►
From YouTube: Judiciary Committee November 16, 2018 (Morning Session)
Description
Friday, November 16th 2018 (Morning Session)
8:30 AM Call to Order - Chairman Kirkbride
8:30 AM Justice Reinvestment - continued
Committee discussion, amendment and sponsorship
19LSO-0221 v0.5 Crime victim compensation eligibility clarification.
19LSO-0231 v1 Limitation on length of probation.
19LSO-0227 v0.6 Limitation on length of parole.
19LSO-0217 v0.4 Modification of probation.
19LSO-0230 v0.6 Probation and parole-incentives and sanctions.
Public Comments
Click here for the November 15, 2018 Morning Session: https://youtu.be/Kd-cIbWSDM4
Click here for the November 15, 2018 Afternoon Session: http://youtu.be/YJFQ1qDYSvo
Click here for the November 16, 2018 Afternoon Session (if needed):
https://youtu.be/KTnptUmzyjc
A
A
A
A
C
A
Yeah,
thank
you
have
a
few
introductory
and
then
we'll
get
going.
We
have
a
couple
of
new
judges
and
justices.
Who've
joined
us
Chief,
Justice
Davis.
Thank
you
for
being
here
and
judge
Christensen.
We
never
acknowledged
you.
Yesterday,
you
sat
in
with
us
and
we'll
hear
from
you
in
a
few
minutes,
so
thank
you
for
being
here,
I
was
reminded
to
remind
you
to
press
the
read
the
button
until
it
turns
red
on
the
microphone
on
the
desk.
When
you
come
up
to
speak,
there
is
a
little
red
dot.
A
That'll
appear
if
everything
is
working
as
it
should
so
make
sure
that's
on,
since
we
are
being
streamed.
I
want
to
give
you
a
word
about
our
schedule,
since
it's
maybe
a
little
unconventional.
But
what
we're
looking
to
do
today
is
hear
from
the
rest
of
the
panelists
there's
about
five
more
people
who
listed
that
will
allow
for
time
to
speak,
beginning
with
mr.
rota,
Colvin
and
we'll
go
to
a
time
of
public
comment.
Then
we're
going
to
hear
from
the
council
state
governments,
people
people
mr.
A
pelikan
his
associates
in
theory
that
maybe
gets
us
to
11
and
we
could
start
working
bills,
but
certainly
we
have
to
be
done
with
that
by
lunchtime
and
then
I'm
suggesting
we
take
an
abbreviated
lunch
from
12:00
to
1:00
and
then
we'll
meet
and
try
and
be
out
of
here
by
4:00.
We
have
10
of
us
have
to
be
in
Casper
tonight
and
we
got
to
beat
the
snowstorm
up
there
to
get
to
the
Republican
caucus
and
I
know.
A
A
Thank
you
for
that.
I
did
want
to
recognize
while
it's
early
in
the
day
and
we're
all
still
bright
and
sitting
upright
in
our
chairs,
say
thanks.
Just
all
of
you
who
followed
us
these
last
two
years,
we've
had
wonderful
support
from
the
judiciary
of
folks
here
at
every
meeting.
We've
appreciated
that,
but
there's
lots
of
you
for
whom
this
is
sort
of
your
home
committee
and
you've
sat
these
long
hours
with
us
and
helped
us
work
the
bills
and
provide
a
good
input.
Thank
you
for
that.
A
I
also
wanted
to
acknowledge
a
couple
of
our
committee
members,
serving
their
last
day
on
the
Judiciary
Committee
representative
winners
and
co-chairman
Christensen
for
sure
and
representing
winners.
You
are
on
this
all
six
years.
Is
that
right
or
you're
on
four
of
your
six
and
mr.
co-chairman?
How
many
years
were
you
chairman.
A
And
some
of
the
rest
of
us
may
or
may
not
be
here
next
year
either,
but
I
will
know
more
about
that
the
next
couple
days,
but
it's
been
good
good
and
hopefully,
we've
done
productive
work
and
have
another
day
in
us
to
tie
some
of
these
things
up.
So
having
said
all
that
as
an
introduction,
let's
get
back
to
our
panelists
mr.
Oda
:,
don't
forget
the
red
light
and
welcome.
E
E
It's
how
we
choose
to
deal
with
it
between
now
and
the
idea
that
they
would
be
arriving
at
the
pin
with
that.
We've
talked
about,
and
it's
been
my
usual
open.
If
you
will,
every
time
I
present
before
you
that
I'm
hoping
that
the
process
brings
early
intervention,
early
options,
early
treatment,
early,
counseling
early
interventions
to
ensure
folks
are
successful
at
leading
or
changing
their
behavior
to
become
a
law-abiding
citizen
and
stay
out
of
the
criminal
justice
system.
E
So
today
we
have
a
series
of
bills,
culminating
after
the
Council
of
state
governments
has
presented
a
lot
of
data
and
I
appreciate
their
data
mining.
Looking
at
the
specific
points
in
Wyoming,
looking
at
the
numbers
of
felons
the
recidivism
rate,
the
options
that
we
have
currently
the
options
that
we
may
need,
where
some
of
the
shortfalls
are
and
and
how
best
from
their
perspective,
to
offer
suggestions
couple
of
the
takeaways
that
I
had
after
the
June
meeting
in
Laramie
is
that
there
is
a
need
for
early
intervention.
E
There's
a
need
for
additional
sanctions
early
to
help
slow
the
stream
or
slow
the
flow
to
the
state
pen
immediately.
If
that
person
can
receive
the
proper
counseling
proper
treatment
and
a
proper
intervention
that
turns
their
life
around,
that
ensures
that
they
lead
a
law-abiding
life
that
they
choose
not
to
return
to
a
life
of
crime
and
continue
their
criminal
activities,
which
ultimately
ends
up
leaving
them
in
jail.
E
We
heard
a
number
of
stories
from
the
prosecutors
from
the
judges
and
from
citizens
of
the
current
system
in
which
folks
are
out
either
on
unsupervised
probation,
which
is
where
they
merely
tell
the
judge.
Yes,
your
honor
or
I
realize
I've,
probably
committed
this
crime
and
I've
may
or
may
not
have
already
pled
guilty
to
this
crime,
but
I'm
here
to
tell
you
today
that
I'm
not
I'm
going
to
lead
a
law-abiding
life
and
I
won't
ever
do
these
kinds
of
activities
again
I
promise
and
away.
They
go.
E
Nobody
checks
on
him
until
they
all
of
a
sudden
pop
up
on
on
another
criminal
enterprise,
and
we
look
at
their
list
of
things
they
weren't
supposed
to
do
that.
They
agreed
and
swore
that
they
wouldn't
ever
do
again
only
to
look
at
that
list
and
go
yeah.
But
you
did
most
of
these
things.
That's
why
you're
here.
Thus
we
end
up
back
in
front
of
the
judge.
Who's
equally
frustrated
going
now.
What
do
I
do
and
the
series
of
Justice
Reinvestment
I
hope
looks
at
answering
that
question
of
now.
What
do
I
do?
E
E
So
it's
a
cost
and
we've
talked
about
it
at
the
last
meeting
and
I
sense.
We'll
talk
about
it
a
little
more
today,
it's
a
cost-benefit
analysis.
Do
we
put
more
money
in
early
intervention,
treatment,
counseling
probation,
or
do
we
wait
and
spend
more
money
on
beds
at
the
pen?
One
of
the
bills
before
us
looks
at
answering
that,
from
the
standpoint
of
we'll
just
cut
back
on
the
amount
of
time
that
they're
on
probation
or
parole
and
shorten
that
time
window
by
several
months
from
five
years
to
roughly
three
and
a
half
years.
E
What
I'm
unclear
is
what
additional
sanctions,
opportunities,
interventions
and
treatments
will
be
before
these
folks
to
ensure
that
that
length
of
time,
they're
successful
as
the
current
data
or
the
data
mining
that
the
CSG
provided
pointed
out
to
nearly
20%
of
the
folks
recidivate
in
year.
Four
and
five
I
think
it's
9%
in
year.
Four
and
I
forget
the
actual
number
for
year
five,
but
it's
a
lesser
number,
a
little
less
than
twenty
percent
in
the
long
run.
E
So
if
we
shorten
the
time
of
probation
and
parole
down
without
doing
any
additional
interventions,
what
are
we
going
to
do
with
the
trend
and
probability
that
nearly
twenty
percent
of
people
will
roof
end
in
year,
four
and
five,
but
they
won't
be
on
probation
or
parole
so
that
new
offense
will
be
a
crime
that
new
offense
will
be
a
charge
that
new
offense
will
be
a
jury
trial.
That
new
offense
will
be
a
pre-sentence
investigation.
That
new
offense
will
be
additional
supervision.
E
E
What
are
we
going
to
do
in
year,
four
and
five,
so
to
speak
if
they
aren't
on
probation
and
parole,
or
what
did
we
do
in
year,
three
and
a
half,
or
the
first,
the
first
three
and
a
half
years
to
ensure
that
they
are
not
finished
part
of
that
twenty
percent
in
year?
Four
and
five
would
be
my
point
when
it
comes
to
House
bill,
230
or
I
should
say
sorry,
Freudian
slip
draft
230.
E
It
looks
at
probation
incentives
and
sanctions
and
there's
several
paragraphs
in
there
with
shall
knots
or
shells
and
one
of
the
challenges
I
had
looking
through
the
bill
and
I
wondered
and
I
already
have
asked
both
the
prosecutors
and
the
judges.
Does
this
bill
flow
with
current
practice
and
law?
Will
it
make
a
difference
in
current
practice
in
law
in
the
Shouse
and
the
shall
nuts?
Does
it
actually
flow?
Does
the
sanction
come
in
at
the
right
time?
Does
the
non
sanction
come
in
at
the
right
time?
Does
that
quick
dip
I
think?
E
E
The
first
one
that
comes
to
mind
isn't,
as
on
page
starts
on
page
five,
with
authorizing
sanctions
under
713
1802
switches
to
page
six
then
starts
at
line
five.
A
sanction
of
time
served
in
custody
between
arrest
and
hearing
between
arrest
and
disposition
of
an
alleged
violation
of
the
hearing
is
not
held
and
goes
through.
E
You
looked
at
some
additional
sanctions
that
they
both
did
affirm
the
defense
and
prosecution
standpoint
they
get
to
have
their
folks
come
to
jail
with
some
assurance
that
they
haven't
indulged
in
alcohol
that
they're
leading
more
of
a
lot
of
binding
life
prior
to
coming
back
to
court.
