couple
of
states,
so
utah
by
state
law
authorizes
their
local
county
executive
to
appoint
one
or
more,
and
this
is
the
quote
from
the
statutory
language
responsible
and
discrete
members
of
the
sheriff's
department
to
serve
as
bail
commissioners.
End
quote:
bail
commissioners
in
utah
are
authorized
to
release
selected
individuals
on
their
own
recognizance,
and
they
can
also
determine
and
receive
financial
conditions
of
release
in
both
misdemeanor
cases
and
also
some
lower
classes
of
felony
cases.
G
State
law
provides
maximum
monetary
bond
amounts
that
can
be
set
by
commissioners
and
those
are
designated
for
each
class
of
offense,
whether
it's
misdemeanor
or
those
lower
level
felonies
and
the
ability
for
commissioners
to
set
release
conditions
in
some
felony
cases.
All
this
was
just
recently
expanded
in
2021
legislation
in
utah
to
really
empower
those
local
bail
commissioners
to
expedite
release
in
cases
and
in
more
cases
than
was
previously
authorized
under
utah
law.
G
I'm
also
going
to
bring
up
colorado
again
in
2019
colorado's
legislature,
enacted
the
prompt
pre-trial
liberty
and
fairness
act,
which
did
a
couple
of
things
it
provided
that
defendants
must
be
allowed
to
post
bond
within
two
hours
after
the
sheriff
receives
the
bond
information
from
the
court.
It
also
provides
that
the
custodian
of
the
jail
must
release
the
defendant
within
four
hours
of
a
defendant,
posting
bond
and
once
they're
physically
present
in
the
jail.
If
they're
coming
back
from
court.
G
There
are
some
exceptions
to
that,
for
you
know
certain
circumstances,
emergencies
and
also,
if
a
defendant
has
had
electronic
monitoring
ordered,
and
they
need
a
little
bit
more
time
to
process
the
electronic
monitoring.
G
The
law
also
required
the
chief
judge
of
each
judicial
district
to
develop
a
plan
for
setting
bonds
in
for
all
in
custody
defendants
within
48
hours
of
arrest.
The
law
required
the
development
of
cost
estimates
for
each
judicial
district
as
well
to
determine
the
feasibility
for
each
district
in
meeting
a
48-hour
timeline.
G
In
order
to
achieve
the
48-hour
requirement,
legislation
was
introduced
in
2020
and
colorado
had
a
bit
of
a
delayed
session
related
to
pandemic,
and
so
legislation
was
reintroduced
on
the
48
hour
timeline
in
2021
and
was
enacted
house
bill
1280
and
that
further
revised
the
timeline
so
that
initial
two
hour
and
four
hour
timeline
were
eliminated
sort
of
after
the
experience
and
implementation
and
instead
the
new
law
revised
those
timelines
to
be
requiring
of
release
within
six
hours
after
conditions
have
been
met
or
recognized,
bond's
recognizance
bond
has
been
set
and
the
defendant
returns
to
jail.
G
So
now,
focusing
on
the
48-hour
piece
of
the
timeline,
the
law
provides.
The
defendants
have
the
right
to
counsel
at
bond
hearings,
and
now
the
state
is,
you
know
not
just
investigating
the
40-hour
48-hour
timeline
they're
now
requiring
bond
hearings
to
be
held
within
48
hours
of
an
arrestee's
arrival
at
jail
and
that
implementation
started
in
april
of
this
year.
G
G
G
So
the
bond
hearing
officer
conducts
these
hearings
throughout
the
states
and
counties
that
request
the
services
the
public
is
able
to
access
and
do
these
hearings
virtually
online
for
each
case
heard
by
the
centralized
state
bond
hearing
officer,
the
arresting
jurisdiction
is
responsible
for
electronically
transmitting
the
arrest
report.
G
The
act
also
addresses
funding
for
this,
and
so
it
creates
the
district
attorney
assistance
for
bond
hearing
grant
program
to
assist
smaller
district
attorney's
offices
in
rural
areas,
in
particular,
in
covering
the
costs
associated
with
attending
and
preparing
for
these
new
virtual
hearings
on
weekends
and
holidays.
There's
also
new
funding
appropriated
for
the
judicial
branch,
the
public
defender's
office
who's
showing
up
his
counsel
at
these
hearings
now
and
also
the
division
of
criminal
justice,
in
addition
to
colorado's
use
of
audio
visual
technology.
G
I
also
just
wanted
to
mention
that
we
saw
one
other
sort
of
technology
component
in
another
state
hawaii
in
a
2019
piece
of
legislation
created
a
statewide
system
for
authorizing
the
posting
of
monetary
bond
amounts
24
7
online,
so
not
necessarily
providing
those
hearings
on
a
different
timeline,
but
creating
a
technological
solution.
For
you
know
in
a
timely
manner.
Any
time
of
day
posting
fiscal
bond
amounts
online.
G
But
for
now
I'll
move
on
to
my
next
slide,
I'm
mostly
going
to
let
angie
talk
about
this,
but
I
just
wanted
to
mention
that
pre-trial
services
agencies
can
also
assist
with
these
sort
of
timelines
and
processing
of
pre-trial
cases.
Kentucky
is
one
of
a
handful
small
handful
of
states
that
have
centralized
statewide
agencies
that
can
help
facilitate
pretrial
services,
particularly
in
rural
areas,
since
that's
a
centralized,
statewide
resource
and
then
outside
of
those
states
with
centralized
agencies.
G
Every
state
has
a
law
authorizing
the
use
of
citations
and
for
some
type
of
offense,
and
then
there
are
at
least
seven
states
that
provide
general
authorization
without
any
sort
of
specific.
You
know,
definition
of
only
misdemeanors
or
in
these
certain
cases,
it's
more
about
officer,
discretion
and
law
enforcement
agency
policy,
and
I
mentioned
this
because
citations
were
really
a
significant
tool
for
many
jurisdictions,
responding
to
the
pandemic,
to
reduce
the
number
of
individuals
that
were
booked
into
jail
and
actually
underwent
the
pretrial
process.
G
So
some
local
jurisdictions,
including
those
there's
some
good
data
from
the
safety
and
justice
challenge
jurisdictions,
engaged
showing
their
reduction
of
bookings
through
expanded
use
of
citations,
los
angeles
county,
for
example,
in
early
2020,
was
able
to
drop
their
daily
bookings
from
300
down
to
60..
G
And
so
I
just
highlight
this
as
another
sort
of
upstream
option
that
local
jurisdictions
are
pursuing
and
that
we've
seen
a
lot
more
recent
state
legislative
guidance,
encouraging
expanded
use
of
citations
so
that
fewer
folks
are
being
booked
into
jail
in
the
first
instance,
and
with
that
I
will
stop
I'm
happy
to
take
questions,
but
I
know
angela
darcy
will
also
have
additional
information
as
well.
A
Thank
you
so
much
ms
witchery.
I
think
I
am
going
to
pause
for
a
moment
for
questions,
but
then
also
allow
members
of
the
community
to
go
back
and
ask
you
questions
once
we
have
heard
from
ms
darcy.
So
let
me
start
now
with
any
questions
up
here
in
carson
city,
all
right.
A
B
Thank
you
church.
I
will.
I
just
wanted
to
ask
a
question
on
the
last
set
of
points
that
you
made
with
respect
to
the
citations,
because
I've
been
getting
mixed
messages
from
media
and
other
sources
where,
particularly
in
california,
where
in
la
and
san
francisco,
we
saw
those
citations
used
pretty
significantly,
and
yet
crime
rates
went
up
and,
and
people
tried
to
connect
those
to
well
these
people
weren't
put
in
jail.
B
G
Thank
you,
chair
scheible
and
senator
picker.
That's
a
great
question
and
I
don't
have
the
data
at
my
fingertips,
but.
D
G
G
Oh
amber
widgery
without
asl
yep
apologies,
so
apologies
chair,
I'm
happy
to
provide
some
of
that
data
for
you
where
it
exists
in
jurisdictions
like
charleston,
county,
south
carolina
or
some
of
those
other
jurisdictions.
So
I
can
definitely
follow
up.
B
Yeah,
I
would
really
like
to
see
the
data
from
the
districts
that
really
used
it
right.
If
we
have
jurisdictions
that
only
used
a
little
bit
or
they
didn't
really
reduce
their
intake
numbers
significantly.
I
don't
know
that
the
data
will
be
all
that
instructive,
but
where
we're
talking
about
like
in
la
as
you
mentioned,
we
went
from
300
bookings
down
to
60..
B
I
I
think,
where
we
see
a
large
difference,
we're
more
likely
to
see
what
those
effects
are,
but
I
I
haven't
heard
that
anybody
actually
has
the
data,
and
maybe
it's
too
soon,
but
I
would
love
to
see
that
because
at
some
point
we
need
to
put
to
bed
whether
or
not
these
changes
are
helping
or
hurting.
We
need
to
know.
A
Thank
you
senator
pickard,
and
I
would
agree.
I
would
also
be
interested
in
that
data.
I
think
our
whole
committee
would
so
if
you
could
provide
that
to
the
staff.
When
you
have
a
chance,
we
will
disseminate
it.
Other
questions,
I'm
sorry
senator
peter.
Do
you
have
any
other
questions?
A
I
don't
see
anybody
jumping
in.
I
know
that
senator
I'm
not
sure
if
senator
harris
is
able
to
turn
on
her
mic
yet,
but
we
will
come
back
to
her
if
we
need
to
oh
there.
She
is
excellent.
We
have
solved
all
the
technological
problems
of
the
day
and
with
that
we
will
move
on
to
our
next
presenter.
Ms
angela
darcy
she's,
the
executive
director
of
the
department
of
pre-trial
services
with
the
administrative
office
of
the
courts
in
kentucky.
A
D
Thank
you
chairman,
and
thank
you,
members
of
the
committee
for
having
me
here
today,
I'm
honored
to
present
a
little
nervous.
So
I'm
I'm
not
a
pro
at
this.
Quite
yet.
This
is
about
my
this
is
my
first
year
in
pre-trial
services
and
before
I
was
in
the
department
of
legal
services,
so
I'm
not
used
to
presenting
in
public,
but
I
think
I
can
get
there.
D
Let
me
go
ahead
and
share
my
screen
and
we
can
get
started
so
really.
What
I'm
going
to
talk
about
today
is
how
kentucky
implements
riverside.
Can
everybody
see
my
screen?
I'm
hoping?
Yes,
we
can
so
tucky
is
a
little
bit
unique
with
how
we
implement
riverside.
We
are
a
a
unified
court
system.
D
We
don't
have
bail
bondsmen
in
kentucky
and
our
department
of
pre-trial
services
is
statewide,
so
it's
under
the
administrative
office
of
the
courts
and
in
1976
we
became
a
unified
court
system
and
that
same
year
we
were
also
created
the
administrative
office
of
the
courts.
D
So
let
me
go
to
the
next
slide,
so
this
just
basically
overviews
on
part
of
the
bail
bond
reform
act
was
the
abolishing
of
bill
bondsman's
in
the
commonwealth
of
kentucky.
D
So
basically,
then
pre-trial
services
was
formed
stepped
in
and
we
are
the
ones
that
help
the
judge
make
a
determination
and
in
some
cases
we
are
also
allowed
to
make
the
determination
ourselves
through
the
administrative
release
program
that
we
have.
So
this
is
our
mission
statement
and
it's
to
make
the
assist
according
making
informed
pre-trial
release
decisions
to
effectively
supervise
defendants
in
order
to
support
safe
communities
and
to
ensure
that
defendants
meet
court
obligations
while
maintaining
the
constitutional
presumption
of
innocence
and
the
right
to
reasonable
bail.
D
We
have
six
essential
principles
of
pre-trial
justice.
As
you
can
see,
it's
the
presumption
of
innocence,
the
right
to
counsel
the
right
against
self-incrimination,
the
right
to
due
process,
equal
protection
under
the
law
and
the
right
to
a
bail
that
is
not
excessive,
so
I
will
go
over
kind
of
our
structure
really
quickly.
We
have
220
plus
employees
with
the
department
of
pretrial
services.
D
D
D
705
arrests
in
2019.
in
2020
we
had
127
652.
in
2021
we
had
136
414
and
so
far
for
this
year
we
have
46
950.
That
puts
us
on
track
to
being
about
140,
000
arrests.
We
have
gone
down
substantially,
as
you
can
tell
between
2019
and
2020,
and
that
is
particularly
due
to
covet
a
lot
of
our
our
officers,
weren't,
making
arrests
and
we
were
trying
to
get
them
out
as
quickly
as
possible
during
covet.
D
So
we
did
see
a
substantial
reduction
in
the
amount
of
breasts
we're
going
a
little
bit
jumping
a
little
bit
back
up
this
year,
but
not
entirely
so
that
is
worth
pointing
out.
