►
Description
House Criminal Justice Committee - February 9, 2022 - House Hearing Room 2
A
A
Thank
you
very
much
members,
any
personal
orders
before
we
get
started.
We
do
have
a
fairly
full
calendar
in
front
of
us
today,
but
want
to
make
sure
if
there's
any
personal
orders,
all
right,
seeing
none
we'll
get
right
to
work.
We
have
item
number
one
on
our
calendar
house
bill
1646
by
vice
chairman
hall,
sir.
You
have
a
motion
and
a
second.
C
A
Hall
I
apologize.
I
just
wanted
to
interject
here
we
do
have
an
amendment
traveling
with
the
bill
and
it
and
it
makes
the
bills
the
only
reason
I
wanted
to
stop
you
there.
Yes,
sir,
that
is
correct,
okay,
very
good
and
that
one
is
coded
one,
two,
eight
zero.
Nine.
We
have
a
motion
and
a
second
question
has
been
called
all
those
in
favor
of
attaching
amendment
coded
one,
two,
eight
zero,
nine
to
house
bill.
1646,
please
signify
by
saying
aye
those
opposed
you
adopt,
sir
you're
recognized
on
your
bill
as
amended.
C
Members,
historically,
the
assault
on
a
law
enforcement
k-9
has
been
nothing
more
than
a
destruction
of
property
crime
house
bill,
1646
changes
all
of
that
and
it
moves
it
to
a
class
b
felony.
It
takes
the
shackles
off
of
the
d.a
and
it
allows
him
to
address
the
proper
crime
depending
on
the
aggressiveness
of
the
act.
This
bill
is
endorsed
by
the
tennessee
sheriff's
association
and
all
95
sheriffs
and
all
the
ingredients
is
in
this
bill.
A
D
C
A
Thank
you
all
for
being
here
and
always
great
when
folks
can
come
and
watch
this
process,
and
I
know
this
is
an
issue-
that's
important,
not
only
in
your
community
but
obvious
to
you
all.
So,
thank
you
so
much
for
being
here
today,
I
do
have
chairman
doggett
on
my
list,
chairman
doggett,
you
recognized.
E
Thank
you,
mr
chairman
and
representative
hall,
does:
would
there
be
any?
Could
there
possibly
be
with
this
this
bill?
If
a
service
dog
or
more
specifically,
a
police
dog,
was
killed
in
the
line
of
duty?
Could
could
there
also
be
a
an
additional
property
crime
for
this,
because
I
know
the
cost
of
these
dogs
to
be
trained.
You
know
from
from
the
time
they
purchased
from
a
breeder,
and
then
they
go
through
the
training
they
can
be
in
excess
of
75
000.
E
C
F
F
F
So
now
the
the
dog
gets
a
stiffer
penalty
for
wounding
the
dog
than
shooting
the
officer.
I
I
have
several
problems
with
that.
I
would
I
just
wish
we
would
keep
it
in
the
lanes
that
it's
always
been
and
that
it's
property
and
put
a
value
on
it
and
let
and
let
that
that
be
what
the
penalty
is,
because
you're
going
to
get
close,
I
don't
know
that
you'd
have
a
b
felony
but
you'll
get
close
to
it
with
the
c,
but
it
keeps
it
on
the
right
foundation.
F
I
also
was
just
going
to
say
in
passing:
I
don't
understand
the
physical
note
class
b
for
range
one's
eight
to
twelve
years
and
it's
got
a
ten
thousand
dollar
physical
note.
I
don't
understand
that
because
it
costs
twenty
nine
thousand
dollars
a
year
to
put
somebody
up
from
one
of
the
fourteen
penitentiaries
in
the
state.
F
F
A
D
D
This
bill
adds
conviction
of
continuous
sexual
abuse
of
a
child
to
the
list
of
offenses
that
currently
require
a
judge
to
revoke
the
defendant's
bail
immediately
upon
conviction,
and
some
of
the
other
items
on
that
list
are
first
degree
murder,
aggravated
kidnapping,
aggravated
robbery,
rape
aggravated
sexual
battery
and
this
would
just
add
continuous
sexual
abuse
of
a
child
to
that
list.