So
I
think
that
starts
there,
but
I
question.
If
that's
where
that
fits
that
sanction
pre
and
does
that?
Where
does
that
fit
with
our
current
admonishments
from
the
court?
As
you
work
through
that
continuing
list
I.
E
E
Over
to
page
7,
starting
on
line
8,
if
I
read
this
correctly,
we
now
start
a
period
of
time
for
90
days
in
a
consenting,
Wyoming
Jail,
coupled
with
substance
abuse,
treatment
contracted
with
and
paid
for
by
the
department.
I
think
that
starts
our
discussion
of
that
early
intervention
and
that
treatment
for
some
of
those
folks.
But
again,
the
confinement
for
90
days
in
the
county
jail
needs
to
be
funded.
E
Now
we
have
a
funding
in
here
at
some
point
or
where
we
talk
about
that
a
little
bit,
but
it's
at
a
much
lesser
rate
than
the
cost,
because,
if
we're
switching
part
of
the
discussion,
currently
the
courts
for
misdemeanor
sentence
people
to
the
county
jail
or
for
periods
of
than
a
year
generally,
they
don't
sentence
felons
to
the
county
jail
for
any
period
of
time.
There's
a
sanction
that
can
be
had
there's
some
time
in
jail,
so
to
speak,
but
generally
sentencing
of
a
felon.
E
Or
or
back
to,
the
counties
need
to
kind
of
flesh
that
out
and
make
sure
that
flows
and,
of
course,
then
the
funding
that
may
need
to
come
with
that.
Otherwise
you're
looking
at
justice
reinvestment
asking
the
counties
to
start
picking
up
felony
incarceration
time
and
money.
Is
that
what
we're
doing.
E
They
get
sanctioned,
which
is
a
penalty
and
now
we're
going
to
give
them
a
credit
off
their
sentence
for
having
a
penalty
and
having
time
I
thought.
If
you
had
a
penalty,
you
had
additional
time
so
now,
if,
if
they
mess
up
they'll
get
full
credit
for
messing
up,
I
think
doesn't
quite
flow.
I'm,
not
too
sure
that
that
is
what
is
in
Ted.
I.
E
E
So
you
are
looking
to
criminal
justice
reform
and
saying,
on
behalf
of
the
state,
will
reduce
the
cost
counties
it's
going
up
because
it's
at
$65
a
day.
Many
of
the
jails
are
over.
A
hundred
I
believe
was
the
testimony
in
June
and
Laramie
that
many
of
the
jail's
are
over
a
hundred
dollars
a
day.
I
get
the
incidental
incarceration,
but
now
we're
talking
wholesale
sentencing
of
folks
to
the
County
Jail.
E
Appreciate
page
11,
starting
in
line
30
and
for
those
folks
that
are
sentenced
to
the
county
jail
through
the
probation
and
parole
Corrections
process.
If
you
will
that
there
is,
if
there's
an
issue
within
housing
under
that
scenario,
that
the
state
would
come
in
and
help
the
sheriff
and
indemnify
fractions
and
processes
and
procedures,
as
they
would
follow
state
process.
E
E
Again,
starting
on
line
9
is
that
flow
question
that
I'm
kind
of
alluding
to
as
I
go
through
these
does
that
actually
flow?
The
court
may
impose
at
any
time
modify
any
condition
of
probation,
parole,
suspension
of
sentence
current
language.
The
court
may
do
that
and
then
it
court
goes
on
to
say
the
mate
Court
may
not
impose
new
custodial
restrictions
on
liberty
unless
there's
a
compliance
violation.
Unless
there's
a
in
response
to
a
compliance
violation.
E
We've
already
talked
about
a
whole
series
of
things
in
which,
if
there's
a
violation,
they
go
to
the
County
Jail,
so
I'm,
not
sure
the
compliance
violation
versus
the
sanction
and
going
to
the
County
Jail
I
would
want
to
hear
from
the
county
attorneys
and
the
judges
that
that
flows.
That's
the
correct
term
for
that
portion
and
how
that
fits
together,
I'm
concerned,
and
why
it's
my
issue
as
it
comes
to
me
into
jail,
so
to
speak.
I.
E
Think,
mr.
chairman,
that
concludes
the
specific
ones
going
through
the
bill
through
2:30
I
should
say
and,
like
I
say,
I'm,
hoping
that
in
the
long
run
we
fund
treatment,
intervention,
counseling
and
those
sanctions
at
the
county
jail
level
are
all
properly
funded,
with
the
idea
that
we
would
be
preventing
folks
from
ultimately
ending
up
in
the
state
pen
for
a
period
of
time
and
that
they
would
the
people
the
population
we're
talking
about.
E
The
probation
and
parole
errs
would
choose
to
lead
a
law-abiding
life
through
one
of
these
interventions
and
sanctions
that
happens
that
they
change
their
behavior
and
ultimately
return
to
our
neighborhoods,
because
this
is
the
folks
next
door.
This
is
the
people
in
the
grocery
store
the
day
after
they
get
out.
It's
our
hometown.
People
that
are
coming
back
to
us,
I
would
like
to
have
them
come
back
with
a
different
frame
of
mind
when
they
do.
Mr.
chairman,
any.
E
F
F
I.
Guess:
I'm
surprised
at
the
that
you're
objecting
to
that.
It's
my
understanding
that
that's
existing
law,
7
13
1107
II,
and
that
this
bill
just
gives
it
a
new
number.
If
it's
my
understanding
that
we
had
this
discussion
about
the
county
jails,
housing
probationers
under
this
90-day
provision,
last
February
and
I
thought
so
I.
Are
you
advocating
repeal
of
what
we
did
last
February.
E
E
G
A
G
Proposed
modification
page
10,
the
page
and
level
from
the
staff
comments.
So
the
question
mr.
Rogovin,
when
we
get
to
subsection
C
there,
it
says
upon
agreement
the
sheriff's
and
the
director,
the
department,
so
it
becomes
a
negotiated
cost
between
the
department
under
sheriff
is.
Is
that
more
acceptable.
C
C
Now
that,
let
me
add
a
proviso
to
that.
The
attorney
general's
also
has
an
agency
a
very
large
state
agency
that
is
managed
by
the
legislature
and
funded
by
the
legislature.
So
we
spend
a
lot
of
time
and
we
will
shortly
I'm
sure
before
joint
procreation.
Although
this
is
not
a
budget
session
talking
about
how
we
operate
and
certainly
answering
questions
the
legislature
about
what
we
do
as
a
state
agency.
C
So
legislature
can
make
decisions
about
our
agency,
but
when
it
comes
to
giving
legal
advice,
even
in
areas
that
we
do
a
lot
of
work
in
it,
pretty
much
there's
a
lot
of
things
that
we
have
to
actually
keep
our
powder
dry
in
here
and
the
reason
for
that
is
pretty
simple:
a
bill.
The
set
of
bills
you
have
here,
obviously,
potentially
some
of
those
will
go
to
a
new
governor
in
March
and
depending
on
how
things
work
out.
C
Maybe
the
Attorney
General
still
in
March
I
mean
but
I
know,
I
won't
be
after
March,
because
I'm
retired,
but
the
fact
is,
there
will
be
an
Attorney
General
and
the
Attorney
General
will
do
what
we
always
do.
I
think
which
provide
written
analyses
to
the
governor
about
constitutionality
of
statutes,
as
they
appear
on
his
desk
after
having
gone
through
and
been
signed
by
the
legislative
leadership
and
ready
to
be
signed
by
the
governor.
So
we
keep
our
powder
dry
on
those
issues
as
we
should
to
provide
that
advice
to
the
governor.
C
So
my
friend
Tom
juban,
who
I've
known
for
many
years,
mentioned
I,
think
yesterday,
separation
of
powers,
issues
here
between
the
judiciary
and
the
executive
branch,
with
respect
to
sentencing
and
probation
parole.
Well,
that's
a
great
issue:
separation
of
powers.
We've
done
a
lot
of
work
on
that
in
the
last
few
years,
the
attorney
general's
office,
but
it's
all
been
representing
statutes
that
have
been
passed
by
legislatures,
signed
by
the
governor
and
attacked
by
citizens
or
other
people
that
have
felt
that
the
statutes
are
unconstitutional.
C
We've
lost
a
few
of
those
as
well,
but
we've
defended
them.
You
know
very
very
strongly,
which
is
our
roles
Attorney
General,
so,
but
when
it
comes
to
saying
providing
anticipatory
advice
on
what
may
be
constitutional
or
not
I'll
just
point
to
the
corner
over
here
with
your
and
I
may
I
say
your
attorneys
and
sitting
over
in
the
corner
over
there
are
brilliant
attorneys.
I
mean
Brian.
Fuller
worked
for
us
as
an
intern,
he's
fantastic
he's,
a
brilliant
guy
and
and
Tory
Racine's
I
known
for
years
and
years
and
years
he's
a
great
attorney.
C
Kayla
is
obviously
a
new
attorney,
but
you
have
great
attorneys
and
one
of
my
best
friends
is
down
the
hall
Dave
Gruber
he
and
I
studied
for
the
bar
together
in
1985.
So
that's
the
that's
where
you
get
your
legal
advice
on
those
types
of
issues
from
legislative
service
office
on
those
big
issues
like
is
this
is
this
constitutional
is
what
we're
presenting
constitutional
and
I
don't
want
to
get
in
the
way
of
that
and
in
fact,
I'm
not
authorized
to
get
in
the
way
of.
E
C
So,
with
all
due
respect
to
my
dear
friend,
Tom
Jim
and
I'm,
not
going
to
pontificate
on
that
issue
here
today
and
I
haven't
done
the
research
anyway,
even
if
I
did
I'd
probably
say
something
really
dumb,
the
Tory
and
and
Brian
we
correct
for
me.
So
that's
my
role
and
that's
where
we
said
now
on
the
the
other
area
that
we
sit
obviously
is:
where
are
we
the
criminal
justice
process?
Because
you
know
the
attorney
general's
office?
We
handle
all
those
all
the
appeals
line,
the
Supreme
Court.
C
We
handle
habeas
corpus
and
all
the
post-conviction
work
and
Miami
courts
and
before
the
federal
judiciary
and
in
that
process
we
see
a
lot
of
things
about
the
criminal
law,
but
what
we
we
basically
do
in
many
cases.
You
know,
in
our
cases
we're
almost
always
supporting
what
a
district
judge
said,
because
if
the,
if
the
criminal
defendant
one
below
there's
no
appeal,
so
that's
they
can't
appeal.