So
let
me
just
do
a
really
brief
overview
of
riverside,
so
riverside
is,
is
definitely
worth
noting,
because
riverside
is,
as
many
people
get
confused
with
riverside
and
arraignments
and
initial
presentation,
so
riverside
is
solely
about
the
probable
cause
determination
of
when
somebody
is
arrested.
D
Without
a
warrant,
then
there
has
to
be
a
probable
cause,
determination
and
riverside
basically
said
that
the
probable
cause
determination
has
to
be
done
within
48
hours
of
arrest,
so
gerstein
bp,
was
the
precursor
to
riverside.
In
gerstein,
the
supreme
court
held
that
the
prom,
the
fourth
amendment,
required
a
prompt
judicial
determination
of
probable
cause
when
a
defendant
was
arrested
without
warrant.
So
what
that
really
said
was-
and
that
was
a
really
interesting
case,
because
in
florida
at
the
time
indictments
were
only
required
for
capital
cases.
Any
other
case
could
proceed
by
information.
D
So
all
other
crimes
charged
by
information
didn't
necessarily
require
a
probable
cause
determination
at
that
time,
so
defendants
were
being
held
for
quite
a
substantial
period
of
time
without
a
probable
cause
determination,
and
so,
when
you're
looking
at
a
citation-
and
you
you
see
on
the
citation
that
there's
no
maybe
no
facts
of
the
case
or
that
there's
there's
nothing
on
that.
That
tells
you
that
there's
actually
a
crime
committed
that
that's
really
key
here.
D
Was
there
probable
cause
to
make
the
arrest,
and
so
that
had
to
be
determined
by
gerstein,
so
gerstein
basically
held
that
that
they
had
to
do
it
promptly.
So,
at
the
time
in
florida,
with
the
indictments
that
were
only
required
for
capital
cases,
they
had
to
be
done
promptly,
not
the
capital
cases,
but
the
information
ones
so
arrest
warrants
were
issued.
The
only
possible
method
was
to
obtain
a
pr.
D
A
judicial
determination
was
a
special
statute
which
allowed
a
preliminary
hearing
within
30
days,
so
defendants
sued
and
that's
where
we
are
today,
that's
the
main
takeaway
from
gerstein.
So
really,
how
kentucky
has
I
guess
interpreted
gerstein
is
is
how
you'll
see
shortly
so
the
main
takeaways
from
gerstein
is
the
probable
cause.
Determination
must
be
made
by
a
judicial
officer
without
it
doesn't
have
to
be
with
an
adversarial
hearing.
D
It
can
just
be
looking
hearing
about
the
citation
determining
if
there's
probable
cause
enough
to
make
an
arrest,
and
if
you
think
about
it,
it
really
makes
sense,
because
a
probable
cause
determination
is
necessary
with
a
search
warrant
right
or
or
with
a
with
a
warrant
or
without
a
with
a
warrant.
There's
already
a
probable
cause
determination.
So
there
really
isn't
a
high
standard
there.
It's
not
a
high
bar
to
obtain
so
and
because
of
its
non-limited
or
because
of
its
limited
function,
it
can
be
non-adversarial.
D
D
D
Rcr
in
our
initial
presentation,
as
you
can
see,
is
that
an
officer
making
an
arrest
under
a
warrant
shall
be
taken
before
a
judge
without
unnecessary
delay,
and
then
any
person
making
an
arrest
without
a
warrant
shall
take
the
arrested
person
without
unnecessary
delay,
so
they're
both
the
same.
However,
we
have
kind
of
done.
We've
veered
away
from
that
rcr
and
that
rcr
is
a
little
bit
outdated
and
we
don't
really
follow
it
as
much
as
we
should
anymore.
D
It's
interesting
to
note
that
this
year
we
are,
we
are
potentially
revamping
this
rule.
We
are
currently
we
have
a
court
notification
committee,
and
this
is
something
that
we
are
working
on,
taking
a
look
at
to
make
it
kind
of
our
initial,
how
we
do
it
with
pre-trial
so
with
pre-trial.
This
is
how
we
work
so
within
24
hours
of
the
defendant's
incarceration.
D
We
must
provide
the
judge
or
trial,
commissioner,
with
the
information
to
assist
the
determination
of
pre-trial
release,
so
pre-trial
services
takes
that
defendant
within
24
hours,
and
we
help
the
judge
either
determine
probable
cause
or
re-release
the
defendant.
So
let
me
get
to
that
next
point,
so
this
is
within
24
hours
of
booking.
D
We
send
it
to
the
queue
for
application
of
risk
assessment
and
to
be
interviewed
if
they
are
ar
eligible,
and
what
ar
eligible
is.
Is
administrative
release
eligible
and
I
will
go
into
a
little
bit
more
detail
about
that.
So
if
they
are
eligible,
then
we'll
automatically
release
them.
So
there
will
be
no
probable
cause
determination
made
by
the
judge,
because
they're
released
immediately.
D
D
So
we
use
the
booking
time
versus
the
arrest
time,
but
we
still
do
it
within
24
hours
so
that
pre-trial
services,
specialist,
slash
officer
will
actually
get
to
the
defendant
within
the
24
hours.
Take
the
citation
they'll
call
the
judge.
They'll
read
the
citation
to
the
judge.
If
they're,
not
administrative
administratively
released
and
the
judge
will
then
assess
the
defendant
they'll
take
the
risk
score
into
into
consideration
they'll.
D
Sometimes
we
will
read
them
the
court
record,
we'll
read
them
the
citation.
The
judge
then
makes
a
probable
cause
determination
at
that
time
and
they're
either
released
on
bond
or
ror
and
at
that
or
their
release
on
a
financial
bond
or
an
unsecured
bond,
which
is
the
we
have
the
unsecured
and
the
financial
release.
D
So
that
is
how
we
operate
within
kentucky.
But
one
of
the
things
I
really
would
like
to
talk
about
is
the
administrative
release
as
well,
because
that
has
been
key
for
us
in
the
commonwealth
of
kentucky
and,
I
believe,
senator
pickard.
You
know
mentioned
all
the
defendants
not
being
arrested
or
cited,
so
these
are
actually
arrested,
but
they're,
low
level,
low
to
moderate
level
risk
level
defendants
and
we
have
an
actual
risk
assessment
that
we
apply
and
it
is
an
evidence-based
tool
that
we
use.
So
we
take
that
evidence-based
tool.
D
We
look
at
the
defendant's
criminal
history,
we
apply
it
to
the
defendant,
and
then
we
have
a
list
of
charges
that
we
look
at
to
see
if
the
defendant
can
be
released.
If
the
defendant
qualifies
for
release,
then
the
pretrial
service
specialist,
by
way
of
the
supreme
court
order,
is
actually
allowed
to
release
the
defendant.
D
So
if
they
had
a
public
intoxication
charge,
they
could
look
at
the
uniform
schedule
of
bail,
see
that
they
could
post
50
and
then
they
would
be
released.
On
the
uniform
schedule
of
bail.
The
problem
became
with
our
uniform
schedule
of
bail.
Is
indigent
defendants
many
times
couldn't
even
post
the
fifty
dollars.
D
So
the
supreme
court
came
up
with
a
pilot
project
called
the
administrative
release
schedule
and
the
administrative
release
schedule
was
piloted
in
a
few
counties
in
the
beginning
it
did
very
well
and
in
2017
on
january,
1st
2017
it
became
mandatory,
so
pre-trial
officers
must
determine
defendant's
eligibility
for
release.
If
ineligible,
then
the
judge
is
contacted
for
the
for
the
bill
decision
and
at
that
time
the
judge
also
makes
the
probable
cause
determination.
D
D
All
right,
let
me
go
to
the
next
slide.
The
next
slide
is
actually
just
showing
our
administrative
release,
and
I
think
it's
pretty
interesting,
and
it's
really
it's
done
very
well.
In
the
commonwealth
of
kentucky,
we
have
released
a
substantial
number
of
defendants
through
our
administrative
release
program.
It
expedites
them
within
about
two
hours
of
their
arrest.
Sometimes
earlier
we
get
to
the
defendants,
we
have
them
processed,
we
have
them
out
of
jail.
D
We
give
them
a
court
date
to
report
back
whatever
the
the
court
schedule
is
to
come
back
to
court
and
then
they
are
and
then
they
report
back
to
court.
Our
administrative
release
is
for
non-violent
low-level
misdemeanors
and
felonies,
and
this
is
kind
of
the
the
rules
around
it.
This
is
actually
on
our
supreme
court.
We
have
the
administrative
orders.
This
can
actually
be
found
also
be
happy
to
send
anybody
a
copy
that
would
like
to
see
it.
D
D
So
the
judge
also
has
the
ability
to
get
their
entire
criminal
history,
and
that's
something
that
we
have
enabled
online
with
our
pretrial
history
report
is.
The
judge
can
also
will
also
read
the
history
to
the
judge,
if
he's,
if
he
or
she
so
needs,
and
then
if
they
have
any
ncic
record,
we
also
tell
the
judge
what
the
ncic
record
is.
It's
not
something
that
we
provide
to
them
through
our
website
because
of
our
ncic
rules,
but
we
do
tell
them
if
they
have
any
out
of
out
of
state
records.
D
So
this
is
our
release
decision.
As
you
can
see,
this
one
particular
defendant
was
released
pursuant
to
the
supreme
court
order.
This
also
takes
some
of
the
weight
off
of
the
judges
because
we
administratively
release
them.
So
it's
it's
showing
to
the
public.
If
anybody
were
to
ever
see
the
conditions
of
the
release
or
the
the
judicial
decision,
it
shows
that
it
wasn't
a
judicial
decision.
It
was
actually
per
the
supreme
court
order.
D
It
also
has
their
bond
conditions
listed
on
there
under
the
ar
order.
They're,
just
not
they're,
ordered
not
to
have
any
new
offenses
or
arrests,
and
I
believe,
under
our
current
supreme
court
order,
they
just
can't
have
contact
with
the
victim
so
with
administrative
release.
This
is
defendants
that
are
extremely
low
level.
We
believe
that
they
will
come
back
to
court.
We
believe
that
they
will
not
reoffend
and
that's
the
two
things
that
our
risk
assessment
looks
at.
Will
they
reoffend
and
will
they
come
back
to
court?
D
We
grade
them,
we
publish
we,
we
have
their
scores,
we
give
that
to
the
judge
and
then
we
either
are
allowed
to
make
the
decision
per
the
supreme
court
order
or,
if
they're
moderate,
to
high
or
if
the
charge
is
now
ineligible,
then
we'll
send
them
to
the
judge,
and
this
is
actually
but
the
jail
sends
back
to
pretrial's
confirmation
that
the
defendant
was
released
at
the
very
bottom
there.
You
can
see
name
of
judge
pre-trial
officer.
D
If
the
judge
didn't
release,
then
our
pre-trial
officer
will
be
the
one
that's
listed
on
that
and
then
we
also
have
a
section
there
for
administrative
release.
So
that
is
it
another
thing
that
we've
done
in
kentucky
and
I'm
sure
you
guys,
judges
and
and
courts
in
nevada
has
have
also
had
to
do
the
same.
But
one
of
the
things
that
we've
had
to
really
step
up
is
our
video
arraignment.
D
So
that's
another
thing
that
I'd
like
to
mention
as
well
is
that
we
have
stepped
up
and
done
all
arraignments
in
the
commonwealth
of
kentucky,
with
the
exception
of
maybe
a
couple
jurisdictions
by
video,
and
that
is
another
way
where
we
comply
with
the
rcr.
3.02
is
because
first
we're
making
the
probable
cause
determination.
D
But
within
a
couple
days
the
defendant
is
arraigned
with
the
judge
at
that
time
their
appointed
counsel,
their
read
their
charges,
their
read
their
rights
and
we
are
implementing.
We
have
implemented
that
through
video
and
one
of
the
great
things
that
we've
been
able
to
do
as
well
is
we've
been
able
to
utilize
arpa
funds
for
our
video
arraignment.
So
the
kentucky
legislator
has
granted
us
a
significant
amount
of
money
to
rule
that
out
in
between
between
our
jails
and
our
in
our
court
system.
D
D
We
are
having
some
issues
with
getting
the
defendant
transported
to
the
other
county.
The
jails
are,
are
are
all
kind
of
backlogged
right
now
and
with
covet
they're
having
difficulties,
our
sheriff's
deputies
are
actually
the
ones
that
go
and
pick
up
the
defendants
at
the
jails
and
not
the
jails.
D
So
the
issue
has
become
that
some
defendants
who
have
already
have
charges
but
have
failure
to
appears,
have
not
been
transported
as
quickly.
D
So
we've
tried
to
implement
that
statewide
and
it's
worked
really
well
and
that's
something
that
we're
currently
in
the
process
of
designing
and
rolling
out
statewide.
Our
jailers
now
have
funding
as
well
to
implement
this
program
so
rather
than
having
to
go
all
the
way
to
the
other
side
of
kentucky,
they
can
actually
appear
by
video.