Mr
chairman,.
A
G
Thank
you,
mr
chairman,
and
very
simple
bill
it.
If
you
commit
a
robbery
right
now
with
a
fake
gun,
it
is
still
a
robbery.
This
would
make
it
clear
that
if
you
commit
an
aggravated
assault
with
a
fake
gun,
it
is
still
an
aggravated
assault
through
the
eyes
of
the
victim.
It
doesn't
matter
whether
it's
fake
gun
or
real
gun.
The
fear
that
it
puts
into
them
is
still
the
same.
A
H
G
Lambert
great
question-
and
I
appreciate
you
asking
it-
I
use
gun
as
an
example
of
one
of
the
type
of
weapons
that
they
could
be.
The
language
of
the
actual
bill
is
user
display
of
a
deadly
weapon
or
any
article
used
or
fashioned
to
lead
the
victim
to
reasonably
believe
that
article
was
a
deadly
weapon.
H
The
reason
why
I
ask,
I
think,
we're
all
aware
of
what
happened,
we're
all
aware
of
what
happened
here
in
davidson
county
about
a
week
ago,
when
the
young
man
was
probably
in
some
sort
of
mental
crisis,
and
he
had
a
box
cutter
with
them,
and
this
would
fall
up
under
that.
Then
I'm
assuming,
unfortunately,
he
was
killed,
but
if
they
were
able
to
talk
him
down
from
that
and
he
would
have
had
an
additional
charge,
this
would
be
an
additional
charge
to
to
that.
Or
how
does
this
work
leader.
G
Lambert,
no
sir.
This
doesn't
involve
that
situation
at
all,
and
I
realize
that's
a
recent
situation
and
such
a
tragedy
for
both
those
officers
and
that
individual
I've
watched
that
entire
video
that's
been
released,
and
it
certainly
is
a
very
difficult
situation.
But
in
that
video,
if
you
review
it
that
poor
young
man
who
obviously
had
some
mental
health
issues,
they
spent
about
a
half
hour
trying
to
talk
with
him
and
talk
him
out
of
the
the
actual
weapon.
G
Not
not
what
we're
talking
about
here,
where
it
could
be
a
fake
weapon
that
was
designed
to
look
like
one.
He
had
a
real
box
cutter
and
then,
unfortunately,
at
the
very
end
of
that
video,
it
appeared
at
least
to
me-
and
I
know
it's
under
investigation
and
the
experts
can
investigate
it-
that
he
dropped
in
what
appeared
to
be
a
shooter's
stance
with
something
else,
and
so
it
this
bill
doesn't
affect
that.
G
I
will
say
it
is
a
tragic
loss
of
life
and
situation,
for
I
think
everybody
involved
both
for
his
family,
those
officers
as
well,
because,
at
least
from
my
perspective,
it
appeared
that
they
tried
everything
they
could
to
deviate
from
that.
That
end
result,
but
this
bill
would
not
affect
that
situation
at
all.
There
may
be
many
other
bills
that
would,
but
this
one
simply
doesn't
involve
that
chairman
dixie.
H
Thank
you
for
the
explanation.
I
just
want
some
clarification
because
I
think
we
all
agree.
That
was
an
unfortunate
situation
and
we
don't
want
that
to
occur,
but
we
also
don't
want
someone
in
the
event
that
they
can
be
talked
down
from
that
situation
and
they're.
Obviously,
in
a
mental
health
crisis,
I
don't
want
them
to
be
subject
to
additional
charge
because
they
were
not
thinking
clearly
at
their
mind,
because
maybe
they
did
have
something
an
object
that
could
be
considered
a
deadly
weapon.
A
A
A
Second,
so
we
have
a
motion
in
a
second.
This
is
now
for
us
to
vote
on
whether
or
not
to
hear
the
untimely
filed.
Amendment
just
want
to
remind
everybody,
the
posture
we
find
ourselves
in
all
those
in
favor
of
hearing
amendment
coded
one
three,
three,
eight
eight,
please
signify
by
saying
I
that
was
opposed.