So
the
only
cases
we
have
are
ones
where
we're
defending
what
a
district
judge
did
and
maybe
what
prosecutors
did.
C
Supreme
Court
is
here
as
well,
but
so
you've
got
the
entire
gamut
of
our
judiciary
to
talk
about
how
they
see
sentencing
because
they're
in
the
trenches
day
in
and
day
out,
it's
just
not
something
the
attorney
general's
office.
Does
we
don't
get
involved
in
those
very
rarely
once
in
a
long
while
we'll
have
an
attorney
that
is
delegated
to
work
with
a
local
prosecutor
and
be
a
special
prosecutor
and
insist
on
a
case.
C
It
happens
very
rarely
and
so
I'm,
just
not
in
a
position
to
to
say
you
know
how
the
process,
whether
these
statutes,
what
they're
going
to
do
with
the
process
and,
in
fact,
when
it
comes
to
Corrections
and
correctional
goals,
and
how
we
can
improve
Corrections
and
how
the
state
can
better
spend
its
money
to
get
the
kind
of
efficiency
that
we
want
and
the
outcomes
that
we
want.
Well,
we
represent
the
Department
of
Corrections.
We
represent.
You
know
the
board
of
parole,
but
on
as
far
as
policy
and
how
they
go
through
their
business.
C
They
are
much
better
situated
to
give
you
that
testimony
on
how
that
should
be
done
and
comment
on
these
bills,
so
basically
I'm
kind
of
a
zero
here,
I'm
not
going
to
be
very
helpful
to
based
on
my
Authority
and
also
based
on
on
that.
We
just
don't
do
this
work
and
I
don't
have
the
knowledge
base
with
which
to
present
that
information
to
you.
That
would
be
helpful
to
you
that
you
should
rely
on.
C
You
should
rely
on
that
if
I
said
something,
maybe
when
I'm
a
citizen,
I
may
show
up
someday
you're
and
give
my
opinion
out
of
left
field
on
something
like
this
and
you
can
take
it
for
what
it's
worth
then,
but
as
official
as
the
Attorney
General
I
won't.
Do
that
to
you
or
put
you
that
position
with
that
being
said,
any
questions
ready.
H
B
B
Just
in
a
general
comment,
the
circuit
court
judges
are
of
always
wanting
more
options.
More
options
are
better
and
we
do
recognize.
There's
limitation
of
resources
and
specially
limitations
and
resources
in
smaller
counties
that
the
counties
may
have
that
the
other
counties,
don't
things
aren't
fair
across
the
state,
but
in
any
event
we
work
towards
making
those
resources,
and
we
find
are
very
helpful
in
doing
our
job.
Making
those
available
throughout
the
state.
I
just
have
some
general
comments
about
some
some
of
these
bills.
B
Here,
I'll
start
as
they
are
listed
here
on
the
juvenile
reinvestment
221
on
the
crime,
victim
compensation,
eligibility,
clarification
and
the
comment
doesn't
specifically
go
to
the
limitation,
but
it
also
just
to
realize
that
we
are
also
not
access
to
justice
for
citizens,
but
also
our
victims,
and
it's
just
ironic.
This
week,
I
had
a
small
claims
case
where
a
victim
of
a
violent,
felony,
domestic
conviction,
the
individual
was
convicted,
went
to
the
penitentiary.
B
She
went
to
live
with
her
family
out
of
state
and
I'm,
not
exactly
sure
how
this
happened,
but
she
was
not
able
to
access
Victim
Compensation
funds
in
the
time
period.
She
was
required
to
do
so,
not
sure
if
that's
correct
or
not
that
that
was
her
claim.
So
she
does
have
an
avenue
to
come
to
small
claims
and
get
a
case
against
the
perpetrator,
who's
now
out
on
parole.
B
She
did
not
go
to
or
psi
interview
as
she
left
the
state,
so
there
was
no
sentence
of
restitution
and
in
the
district
court's
judgment
and
sentence,
and
so
that
left
her
when
she
getting
collectors
calling
the
calling
her
about
paying
these
medical
bills
left
coming
to
small
claims
court
to
get
a
judgment
where
the
individual
did
show.
While
he
was
on
parole
and
did
admit
that
he
had
a
liability
to
this
individual
for
what
he
did.
So
it
was
rather
easy
to
do.
B
So
access
to
justice
I
think
we
still
need
to
remember
what
we're
what
we're
focused
on,
not
just
for
the
defendants,
but
also
for
our
victims
and
the
citizens.
And
again
you
know
everybody
knows.
The
goal
here
is
to
change
behavior
modify
behavior,
so
they
don't
come
back
to
impact
our
criminal
justice
system,
which
kind
of
leads
into
limitation
on
length
of
probation
and
parole.
As
mr.
Oda
kovin
said,
you
know,
we
really
are
the
intervention,
the
more
likely
we're
going
to
be
able
to
change
that
behavior
or
modify
it.
The
more
somebody
is
institutionalized.
B
It
becomes
an
institutionalized
offender
harder.
It
is
to
change
that
behavior
and
it
takes
longer
my
jurisdiction
lasts.
For
one
year
we
could
have
consecutive
sentences
that
could
go
longer.
So
a
lot
of
the
information
and
the
the
things
addressed,
don't
really
pertain
to
circuit
courts,
but
I
would
just
looking
at
the
length
of
parole.
We
do
have
statutes
that
allow
for
our
court
supervised
treatment
programs
to
last
up
to
three
years.
This
parole
lasts
up
I.
B
Think
if
I'm
reading
this
right
thirty
months
and
we're
dealing
again
with
institutionalized
offenders,
we
do
have
parolees
out
in
our
drug
court
programs
and
setting
a
barrier
on
that
length.
Most
of
them
take.
You
know,
18
months
to
two
years,
but
there
are
individuals
will
take
longer,
and
so,
if
we
get
butted
up
against
that
thirty
months,
it
may
be
something
inconsistent
with
our
court
supervised
treatment,
three-year
programs
that
are
allowed
under
statute
to
extend
probation
out
to
that
length
in
order
for
them
to
participate
in
those
drug
court
programs.
B
The
excuse
me
one
of
the
things
talking
about
probation
and
I,
didn't
really
fair
it
out
from
the
information
of
the
data
in
Natrona
County.
We
have
a
standard
condition
now,
in
our
judgment,
sentences
that
allows
for
probation
and
parole
to
move
to
on
supervised,
probation,
usually
upon
certain
conditions.
B
Either
they
have
completed
their
counseling
or
paid
their
financials
or
the
court
may
have
set
a
date
such
as,
if
you
had
a
potential
two
years
supervised
probation
after
three
months
or
six
months,
so
the
length
of
probation
may
not
be
taken
into
consideration
on
some
of
these
allows
probation
parole
upon
their
risk
assessments.
Well,
let
me
back
up
a
little.
It
is
rare
for
a
circuit
court
judge
to
ask
for
a
pre-sentence
investigation.
We
don't
generally
ask
for
PSIs.
We
either.
We
may
ask
for
a
victim
impact
statement.
We
may
get
substance
abuse
evaluations.
B
We
may
get
domestic
violence
as
inventory
assessments
to
determine
what
type
of
counseling
would
be
most
effective.
While
somebody
is
on
probation
once
that
trade
off,
though,
is
to
not
not
ordering
those
PSIs
which
takes
the
time
of
probation
and
parole
agents
to
do
those
PSIs
and
then
come
back
with
us.
That's
why
we
allow
for
that
initial
supervised,
probation
and
then
allow
for
probation
parole
to
move
them
to
unsupervised.
Probation
supervision
leads
to
compliance.
B
You
can
imagine,
on
supervised,
probation,
there's
a
lot
more
non-compliance
with
orders
to
comply
with
counselling
or
or
with
any
other
conditions
that
the
court
may
set
on
on
that
suit
unsupervised,
probation,
it's
supervised
at
least
to
a
lot
more
compliance,
as
would
make
sense
just
to
comment
on
those
of
us
have
been
around
for
more
than
a
couple
decades
in
the
criminal
justice
system.
When
we
first
got
out
of
law
school,
there
was
no
such
thing
as
domestic
battery.
It
was
all
included
under
battery
an
assault
and
battery.
B
It
was
all
included
in
assault
battery
when
the
recognition
came
that
were
needed
to
be
more
focus
upon
these
acts
of
domestic
matters.
One
of
the
basis
and
my
training
back
in
the
90s
was
based
on
a
Department
of
Navy
study
that
showed
that
an
individual
who
committed
domestic
battery
was
less
likely
to
Rhea
fend
them.
It
another
act
of
domestic
battery.
B
If
they're
on
supervised,
probation,
they
tested
other
counseling
programs,
no
counseling
programs,
the
the
key
factor
in
those
studies
was
they
were
on
supervised
probation,
then
that
led
to
lack
of
recidivism
and
if
they
were
on
a
nun.
Superin
unsupervised
probation,
the
recidivism
was
the
same
as
whether
there
was
no
probation
at
all
so
I.
Just
wanna
leave
you
with
that
and
limiting
the
amount
of
probation
on
some
of
these
these
cases,
and
we
also
see
that
and
something
we've
not
really
addressed.
B
B
I
That
I
think
you
can
rest
assured
that
the
judiciary
is
committed
to
faithfully
applying
the
rule
of
law
and
that
we
are
committed
to,
and
you
know
whether
some
of
these
initiatives
get
ended
up
becoming
law.
If
individual
judges
didn't
particularly
agree
with
that,
I
am
confident
that
they
will
do
their
best
to
apply
those
equally
across
the
board.
That's
our
job!
Try
to
follow
the
rule
of
law.
I
Having
said
that,
I
would
like
to
try
to
give
you
some
perspective
from
the
judicial
point
of
view
raised
some
possible
considerations
for
you
on
some
of
these
drafts
and
suggest
some
potential
consequences
that,
depending
on
how
these
might
go
forward
and,
of
course,
I
need
to
give
you
that
disclaimer.
That
I
can't
really
speak
for
all
of
my
colleagues.
I
I
really
am
speaking
I
guess
from
my
own
experience
and
from
having
the
benefit
of
speaking
with
a
lot
of
my
colleagues,
but
I
certainly
can't
speak
for
each
one
of
them
and
to
the
extent
that
there
might
be
enough
time
mr.
chary
business
arimin.
The
perhaps
my
colleagues
might
cover
some
anything
that
I
might
have
forgotten
or
screwed
up
or
just
to
give
you
their
own
perspectives
on
on
some
of
this.