The
judge
can
see
them.
The
judge
can
say:
hey,
I'm
going
to
change
your
bond
to
an
ror
or
an
unsecured
sediment
new
court
date.
The
defendant
is
released
or
the
judge
can
at
least
put
eyes
on
them.
D
The
defendant
can
see.
The
judge
know
that
they
have
an
attorney
appointed
that
they're
going
to
be
brought
to
court
or
brought
back
to
their
original
county
within
two
or
three
days
and
there's
a
little
bit
more.
I
guess
security,
a
feeling
of
security
for
the
defendant,
because
one
of
the
issues
that
we've
seen
is
that
defendants
don't
really
know
so
they
may
be
held
in
jefferson
county,
but
they'll
have
a
pike
county
charge
and
that's
about
a
four-hour
time
frame.
Drive-Wise
so
they'll
be
held
in
jefferson.
D
County
won't
know
when
they're
going
back
to
pike
county.
So
with
our
video
arraignment
system
in
our
video
hearing
system,
we
can
actually
get
to
them
quicker.
The
judge
will
tell
them
when
they
should
be
expected
to
be
transported
back
to
pike,
county
and,
and
at
least
the
defendant
knows
they've
seen
a
judge.
They
know
what
their
bond
is.
They
know
that
they
have
an
attorney
and
they
know
approximately
when
they'll
be
transported
back
to
pike
county.
D
So
that's
something
that
we're
working
on
there's
always
as
you
go
along
you
know,
and
especially
during
covet.
This
has
become
more
and
more
of
an
issue.
D
So
we've
we've
kind
of
we've
tried
to
we've
created
a
committee
and
on
that
committee
we
have
defense,
attorneys
prosecutors,
jailers,
sheriffs
and
judges
to
talk
about
this
issue
and
how
we
can
kind
of
expedite
these
out
of
custody
defendants.
D
So
that's
another
thing
that
we're
looking
at
and
I'm
going
to
go
back
to
302,
really
quick
and
just
show
you
that
that's
something
that
we're
addressing
with
that
rule
and
also
with
our
arraignment
rule,
because
it
doesn't
really
speak
to
an
out
of
and
out
of
custody
or
an
out
of
county
defendant.
D
So
we're
going
to
try
and
shore
this
up
and
add
another
rule
that
does
address
perhaps
out
of
county
defendants.
So
this
is
only
in
the
initial
appearance
and
many
of
in
a
few
of
our
jurisdictions.
So
I
believe
in
jefferson
county
and
in
fayette
county
and
some
of
our
bigger
jurisdictions.
We
actually
do
the
initial
appearance
within
48
hours,
because
they're
bigger
counties
they
have
court
every
day
in
jefferson
county.
They
literally
have
courts
seven
days
a
week
for
arraignments.
D
So
we
actually
do
the
48
hour
determination
pretty
quickly
with
that,
and
so
we
combined
those
typically
a
lot
of
times.
The
judges
will
not
ask
us
to
read
the
citation
to
them
because
they
know
that
they're
going
to
be
coming
up
tomorrow
for
arraignment,
so
we've
combined
the
probable
cause,
determination
and
the
arraignment
into
one
proceeding
in
our
bigger
counties,
and
I
think
that
that
pretty
much
summarizes
it.
I
hope
that
I've
expressed
it
clearly
and
if
anybody
has
any
questions,
then.
A
A
E
E
I
would
love
to
know.
You
said
you
had
200
and
some
odd
employees
in
the
administrative
office
of
the
court.
I'd
love
to
know
what
your
budget
is
yearly
and
the
last
question
I
have
is:
I
have
two
more
software.
If
is,
is
it
a
proprietary
and
the
last
would
be
your
video
system?
Are
you
using
something
proprietary,
or
are
you
using
something
already
in
use
your
cost
for
that,
and
I
just
love
to
know
how
this
is
going
for
you.
Thank
you.
D
D
I
think
that
the
main
issue
that
we've
probably
had
more
than
not-
but
I
think
that
judges
have
finally
started
to
be
okay,
with
the
administrative
release
order,
I
think
in
the
beginning
there
was
some
hesitation
for
the
judges
to
implement
that,
because
it
was
actually
a
pretrial
service
specialist
that
was
releasing
these
defendants
versus
the
judge.
D
D
Let
me
see
if
I
can
remember
all
your
questions.
Your
next
question
was:
are
software?
Is
it
proprietary?
It
is
created
by
us.
It's
a
case
management
system.
It
is
something
that
we
hope
to
update
in
the
next
few
years.
It
is
we've
been
using
it,
I
think,
since
2007
or
2008,
so
we
are
in
need
of
an
update.
D
It
is
a
it's
not
a
web-based
program,
so
it's
just
a
you
know,
just
a
regular,
a
regular
program
that
all
our
pre-trial
services
specialists
use
and
it
basically
the
the
screen
that
you
saw
and
I,
with
the
release
decision
it
basically
populates,
so
that
screen
is
populated
by
our
system
and
it
uploads
to
the
pre-trial
release
decision
and
that's
something.
So
our
software
is
proprietary,
but
we
are
looking
at
other
options
in
the
near
future
and
we
do
hope
to.
We
do
hope
to
update
that.
D
E
I
didn't
say
that
I
think
it
does.
I
think,
I'm
just
so
amazed
that
you
all
were
able
to
figure
this
out.
Our
issue
is,
is
definitely
our
rule.
E
Counties
are
are
really
struggling
with
this
and
we
really
want
to
make
sure
that
we
are
sensitive
to
that
and
try
and
find
solutions,
and
so
I
think
that
the
things
that
you
are
mentioning
work
well,
I
will
ask
one
more
thing:
you
said
earlier
that
you
are
super
excited
about
the
data
that
you
all
have
collected
and
do
you
have
a
response
to
the
question
that
was
raised
by
senator
pickard
earlier
about?
Have
you
seen
this
increase
in
in
crime
because
you
are
using
this
administrative
process
as
opposed
to
holding
folks
in
jail
pre-trial.
D
So
I
don't
believe,
we've
seen
an
increase
in
crime
because
we
we've
done
administrative
release.
I
certainly
will
be
happy
to
get
some
numbers
for
you.
We,
we
have
a
lot
of
numbers
on
our
administrative
release
program
because
we've
we
want
to
make
sure
that
we
get
it
right,
especially
with
our
judges.
D
So
I
will
be
happy
to
supplement
and
get
you
some
data
on
our
administrative
release
process.
Just
so
you
know
we
do
have.
We
always
have
ftas
and
we
always
will
have
new
criminal
activity.
That's
just
a
risk
that
you
take,
but
our
administrative
release
works
so
well
because
it
helps
defendants
and
and
it's
not
as
it's
not
a
large
of
a
number
that
you
would
think.
It's
mainly
used
for
misdemeanors
and
some
class
d
felonies.
D
So
these
are
non-violent,
so
assault
wouldn't
be
eligible.
Dui
second
and
thirds
are
not
eligible,
so
they're,
just
they
are
really
low
level
and
it
was
similar
to
a
uniform
schedule
of
bail.
So
anything
that
was
on
the
uniform
schedule
of
bail,
I
believe,
was
also
on
our
administrative
release
program.
D
A
Thank
you.
I
think
there
was
one
other
question.
Assemblywoman
summers
armstrong
asked,
which
was
what
the
response
has
been
like
to
not
having
bail
bonds
or
not
having
bail
bonds
officers
in
kentucky,
and
I
would
be
interested
to
hear
how
that
came
to
be
and
how
it's
gone.
D
D
You
know,
there's
always
the
urban
legend
that
you
know
a
judge
was
you
know
a
bail
bondsman
and
you
know
so
there
there's
a
there's,
a
ton
of
there's
a
ton
of
history
out
there
and
I'll
be
happy
to
send
you
the
article
once
we
I
we
have
tons
of
articles
and
so
I'll
be
happy
to
send
you
the
article,
but
the
general
assembly
made
a
decision
not
to
use
bail,
bondsmen
and
it
was-
and
it's
still
really
controversial,
so
we
are
really
still
we're.
Not
we.
D
D
We
we
do
use
the
risk
assessment
tool,
I
think
is,
is
one
of
the
keys
to
why
it
works
so
well
is
because
we
can
kind
of
grade
what
risk
level
the
defendant
is
going
to
be
and
if
they're
high,
then
the
judge
sets
you
know
a
bond,
that's
commensurate
to
the
risk
level
and
the
charges
and
the
defendant
is
either
not
released
or
has
to
post
a
high
financial
bond.
So
and
since
we
don't
have
bail
bondsmen,
that
is
probably
one
of
the
downsides.
D
Maybe
is
that
the
defendant
can't
there
is
no
10
percent
there?
It's
it's
full
cash
or
or
they're
not
released.
We
do
have
various
levels
of
financial
release,
so
we
have
a
surety
bond
where
somebody
can
sign
a
defendant
out
and
put
their
name
up
on
the
line.
We
also
have
a
10
percent.
We
have
a
partially
secure
bond
and
then
we
have
the
full
cash
bond
and
then
we
also
have
a
property
bond
as
well.
D
So
we
we
have
a
multitude
of
different
types
of
bond
where
the
defendant
is
released
if
the
defendant-
and
it's
also
worth
noting
that
if,
if
the
defendant
isn't
released
within
24
hours,
then
we
call
the
judge
again
within
24
hours
and
just
let
them
know
that
the
defendant
has
been
unable
to
post
bail
and
do
they
want
to
look
at
the
charges
again.
Do
they
want
to
look
at
the
you
know
the
defendant's
risk
level
and
and
we'll
kind
of
go
through
that
review
again
with
them.
D
A
Thank
you.
I
have
some
more
questions,
but
I
usually
save
mine
for
the
end,
which
I
will
do
this
time.
I'll
go
back
down
to
our
colleagues
in
las
vegas
and
see
who
has
questions
it
looks
like
vice
chairwin
has
a
question.
A
B
Thank
you
and
someone.
Summers
armstrong
took
a
little
bit
of
my
win,
but
I
am
interested
to
know
how
these
things
have
worked,
because
we
get
the
the
differing
reports.
B
I'd
also
be
particularly
interested
in
knowing
what
you
use
as
a
risk
assessment
tool,
because
there's
a
lot
of
them
out
there
created
for
different
purposes
by
different
people.
I
I
not
to
plug
a
particular
author,
but
I
was
reading
a
book.
B
It
was
talking
to
strangers
by
malcolm
gladwell
and
he
talked
about
the
studies
that
have
been
done
as
to
whether
or
not
judges
can
make
a
better
decision
than
the
risk
assessment
tool
and
they
failed
utterly,
and
so
I've
been
really
interested
in
finding
out
what
works
and
what
doesn't
in
terms
of
that
risk
assessment
tool.
So
I
wonder
if
you
would
share
with
us
the
details
of
that,
so
that
we
can,
you
know
more,
compare
that
to
what
we're
using
so
that
was
it
chair
scheible.
Thank
you.
D
So
our
risk
assessment
tool
was
created
by
the
arnold
foundation
and
we
we've
they.
They
did
a
big
study
and
evaluated,
and-
and
we
did
a
lot
of
in
case-
not
case
studies,
but
we
took
the
defendant
and
the
arnold
tool
helped
us
or
the
arnold
foundation,
helped
us
build
that
tool
so
and
I'll
be
happy
to
send
you
the
risk
factors
that
we
look
at
and
and
how
we
grade
it,
because
it
is
really
interesting.
D
Now
I
mean
we
do
have
some
judges
that
don't
like
the
risk
assessment
tool
right
and
believe
that
judicial
discretion
is
key
and
that
they
know
you
know,
as
you
said
better
than
the
tool,
and
so
it's
just
one
of
the
factors
that
the
court
has
to
consider.
The
court
doesn't
have
to
base
their
whole
determination
on
what
our
risk
assessment
tool
says.
It's
just
they
can
look
at
it,
they
can
say
yeah.
D
I
don't
think
that's
true
and
I'm
going
to
say
that,
because
of
the
nature
of
the
offense
because
of
the
his
criminal
history,
I'm
going
to
give
him
a
higher
bond.
So
there's
still
judicial
discretion
built
in
there
for
our
judges,
and
I
think
that's
really
the
key
and
that's
something
that
we
try
to
you
know
constantly
emphasize
is
that
you
always
have
discretion
to
go
against
the
tool.
That
is
your
as
a
judge
that
absolutely
you're
you're
right.
So,
but
it's
built
it
it
does
it.
D
There
are
faults
with
it
and
there's
always
you
know,
there's
I
think
five
plus
or
minus
five
percent,
it's
accurate.