A
G
Chairman
and
members,
thank
you.
The
we've
had
two
three
different
amendments
on
this:
to
try
to
get
this
language
exactly
in
the
right
posture
and
there's
a
number
of
other
groups
that
have
worked
on
this
representative
halford
had
reached
out
to
me
in
in
between
year
one
and
two
of
this
legislative
session
and
had
a
young
lady
in
his
district
who
was
charged
with
a
theft
and
then
several
years
later
was
charged
and
convicted
of
a
dui.
G
She
was
guilty
of
both
and
under
our
statutes
the
theft
is
an
expungable
offense,
it's
a
first
time
low
level
offense
that
we
have
for
years
allowed
folks
to
be
able
to
expunge
what
came
as
somewhat
as
a
surprise
to
me-
and
I
probably
knew
this
and
had
forgotten
it
at
some
point.
But
it's
what
you
have
on
your
record
at
the
time
you
file
for
an
expungement,
not
at
the
time
that
you
were
convicted
of
that
offense.
This
fixes
that-
and
it
says
you
know
she
had
a
theft
and
a
dui.
G
The
dui
under
current
law
blocks
her
from
being
able
to
go
back
and
get
that
theft.
Expunged
and
represented
beck
asked
a
very,
very
good
question,
as
you
always
do
last
week
as
to
whether
or
not
we
would
allow
folks
to
kind
of
cherry
pick
where
in
their
criminal
history,
they
wanted
to
expunge
something.
My
answer
was
no.
G
This
fixes
that-
and
it
makes
it
crystal
clear
just
like
we
passed
last
year
with
the
chairman's
bill
that
you
get
one
bite
at
the
apple,
you
get
one
time
to
get
an
expungement,
but
this
will
allow
folks,
like
that
young
lady,
to
be
able
to
go
back
and
get
it
expunged.
Why
it
was
important
in
chairman,
halford's,
constituent
situation
is
that
that
theft
was
keeping
her
from
being
able
to
be
employed
where
she
wished
to
be
hired,
the
dui
was
not,
but
the
theft
the
nature
of
that
offense
was
simply
something
that
they
said.
G
A
B
What
has
kind
of
caused
me
some
concern
with
the
expungement.
Is
that
once
a
conviction
is
expunged,
I
mean
that
conviction
is
gone
for
all
practical
purposes.
So
what
if
an
individual
got
a
conviction?
Sponge
but
then
later
later
on,
creates
another
commits.
Another
offense
and
you
know,
could
be
serious
and
so
forth.
B
It
should
that
individual
should
they
still
be
entitled
to
have
that
their
convictions
hidden
or
for
future
purposes,
but
so
I
would
offer
as
a
possible
suggestion
solution
that
persons
who,
having
a
conviction
on
their
record,
could
apply
to
a
circuit
court
judge
even
general
sessions,
judge
for
maybe
misdemeanors
and
just
apply
for
a
sealing
their
conviction.
History
from
prospective
employers
and
people
that
want
to
inquire
on
criminal
history
and
those
records
could
be
sealed
and
then
later
on.
B
If
someone
should
commit
another
offense
or
something
or
you
know
those
that
history
would
still
apply
and
carry
with
that
person,
because
I
think
people
need
to
be
responsible
for
their
actions
and
there
ought
to
be.
You
know,
consequences
for
decisions,
so
I
just
want
to
throw
that
out
there.
Maybe
that's
something
for
a
future
discussion
or
whatever,
but
so,
but
I
I
will
be
supporting
your
bill
later.
Thank
you.
Thank
you,
mr
chairman.
Thank.
H
H
This
was
a
appropriate
time
to
ask,
or
maybe
like
just
for
consideration-
and
you
made
a
point.
You
said
that
you
get
one.
I
one
bite
at
the
apple
at
this,
and
I
was
just
thinking
about
I've.