I
The
district
judges
are
giving
a
tremendous
amount
of
discretion
in
most
cases,
to
impose
any
sentence
from
probation
to
the
maximum
allowed
by
law,
and
there
are
a
few
crimes
for
which
there's
a
mandatory
minimum,
but
that's
not
most
crimes
most
crimes.
It's
all
the
way
from
you
know.
Let's
say
it's
a
10-year
aggravated
felony
assault,
so
he
you
could
determine
that
under
the
specific
circumstances
of
that
case,
then
probation
would
be
appropriate
or
you
could
decide.
I
This
is
a
situation
that
deserves
a
maximum,
not
less
than
nine
and
more
than
a
10-year
sentence,
and
because
of
that
huge
discretion,
the
judges
are
mandated
to
consider
lots
of
different
things
were
to
consider
the
crime
and
its
circumstances,
the
character
of
the
defendant,
the
aggravating
and
mitigating
circumstances,
the
effect
on
the
victim
community
safety,
the
impact
on
the
community,
and
you
know
insured.
It's
definitely
not
a
cookie
cutter
process
and
so
the
these
two
bills.
I
You
know
how
those
statistics
have
translated
into
the
suggested
minimums
of
probation
and
parole.
I
would
say
that,
because
of
the
number
of
factors
that
you
need
to
take
into
consideration
in
fashioning,
what
you
think
is
a
just
sentence
in
any
particular
case,
the
fairly
strict
limitation
on
the
length
of
probation
and
parole
would
would
be
of
concern
to
the
the
judiciary
and
and
I
think
it's
important
and
I.
I
Maybe
it
was
mr.
Reed
yesterday,
but
someone
mentioned
that
probation
and
parole
is
a
penalty.
It
is,
you
know,
a
significant
restriction
on
a
person's
liberty,
and
so,
when
you're
fashioning
a
sentence
in
deciding
on
one
hand
the
length
of
a
period
of
probation
or,
on
the
other
hand,
the
difference
between
a
minimum
and
maximum
sentence
which
is
going
to
affect
how
long
a
person
is
on
parole.
I
Sometimes,
for
example,
you
might
think
well
I
think
we
could
take
a
chance
on
probation
on
this
individual,
but
if
I
can
only
put
this
individual
on
probation
for
three
and
a
half
years,
that's
not.
Is
that
going
to
be
a
big
enough
incentive
for
the
individual
to
conform
while
he's
on
probation?
Is
it
going
to
be
a
big
enough
incentive
for
him
to
be
deterred
in
the
future?
I
Is
it
does
it
provide
that
kind
of
general
deterrence
which,
of
course,
is
one
of
the
goals
of
sentencing
to
others,
or
is
it
going
to
be
perceived
that
that
that's
not
really
much
punishment
or
it's
not
enough
punishment?
It's
not
a
long
enough
period
of
probation
and
when
we
talk
about
punishment
as
a
goal
of
sentencing,
it's
also
talked
about
as
retribution
which
is
really
could
be
described
as
the
community's.
I
We
talked
before
about
the
fact-
and
it's
been
raised
here
yesterday-
that
there
is
already
a
process
by
which
probation
can
come
back
to
the
court
and
seek
an
early
discharge
for
offenders
on
probation
and
I.
I.
Think
I
testified
last
time
that,
in
my
experience
and
and
and
my
knowledge
of
many
other
judges
that
they
frequently
grant
discharges
of
probation,
often
at
the
halfway
mark,
it
is
curious
to
me
about
the
the
statistic
that
60%
of
felony
probation
terms
are
greater
than
three
years.
I
I
Then
you
would
like
to
give
them.
Maybe
they
need
some
incarceration,
but
you'd
like
to
make
sure
that
you
made
the
right
decision
and
therefore
you
you
might,
if
you
don't
incarcerate
them,
you're
gonna
put
them
on
a
longer
period
of
probation
to
make
sure
that
that
happens,
give
them
the
incentive
to
continue
to
conform
and
not.
I
Reoffended
Ramin
minimum
maximum
for
probation
so
that
any
period
of
incarceration
they
serve.
We
make
sure
number
one
that
they're
reforming
while
they're
in
an
institution
and
then
they
can
maybe
hit
their
minimum
number
and
if
they
aren't
they're,
probably
not
a
good
risk
to
be
out
so
they're
going
to
be
doing
a
lot
more
than
their
minimum
number.
I
If
they
get
out
and
they
then
you
know,
we
need
to
give
them
an
opportunity
to
show
us
that
they
will
conform
and
continue
their
reform
while
they're
on
parole
and
I
think
judges
think
about
how
will
the
public
perceive
this?
And
how
can
we
protect
the
public
and
it
would
be
it
might
go
through
the
mind
of
a
judge
if
you're
thinking
of
well
okay,
I'm
going
to
give
there
has
to
be
some
incarceration.
I
Probation
just
unduly
diminishes
the
severity
of
the
crime.
So
it's
going
to
be
one
year,
but
I'm
gonna
put
a
tenure
a
one
to
ten
on
him,
because
we
we
need
to
let
the
public
know
that
there
was
some
incarceration,
but
we'll
we're
gonna
be
making
sure
that
this
individual
will
be
reforming
and
he'll
have
supervision
and
you'll
have
hopefully
resources
to
help
not
reoffended.
I
Is
that
really
enough
time?
Is
that
going
to
serve
the
concern
of
Community
Safety
and
the
perception
that
this
was
an
appropriate
sentence?
Will
that
potentially
translate
into
a
higher?
You
know
a
judge's
calculus
that
maybe
we
need
to
do
a
higher
bottom
number
and
the
person
ends
up
having
to
go
to
prison
for
a
longer
period
of
time,
which
would
be
an
unintended
consequence,
I
suppose
of
having
a
limitation
on
parole.
I
F
F
However,
it's
my
understanding
that
this
draft
legislation
only
applies
to
one
first-time
offenders
and
two:
it's
we're
not
talking
about
murderers,
sexual
assault.
First
second-degree
aggravated
assault
battery
arson.
We're
not
talking
about
those
Violent
Crimes
judge.
We're
talking
about
nonviolent
offenders.
Is
that
your
understanding
of
the
legislation?
Well,
yes,.
J
I
Tell
me
you
know,
judge
I,
do
really
great
when
I'm
on
probation,
in
fact,
I
never
screw
up
and
the
minute
I
get
off
probation
I
screw
up,
and
that
doesn't
mean
that
a
judge
has
put
addicted
offenders
on
maximum
terms
of
probation
or
have
a
huge
difference
between
men
and
max.
But
there
are
situations
where
people
really
do
better
on
a
longer
probation.
I
I
There
are
good
and
demonstrable
reasons
why
someone
should
have
a
longer
period
of
probation
or
a
greater
period
of
parole
and
be
able
to
demonstrate
that
on
the
record,
there
are
examples
of
that
in
the
law
already
and
oh
I
guess
the
ones
I
can
could
think
of
quickly
are
actually
in
the
juvenile
code
where
the
juvenile
code
sanctioned
they
give
sanction
levels,
seriousness
levels
to
offenses,
one
through
five
and
they
say
okay
judge.
If
your
juvenile
delinquent
is
a
tension
level.
I
Three
here
are
the
things
you
can
do
and
it
doesn't
include,
for
instance,
the
Wyoming
boys
school
or
the.
Why
I
mean
girls
school,
but
then
it
goes
on
to
say,
however,
if
in
the
judges
discretion
you
feel
that
that
is
an
important
goal
in
your
case,
then
you
can
do
it.
Similarly,
in
the
juvenile
code,
it
says
that
the
multidisciplinary
team
makes
recommendations
to
the
to
the
sentencing,
judge
the
juvenile
judge
and
the
judges
to
accept
those
recommendations,
but
then
it
goes
on
to
say
provided.
I
However,
if
the
judge
wants
thinks
that
something
different
is
necessary,
he
shall
put
on
the
record
why
he
is
doing
something
different
than
the
recommendations
from
the
multidisciplinary
team
and
it
kind
of
goes
back
to
the
idea
that
at
the
time
of
sentencing,
the
judge
is
the
one
that
should
have
the
most
information.
They
have
the
benefit
of
the
pre-sentence
investigation
report.
I
F
Chairman
before
we
move
on,
I
do
have
a
question
on
231
judge,
based
on
your
your
comments
about
the
safety
valve
and
I.
Appreciate
I,
appreciate
those
comments,
I'm
wondering
so
I'm.
Looking
at
bill,
giraffe
231,
page
3,
the
amendment
under
713
302
begins
on
line
6.
For
example,
the
the
limitation
on
probation
is
prefaced
with
the
Clause
unless
up
low
eyes
authorized
by
law.
F
Now
my
understanding
of
that
at
least
would
be
in
the
juvenile
code
example
that
you
gave
judge
then
maybe
that
that
would
provide
sufficient
flexibility,
because
your
if
it's
already
authorized
by
law,
I
think
you're
gonna
be
able
to
any
judge
is
going
to
be
able
to
expand
beyond
that
and
so
I
guess.
My
question
is:
is
that
enough
of
a
safety
valve
or
are
you
looking
for
something
more
and
if
you
are
I
guess,
I
need
a
little
more
guidance
on
what
that
would
be
well.
I
I,
don't
representative
I'm,
not
sure
that
that
would
be
necessarily
referring
to
this
is
talking.
This
is
in
the
Criminal
Code
and
it
wouldn't
be
really
relevant
to
the
juvenile
offense
juvenile
offenses,
so
I,
wouldn't
I
wasn't
suggesting
that
this
would
limit
the
the
the
discretion
of
the
judge
in
the
juvenile
situation.
I
But
it
does
say
any
term
of
probation
under
this
section
for
a
felony
shall
in
no
case
exceed
forty-two
months,
and
so,
unless
there
were
a
specific
exception
in
an
individual
criminal
offense
statute
to
say
you
could
put
him
on
probation
for
longer.
Then
I
think
this
would
be
the
limitation
for
the
length
of
probation,
except
for
those
offenses
that
you
pointed
out
were
exempt
from
this.
I
I
Think
it's
fine
to
have.
You
know
those
look
like
reasonable
things
for
the
court
to
consider
it.
It
occurs
to
me
that
when
it
says,
may
consider
you
wonder
if
that
means.
That's
the
only
thing
you
consider
or
is
a
you
may
consider
without
limitation,
or
you
may
consider
factors,
including
it
and
and
to
the
degree
that
it
emits
other
factors
that
you
can
consider.