So
so
there's
always
that
level
where
it's
not
it's
going
to
miss
and
I
think
what's
interesting,
yeah,
because
a
lot
of
times
what
you'll
have
is
somebody
that
has
never
committed
a
crime
in
their
entire
life
and
then
has
been
charged
with
murder,
so
they're
going
to
be
low
on
the
scale
because
they
don't
have
any
failures
to
appear
and
they
don't
have
any
new
criminal
activity.
B
So
what
I
hear
you
saying
is
that
the
risk
assessment
tool
is
by
and
large
working
well
and
you're,
not
seeing
an
increase
of
even
petty
crime,
corresponding
to
people
that
aren't
being
kept
in
custody
and
so,
generally
speaking,
give
or
take
a
little
bit
of
built-in
human
error.
You're
you're,
you
feel
it's
successful.
So
that's
that's
really
good
to
hear.
D
You
know
harvard
we'll
we'll
get
somebody
to
look
at
the
tool
and
see
with
both
factors
there,
which
one
actually
is
evidence-based
and
has
the
the
backing
behind
it
to
prove
it,
and
then
you
know
and
in
our
our
existing
tool.
If
that
still
is
accurate,
I
will
say
this:
what
we
have
realized,
though,
during
covet,
is
that
as
charges
get
pushed
down,
the
road
defendants
are
more
likely
not
to
appear
so
that
has
been
one
of
the
things
that
has
been
concerning.
B
That
and
that's
critical
information
right,
because
then
we
have
to
correlate
that
data.
You
know
that
that
trend
against
the
the
tool
itself
to
see,
maybe
the
ftas
are
going
down
for
a
different
reason.
Maybe
the
tool
isn't
even
the
the
key
connection
anyway.
I
don't
want
to
take
too
much
time
on
this,
but
thank
you
it's!
It's
really
encouraging
to
hear
that
this
concept
is
working
because
it's
new
here.
Well,
it's
not
new.
It's
just
something
we
haven't
fully
adopted
in
the
same
way
you
have.
D
Yeah-
and
I
will
say
that
if
we,
it
would
be
very
difficult,
so
my
understanding
that
with
the
nevada
system
is
that
the
judges
are
doing
court
and
you
were
doing
the
initial
hearing
in
all
of
that
within
48
hours,
and
I
think
that
that
would
also
be
difficult
in
the
commonwealth
of
kentucky
as
well.
That's
why
we
have
implemented
our
24-hour
rule
with
pre-trial
so
that
probable,
so
they're
either
released
or
that
probable
clause
determination
is
made
right
away.
So
that
has
I
believe
that
has
been
critical
to
our
success.
A
Thank
you
did
we
have
other
questions
from
our
members
online,
or
did
ms
widgery
want
to
chime
in
go
ahead?
Mr
yeah,
thank
you.
So
much.
G
Senator
schreibel
and
bridgery
ncsl,
I
was
just
taking
notes
on
some
of
those
questions
and
wanted
to
sort
of
weigh
in
from
a
broader
perspective.
Outside
of
kentucky
kentucky,
you
know
prohibited
the
use
of
commercial
bill
bondsmen.
You
know
a
long
time
ago.
I
just
wanted
to
highlight
that
there
are
also
a
total
of
five
states
that
have
eliminated
commercial
bail
bondsmen
legally.
The
most
recent
to
do
so
was
massachusetts
in
2017..
G
You
know
illinois,
oregon
and
wisconsin.
Were
you
know
many
years
before
that,
but
massachusetts
being
the
most
recent
to
eliminate
the
use
of
commercial
bail
bondsmen
in
statute.
G
Specifically,
it
actually
didn't
get
a
lot
of
attention
and
wasn't
very
controversial,
because
a
lot
of
their
system
had
evolved
so
much
over
time,
whether
through
you
know
authorizing
10
bonds
or
reducing
reliance
on
money
in
general,
that
bondsman
really
weren't
working
in
the
state
by
the
time
the
legal
elimination
came
through,
and
so
there
was
a
statutory
prohibition
on
fiscally
benefiting
from
posting
a
bond,
so
somebody
else
can
still
post
your
bond.
G
You
just
can't
fiscally
benefit
and
make
a
profit
off
of
posting
that
bond
in
massachusetts,
and
I
would
say
that
largely
went
sort
of
unnoticed
overall
because
they
were
already
just
functionally,
not
using
commercial
bond
industry
in
that
state,
and
then
we
also
have
a
couple
examples
of
states.
New
jersey
is
usually
the
example
that
comes
up
commercial
bail,
bondsmen
aren't
statutorily
prohibited
from
operating
within
this
that
state,
but
functionally
they're,
just
really
not
utilized.
All
that
often
the
same
can
be
said
for
the
washington
dc
system
as
well.
So.
G
You
know
kentucky
sort
of
that
elimination
was
a
long
time
ago,
some
of
the
more
recent
history
on
that
front,
and
then
I
can
talk
about
the
risk
assessment
piece
if
that's
of
interest
in
terms
of
what
other
states
are
doing
too
but
I'll
stop
there
senator.
A
Thank
you.
That
is
also
helpful.
I
I
do
have
a
couple
of
questions
and
maybe
going
to
ms
darcy
and
getting
an
understanding.
First
would
be
really
helpful
because
you
did
mention
that
you
know
nevada's
system
works
and
it
is
nevada,
not
nevada.
It
works
a
little
a
little
different
than
kentucky's,
and
so
here
we
have
judges
who
review
probable
cause.
A
You
know
just
from
a
piece
of
paper:
they
don't
see
the
defendant
in
person
in
order
to
do
that,
and
then
the
first,
but
they
can
set
bail
at
that
time
or
release
them
at
that
time,
and
it
sounds
like
that.
Part
is
similar
to
kentucky
and
then
the
part
where
the
individual
gets
seen
within
48
hours,
regardless
in
nevada.
D
They
we
talk
to
the
judge
within
24
hours.
Pre-Trial
does
talks
to
the
judge,
the
defendant
doesn't
necessarily,
except
for
our
larger
jurisdictions.
Kentucky
doesn't
necessarily
the
defendants
in
our
rural
jurisdictions.
Don't
see
the
judge
right
away.
The
arraignment
is
with
with
in
that
lovely
language
of
without
unnecessary
delay.
D
So,
and
I
think
that
has
been
you
know
all
you
know
in
every
state.
I
think
that's
you
know
that's
up
to
what
unnecessary
delay
really
means,
and
so
we
haven't
defined
that
in
kentucky,
but
they
are
presented
to
the
judge.
So
we
call
the
judge.
We
will
tell
the
judge
what
their
risk
assessment
score
is.
We
will
present
the
citation
to
them
and
we
do
that
within
the
24
hours.
D
The
defendant
isn't
necessarily
going
to
see
the
judge
within
24
hours,
but
the
judge
does
know
that
the
defendant
has
been
arrested
and
that
there
is
a
charge
out
there
and
then
they
are
set
on
the
docket
for
arraignment
so
and
in
our
rural
counties.
That
is
something
that
you
know
with
the
court
notification
process
committee.
That's
something
that
we're
looking
at
as
well,
because
do
we
need
to
expedite
those
as
well
and
get
those
done
quicker
because
in
salt,
some
of
our
smaller
communities,
probably
much
like
nevada?
D
You
know
we
only
have
court,
maybe
once
a
week-
and
so
you
know
the
defendant
is
also
even
though
his
bail
has
been
determined
by
the
judge
and
the
probable
cause
determination
has
been
made.
They
still
haven't
necessarily
talked
to
their
counsel,
yet
they
haven't
been
read
their
rights.
They
haven't
been
arraigned.
So
that
is
something
that
we
are
currently
working
on
and
hoping
that
we
can
tweak
that
a
little
bit
more
in
much
like
my
goodness
nevada
did.
I
say
it
right.
A
D
Nevada,
okay,
it's
it's
like
it's
like
louisville,
everybody
says
louisville
and
it's
louisville.
So
exactly
nevada
is
yeah.
We
we
still
have
things
to
work
on
and-
and
I
think
that's
any
time
that
you
have
defendants
with.
You
know
substantial
due
process
rights
and
and
just
to
make
sure
that
you're
conforming
with
the
constitution,
it's
important
to
get
that
right
and
and
that's
something
that
kentucky
is
constantly
pushing
to
get
right,
so
we're
by
no
means
perfect.
D
A
Thank
you
that
that's
a
very
helpful,
so
they
they
do
get
bail
set
within
24
hours
and
then
what
you're
saying
is,
if
you
know
bail,
is
set
at
an
amount
that
they
can't
afford.
Then
that's
it's
that
period
of
time.
From
the
time
bail
is
set
to
the
time
they
go
in
front
of
a
judge
that
could
be
longer
than
24
or
48
hours
in
the
more
populist
jurisdictions,
it's
probably
only
24
hours,
but
in
a
more
rural
jurisdiction
where
they
only
meet
once
a
week.
A
If
you're
arrested
on
wednesday
and
they
meet
on
tuesday,
it
could
be
next
tuesday
before
you're,
seen
by
the
judge,
and
so,
if
you're
seen
by
the
judge,
the
next
tuesday.
I
assume
that
is
when
council
would
be
appointed
if
you
can't
afford
it
and
then
that
council
could
readdress
their
custody
status
and
that
would
also
be
their
arraignment.
I
am
I
correct.
That
would
be
the
amendment
time,
something
else
that
I
think
would
be
helpful
for
us
to
understand,
because
it's
different
in
different
states
is
when
somebody
is
arraigned.
A
D
So
within
kentucky
we
have
misdemeanors
and
felonies,
and
so
some
of
our
misdemeanors
are
all
of
our
misdemeanors.
Are
the
next
step
would
be
a
pre-trial
conference
with
felonies.
The
next
step
is
if
they're
arrested
and
it's
not
by
indictment-
and
it's
just
so
let's
say
an
officer
charges,
the
defendant
and
there's,
and
so
there's
what
we
call
an
f
case,
and
the
f
case
is
is
where
it
starts,
and
it
basically
starts
in
misdemeanor
court
in
our
district
courts,
and
so
they
have
to
have
a
hearing
within
10
days
of
the
defendant
being
arraigned.
A
And
that
sounds
a
lot
like
nevada's
probable
cause
hearing,
which
is
within
15
days
of
an
arraignment,
and
one
of
the
unique
things
about
nevada's
probable
cause
hearings
are
that
we
have
all
the
same
rules
of
evidence
that
apply
at
the
jury.
Trial
apply
to
our
probable
cause.
Preliminary
hearings:
do
you
know
if
kentucky
is
the
same
or
if
they
have
different
rules
of
evidence
for
their
preliminary
hearing?
A
D
A
Okay,
so
so
so
that
is
very
different
from
nevada's
system
and
so
yeah
so-
and
this
is
more
of
a
comment
than
a
question
just
to
help
some
folks
who
might
not
be
familiar
to
understand
the
difference
between
in
kentucky,
if
you're
getting
ready
to
go
if
you've
already
been
arraigned
and
you're
getting
ready
to
go
to
your
probable
cause
hearing
in
10
days,
you
can
expect
that
the
prosecutor
there
can
present
hearsay,
they
probably
bring
in
an
officer
who
explains
to
the
court
what
they
saw
when
they
got
there,
who
told
them
what,
when
they
got
there,
and
so
as
you
can
imagine
that
takes
a
certain
amount
of
time
for
all
the
parties
to
get
ready
for
that
kind
of
hearing
here
in
nevada.
A
Our
standard
is
the
standard
of
proof
isn't
higher,
but
the
type
of
evidence
that
you
need
is
more
stringent.
It
follows
the
rules
of
a
felony
jury
trial,
so,
instead
of
just
bringing
in
an
officer
who
can
describe
what
happened
on
the
scene,
who
he
or
she
talked
to
here
in
nevada,
we
have
to
bring
in
the
victim
or
an
eyewitness
or
the
owner
of
the
property.
Things
like
that.
So
I'm
just
mentioning
this
so
that
people
can
kind
of
you
know
get
get
a
picture
for
the
difference
between
going
from.
A
You
know,
10
days
in
kentucky
to
get
an
officer
on
the
stand
versus
in
nevada,
going
15
days
to
get
a
victim
and
an
eyewitness
and
an
officer
all
on
the
stand,
and
also
the
time
that
it
takes
a
court
to
conduct
a
preliminary
hearing,
because
I've
also
practiced
in
jurisdictions
that
have
the
you
know
that
allow
here
save
the
preliminary
hearing
level
and
those
preliminary
hearings
go
much
faster.
A
D
So
and-
and
I
think
kentucky
will
say
that
the
unified
court
system
makes
the
process
a
lot
simpler,
because
we
all
play
by
the
same
rules
and
we
are
all
under
the
authority
of
the
supreme
court.
So
the
supreme
court
establishes
our
rules
and
procedures,
and
so
you
may
see
a
little
variation
jurisdiction
to
jurisdiction,
but
for
the
most
part
the
procedure
remains
the
same,
and
so
I
think
that
that
makes
it.