Had
some
constituents
and
friends
that
maybe
have
gotten
into
trouble
20
years
ago,
25
years
ago,
never
been
in
trouble
since
then,
but
sometimes
we
know
that
when
they're
going
through
this
particular
downward
spiral,
they
catch
one
two
three
four
cases,
but
finally
they
finally
wake
up
and
say
you
know
what
this
is.
H
What
I
was
not
meant
to
do.
This
is
not
what
life's
about
is.
Maybe
will
be
future
consideration
for
people
who
have
not
been
in
trouble
for
that
long
to
be
able
to
come
back
and
get
that
maybe
other
two,
because
if
I'm
not
mistaken,
you
can
get
two
offenses
with
one
expunction
correct
and
then
maybe
they
could
come
back
and
do
other
ones
is
there?
Will
there
be
consideration
for
that.
A
G
Lambert,
mr
chairman
and
there's,
I
think,
always
consideration
into
both
gentlemen's
point.
I
mean
it
is:
we've
talked
about
ceiling
records
for
a
while
this
this
bill.
The
caption
would
really
not
hold
that,
but
I
think
it's
a
conversation
to
have.
I
will
say
when
you're
talking
about
multiple
offenses
expungement
really
is
based
on
the
old
testament
principle
of
forgiveness
of
sin,
where
it
is
wiped
clean
as
if
it
never
occurred.
G
Sealing
a
record
allows
it
to
still
be
there
for
purposes
of
law
enforcement,
representative
griffey's
point
and
for
enhancement.
If
you
were
to
commit
a
crime
later
or
something
of
that
nature,
but
employers
and
the
public
could
not
see
it.
So
it
is
a
conversation
that
seems
to
have
been
percolating
for
some
years.
It
wouldn't
necessarily
fit
on
this
bill,
but
it
is
something
worthy
of
discussion.
A
G
Two
things
one
I
did
want
to
indicate
since
I
have
another
bill
that
has
a
fiscal
note.
That
is
a
little
hefty.
This
one
saves
or
increases
local
revenue
by
almost
a
million
dollars.
So
all
of
you
can
get
a
thank
you
note
from
your
local
jurisdictions
for
that
additional
funds.
If
we
were
to
be
successful
here,
I
also
want
to
say
that
members
I
did
not
intend
to
file
a
late
amendment.
G
I
know
there
are
some
groups
that
have
not
seen
this
amendment,
I'm
at
the
will
of
the
body
as
to
whether
or
not
to
go
forward
today,
whether
or
not
to
roll
this
a
week
or
mr
chairman,
whatever
your
guidance
to
me
or
the
committee's
guidance,
would
be
I'm
comfortable
either
way,
I
mean
it
isn't
the
posture
that
we
intended
it
to
be
in,
but
it
was
a
late
file
amendment
for
that.
I
apologize.
A
Well,
unless
there
is
any
objection
to
voting,
which
I
do
not
see
any,
then
we
are
ready
to
vote
all
those
in
favor
of
sending
house
bill
1679
as
amended
to
finance,
please
signify
by
saying
aye
those
opposed,
sir.
You
had
to
finance,
but
I
will
say
leader,
lambert
thank
you
for
making
that
offer,
but
we,
I
think,
we're
good.
A
G
A
Second,
thank
you
for
that.
I
can,
I
don't
know.
Can
I
gavel
my
own
amendment
sure
members,
what
this
amendment
does
it?
It
keeps
intact
the
leader's
intent
here.
What
we're
dealing
with
is
pill
presses
and
a
number
of
years
ago,
when
I
was
touring
the
tbi,
I
was
educated
that
not
only
do
drug
dealers
and
other
nerdy
wells.
Have
these
pill
presses
at
their
disposal,
but
oftentimes
there
will
be
a
gang
of
folks
or
a
ring
of
folks
and
they
will
have
pieces
of
a
pill.
A
Press
they'll
come
together
in
a
storage
unit
on
a
saturday
night
with
their
fentanyl
they'll,
make
the
drugs
and
then
disassemble
the
press,
so
that
nobody's
got
the
entire
piece
of
equipment.