I
There
are
very
few
inpatient
treatment,
centers
and
you
you
heard
from
the
public
defender
yesterday
that
you
know
there
can
be
six
to
nine-month
waits
to
get
into
treatment.
One
of
the
sanctions,
that's
you
know
linked
to
rehabilitation.
Is
you
know
a
90-day
jail
sentences
where
you
can
get
substance
abuse
treatment?
I
There
aren't
a
lot
of
jails
in
Wyoming
that
currently
provide
substance,
abuse
treatment
in-house
at
least
not
that
I
know
of
I
know
there
are
some
so
I'm,
not
sure
that
the
resources
that
we
want
to
front-load
on
probation
to
try
to
minimize
reoffending
in
an
eventual
prison
really
exist.
So
that's
a
resource
issue
and
I
think
you
know.
I
talked
with
mark
on
Monday
at
length
and
his
people,
and
we
had
a
I
thought.
I
Some
more
specific
points,
I,
I,
guess
I-
would
draw
your
attention
to
the
staff
comment
on
page
pages
19
and
20,
where
they
basically
say
it's
unclear.
If
the
court
can
only
revoke
probation
for
new
felonies
or
for
an
individual
who
absconds
and
I
would
agree
with
that.
Having
just
kind
of
read
the
overall
draft
that
it's,
it
is
unclear
whether
the
traditional
probation
revocations
that
have
happened
in
the
past
would
now
only
be
available
for
someone
who
committed
a
new,
felony,
offense
or
absconded,
and
similarly
it
and
as
mr.
I
Conversely,
it's
unclear
to
me
if,
if
what
you
know
what
about,
if
probation
and
parole
they
have
these
shout,
you
know
you
shall
do
this
for
sanctions
and
incentives
for
these
compliance
violations.
What
if
some
someone
commits
a
new
misdemeanor
offense,
a
violent,
misdemeanor,
offense
domestic
battery?
I
Can
they
circumvent
this
and
and
choose
to
immediately
seek
to
revoke
probation
with
with
the
district
court
or
or
not,
and
once
it
gets
to
district
court,
it
unclear
to
me
what
the
process
is.
Do
we
do?
We
just
fall
back
on
the
old
process,
or
does
this
language
that
I
think
is
somewhat
unclear
at
7:13,
three
or
four,
a
suggest
that
we're
supposed
to
be
doing
a
different
process
based
on
the
process
that
was
set
up
for
the
compliance
sanctions.
I
I
And
it
basically
says
that
a
court
couldn't
put
someone
on
intensive
supervised
probation
unless
they
were
considered
to
be
a
high
risk
for
RIA
fence
based
on
a
validated
risk
assessment
instrument,
which
we
know
right
now
is
compass
and
I
have
some
concerns
about
that
and
I
think
we
talked
about
that
last
time
as
well.
But
first
of
all,
compass
is
not
a
good
instrument
for
sex
offender
assessing
sex
offender
risk.
It's
not
a
good
instrument
for
assessing
DUI
offender
risk.
I.
I
I
You
know
a
reasonably
helpful
instrument
and
not
have
any
instrument
at
all,
but
these
these
instruments
are
not
precisely
predictive
and
they
can
over
assess
risk
and
they
can
under
assess
risk,
and
it
concerns
me
that
if,
if
a
court
would
think
that
it
would
really
be
helpful
to
have
an
offender
knowing
as
much
as
you
possibly
can
about
the
situation
to
have
them
on
intensive
supervised
probation
but
gosh
darnit,
the
I
can't
do
it.
Because
the
compass
assessment
on
the
pre-sentence
investigation
report
says
there
are
only
a
medium
risk.
I
I
believe
that
it
would
be
commonplace
for
district
judges
to
tell
you
that
they
have
encountered
many
times
the
situation
where
they're
there
they
get
to
the
end
of
the
pre-sentence
investigation
report
and
have
reviewed
the
criminal
history
and
all
of
the
personal
history
and
the
crime
and
what
happened.
And
then
it's
like
whoa.
This
person's
assessed
is
a
low-risk
or
as
a
medium
risk
and
I
I
mean
just
so
that
it
there's
some
basis
in
this
I.
Just
I
just
had
a
sentencing
and
this
individual
had
had
a
trial
in
my
court.
I
He
was
not
only
convicted
of
aggravated
assault
and
battery
on
his
girlfriend
who
he
nearly
beat
to
death,
but
he
had
been
charged
with
enhanced
penalties
for
having
committed
three
similar
felony
offenses
in
California,
and
he
was
sentenced
because
of
that
to
life
in
prison,
mandatorily
it
was
reversed
by
the
Supreme
Court
for
trial
Ayers.
It
came
back
and
the
individual
pled
guilty
to
the
aggravated
assault
and
battery
in
the
state
of
Wyoming.
I
The
prosecutor
dropped
the
enhanced
penalties
so
instead
of
facing
life
in
prison,
he
faced
a
maximum
penalty
of
up
to
ten
years,
and
so
we
did
a
new
pre-sentence
investigation
report
and
this
individual
had.
He
was
39.
He
started
his
criminal
history
at
19.
He
had
at
least
seven
misdemeanor
convictions,
including
assault
on
a
police
officer,
assault
on
a
transportation
officer.
I
I
I
K
K
It
allows
an
offender
to
be
placed
on
probation
for
a
period
of
up
to
five
years
and
if
they're
successfully
discharged
and
probation,
they
will
not
have
a
conviction
against
them,
and
so
there
is
on-
and
this
is
existing
law
on
page
two-
that
I
believe
lines
four
through
seven
or
eight
those
offenses.
That
would
not
allow
an
offender
for
one
of
the
I'm,
sorry
it
it
would
be
the
entire
subparagraph
a
on
page
2
line
two
through
line
12.
K
It
would
disqualify
an
offender
for
certain
offenses
to
receive
this
special
treatment
where
they
would
not
have
a
conviction
against
them
if
they
were
successful
on
probation.
The
existing
lawn
on
that
statute
is
a
five
year
maximum
probation
term,
so
changing
it
to
forty
two
months.
I,
don't
know
that
those
of
us
who
have
reviewed
and
commented
with
judge
day
have
much
of
a
problem
about
a
six
month
difference
the
the
the
statute.
K
That
I
think
is
the
the
aim
of
the
comments
by
judge
day,
and
he
expressed
some
concerns
that
we
relate
to
him
is
on
page
three
at
line
four
at
713
302.
This
is
the
general
probation
statute.
What
you
don't
have
in
this
bill
draft
is
subsection
a
which
basically
says,
except
for
I'm
paraphrasing,
but
basically
for
like
felony
murder
or
capital
crimes,
or
things
like
that.
Then
the
court
can
place
somebody
on
probation
and
I'm
paraphrasing
up
to
the
maximum
terms
provided
by
statute.
K
A
H
H
K
If
all
those
things
that
Judge
day
mentioned
about,
for
example,
a
sex
offense,
where
there's
a
need
for
more
supervision
or
based
on
an
individualÃs
circumstance,
perhaps
an
individual
needs
more
supervision
to
accomplish
successful
treatment
and
that
sort
of
thing
beyond
42
months.
Those
are
that
those
are
the
areas
mostly
of
our
concern
there.
These
other
statutes
I,
guess
just
to
expand
upon
that.
A
little
bit
on
page
four
stat
line
one
statute:
thirty,
five,
seven,
ten,
thirty-seven,
that's
a
drug
for
a
controlled
substance,
deferred
prosecution
statute.
K
If
you
will
there's
no
conviction
if
the
probationer
is
successful
in
being
discharged
is
not
a
conviction
for
those
qualifying
control,
substance
of
offenses
that
are
allowed
under
that
statute.
We
don't
have
a
problem
with
that.
It's
it's
mostly
aimed
I'm,
not
say
problem
or
concerns
are
mostly
aimed
at
7:13
302,
on
line
4
on
page
3,.
L
You
I
appreciate
your
comments
and
and
directing
the
committee's
attention
to
the
most
problematic
version
of
what
I
identify
in
this
bill
and
share
your
concerns
about
the
limitation
of
putting
a
42
month,
probation
term
for
all
crimes.
Essentially,
however,
the
reason
why
that's
being
proposed-
and
the
reason
why
we're
all
here
today
is
because
of
a
failure
of
the
criminal
justice
system
to
properly
use
probation,
resulting
in
increased
costs,
and
so
we
are
evaluating
that
very,
very
carefully.
L
L
So
what
I'm,
asking
for
and
I
hope
to
hear
from
is
what
crimes
specifically
and
I'm
not
talking
about
how
long
somebody
should
be
on
treatment,
because
my
experience
in
those
courtrooms
is
that
you
cannot
get
a
treatment
provider
where,
whether
it's
substance,
abuse
or
mental
health,
it's
ever
going
to
say
somebody
is
fully
recovered
and
it's
time
for
treatment
to
stop.
So
really
that's
a
lifetime
situation,
so
probation
is
going
to
be
appropriate
for
life,
particularly
for
sex
offenders
right,
but
at
some
point
the
criminal
justice
system's
relationship
with
these
individuals
has
to
stop.
L
So
what
I
am
looking
for
is
a
balance
here
between
those
crimes
that
truly
need
those
longer
probation
terms
and
I'm,
not
talking
about
continuation
of
treatment
for
life,
but
really
those
crimes
that
require
an
appropriate
balance
of
punishment.
We're
not
42
months,
isn't
appropriate,
and
so
some
of
those
violent
crimes
and
aggravated
assault
would
be
a
would
not
be
appropriate
for
it
took
42
months
sentence,
but
prison
may
also
not
be
appropriate
either,
and
so
what
I
would
like
to
do
is
a
thoughtful
consideration
from
both
the
prosecutors
in
the
room.
L
Defense
counsel
and
the
judiciary
about
what
those
crimes
are
and
again
I
want
to
I
want
to
stress
that,
from
my
perspective,
this
is
not
treatment
based.
This
is
about
appropriate
punishment
for
the
balance
of
the
crime
to
the
punishment
and
what
that
needs
to
look
like.
So
with
that,
that's
a
question
to
you:
they
don't
expect
you
to
answer
right
now,
but
certainly
hope.
We
hear
some
feedback
from
those
in
the
room
that
practice
in
this
area
of
law,
so
we
can
provide
some
well-balanced
responses
to
this
issue.
L
D
A
K
Senator
near
the
cot,
I
I
don't
have
a
full
response.
I
guess
to
your
question.