D
D
D
So
they
may
do
things
a
little
bit
differently,
but
typically,
you
know
ahead
of
time
as
an
attorney
practicing
what
those
procedures
look
like
like
when
they
do
motion
hour
when
they
have
their
arraignment
dockets,
because
a
lot
of
times
that
is
on
the
internet
with
their
local
rules-
and
you
know,
the
chief
justice
and
the
supreme
court
have
approved
those
local
rules.
So
I
think
it.
D
I
think
it
helps
there's
always
going
to
be
a
little
bit
of
difference,
because
that's
just
the
way
things
are,
but
for
the
most
part
we
have
uniform
procedures.
We
know
what
to
expect,
and
there
may
be
a
little
nuance
here
and
there,
but
we
believe
that
the
unified
court
system
has
worked
really
well
for
kentucky.
A
Thank
you.
That
is
also
helpful,
and
I
know
that
we've
already
talked
about
funding.
I
was
just
hoping
that
you
could
give
us
a
quick
insight
into
the
funding
structure
in
kentucky,
whether
you
guys
utilize
fees
from
people
who
are
being
charged
with
crimes,
whether
it
is
a
state
fund
expenditure,
local
dollars.
How
do
you
do
that.
D
So,
and-
and
if
I
can
add
to
that
as
well,
senator
is
that
with
the
unified
court
system,
just
on
the
other
point,
is
that
that
also
helps
give
us
a
really
good
data.
D
Our
data
is
is
since
it's
all
unified,
we
actually
have
a
research
and
stats
department
within
the
administrative
office
of
the
courts
and
they
can
pull
all
our
data.
So
that's
one
of
the
other
benefits
of
being
a
unified
court
system
as
far
as
how
we're
funded.
So
we
are
funded
by
the
legislators,
but
then
we
also
have
some-
and-
and
I
really
can't
speak
to
this-
because
I'm
not
in
budget-
and
I
can
certainly
get
them
to
to
to
supplement
that
if
you
would
like.
D
But
the
way
we
work
is
that
the
kentucky
legislators
give
us
a
budget.
Every
year
we
have
an
annual
budget,
much
like
the
executive
branch,
so
the
kentucky
legislators,
since
we
are
a
unified
court
system,
the
judicial
branch
has
a
budget
and
some
of
it
is
designated
for
salary.
Some
of
it
is
designated
for
other,
and
a
lot
of
our
a
lot
of
our
budget
is
can
be
line
items
by
the
kentucky
legislator
with
a
certain
respect
since
we're
a
separate
branch
of
government.
D
Obviously
there
is
also
you
know
a
different
level
of
control
as
well,
but
we
have.
We
do
supplement
our
salaries
with
court
costs
fees.
We
also
have
programs
that
may
bring
in
and
may
fund
like
an
additional
position.
For
example,
in
the
past,
we've
had
diversion
positions
with
kentucky
pre-trial
and
the
fees
that
come
from.
Those
diversions
may
actually
fund
that
position.
D
So
we
have
some
internal
funding.
We
also
have
our
records
department
that
charges
for
a
court
record
for
a
private
agency,
and
they
that
is
a
an
additional.
I
think
I
think
some
of
that
money
goes
towards
into
the
general
fund
and
the
general
fund
is
the
state
fund,
and
then
I
believe
some
of
that
is
allowed
by
the
legislators
to
come
back
to
the
administrative
office
of
the
courts.
So
the
judicial
branch
has
a
budget.
D
Aoc
is
within
the
judicial
branch,
so
we
have
a
designated
budget
as
well
and
it
is
actually
public
record.
I
believe
this
year
our
budget
was
house
bill
244,
and
so,
if
you
want
to
see
our
our
overall
costs
and
how
much
we
were
allocated,
then
you
can
look
at
house
bill
244
and
that
that
will
line
out
how
much
we
get
every
year.
A
A
No,
they
need
you
where
you
are,
because
you
are
so
knowledgeable
and
obviously
doing
such
great
work
to
you
know,
bring
kentucky's
court
systems
into
compliance
with
your
constitution,
and
you
know
you
you
mentioned
how
important
it
is
that
when
we
pass
laws
when
we
have
a
constitution
that
gives
people
accused
of
crime,
certain
rights
that
we
have
to
have
to
follow
it
and
ensure
that
everybody
is
has
equal
access
to
justice.
So
we
really
appreciate
that
you
did
inspire
and
me
just
two
more
ques.
A
Well
one
more
question
for
you
and
one
more
question
for
ms
widgery
and
my
question,
for
you
is,
if
you
could
say
just
kind
of
generally,
if
I
am
like
the
loved
one
of
somebody
who
has
been
arrested
is
any
or
most
of
this
information
also
updated
online,
as
somebody
goes
through
the
process.
D
So
you
would
have
to
be
connected
to
the
court
system
in
the
sense
of
I
think
that
anybody
can
look
up.
I
think
it
is
public
are
so
we
have
our
our
court
records.
Aren't
necessarily
our
electronic
court
records
aren't
public
like
because
they're,
not
court
records,
that's
just
our
case
management
system,
so
but
the
public
can
look
on
there
and
actually
see
when
a
defendant.
If
the
case
is
currently
pending,
they
can
actually
look
on
there
and
see
when
the
defendant's
next
court
date
is
I'll,
have
to
look
and
see.
D
D
We
have
an
email
address
and,
and
we
get
you
know
a
substantial
amount
of
emails
on
a
daily
basis
of
hey
my
loved
ones
in
jail.
Can
you
tell
me
what
the
process
is
and
we
get
back
to
them
pretty
quickly
on
that
and
let
them
know
you
know,
here's
here's
the
bond,
here's!
You
know
here's
what
the
process
is
and-
and
we
try
to
do
as
much
as
we
can
to
explain
it
to
them.
A
Thank
you,
and
I
think
that
is
fantastic.
I
could
probably
keep
asking
questions
for
the
rest
of
the
meeting,
so
I
am
going
to
restrain
myself
and
I
think
some
members
had
some
questions,
but
before
I
forget
ms
widgery,
we
were
hoping
that
we
could
get
another
presentation
like
this
we're
very
interested
in
other
states
that
have
those
rural
jurisdictions
and
I
think
that
we're
facing
the
exact
same
problems
kentucky
is
facing
with
jurisdictions
where
court
only
meets
once
a
week
and
how
you
get
somebody.
A
Even
if
you
get
the
judge
to
review
the
document
you
get
bail
set.
How
do
you
get
somebody
in
front
of
a
judge
when
court
doesn't
meet
for
three
or
five
or
six
more
days,
and
so,
if
you
have
any
jurisdictions,
you
know
of
that
have
approached
that
problem
have
ideas.
Maybe
they
even
solved
the
problem.
We
would
love
to
hear
from
them.
So
maybe
it's
can.
I
please.
D
Can
I
say
one
more
thing
about
that?
That
is
also
something
that
we
have
addressed
with
our
video
arraignment
system.
We
are
actually
getting
them
in
front
of
the
court,
a
lot
quicker
than
what
we
have
previously
with
our
video
arraignment
system.
So
and
it
hasn't,
it's
actually
been
really
cost
effective
for
the
courts
and
the
legislators,
because
it
there's
at
least
eyes
on
the
defendant
with
our
video
arraignment
system,
and
I
just
wanted
to
to
mention
that.
That's
something
that
we're
using
as
well.
A
Oops,
thank
you.
I
appreciate
that,
and
so
with
the
video
system.
Is
it
generally
the
judge
who
would
who
presides
over
the
case?
Who
sees
them
or
do
the
judges
rotate
and
take
turns?
Or
so
are
you
saying
that
judges
who
work
in
courthouses,
where
they
only
hold
court,
say
every
tuesday
will
hop
on
a
video
conference
and
do
an
arraignment
on
a
thursday.
D
So
our
courts
have
been
more
willing
to
do
video
arraignments
because
they're
allowed
so
our
courts
and
it's
much
like
any,
probably
any
other
jurisdiction.
The
judge
may
cover
three
or
four
different
counties,
and
so
he
has
a
circuit.
So
one
of
the
issues
has
been
is
that
he
couldn't
necessarily
cover.
D
You
know
I'm
going
to
go
back
to
pikeville,
because
that's
where
I
practice
law
he
might
not
be
able
to,
he
might
not
be
able
to
get
to
pikeville
kentucky
because
he's
in
floyd
county,
so
he
may
not
be
able
to
do
it
in
person,
but
he
can
certainly
do
a
video
arraignment.
So
I
believe
that
judges
have
been
implementing
the
video
arraignment
system
to
get
these
defendants
brought
before
them
quicker.
D
So
I
think
in
certain
jurisdictions
the
answer
is
yes,
they
have
been
using
that
as
a
great
tool
and
it's
particularly
with
our
out
of
custody
or
I
keep
saying
out
of
custody.
I've
got
that
in
my
head
with
our
out
of
county
defendants
that
has
been
the
key
to
getting
our
out
of
county
defendants,
so
somebody
might
have
not
been
arraigned
but
didn't
show
up
for
the
charge,
and
so
the
judge
can
actually
see
that
defendant
in
it.
D
Let's
say
they
went
to
jefferson
that
day
and
picked
up
and
and
got
a
bench
warrant
served
on
them.
So
the
judge
in
pike
county
could
actually
video
arrange
the
defendant
in
jefferson
county
and
then
at
least
get
a
pound
council
appointed,
hopefully,
transition
them
quicker
back
to
pikeville,
and
that's
that's
one
of
the
things
that
we've
been
studying.
We
still
have
issues
there's
you
know
we're
always
going
to
have
issues
but
we're,
I
think,
we're
we're
kind
of
getting
into
where
we're
really
using
technology
to
help
us.
A
When
you
utilize
the
technology,
do
you
have
to
bring
do
you
know
they
have
to
bring
in
the
full
court
staff
in
order
to
do
that?
Are
they
able
to
do
a
ra?
I
think
you
mentioned
they
do
arraignments
from
other
courtrooms.
Will
the
you
know
the
staff
in?
I
think
you
said
it
was
floyd.
They
will
run
the
technology
for
a
defendant
who
might
be
in
pikeville
and
just
conduct
that
arraignment,
even
though
it's
not
they're,
okay
you're,
not
in
your
head,
yeah.
D
Yeah,
so
our
jab
system
records
it.
So
our
main
concern
is
whether
it's
recorded
and
on
the
record,
and
so
our
jab
system
records
it.
But
we
are.
We
are
working
on
a
uniform,
so
the
kentucky
legislator
has
given
given
us
a
substantial
amount
of
money,
as
well
as
the
jails
to
coordinate
with
us
to
to
make
that
happen.
So,
yes,
we
can.
We
have
the
same
software,
so
we
can
use
in
pikeville
kentucky
we
could
use.
A
That
that
sounds
like
a
huge,
a
huge
piece
of
the
puzzle.
So
thank
you.
I
appreciate
that
and
I
think
that
my
colleague
here
in
carson
city
has
okay.
Is
there
anybody
down
in
las
vegas?
Who
has
any
more
questions.
A
D
So
in
kentucky
we
used
to
have
and-
and
we
have
vine
link
in
kentucky
where
it
notifies
a
the
victim
if
the
victim
signs
up
whether
the
the
defendant
has
been
released
from
custody,
but
in
kentucky
marsy's
law
puts
the
onus
on
the
prosecutors
to
notify
the
victim
and
to
keep
the
victim
updated.
D
So
it
is
our
prosecutors
by
statute
that
are
required
under
marsy's
law
to
to
do
all
that
notification.
D
Now
so,
and
that's
a
really
good
point
is
that
we
haven't
had
as
far
as
I
know,
our
marxist
law
statute
is
is
really
new
and
it's
actually,
I
believe
that
it's
in
the
constitution
now.
So
there
was
a
constitutional
amendment
on
marsy's
law
and
that's
a
good
point
and
the
answer
is
we
haven't
had
any
instances
yet
that
we
know
of
where
the
victim
has
notified
a
prosecutor,
and
the
prosecutor
has
started
the
right
before
during
that
24-hour
period
to
notify
the
victim.
D
So
we,
as
far
as
I
have
that
I
know
we
haven't
had
any
of
those
instances,
but
certainly
under
marshy's
law,
the
victim
would
absolutely
be
entitled
to
have
a
say
in
that
our
24-hour
determination
is
is
kind
of
like
a
probable
cause,
and
so
that's
when
the
judge
reviews
to
see
if
it's
something
you
know
that
they
would
have
necessarily
kept
the
defendant
in
custody
on
anyway.
C
D
So
that's
a
good
question
with
our
administrative
release
program
and
and
that's
something
that
the
administrative
release
and
just
for
the
record,
our
admin
release
program
doesn't
typically
have
what
you
would
say
as
victims
like
they,
we
may
have
trespassing
charges
on
there.
We
may
have
some
theft
charges,
but
we
don't
typically
have
any.