So
all
this
amendment
does
is:
it
adds
pieces
of
a
pill
press
to
what
the
leader
is
doing
with
that
explanation.
G
Famous
chairman
and
thank
you
for
the
improvement
there
on,
I
do
want
to
give
chairman
doggett
a
shout
out
here.
He
invited
all
of
us
to
go
tour
the
tbi
lab
and
facilities
not
that
long
ago,
and
several
of
us
took
him
up
on
that
invitation
and
chairman.
Thank
you
for
that
invitation.
I'd
been
over
to
tbi
several
times
and
in
fact
I've
been
back
to
view
the
expungement
unit
and
see
exactly
what
they
do
something.
G
I
would
encourage
everyone
to
do,
based
on
the
last
bill
that
I
just
had,
but
as
we
were
touring
on
chairman
doggett's
tour,
I
asked
a
question
and
we
all
kind
of
asked
a
question
of.
Why
is
there
such
an
increase
in
opioid
overdoses,
and
so
many
fake
appeals
out
there
in
the
street
and
their
immediate
answer
was
well,
you
can
order
a
pill
press
on
you
know
line.
G
You
can
just
go
on
the
internet
and
order
one
of
these,
and
then
anybody
can
mix
up
whatever
substance
they
want
to,
and
just
press
out
pills
that
look
exactly
like
what
someone
would
buy.
You
know
at
the
pharmacy,
so
that
concerned
me-
and
I
began
talking
to
some
of
our
fellow
members
on
this
committee
and
members
of
law
enforcement
and
that's
what
spurred
this
particular
piece
of
legislation.
A
A
You
know
not
covered
19,
not
violent
gun
deaths,
not
car
accidents,
not
heart
disease,
not
cancer
fentanyl,
and
not
only
is
that
a
tragedy
for
our
just
what
it
says
about
where
we
are
as
a
country
but
think
about
the
loss
of
productivity
loss
of
life.
All
of
those
folks
are
in
their
prime
earning
years,
their
prime
working
years.
That's
when
folks
are
supposed
to
be
raising
their
kids
going
to
work
in
the
morning
and
living
out
really
the
best
years
of
their
lives
and
the
number
one
cause
of
death
for
those
folks
is
fentanyl.
A
So
I
just
want
to
take
the
time
to
sort
of
mark
that
solemn
point
and
thank
you
for
doing
what
you
can
to
combat
that.
So
any
questions
for
the
sponsor,
seeing
none
we're
ready
to
vote
all
those
in
favor
of
sending
house
bill
1763
as
amended
to
calendar
and
rules.
Please
signify
by
saying
aye
aye
that
was
opposed
oops
your
bill
passes
to
calendar
and
rules.
I
A
Right,
thank
you,
sir.
Yes,
it
is
at
one
one,
nine,
six,
eight!
It
does
make
the
bill
members.
I
wanna
kind
of
bring
everybody
up
to
speed
with
what
what
we're
doing
here
a
couple
of
years
ago,
we
reformed
together
the
drug
free
zone
statute
in
tennessee,
and
we
wanted
to
make
sure
that
we
were
able
to
stiffen
penalties
on
those
who
were
truly
trafficking
drugs,
especially
to
children,
but
at
the
same
time
make
sure
that
there
was
discretion
for
the
judge
inside
that
zone.
A
If
somebody
was
truly
in
the
wrong
place
at
the
wrong
time,
we
had
judges
at
that
time.
That
came
and
testified
to
say
you
know
we
knew
this.
This
defendant
was
truly
at
their
own
home
with
a
user
amount,
but
because
the
tennessee
code
tied
our
hands,
it
forced
us
into
that
mandatory
minimum
prison
sentence,
and
so
you
had
folks
for
relatively
low
level
drug
crimes,
spending
sentences
longer
than
that
and
murderers
and
rapists
in
our
tennessee
prisons.