To
me.
I
do
have
a
partial
response.
The
partial
response
is,
if
you
look
at
page
3a
lying
for
Wyoming
statute,
713
302,
the
existing
law
basically
says
that
we
can
impose
under
those
crimes
for
which
we
are
allowed
to
consider
probation
a
term
of
probation
up
to
the
maximum
term
provided
by
statute
for
imprisonment.
K
What
I
I
this
is
anecdotal,
but
what
I
do
I
try
and
give
the
Department
of
Corrections,
probation
and
parole
offices
or
agents
an
ability
to
work
within
a
probation
sentence
that
I
would
impose
upon
a
defendant.
I
do
this,
particularly
in
Fremont
County,
because
there
seems
to
be
an
understanding
that
it
works.
Well.
I
can't
say
that
I've
had
a
request
in
other
places
that
I
sentence
individuals,
but
Fremont
County
very
frequently.
K
K
Maybe
the
agent
can
do
an
assessment,
a
follow-up
assessment
to
see
if
they
post
some
sort
of
a
further
need
to
afford
supervision,
but
they're
always
free
to
come
to
me
and
ask
for
an
early
discharge
the
same
with
the
state.
The
prosecutor
can
file
a
petition
to
modify
probation
under
rule
39
B
of
the
weiming
rules,
a
criminal
procedure
to
modify
terms
of
probation
to
limit
the
length
of
the
probation.
K
If
it's
not
working
out,
I've
had
many
instances
where
I
may
include
a
condition
of
probation
that
is
not
suitable
for
that
particular
individual
and
I've.
Had
agents
and
prosecutors
come
to
me
and
say:
well,
you
remove
this
as
a
term
of
probation
and
it
would
tend
to
shorten
the
term
of
probation
as
well.
So
something
is
I.
K
Guess
is
uncomplicated,
as
giving
the
Department
of
Corrections
more
latitude
to
make
assessments
about
what,
where
they
want
to
devote
their
resources
and
devote
the
resources
to
individuals
who
may
need
more
or
less
supervision,
seems
right
to
me
and
so
I
try
and
accommodate
that
by
just
saying,
unless
soon
or
discharged,
putting
this
42
months,
for
example,
limitation,
where
you
have
a
statute
that
it's
a
maximum
ten
year
imprisonment,
but
I
can
only
put
them
on
probation
for
forty
two
months.
It
makes
me
pause
at
the
time
of
sentencing.
K
Is
this
going
to
work,
and
so
I
just
wanted
to
I
guess
highlight
that
that
is
the
essence
of
what
would
go
through.
At
least
this
judge
has
had
at
a
sentencing
with
this
legislation
in
place
on
most
of
the
sentence
things
that
I
would
would
do
where
I'm
considering
probation
and
I'd
really
have
to
factor
in
this,
this
limitation.
As
to
how
effective
it
may
be
as
to
that
individual
that
I'm
required
to
assess
on
that
individuals,
characteristics.
I
know
it
was
a
long
answer
for
a
short
off
the
top
of
my
head
response.
M
M
That
the
prosecutors
consent
to
that
require
five
years
of
probation
instead
of
just
three
so
that
18-month
differential
may
have
some
unintended
consequences
because
it,
instead
of
granting
a
713
301
to
people,
it
may
end
up,
resulting
in
a
felony
conviction
and
I
will
also
point
out
that
one
of
the
items
that
a
7:13
301
seems
to
be
used
for
by
the
defense
bar
and
the
prosecution
is,
there
may
be
allegations
of
second-degree
sexual
assault.
That
may
actually
be
amended
down
the
third-degree
sexual
assault
and
placed
on
five
years
of
supervised
probation
under
713
301.
M
M
Mr.
juban,
nor
the
prosecuting
attorneys
association
of
commented
on
that,
and
I
think
that
that
may
actually
be
a
factor
that
will
affect
justice.
The
other
item
that
I
don't
believe
has
been
mentioned
is
length
of
probation,
sometimes
is
utilized
by
me
and
I
know
by
some
of
my
colleagues
for
a
long
term
probation
for
people
to
pay
back
theft
or
embezzlement.
M
There
are
business
entities
that
will
have
particularly
an
employee.
You
can
even
have
them
a
family
member
who
will
steal
they'll
get
caught,
they
may
say:
oh
they've
already
had
their
their
job
loss
they've
had
their
careers
Roone,
they
don't
need
to
go
to
prison
and
all
I
care
about
is
restitution
and
they
don't
have
the
ability
to
pay
it
back
in
a
short
period
of
time.
Certainly
any
conviction
can
be
a
civil
judgment
and,
as
a
judge,
Christensen
spoke
about,
I
can
enter
that
civil
judgment
and
say:
okay.
M
Now
it's
up
to
the
victim
to
go
ahead
and
collect
that
which
again
is
a
policy
choice
that
I
think
you
folks
have.
But
that
is
another
factor
that
goes
along
with
this
42
month
limitation.
That
think
about
your
business
members
in
your
communities
and
how
that
may
or
may
not
affect
them
in
in
these
kinds
of
situations.
The
last
item,
mr.
chair,
that
I'll
comment
on
is
the
intensive
supervised
probation.
M
One
of
the
other
comments
that
that
and
and
with
all
due
respect,
I
I
realize
this
is
expanding
beyond
the
specifics
of
this
legislation
and
proposed
legislation
in
the
comments
here
today,
but
I
generally
have
in
my
jurisdiction
four
different
communities
that
I
deal
with
one
is
star
Valley
one
is
Kemmer
Evanston
and
Bridger.
Valley
I
have
intensive,
supervised
probation
available
in
my
jurisdiction
and
only
one
of
those
four
communities.
I
cannot
put
an
individual
on
intensive,
supervised
probation
in
star
Valley
camera
or
Bridger
Valley.
M
If
I
place
them
on
intensive
supervised
probation,
they
have
to
move
to
either
Evanston
Jackson
or
another
location
that
has
intensive,
supervised
probation
available.
Sometimes
that's
particularly
important
when
you're
starting
to
talk
about
fourth
or
subsequent
offense
duis,
and
it
can
also
come
about
if
someone
is
actually
entitled
to
probation
in
a
plea
agreement
or
some
sort
of
a
specific
sentence
on
a
DUI
with
serious
bodily
injury
and
some
of
those
items
and
I
questioned.
M
The
value
of
intensive
supervised
probation
to
me
in
those
communities
is
actually
very
great
and
if
I
don't
have
that
available
a
lot
of
times,
I
only
have
the
option
of
sending
them
to
prison
and
putting
them
on
parole
and
having
the
parole
system
be
responsible
for
it
because
of
the
high
risk
to
the
community.
Thank
You
mr.
chairman,
and
if
any
of
you
have
any
questions,
I'll
do
my
best
to
respond.
Thank.
L
L
You
briefly
well,
thank
you
for
your
comments.
Your
initial
comment,
where
you
were
concerned
at
the
price
willingness
to
consent
to
301
dispositions
because
of
the
reduced
probationary
term,
following
up
from
the
testimony
that
we
heard
yesterday.
The
basis
for
that
reduced
probationary
term
is
based
on
empirical
data
that
we've
received
from
the
Council
of
state
governments.
L
I
mean
I,
hear
what
you're
saying
and
share
those
concerns
as
well,
that
they
just
don't
like
it,
because
they
prefer
the
arbitrary
number
of
five
years
or
eight
five
to
eight
years,
because
it
feels
comfortable
the
four
to
six
term
that
those
numbers
we
frequently
grab
for
in
the
system
which
are
just
based
on
how
we
feel,
rather
than
what
the
data
suggests
or
reveals
for
actual
performance
outcomes.
And
so
how
do
we?
L
M
Thank
mr.
chairman,
senator
Nelly
cot
I
am
I,
can't
speak
for
the
prosecutors,
the
defense
attorneys
or
for
my
colleagues,
but
I'll
go
ahead
and
speak
from
my
personal
perspective.
This
information
does
not
surprise
me.
The
only
question
I
have,
and
maybe
you
can
ask
this,
and-
and
maybe
you
know
this
already
and
I
just
haven't
gleaned
this
from
the
details
of
the
statistics,
and
that
is
when
they
talk
about
the
length
of
time
that
somebody
ends
up
having
their
probation
revoked
and
going
to
prison.
M
Is
that
the
second
or
the
third
time
that
their
probation
has
been
revoked
and
reinstated?
Because,
frankly,
from
my
perspective,
I
will
tell
you
this
does
not
change
anything
in
my
mind
from
what
I
see
from
the
bench
and
that
most
of
the
probationers
that
violate
they
get
their
probation
revoked,
do
fit
entirely
within
that
three
year
period
of
time,
but
I
do
have
some
that
go
beyond
that
and
they
particularly
come
about
with
sex
offenders
and
sex
offenders.
M
If
I've
put
somebody
on
probation
with
a
sex
offense
or
maybe
failing
to
register
as
a
sex
offender,
it
is
interesting
that
I
do
have
those
violations
where
people
will
appear
in
locations
that
they're
not
supposed
to
be
such
as
rec
centers
areas
where
young
people
are
available
for
them
to
have
contact
and
probation
for
a
lengthy
period
of
time
can
keep
them
out
of
that.
And,
frankly,
those
are
people
that
I
think
fit
in
at
margin
where
they
they're
successful
in
42
months
and
they're
done
with
probation.
M
It
would
be
a
crime
for
them
to
go
to
a
recreation
center
and
be
there
and
till
they're
convicted
or
found
and
proven
beyond
a
reasonable
doubt
to
have
done
something:
that's
a
violation
and,
and
that
I
so
I
guess
the
thing
I
would
say
is
frankly
mr.
chairman
and
Senator
Nethercutt.
This
really
doesn't
change
anything
to
me.
The
only
way
that
it
would
change
it
is
if
I
have
somebody
that
I'm
thinking.
M
G
G
By
far
have
the
toughest
job
in
the
state
of
Wyoming
dealing
with
these
issues
and
my
eight
years
on
this
committee,
we
have
given
tremendous
due
deference
a
circuit
court.
Judges
always
tried
to
provide
the
maximum
amount
of
discretion.
Give
you
the
tools
that
you
needed
to
do
the
job,
but
my
concern
is
in
judging
I.
Think
you
just
Illustrated
is
what
we've
been
presented
with
as
a
legislature
is
empirical
more
than
excellent
and
I
don't
want
to
characterize.
But
what
I
think
I
heard
today,
based
on
the
testimony?