We
don't
have
any
violent
offenses
on
our
administrative
release
program.
D
Our
administrative
release
program
has
no
conditions
other
than
not
to
commit
any
new
offenses
and
to
come
back
to
court
and
not
to
have
contact
that
there's
a
victim
in
the
case
not
to
have
contact
with
the
victim.
That's
what
our
administrative
release
program
does.
The
other
aspect
of
it
is
our
monitored,
conditioned
release
program,
and
that
is
where
pre-trial
supervises
them.
D
D
So
that's
something
that
we're
also
trying
to
to
implement
in
kentucky
as
well.
That
is,
we've
just
started
the
talks
about
that.
The
kentucky
court
system
has
adopted
the
recovery
oriented
system
of
care,
so
we
are
in
the
process
of
implementing
that
as
well
and
it's
kind
of
resource
driven.
So
if
we
can-
and
it's
not
us
actually
doing
the
work
on
it,
if
we
can
refer
them
to
a
source
and
the
source
can
get
them
into
treatment,
then
we
will
tell
the
judge
that
you
know
hey.
D
D
We've
got
a
pilot
for
case
managers
coming
up
where
we
will
actually
look
at
we'll,
we'll
refer
them
to
a
mental
health
provider
or
a
they'll,
do
a
clinical
assessment
and
then
see
if
they
can
be
provided
services
for
drug
treatment
so,
and
we
also
have
something
that
just
popped
up
recently
called
senate
bill
1990
that
just
passed,
which
is
going
to
be
a
pilot
in
at
least
10,
and
and
that's
going
to
be
diverting
the
charges,
certain
charges
in
drug
treatment
or
mental
health
treatment
for
the
defendant.
D
C
D
The
success
so
I
do
appreciate
it
and
thank
you,
chair.
A
Thank
you
so
much.
I
agree
that
there
there's
so
much
more
to
to
talk
about
here
and
I'm
already
bugging
my
staff
about
coming
up
with
a
another
meeting
or
a
forum
or
a
workshop
or
or
something,
and
I
hope
that
you
are
interested
in
traveling
to
nevada.
We
can
be
meet
up
north
at
lake
tahoe
or
down
south
in
las
vegas,
so
think
about
which
one
you
would
prefer,
or
we
can
go
assembly.
Member.
C
A
Can
go
to
ely
or
elko?
Yes,
we
have.
The
peanut
gallery
agrees
that
we
they'd
like
to
see
you
in
elko.
So
I
guess
it's
been
decided.
We
just
need
a
date
and
it
is,
it
is
only
partially
ingest.
A
This
has
been
fascinating,
incredibly
helpful
and
it's
also
kind
of,
I
think,
reassuring
to
hear
that
other
states
have
similar
issues
similar
questions
and
that
you
know,
nevada
is
not
alone
in
trying
to
undertake
this
huge
project
of
reforming
the
way
that
we
treat
people
pre-trial
and
trying
to
get
them
out
of
custody,
but
keep
the
community
safe.
And
so
thank
you.
Thank
you
so
much
for
presenting
to
us
today
and
answering
all
of
our
questions.
A
Thank
you,
ms
widgery,
for
joining
us
for
bringing
us
ms
darcy,
and
we
just
we
can't
thank
you
enough
for
taking
the
time
to
do
these
presentations.
So
I
think
that
will
close
out
agenda
item
number
three:
we're
going
to
move
on
we're
gonna
move
to
agenda
item
number
five,
because
we
have
some
presenters
who
have
some
time
constraints,
and
I
also
know
that
it
is
noon
and
I
am
hungry.
A
Other
people
may
or
may
not
be
hungry,
but
we're
not
breaking
for
lunch
yet
because
we
have
to
get
through
our
fantastic
presentation
from
the
fines
and
feast
justice
center
you're
always
welcome
to
eat
snacks
at
your
desk.
While
we
hear
these
presentations
and
then
we
will
probably
break
for
lunch
after
that,
which
is
not
a
way
of
asking
you
to
hurry
or
anything,
we
do
want
to
give
you
our
full
attention
and
I'm
sure
we'll
have
some
questions.
So
please
go
ahead
whenever
you
are
ready.
F
F
Well,
good,
yeah,
good
afternoon,
cher,
scheible,
judiciary
committee
and
members
and
the
members
of
the
peanut
gallery.
I
mean
shout
out
to
the
peanut
gallery.
I
am
lisa
mosley,
the
nevada
state
director
for
the
fines
and
fees
justice
center
and,
if
you
don't
know,
the
fines
and
fees
justice
center
is
a
national
organization
that
works
to
eliminate
fees
in
the
criminal
legal
system
and
to
make
fines
more
proportionate
to
an
individual's
ability
to
pay.
F
I
am
joined
today
by
our
fabulous
deputy
state
director
nick
chipak
here
in
carson
city.
We
have
some
presenters
that
will
be
joining
us
from
grant
sawyer,
which
is
nate
wall
from
the
haunted,
nevada,
homeless
alliance
and
ms
yvette
williams
from
the
clark
county
black
caucus,
and
I
do
hope
that
our
presentation
is
going
to
be
as
riveting
as
miss
darcy
and
miss
widgery.
F
I
agree
mr
o'neill
was
quite
fascinating,
and
so
today
we
are
here
to
talk
about
misdemeanors
and
out
of
respect
for
the
committee
and
your
time.
Our
presentation
is
going
to
be
as
concise
as
possible
and
we
will
be
happy
to
come
back
and
present
a
more
in-depth
presentation
at
a
later
time.
If
you
so
desire.
F
F
F
They
can
be
disqualified
from
receiving
social
services
and
even
prevented
from
getting
admission
to
things
like
law,
school
or
medical
school
misdemeanors
criminalized
the
homeless
by
making
some
actions
of
the
unhoused
a
criminal,
offense
and
nate
from
the
homeless
alliance
will
talk
about
that.
In
a
few
minutes,
misdemeanors
generate
a
ton
of
revenue
for
municipalities.
F
H
Thank
you,
chair,
scheibel
and
committee
members.
My
name
is
nick
chipak.
I
am
the
state
deputy
director
of
the
fines
and
fees
justice
center
here
in
nevada,
I'm
very
happy
to
be
following
the
presentation
from
kentucky
because
they
talked
a
lot
about
how
they
have
a
unified
court
system
and
how
great
that
is
for
data
collection.
We
do
not
have
a
unified
court
system
here
in
nevada
and
getting
data
on
things
such
as
misdemeanors
has
been
proven
very
difficult.
H
That
is
one
reason
why
one
of
our
suggestions
moving
forward
here
will
be
to
work
with
the
sentencing
commission
to
gather
the
data
necessary
to
do
a
robust
analysis
and
hopefully
robust
reform
of
the
misdemeanor
system.
Here
in
the
state,
I
will
quickly
mention
the
supplemental
information
that
we
have
provided
the
committee
we
have.
There
are
some
charts
that
show
the
total
number
of
misdemeanors
in
which
courts
they
are
filed
in.
There
are
also
some
charts
that
break
it
down
by
population
size.
H
We
I
also
provided
information
on
what
colorado
did
colorado
embarked
on
a
multi-year
assessment
of
their
misdemeanor
system,
where
they
made
recommendations
line
by
line
with
an
eye
at
figuring
out
ways
to
either
decriminalize
legalize
or
move
lower,
the
penalties
of
citations
that
do
not
have
a
direct
impact
on
public
safety.
They
also
found
some
misdemeanors
that
they
believe
should
be
moved
up
to
what
we
would
have
as
a
gross
misdemeanor
or
even
low-level
felonies.
H
H
So
this
is
the
total
misdemeanor
filings
in
nevada
for
the
last
three
years,
so
it
was
just
over
82
000
in
2019,
almost
87
000
in
2020,
while
felonies
dropped
and
traffic
plummeted.
During
the
pandemic,
we
actually
saw
more
misdemeanor
cases
filed
than
the
previous
year.
In
2021
we
saw
a
significant
drop
down
back
down
to
72
000..
H
They
make
over
up
over
half
of
all
criminal
filings
each
year,
and
if
you
look
at
just
some
uni
courts
and
the
justice
courts
which
handle
most
of
our
criminal
cases,
they
make
up
over
60
percent
each
time.
So
this
the
misdemeanor
system
is
in
fact
the
biggest
chunk
of
all
criminal,
the
criminal
system
here
in
nevada,
when
we
look
at
courts
with
the
highest
misdemeanor
filings.
H
This
probably
isn't
a
surprise
to
anyone.
Las
vegas
in
the
justice
courts
makes
up
almost
three
quarters.
It
did
make
up
almost
three
quarters
in
2020
and
it's
over
64
percent
of
all
misdemeanors
filed
are
in
las
vegas
justice
in
the
justice
courts,
followed
by
reno
and
sparks
for
most
years.
Although
carson
city
is
right,
there
with
sparks
hovering
around
3.6
to
3
percent
of
all
misdemeanors
filed.
When
we
look
at
the
municipal
courts,
it's
las
vegas,
reno
henderson
have
the
highest
number
of
misdemeanors
filed
now
this
data.
H
If
we
only
look
at
this,
may
suggest
that
misdemeanors
are
a
problem
or
are
at
least
a
concern
in
the
more
metropolitan
areas
of
our
state.
But
one
thing
that
we
are
doing
at
the
fines
and
fees
justice
center
is
trying
to
focus
more
on
the
worlds.
We
believe
strongly
that
really
every
entity
did
from
the
legislature
to
at
organizations
such
as
our
own
often
focus
on
washoe
clark,
and
we
forget
about
our
girls.
So
we've
been
doing,
we
have
started
to
embark
on
a
world
tour.
H
And
so,
if
we
look
at
that
and
then
we
look
at
how
many
misdemeanor
cases
are
filed
per
individual
served,
we
see
that
this
issue
truly
is
impacting
everyone
in
the
state.
We
have
tahoe
hawthorne
virginia
city,
searchlight
makes
a
list,
laughlin
good
springs,
and
then,
when
we
look
at
the
munich
courts,
it
is
fallon
west,
windover
carlin.
H
So
what
we're
hoping
that
a
robust
look
at
misdemeanors
does
is
not
only
find
places
where
we
can
remove
crimes
from
the
books.
We
can
maybe
figure
out
some
better
alternatives
than
criminal
punishments,
but
also
what's
happening
in
these
rural
areas,
where
they're
having
such
a
high
rate
of
misdemeanors
file
based
on
their
population,
and
how
can
we
assist
those
rural
communities
in
addressing
those
issues,
because
if
the
misdemeanor
rates
are
staying
high
year
over
year-
and
these
are
small
level
crimes
they're,
usually
due
to
poverty?
H
We
have
been
working
to
find
collection
rate
data
because
often
misdemeanors
come
with
financial
penalties
and
that's
where
the
fines
and
fees
justice
center
is
really
focused
right.
It's
we
see
these
sanctions,
misdemeanor
sanctions,
fines
and
fees
come
instead
of
incarceration,
but
the
collection
rates
across
the
country
we
know
are
extremely
low.
H
But
we've
been
working
with
reno
municipal
court
and
some
of
the
reno
city
council
members
to
take
a
look
and
see
how
we
can
address
some
of
these
issues
in
reno
and
what
we
see
with
year
to
year,
collection
rates
for
misdemeanors
in
reno,
and
these
are
non-traffic
misdemeanors
we've.
This
whole
everything
we've
talked
about
is
the
non-trafficked
misdemeanors,
so
we're
looking
at
a
collection
rate
in
fiscal
year,
1819
of
48
51
in
1920
and
41
in
2021..
H
Out
of
the
money
assessed
for
these
fees,
they
come
with
misdemeanors,
less
than
half
is
being
collected
and
again
it's
kentucky
helped
set
this
up
for
us
where
they
talked
about
how
people
were
unable
to
post
a
50
to
25
bond.
We
see
that
in
nevada
as
well,
where
people
who
are
getting
these
low-level
misdemeanors
are
una.
They
get
a
ticket.
H
When
we're
talking
about
traffic
citations-
and
so
we
have-
and
we
will
propose
towards
the
end,
some
solutions
that
we
believe
can
one
help
us
continue
to
hold
individuals
accountable,
but
also
make
sure
that
the
the
financial
penalties
are
structured
in
such
a
way
that
the
individuals
are
able
to
pay
them
and
we
can
have.
We
will
see
an
inkling,
an
increase
in
those
collection
rates,
and
so
that
is
some
of
the
top
line
data.
I
I
Based
on
the
2021
point
in
time
count,
it
is
estimated
that
on
any
given
night,
thirteen
thousand
seventy
six
individuals
are
experiencing
homelessness
in
clark
county.
Forty,
nine
percent
of
these
individuals
suffer
from
substance
abuse,
thirty,
eight
percent
with
mental
health
concerns
and
25
percent
with
developmental
disabilities.
Rather
than
investing
in
increasing
infrastructure.