A
We
have
about
495
people
who
were
sentenced
under
the
old
statute
who
are
in
prison,
and
I
will
be
the
first
one
again
to
say
that
most
of
those
folks
they
have
a
variety
of
other
charges
and
and
they
they
are
going
to
be
in
prison
for
a
long
period
of
time,
regardless
of
this
drug
re-zone
rewrite.
However,
there
are
some
of
those
there
are
about
50
of
those
to
be
exact,
who
are
first-time
non-violent
offenders,
and
so
because
of
this,
we
wanted
to
find
a
judicial
solution
where
these
cases
could
be
looked
at
again.
A
A
What
we're
doing
is
we're
giving
an
opportunity
for
folks
who
were
convicted
under
the
old
statute
to
file
a
motion
and
go
before
a
judge
in
consultation
with
the
district
attorney
and
to
have
a
hearing
on
this
motion
whether
or
not
they
should
be
able
to
seek
relief
based
on
the
new
sentencing
statute
of
that
drug-free
zone.
Violation.
There's
a
couple
of
very
important
things
here
that
I
want
to
point
out
number
one.
A
But
maybe
they
were
gang-related,
for
example,
and
they
didn't
want
a
family
to
have
to
come
forward
and
testify
because
they
said.
Look
if
I
testify
against
this
person,
they're
going
to
seek
retribution
against
us,
and
so
the
prosecutor,
using
their
prosecutorial
discretion
could
say.
Well,
we've
got
them
on
a
drug
free
zone
charge
and
they're
going
to
be
going
away
for
a
long
time.
Based
on
that,
so
we
don't
have
to
expose
your
family
to
danger.
A
Also,
if
a
previous
motion
was
made
under
this
section
to
reduce
the
sentence
and
it
was
denied
after
review-
they
cannot
do
that.
So
we
don't
want
to
create
this
unending
cycle
of
appeals
again
we're
talking
about
a
defined
population.
It's
never
going
to
get
any
bigger,
because
we've
already
changed
the
sentencing
statute.
A
A
So
that's
the
substance
of
this
amendment.
Again.
I've
worked
very
hard
with
members
of
law
enforcement
to
make
sure
we
get
to
a
place
to
where
we
believe
we're
doing
no
harm
and
that
we're
trying
to
get
those
folks
who
were
convicted
under
that
old
sentence,
at
least
an
opportunity
to
have
that
file
opened
and
examined.
If
there's
somebody
who's
truly
worthy
of
relief
under
this,
then
we
want
to
make
sure
that
they
get
it.
A
I
Thank
you,
chairman
kercio,
and
I
would
just
like
to
say
that,
based
on
what
I
know
about
this
bill,
I
do
appreciate
the
bill
itself
and
I
think
you
said
you're
trying
to
create
a
a
way
to
look
at
these
and
that
doesn't
give
anyone
a
pass.
It
just
says
that
if
someone
maybe
deserves
a
second
chance
for
a
small
crime,
then
there
should
be
a
way,
and
so
I
appreciate
that-
and
I
wonder,
is
there
any
questions
on
the
amendment?
I
A
J
Thank
you
so
much
for
a
personal
order.
If
I
could,
we've
got
a
few
minutes
extra
in
this
committee,
and-
and
I
was
intrigued
by
by
the
names
on
the
on
the
first
bill
in
our
calendar
house,
bill
item
number
one
house
bill
1646
by
representative
hall,
was
also
senate
bill
2013
by
senator
bell
and
I'm
wondering
if
legal
staff
may
be
able
to
delve
in
if
you've
got
some
free
time.
What
would
have
happened
if
this
was
the
first
year
of
a
general
assembly?
J
Representative
hall
passes
the
bill
in
the
house,
then
he
gets
elected
to
the
senate
and
he
takes
over
the
senate.
Legislation
is.
Is
that
and
again
you
may
not
have
an
answer
at
the
moment,
but
sometimes
my
mind
goes
to
interesting
places
like
that
and
and
just
wonder
if
there
is
precedent
for
a
house
member,
passing
a
bill
and
then
devolving
into
a
senator
and
then
passing
the
same
bill
in
the
senate,
or
vice
versa.
So
just
food
for
thought,
chairman.