G
Not
just
yours
but
everybody's
testimony-
is
this
nothing's
changed
from
the
perspective
of
the
judiciary
with
the
empirical
evidence
that
we
have
to
deal
with
and
we
have
a
shared
responsibility,
don't
I
think
senator
Nethercutt
spot-on.
What
we
need
is
precise
recommendation,
because
here's
the
dilemma
that
we're
facing,
if
we
do
nothing,
we're
gonna,
have
to
write
a
check
for
51
million
dollars.
That's
just
for
the
prison
system,
because
the
system
we
have
now
is
a
revolving
door.
G
When
we
look
at
your
caseloads
at
the
circuit
and
discont
level,
a
lot
of
this
is
the
recidivism
coming
back
in.
So
then,
we're
gonna
have
to
put
more
judges
more
courtroom
security
and
it
is
a
spiraling
out
of
control
fiscal
nightmare
tonight
and
I
just
went
through
election
cycle,
and
you
know
what
I
heard
round
clear:
I
don't
want
my
property
taxes,
I
don't
want
my
income
taxes
and
I.
Don't
want
my
sales
taxes,
so
we
have
a
dilemma
here.
G
G
What
we
need
from
from
the
judiciary
is
empirical
data
to
start
making
better
decisions,
and
until
we
have
that,
but-
and
so
the
suggestion
I'm
going
to
make
this-
is
that
we
continue
put
together
a
list
of
things
engage
with
CSU
any
of
these
nonprofit
organizations.
I'm
gonna
tell
you
I'm
sitting
here
today
and
I'm
looking
through
this
bill
and
what
I've
heard
the
testimony
is
really
disturbing,
because
I
understand
the
dilemma
that
you
guys
are
faced
with,
and
thank
God
that
you're
willing
to
step
up
and
do
the
job
I'm
grateful.
G
But
there
has
to
be
a
shared
concern.
What
the
dilemma
that
we
and
to
go
back
to
our
to
our
constituents
and
say,
look
we're
going
to
do
the
same
little
thing
right
to
check
folks
and
so
we're
at
loggerheads,
and
what
we
need
is
a
partnership
and
I
think
it
gets
right
back
to
what
Senator
another
cop
I
need
specifics.
Where
does
the
42
work
and
where
it
doesn't
want?
G
What
are
the
specific
crimes
so
I
appreciate
that
you
guys
I
mean
we
knew
when
we
pass
this
out
in
Laramie
I
think
my
comment
was:
is
the
best
way
to
spur
a
discussion
is
to
have
a
piece
of
draft
legislation?
It's
done,
but
we
can't
stop
here
and
whether
we
pass
this
out
or
not.
Today,
this
discussion
needs
to
go
on
and
we
need
to
have
a
shared
mutual
appreciation
for
the
dilemmas
that
all
of
government
all
three
branches
of
government
of
dealing
with,
because
you've
got
the
third
branch
sitting
here.
G
With
this
with
do
see
and
they're
the
guys
that
have
to
deliver
we're
going
to
provide
the
funding.
You
guys
provide
the
direction
the
do
see
has
to
deliver
the
goods
and,
quite
frankly,
I'm
glad
this
discussions
happened,
but
I
think
we're
a
long
way
from
this
and
so
I'm
a
little
concerned
based
on
some
of
the
testimony
you
know
from
the
judiciary,
so
I
just
kind
of
so
want
to
reiterate
what
I
think
I
heard,
because
sometimes
what
you
think
you
heard
what
you
actually
heard,
you're
too
still
I,
don't
want
to
miss
character.
G
One
of
the
things
that
left
me
with
possible
concern
was
this:
if
you
implement
this
law,
we're
just
going
to
ask
the
to
longer
sentences
and
and
that's
what
I
thought
I
heard
and
I
don't
know
if
that
is
implicated
and-
and
the
other
part
is
is,
is
if
you,
if
yet
we're
more
comfortable
with
the
status
quo
than
we
are
trying.
Anything
and
I
understand
that
it's
easy
to
do
the
same
thing.
G
We've
always
done,
but
you
know
remember
what
Albert
Einstein
said:
they're
doing
the
same
thing
over
and
over
again
and
expecting
different
results
as
the
very
definition
of
insanity.
And
what
we
are
doing
is
it's
not
justice,
it's
not
rehabilitation
and
it's
not
responsible,
and
so
we
we
have
to
come
up
with
a
responsible
alternative
and
that's
what
we're
trying
to
do
so
I'm,
just
telling
you
it
is
a
dilemma
and
it
just
you
know.
I
may
not
be
on
this
committee
in
the
future.
G
M
M
Please
let
me
correct
my
my
statement
because
that
certainly
is
not
my
intent.
I
have
to
tell
you
that
I
won't
rule
out
that
that
will
come
into
argument
when
I
have
to
do
sentencing.
I
can
expect
fully
that
I'll
hear
that
and
I
think
that
you
could
visit
with
the
prosecutors
and
I
give
all
due
respect
to
my
colleague
and
good
friend,
Tom
juban.
When
he
said.
Might
this
happen?
I,
don't
know
I
I
I'm
just
here
to
talk
about
one
of
the
potential
things
if
I
may,
mr.
M
chairman
and
and
Senator
Hicks
I,
actually
pause
it
to
you
that
that
may
be.
The
group
that
you
have
with
the
Department
of
Corrections
has
the
statistics
and
they
can
tell
you
what
type
of
offenses
do
end
up
having
the
probation
revoked
after
the
42
months
and,
more
importantly,
even
after
the
36
months,
and
they
probably
have
that
empirical
evidence
that
the
two
senators
mr.
chairman
have
inquired
about.
M
chairman
that
you
have
people
that
that
does
have
access
to
all
of
that
information
and
how
they
choose
to
present
that
information
and
and
what
questions
you
ask
certainly
can
provide
that
and
I
will
assure
you
that
all
of
my
colleagues
and
I
will
work
very
closely
with
the
legislature,
no
matter
what
it
is
that
you
choose
to
do
on
these
important
matters
and
trust
me,
we
understand
very
much
the
dollars
that
are
involved
every
time.
We
make
a
decision
that
we're
sending
somebody
into
the
system.
M
H
You
judge
well
now
wanted.
Let
me
just
throw
this
out
I'll,
make
sure
I'm
kind
of
hearing
of
some
of
the
bigger
picture
on
this
and,
and
the
issue
is
one
of
the
things
I'm
hearing
is
when
we
think
about
this
from
a
public
safety
standpoint.
I
think
that's
also
a
top
priority
for
the
legislature
from
its
public
safety
standpoint.
H
The
judiciary
has
concerns
with
some
of
these
limitations.
It
could
result
in
either
earlier
releases
from
rotation
or
parole
that
could
increase
a
threat
to
public
safety,
and
the
alternative,
based
on
the
concerns
you've
expressed,
is
keeping
public
safety
in
mind
is
increased
possible,
increased
incarceration
terms.
A
F
Members
of
the
committee,
my
name
is
Franz
Fuchs
I'm,
a
policy
analyst
with
Department
of
Health.
We
collaborated
with
CSG
on
their
presentation
and
I
believe
I'm
on
the
agenda
to
be
able
to
answer
any
technical
questions
on
that.
One
component
of
that
collaboration
so
I'd
be
happy
to
just
hang
back
in
the
audience
and
wait
for
the
presentation.
If
the
committee
has
any
questions
on
those
particular
pieces
answer
them
at
that
point,.
G
L
Maybe
back
to
the
district
court
judge
is
so
curious
to
hear.
If
there's
been
any
conversation
from
the
court
of
reevaluating,
some
of
those
financial
priorities
for
access
to
data
and
information,
so
more
empirical
determinations
can
be
made
regarding
appropriate
decisions
by
our
district
court.
Judges.
G
A
D
Think
it's
a
realistic
one
is
that
we
we
are
gathering
data
consistently
now,
as
we've
moved
to
an
electronic
case
management
system
that
we're
able
to
mine
to
a
certain
extent,
it
was
my
understanding
that
perhaps
that
data
was
mine
to
some
extent
by
CSG,
and
my
hope
at
least
is
that
we
will
be
able
to
provide
greater
statistical
information
on
a
variety
of
topics,
but
I
should
probably
defer
to
our
court
administrator
or
our
IT
people
on
that
topic.
If.
N
N
A
O
O
O
O
Members
of
the
joint
Judiciary
Committee
I
would
like
to
share
a
story
of
reconciliation
with
you.
There's
a
young
promising
boy
that
seemed
to
have
the
world
at
his
hands
soon.
This
young
teenager
thought
that
he
knew
ever.
You
want
everything.
I
don't
know
if
that
sounds
familiar
to
anyone,
but
he
eventually
got
mixed
up
in
drugs
and
alcohol,
and
his
life
soon
began
to
spiral.
He
was
in
trouble
so
much
he
was
kicked
out
of
sports,
his
senior
of
high
school.
This
only
led
to
the
spiraling
downward
only
led
to
spiraling
downward.
O
He
soon
got
to
college
where
he
still
knew
everything
and
still
did
drugs
and
alcohol
to
chase
what
he
thought
was
normal
his
normal
little
did.
He
know
that
his
biological
makeup
had
deficits
in
which
drugs
and
alcohol
only
covered
the
problem
shortly
into
college.
With
failing
grades
and
absences
piling
up,
he
had
a
mental
break.
He
somehow
thought
he
was
invincible
and
became
reckless
only
after
being
stopped
by
campus
security.
Did
he
get
the
help
he
truly
needed.
He
was
taking
the
hospital
and
tested
for
drugs.
O
The
police
were
involved
in
found
drugs
in
his
dorm
room.
They
decided
that
treatment
was
best
in
that
decision
saved
his
life
I
had
a
coke
or
co-occurring
disorder
and
I
was
put
into
treatment
at
Wyoming.
Behavioral
Institute
in
Casper
I
believe
I
was
put
there
because
I
had
private
insurance
from
my
parents.
I
was
put
into
treatment
for
under
title
I,
won't
quote
it
because
I
forget
the
title,
but
but
I
received
treatment
and
the
courts
put
it
up
to
the
psychiatrist.
To
eval
me
and
release
me
when
it
was
time.
O
All
these
wraparound
services
that
I
think
everyone's
wanting
to
get,
but
this
bill
doesn't
necessarily
include
and
I
got
back
into
activities
with
friends,
family
and
church
activities
and
I
would
I
would
elude
that.