I
To
give
these
individuals
help,
we
are
citing
them
finding
them
and
arresting
them.
Creating
a
cycle
of
fines,
imprisonment,
release
rinse
and
repeat
that
is
nearly
impossible
for
them
to
break
out
of
these
ordinances
demonstrate
nothing
more
than
prejudice
against
the
unhoused
and
the
belief
that
being
homeless
is
a
crime
to
be
punished
for
and
not
a
situation
to
be
lifted
out
of
in
their
2019
report.
Housing
on
handcuffs,
the
national
homelessness
law
center
has
three
key
findings
worth
noting
criminalization
of
homelessness
results
in
fines
and
fees
that
perpetuate
the
cycle
of
poverty.
I
Financial
obligations,
such
as
from
fines
and
fees
for
using
a
tent
or
vehicle
to
shelter
oneself,
can
prolong
the
amount
of
time
that
a
person
with
will
experience,
homelessness
and
can
also
leave
homeless,
people
less
able
to
pay
for
food
transportation,
medication
or
other
necessities.
Civil
and
court
imposed.
I
Fines
and
fees
can
also
prevent
a
person
from
being
accepted
into
housing
or
even
result
in
their
incarceration
for
failure
to
pay
them
criminalization
of
homelessness,
harms
public
safety,
criminalization
policies,
divert
law
enforcement
resources
from
true
street
crime,
clog
our
criminal
justice
system
with
unnecessary
arrests
and
fill
already
overcrowded
jails.
They
also
erode
trust
between
the
homeless,
the
people
and
the
police,
heightening
the
risk
of
violent
confrontations
between
police
and
unhoused
people
and
leaving
homeless
people
more
vulnerable
to
private
acts
of
violence
without
police
protection.
I
A
practice
often
referred
to
as
a
sweep,
but
such
practices
threaten
public
health
by
dispersing
people
who
have
no
nowhere
to
discard
food
waste
and
trash
to
expel
bodily
waste
or
to
clean
themselves
their
belongings
to
more
areas
of
the
city,
but
with
no
new
services
to
meet
their
basic
sanitation
and
waste
disposal
needs.
Moreover,
sweeps
often
result
in
the
destruction
of
homeless,
people's
tents
and
other
belongings
used
to
provide
shelter
from
the
elements
cause
stress
and
cause
loss
of
sleep,
contributing
to
worsened
physical
and
mental
health
among
an
all
already
vulnerable
population.
C
C
I
would
also
like
to
respectfully
acknowledge
my
own
representative
in
assembly
district
10,
assemblywoman,
win
good
to
see
you,
I'm
not
I'm
going
to
go
a
little
quick
because
my
colleagues
have
already
spoke
a
lot
about.
Why
we're
here
today,
and
we
certainly
share
and
agree
150
with
all
of
the
comments
before
you
and
so
for
the
sake
of
time,
and
so
that
folks
can
get
to
lunch.
I'm
going
to
try
to
keep
this
very
very
brief,
but
I
do
want
to
just
reemphasize
a
couple
of
things.
One.
C
We
urgently
need
a
review
and
an
assessment
of
the
nevada
misdemeanor
system.
We've
had
conversations
with
our
district
attorney
in
clark
county
and
he
indic
and-
and
he
even
indicated,
that
there
are
low-level
misdemeanors
that
have
been
on
the
books
for
many
years.
That
probably
need
to
be
removed
or
reassessed
and
in
some
cases
quite
out
of
date,
others
they're
not
even
prosecuting
and-
and
he
even
welcomes
that
opportunity-
that's
what
he
has
expressed
to
us
in
our
meetings
with
him.
C
So
there
is
support
for
this
in
the
district
attorney's
office,
trauma
and
impact
to
individuals
and
families.
As
a
result
of
mr
of
a
misdemeanor
record,
it
doesn't
often
provide
families
or
are
those
with
that
infraction
a
second
chance.
It
impacts
the
opportunities
to
higher
education,
secure
housing,
employment
opportunities,
etc.
C
C
We
have
to
consider
how
extreme
low-level
infractions,
destabilize
families
and-
and
they
truly
and
are
they
truly
just-
do
these
low-level
misdemeanors
reflect
a
fair
and
just
punishment,
and
how
does
the
misdemeanor
system
impact
our
students
at
our
recent
african-american
student
summit
in
november
of
last
year?
96
96
percent
of
those
attending
said
that
they
or
someone
they
know
had
a
mental
health
crisis
and
94
percent
feel
they
are
treated
differently
due
to
their
race.
C
C
We
are
strongly
supporting
this
review.
C
Black
caucus
would
like
to
ask
this
committee
to
implement
policy
that
limits
incarceration
and
detention
to
to
the
more
serious
cases,
and
that's
something
that
I
believe
we
can
address
this
next
session
prior
to
a
review
of
the
entire
system
and
with
that.
Thank
you.
So
much
for
your
time
and
again,
we.
D
F
Thank
you
so
much
miss
williams
and
nate.
I
this
is
lisa
mosley
and
I
believe
miss
williams
was
referring
to
assembly
bill
116,
correct
me.
If
I'm
wrong
that
first
last
legislative
session,
and
so
as
we
close,
we
want
to
again
thank
the
committee
and
all
of
the
members
for
allowing
us
to
make
this
presentation
and
listening
to
us
and
we
just
before
we
go,
we
all
we
have
some
proposed
solutions
that
we
would
like
to
share
with
the
committee
actually
nick.
If
you
want
to
take
this,
you
can.
H
Absolutely
nick
shepak
yeah,
so
we
are
happy
here
to
share
what
we
believe
are
some
possible
solutions,
ways
for
us
to
move
forward
and
address
some
of
the
issues
raised
today.
We
also
want
to
make
sure
that
everyone
is
aware
that
we
have
a
lot
more
to
say
about
this
and
a
lot
more
data
and
we
are
very
happy
to
have
these
conversations
both
offline
or
in
any
format
that
that
anyone
would
be
interested
in.
H
So
our
the
really
one
of
our
big
solutions,
and
what
we
think
we
needs
to
happen
in
the
state
is
that
we
task
the
sentencing
commission
with
completing
a
comprehensive
review
of
nevada's
misdemeanor
system
and
provide
them
with
the
necessary
resources
to
do
so.
As
mentioned,
this
was
done
in
colorado.
H
It
had
complete
bipartisan
support.
They
were
able
to
go
line
by
line
through
the
misdemeanor
system
through
the
misdemeanor
code.
It
took
a
lot
of
time.
They
were
able
to
collect
the
data
necessary
necessary
to
make
data-driven
solutions
and
they
were
able
to
create
a
code
that
focused
on
public
safety
and
eliminated
a
lot
of
the
crimes
that
criminalize
poverty.
H
When
we
first
started.
Looking
into
this,
we
thought
that
we
possibly
could
conduct
such
a
review,
but
the
amount
of
data
that
is
needed
and
the
difficulty
in
getting
it.
We
do
believe
that
it
is
worth
tasking
an
entity
that
has
the
resources
and
the
ability
to
do
it.
We
have
some
more
short-term
solutions
as
well,
requiring
requiring
the
courts
to
offer
an
ability
to
pay
assessment
for
misdemeanors
and
traffic
citations.
H
There's
multiple
ways
to
do
this,
but
it
ensures
that
individuals
who
are
sighted
and
fined
have
the
ability
to
pay
those
fines,
and
it
is
much
easier
to
hold
someone
accountable
when
you
know
that
they
can
pay.
We
have
developed
a
one
we
have
developed.
One
of
these
other
states
use
these,
and
it
is
a
really
good
way
to
address
the
fact
that
right
now
we're
collecting
in
some
courts
30
percent
of
our
fines
and
fees
through
the
system.
We
can
also
expand
the
definition
of
community
service.
H
H
People
spend
their
time
well,
and
people
are
more
willing
to
engage
with
the
community
service
process
and
we've
even
had
some
conversations
with
rural
judges,
world
defense
council,
where
their
clients,
if
they
take
community
service,
maybe
they
can
pick
up
trash
in
one
area.
They
they
they
wash
the
police
cars.
But
you
have
to
wait.
H
H
We
suggest
that
we
restrict
the
court's
ability
to
charge
a
fee
to
enter
into
a
payment
plan
for
both
traffic
and
misdemeanor
fines
and
fees
right
now,
anywhere
from
twenty
dollars
to
over
a
hundred
dollars
is
charged
to
an
individual
who
is
unable
to
afford
their
fines
and
fees
if
they
want
to
get
on
a
payment
plan.
This
is
a
fee
that
is
only
charged
to
people
who
have
an
inability
to
pay
at
the
time
that
they
are
sentenced.
H
H
We,
as
nate
mentioned
regulating
local
jurisdictions
authority
to
create
misdemeanors
that
specifically
target
or
disproportionately
affect
in
individuals
experiencing
homelessness,
would
have
a
great
impact
in
us.
Dealing
with
what
has
we
can
all
agree
has
become
a
crisis
with
the
unsheltered
and
unfortunately,
we
did
not
have
mass
liberation
here
today
with
us.
H
We
often
put
people
who
represent
these
individuals
on
these
boards
without
actually
having
the
individuals
themselves,
have
the
input,
and
so
those
are
things
we
believe
we
can
do
this
next
session.
We
had
a
few
notes
that
we
wanted
to
mention
since
we're
here
about
ab116
traffic
dcrim,
a
few
things
that
we've
heard
that
we
believe
need
clarifying.
We
know
that
there's
probably
some
cleanup
language
coming,
but
a
few
things
that
have
been
brought
to
our
attention.
H
One
brought
to
us
by
the
aoc
is
that
it
isn't
exactly
clear
if
an
online
ability
to
do
a
pay
assessment
would
be
allowed
that
if
somebody
was
unable
to
pay
their
ticket
and
they
wanted
to
to
have
that
discussion-
that
they
would
have
to
challenge
the
ticket.
H
However,
we
do
not
believe
that
was
the
intent
of
the
legislation
you
shouldn't.
People
can
be
both
admitting
guilt
and
needing
to
let
the
court
know
that
they
cannot
pay
the
ticket
in
full,
so
possibly
some
language
to
clean
that
up.
There's
also
some
confusion
around
driver's
license
suspension.
Two
p:
there
was
a
piece
of
legislation
that
ran
that
ended
driver's
license
to
suspension.
H
There's
something
in
116
that
mentions
driver's
license
suspension
and
different
courts
are
having
different
readings.
Some
believe
that,
starting
on
the
first
of
next
year,
they
will
be
able
to
start
suspending
driver's
licenses
again,
and
that
was
clearly
not
the
intent
of
the
two
pieces
of
legislation
that
were
passed
last
session.
H
And
lastly,
there
is
a
section
in
116
that
requires
you
to
post
a
bond
before
you
challenge
the
ticket
and
we
don't
one
believe,
that's
legal.
But
we
also
believe
that
anyone
who
wants
to
dispute
a
ticket
should
not
have
to
post
a
bond
prior
to
disputing
the
ticket.
Now
there
is
an
argument
that
moving
forward
past
that,
if
you
want
to,
if
you
want
to
challenge
the
decision
on
your
initial
challenge,
that
possibly
a
bond
could
be
necessary.
H
But
you
should
not
have
to
put
down
any
money
in
order
to
challenge
a
ticket,
and
do
you
have
anything
to
add
to
that.
F
Lisa
mosley,
I
do
I
want
to
share
with
the
committee
that,
in
coming
up
with
these
solutions,
particularly
tasking
the
sentencing
commission,
our
ask
of
tasking
the
sentencing
commission
with
doing
a
full
review
of
the
misdemeanor
system.
We
considered
other
ways
to
do
that,
including
establishing
an
independent
review
committee
of
local
organizations
or
agencies.
F
But
after
having
these
conversations
with
amongst
ourselves
and
our
partners,
we
came
up
with
the
we
came
to
the
conclusion
that
the
sentencing
commission
probably
would
be
the
best
way
to
do
this.
They
have
the
resources
to
collect
the
data
that
we
think
is
necessary
to
make
any
reforms.
Once
the
review
is
completed,
they
have
excellent
staff
and
folks
that
are
sitting
on
that
committee.
F
We
do
believe
that,
as
nick
said
earlier,
that
that
committee
could
be
expanded
to
maybe
include
more
people
that
are
directly
impacted
so
that
those
voices
are
considered
as
well
and
just
wanted
to
point
that
out,
and
we
believe
again
that
the
sentencing
commission
is
best
equipped
to
be
able
to
do
this
review
and
we're
hoping
that,
once
this
review
is
complete,
that
it
will
lead
to
some
of
these
reforms.
That
we
believe
will
make
us
more
in
line
to
make
the
system
work
for
all
of
us
in
any
way
that
it
can.
F
We
have
heard
from
the
department
of
motor
vehicles
and
their
officials,
and
they
are
also
of
the
opinion
that
they
will
begin
resuming
driver
license
suspensions
as
of
january
1
2023,
and
we
know
that
that
was
not
in
the
intent
of
either
of
these
bills.
So
we're
asking
for
that.
Cleanup
language,
we're
also
asking,
as
part
of
the
cleanup
language
for
assembly
bill
116
that
we
nick
mentioned
no
fee
for
payment
plans,
and
so
we
just
want
to
make
sure.
F
A
C
I
have
a
question
chair.
Thank
you
for
that
presentation.
I
appreciate
that.
Obviously
I
think
everyone
here,
those
two
bills
passed
pretty
solidly
across
party
lines
to
do
that,
so
I
have
also
been
informed
that
the
reading
of
that
is
that
the
license
suspensions
could
resume
come
january.
1St
2023
and
I
can
say
I
don't
believe
that
was
anyone's
intention.
So
if
that's
something
that
we
need
to
do
need
to
correct,
I
appreciate
you
guys
constantly
following
up
on
that,
to
make
sure
that
the
legislative
intent
is
followed.
C
And
then
short
of
you
know,
establishing
a
unified
court
system.
Are
there
any
jurisdictions
that
have
looked
to
address
or
readdress
their
misdemeanor
sentencing
structures
or
anything
like
that
that
are
in
non-unified
court
systems?.
H
Nick
sheabeck
for
the
record,
I
will
look
into
that
more.
There
is
misdemeanor
reform
happening
around
the
country.
Nothing
has
been
quite
as
robust
as
what
has
recently
happened
in
colorado,
which
was
a
complete
review
of
the
system,
but
there
is
reforms
happening
across
the
country
and
I
will
find
which
ones
are
occurring
in
the
non-unified
systems
and
report.
That
back
to
the
committee.
C
Thank
you
and
then
I
just
have
a
couple
of
other
questions
that
I
think
you'll
be
able
to
answer.
I
appreciate
the
fact
that
I
think
we're
most
successful
here
when
we
are
making
evidence-based
decisions.
So
I
appreciate
your
suggestion
to
have
a
sentencing
commission,
which
reviews
sentencing.
C
H
Nick
sheep
for
the
record-
yes,
they
have
a
very
similar
commission.
It
is
not
called
a
sentencing
commission,
but
it
is
a
sitting
commission
that
deals
with
criminal
justice
reform.
What
they
did.
It's
very
large
commission,
even
larger
than
the
sentencing
commission.
What
they
did
is
they
created
a
subcommittee
and
then
they
had
an
even
smaller
committee.
Underneath
that
made
up
of
defense
counsel
prosecutors,
law
enforcement,
some
legislators
they
went
it
took
them
a
little
under
two
years.
They
went
line
by
line.
H
They
had
the
information
on
on
how
many
on
each
crime,
how
many
were
tried,
what
the
outcomes
were
were
they
went
line
by
line
through
the
misdemeanor
system.
They
had
those
discussions,
debates
with
each
other
over
a
little
over
a
year
period
where
they
and
then
they
made
their
recommendations.
They
were
bipartisan
recommendations.
They
brought
them
from
the
smaller
subcommittee
up
to
the
whole
committee.
H
They
presented
them
over
multiple
meetings
to
the
larger
committee.
The
larger
committee
made
some
minor
changes,
but
nothing
major,
and
then
they
were
able
to
bring
that
to
the
legislature
as
a
recommendation,
the
recommendations
I
have
provided
it's
a
pretty
large
packet.
They
made
their
complete
recommendations
to
the
legislature,
so
it
was
really
about
a
two
two-year
process.
Before
they
got
in
front
of
the
legislature.
They
were
able
to
pass
them
without
any
amendments,
because
the
work
that
had
been
done
had
been
so
thoroughly
vetted
and
bipartisan
that
the
bill
passed
without
any
amendments.
C
Obviously,
in
this
date
this
sounds
kind
of
like
a
similar
process
that
we
went
through
with
2019
legislation,
assembly
bill
236,
and
we
learned
then
that
we
had
to
have
people
that
went
through
each
individual
judgment
of
conviction
every
individual
pre-sentence
investigation
report.
In
order
to
collect
some
of
this
information.
Do
you
anticipate
with
the
fact
that
we
don't
have
a
unified
court
system
that
any
recommendations
to
a
sentencing
policy?
You
know
to
fund
that
collection
of
data?
I
mean
that
seems
like
a
very
intense
process.
H
H
No,
I
can
find
out
exactly
what
data
they
had.
I've
had
conversations
with
the
people
on
the
committee.
It
has
been
a
minute
exactly
what
they
had
for
each
individual
crime.
I
do
not
know,
I
know
they've
gotten
experts
in
each
area
as
they
took
sections
of
crime,
so
they
had
those
discussions
whether
it
was
misdemeanors
dealing
with
wildlife
or
fish
and
game
things
like
that
they
would
bring
in
individuals
what
the
sentencing
commission
would
have
to
collect
for
us
to
do.
This
is
a
discussion
that
I
think
we
need
to
have.
H
I
I
don't
know
that
we
we
have
ideas.
I
don't
know
that
we
know
fully
what
they
will
need.
I
do
know
that
the
local
coordinating
council
that
is
under
that
is
in
the
department
of
sentencing
is
in.
The
pro
has
individuals
that
are
in
contact
with
the
courts
and
we
and
should
be
able
to
find
out
what
information
is
actually
available.
F
F
We
were
told
that
we
would
not
be
able
to
get
that
data
for
at
least
seven
months
and
the
problem
with
that
is.
We
know
that
some
of
the
data
was
already
provided
for
the
state
audit
committee
committee.
That
did
a
recent
audit
of
the
nevada
department
of
corrections.
So
we
know
some
of
that
data
is
readily
available,
but
we
have
not
been
able
to
get
it.
F
So
I
just
wanted
to
point
that
out
so
that
you
all
know
that
why
we
are
trying
to
get
this
data
and
why
we
think
the
sentencing
commission
might
be
best
tasked
for
that,
because
just
on
our
own
and
with
records
requests
has
been
incredibly
challenging
to
obtain
the
data
that
we
feel
is
necessary.
A
C
A
question
please
chair:
all
right,
please
go
ahead.
Thank
you,
chair.
Thank
you
for
your
presentation,
mr
shupac.
I
was
just
wondering
about
assembly
bill
440
from
the
2021
nevada
legislative
session.
I
believe
that
bill
dealt
with
issuing
citations
in
lieu
of
arrest
for
misdemeanors,
and
I
was
just
wondering
if
that
wasn't
playing
any
part
in
in
your
presentation
now
and
and
what
you're
thinking
of
for
the
future
for
the
2023
legislative
session
and
your
thoughts
on
how
that's
rolling
out.
Thank
you.
H
H
I
haven't
received
enough
data
yet
on
how
that's
working
to
see
how
it's
going.
We
do
think
that
citation
in
lieu
of
arrest
ism
is
a
part
of
reform.
Really
we
see
a
comprehensive
review
leading
to
a
few
things
one,
while
I'm
always
reluctant
to
say
that
we
should
ever
raise
penalties.
I
do
believe
that
there
are
probably
some
misdemeanors
that
collectively
we
would
agree
on
should
be
bumped
up
to
gross
misdemeanors,
something
like
that.
So
there
would
be
an
actual
raising
of
some.
I
believe
there
would
be
a
bifurcation
of
some
crimes
in
colorado.
H
What
we
saw
is
that
it
was
a
lola.
It
was
a
felony
grand
theft,
auto
if
you
took
a
car
and
took
it
to
a
chop
shop
or
if
you
took
a
car
for
a
joyride
and
ditched
it
one.
H
So
what
they
did
is
they
bifurcated
that
crime,
making
it
a
high
level
misdemeanor
for
joyriding,
and
they
kept
the
theft
with
intent
to
sell
or
destroy
a
vehicle
as
a
felony,
I
see
then
there's
decriminalization,
which
would
be
moving
things
into
the
civil
system
that
we
have
created
for
traffic,
and
then
there
is
legalization,
which
is
when
we
decide
that
some
crimes
do
not
belong
on
the
books
and
then
this
citation
in
lieu
of
a
rest,
which
is
where
we
keep
something
criminal.
H
But
we
remove
the
ability
to
arrest,
and
I
think
what
we
need
is
what
we
do
need
is
more
data.
So
I
think
that
one
thing
we
need
to
look
at
is:
how
is
that
rolling
out,
like
you
suggested
right,
the
ones
that
we
have
moved
to
citation
in
louisville's
is
that
working
is
that
creating?
Is
that
not?
Is
that
adding
to
public
safety
is
right,
and
if
it
is,
then,
can
we
expand
that
model
while
continuing
to
have
a
focus
on
public
safety.
F
This
is
lisa
mosley
I'd
like
to
offer
a
comment
to
the
assemblywoman
as
well.
I
am
not
as
familiar
with
sb440,
I
believe,
is
sb440
or
ab440
in
citation
and
lieu
of
arrest,
but
what
I
would
offer
is
that
many
of
the
misdemeanor
infractions
that
we
talk
about
do
come
with
the
citations,
for
example,
traffic
citations.
F
Though
an
officer
could
arrest
someone
most
times.
We
know
that
they
don't
and
even
though
they
are
issued
a
citation,
it's
often
the
fines
and
the
fees
that
come
with
those
citations
later
that
present
the
most
harm
to
people
who
those
citations
are
issued
to,
and
so
with.
That
is.
That
is
one
of
the
reasons
we
are
asking
for.
The
review
to
see
which
ones
of
those
misdemeanors
are
people
most
often
being
cited
or
charged
with,
and
how
those
misdemeanors
the
long-term
effects
of
those
misdemeanors
are
playing
out.
F
So
it's
not
always
the
act
of
being
arrested
for
those
misdemeanors.
It's
the
citation
and
oftentimes
it's
the
interaction
or
the
contact
with
law
enforcement
that
sometimes
creates
those
possible
violent
interactions
later
on
down
the
line.
So
it's
not
always
just
the
arrest.
It's
also
just
the
the
foray
into
the
misdemeanor
system
with
that
citation.
F
C
Well,
thank
you,
miss
mosley
and
mr
schupak
well
number
one
I'd
really
like
to
hear
more
information
if
you
can
find
it
or
if
you
can
work
with
law
enforcement
or
our
district
attorneys
or
public
defenders
and
finding
out
how
that
is
rolling
out.
It's
ab440
from
the
2021
legislative
session,
and
I
have
to
respectfully
disagree
with
you.
C
I
do
think
that
people
that
are
being
arrested
might
experience,
ptsd
or
trauma
from
just
the
act
of
being
arrested
and,
and
yes,
fines
and
fees
just
add
on
top
of
that
for
people
that
can't
afford
to
pay
it.
But
I
think
it's
both.
F
Lisa,
mostly,
I
absolutely
will
agree
with
you.
I
absolutely
will
agree
with
you,
but
also
just
reiterate
that
even
for
the
folks
that
don't
see
a
rest,
we
do
the
long-term
effects
of
those
often
are
in
some
cases
just
as
harmful,
but
I
absolutely
will
agree
with
you,
and
that
is
absolutely
the
reason
why
we
want
to
look
at
this
and
get
this
review
and
see
where
we
can
make
some
of
those
changes.
So
we
can
minimize
those
effects
as
much
as
we
can.
Thank
you.
Ma'am.
A
I
have
just
a
brief
question
to
to
follow
up
on
the
ab440
discussion
and
I
think
we
probably
need
more
data,
but
when
people
are
issued
a
citation
they're
given
a
court
date
when
they
don't
make
that
court
date,
I'm
assuming
bench
warrants
are
generally
issued,
I'm
wondering
if
other
jurisdictions
have
come
up
with
a
workaround.
For
you
know.
A
F
Lisa
mosley
for
the
record.
Yes,
we
can
certainly
look
into
other
jurisdictions
that
around
the
country
I
mean
our
organization
works
with
courts
and
jurisdictions
around
the
country.
So
we
can
certainly
look
for
that
data
and
look
for
any
information
on
that
and
provide
that
to
you.
But
we
know
that
some
jurisdictions
send.
If
someone
misses
a
court
date,
they
send
a
notice
out
to
them
and
say:
hey.
You
missed
a
court
date.
Is
there
something
going
on?
A
Excellent,
thank
you
all
right
and
now
I'm
not
seeing
anything
further.
So
we
will
thank
the
fines
and
fees
justice
center
for
your
presentation
and
for
your
partners
down
in
las
vegas
who
helped
out.
We
are
going
to
take
our
lunch
break
at
this
point.
A
I
I
think
that
was
a
sigh
of
relief
that
I
heard
next
to
me
we're
a
little
bit
after
1
pm.
So
let's
come
back
a
little
bit
before
2
p.m.
I
will
be
back
here
by
1
45
and
when
we
have
a
quorum
we
will
reconvene
and
I
will
see
you
all
then
thanks.