There's
many
people
that
my
cohort
and
I
have
talked
to
of
the
of
the
religious
community
that
have
seen
problems
like
these
with
parolees
and
probationers,
and
the
reason
I
think
I
was
so
successful.
Is
that
I
got
treatment
right
away.
O
I
got
a
bed
I
got
into
wbi
and
and
I
think
I
have
a
there's
a
I'm
from
Bridger
I'm
from
Casper,
but
I'm,
currently
living
in
Bridger
Valley,
where
my
wife
is
a
fourth
grade.
Teacher
and
I
was
a
previous
fourth
grade
teacher
but
decided
to
pursue
the
Masters
in
Social
Work
and
there's
a
sense
of
community
in
Bridger
Valley
in
Mountain.
View
people
wrap
their
arms
around
each
other,
someone's
in
trouble.
O
O
Think
Wyoming
has
a
strong
culture
of
faith
and
community,
and
so
Jason
brough
States
forgiving.
Those
who
have
made
who
have
may
have
caused
our
hard
thing
and
reconciling
ourselves
to
the
will
of
God
can
be
very
difficult.
It
can
hurt
most
when
our
hard
thing
is
caused
by
a
family
member,
a
close
friend
or
even
ourselves,
as
we
face
hard
things
in
the
Lord's
way.
O
May
we
lift
up
our
heads
and
rejoice
at
this
sacred
opportunity
to
testify
to
the
world
what
Wyoming
really
holds
true
I
added
the
last
part,
so
I
just
wanted
to
share
my
testimony
of
how
treatment
and
how
lesser
penalties,
not
punitive
treatment.
Those
types
of
things
can
really
turn
a
life
around
made
me.
A
fourth
grade
teacher
had
awesome
relationships
with
the
kids.
A
G
Thank
you
and
appreciate
your
testimony.
It
takes
a
lot
of
courage.
The
question
I
have
is
this:
you
know
we've
got
an
article
up
here
and
I,
don't
know
who
presented
I
read
it
earlier
this
morning
about
the
experiments
of
North
Dakota
and
the
the
role
of
faith-based
organizations
up
there
in
their
program,
but
we
would
even
with
the
treatment.
G
Would
you
characterize
what
role
and
you
know
I
don't
want
to
percentage
your
stuff,
but
you
know
it's
one
thing
to
get
counseling,
it's
another
thing
to
have
that
that
support
system
and
I
think
that's
what
the
North
Dakota
model,
but
how
do
those
play
off
of
each
other
I
mean
one's
important,
but
is
one
sufficient
to
get
you
over
the
hump
and
in
your
particular
case
it
sounds
like
it
took
more
than
just
the
treatment
that
it
also
took
that
faith
they
support
from
the
community.
But
do
you
think
there
is
enough?
G
O
Yes,
I
would
I
would
think
that
yes,
definitely
both
supplement
and
complement
and
each
other
with
in
regards
to
Casper
there's
a
lot
of
faith-based
organizations
that
try
to
do
help
and
do
those
things
in
the
community.
There's
a
coalition
of
churches
that
my
dad
is
a
part
of
there's.
You
know,
there's
the
Catholic
Church,
the
Lutheran's,
the
Baptist's
LDS
Church
and
in
Bridger
Valley,
it's
highly
LDS
populated
and
so
there's
a
lot
of
support
but
I'm
working
in
Bridger
Valley
right
now,
with
the
public
of
health
Kim
prophet
and
Ken
Kendra
Safford.
O
The
mental
health
behavioral
health
realm
and
the
faith-based
community
haven't
made
a
unity
if
that
makes
hasn't
hasn't
made
quite
a
unity
to
make
a
coalition
to
help
with
substance,
abuse,
behavioral
health
issues
and
I
think
if
we
had
people
in
each
community
trying
to
make
that
a
stronger
fit.
That
would
help.
Thank
you.
Does
that
answer.
Yeah.
P
Name
is
Anna
crier
and
I'm,
just
a
citizen
with
some
concerns,
thanks
chairman
senators
representatives
for
allowing
me
to
speak
this
morning,
I'm
wanting
you
to
hear
this
story
about
my
21
year
old
daughter,
Madison
Ricans.
She
is
currently
serving
a
two
and
a
half
year
sentence
in
our
County
Jail
for
a
second
misdemeanor
marijuana
charge
she
has
had.
She
is
a
needed
mental
health
treatment
instead
of
jail.
She
has
had
some
traumatic
events
in
her
short
life.
P
She
was
sexually
abused
from
the
ages
of
12
to
14
by
her
stepfather,
which
has
led
to
substance,
abuse
cell
part
and
two
suicide
attempts
to
help
her
cope
with
this
trauma
at
age
17.
Barely
she
gets
her
first
charge
for
possession
of
marijuana.
Misdemeanor
judge
now
charged
her
like
an
adult
six
months
with
youth
alternatives.
P
$2,500
cash
bond
only
her
caseworker
dies
that
I
could
not
find
her
file.
She
relapsed
she
was
supposed
to
be
released,
but
Judge
now
orders
her
to
take
a
UA
and
to
come
back,
sends
her
to
the
youth
jail
and
puts
her
back
on
probation
because
she
fails
her.
You
a
no
offer
of
mental
health
or
substance
abuse
counseling
at
age,
19,
a
misdemeanor
marijuana
charge,
judge
now
remembers
her
brings
up
her
Maya
and
her
record
in
court
gives
her
one
year
probation,
no
diversion
program
offered
no
offer
of
mental
health
or
substance
abuse
counseling.
P
It
takes
her
several
months
to
come
clean
from
her
u-ace.
She
tests
dirty
one
time
test
clean
in
casts
clean
she's,
not
continuing
to
use
jugs.
It's
the
faulty
test
strips
in
December,
her
childhood
dog
dies.
She
attempted
suicide
and
relapsed,
tell
the
couple
UAE's
and
stopped
going
at
age
19.
She
gets
a
possession
charge,
DUI
misdemeanor
on
4/20.
She
was
pulled
over
for
failure
to
signal.
She
had
three
warrants
spent
eight
days
in
jail
and
a
$5,000.
Only
cash
bond
judge
now
was
enraged.
P
P
She
pleads
out
and
wants
to
go
to
rehab
her
choice
and
then
Laramie
County
drug
court
judge.
Now,
with
an
underlying
two-and-a-half
year
sentence
in
County,
she
attends
an
elite
rehab
center,
the
foundry
in
Steamboat
Springs
Colorado
for
60
days.
She
does
incredibly
well
in
the
program,
but
our
insurance
won't
cover
another
30
days
in
rehab.
P
The
therapy
started
to
bring
out
the
sexual
abuse
that
she
had
repressed
from
the
ages
of
12
to
14
from
her
stepfather,
resulting
in
her
self,
harming
her
suicide
attempts
at
age,
14
and
again
at
19
rehab
hoped
that
she
would
have
a
great
after
care
program
to
continue
to
work
on
these
issues.
She
came
out
a
treatment
ready
to
conquer
the
world
stable
on
her
psych
meds.
She
entered
Laramie
County
drug
court
with
high
hopes
drug
court
in
August.
She
got
into
drug
court
with
the
misdemeanor
charged.
P
Not
a
felony
judge
now
asked
them
to
do
a
personal
favor
for
her
to
accept
her
into
the
program.
There
was
no
addiction
severity
index
done
at
the
time
when
she
entered
the
drug
court,
so
they
had
no
idea
where
she
should
truly
be
starting.
She
had
to
start
at
0,
even
though
she
had
just
finished
60
days
in
elite
rehab.
P
She
had
to
redo
the
same
work
that
she
did
in
rehab
and
in
Steamboat
she
spent
10
months
in
IOP.
There
was
conflicting
treatment
pens
that
she
had
from
what
she
had
learned
in
rehab.
She
had
no
time
for
a
a
or
n/a.
She
was
only
allowed
to
see
Jim
Nelson,
a
male
therapist.
She
wasn't
comfortable
talking
about
anything
with
a
man.
P
She
was
seeing
a
female
therapist,
Mary
Jane
Schultz,
which
drug
court
told
her
that
she
wasn't
allowed
to
see
anymore
partially
because
she
held
jug
court
accountable
drug
court
did
have
their
favorites.
A
female
member
of
drug
court
was
not
required
to
have
a
phone,
but
my
daughter
was
required
to
have
one
another
female
drug
court
member
was
caught
in
the
act
of
a
sexual
relationship
with
another
drug
court
person,
which
was
supposedly
grounds
for
immediate
termination
from
the
program,
and
yet
nothing
happened
to
them.
The
same
female
wasn't
the
same.
P
P
P
Weekly
one-on-one
meetings
with
gym
meet
with
her
probation
officer,
McKenzie
Walters
every
week
to
do
schedules.
She
had
no
time
to
work
the
program
she
learned
in
rehab.
She
had
several
minor
violations
and
sanctions.
She
relapsed
in
February
from
a
bait
pen
that
she
didn't
know
I
had
THC
in
it.
She
took
a
hit.
She
told
on
herself
she
relapsed
again
in
April.
P
P
She
went
to
jail
for
not
having
a
job
every
weekend
until
she
got
one,
even
though
she
was
a
full-time
student.
She
was
saying
shouldn't
for
not
paying
drug
court
fees,
even
though
they
told
her.
They
would
be
okay
until
she
got
a
job
as
long
as
it
was
paid
off
before
she
graduated
the
program.
She
was
one
minute
late
for
Court
and
spent
24
hours
in
jail.
Other
people
were
laid
in
the
same
day
and
had
recently
relapsed,
but
nothing
happened
to
them.
P
P
She
was
saying
soon
for
leaving
the
house
to
go,
get
food.
She
couldn't
reach
her
probation
officer.
She
was
saying
for
me
having
company
at
the
house.
She
got
fired
from
a
job
in
which
she
was
being
sexually
harassed
by
a
boss.
Who
was
a
registered
sex
offender?
No
one
would
do
anything
to
him,
even
though
he
was
violating
his
probation.
P
P
She
may
be
in
total,
was
without
an
ankle,
monitor
for
about
two
months,
her
fire.
Her
final
violation
was
when
she
was
at
work
and
she
forgot
her
phone
at
home.
The
PIO
came
in
at
4:30
wanting
her
to
take
a
UA
by
5:00.
She
was
the
only
employee
on
duty
and
couldn't
leave.
She
was
on
the
phone
with
tech
support
when
a
probation
officer
arrived
and
she
couldn't
talk
to
a
probation
officer,
tech
support
answered
and
she
turned
away
to
take
the
call
in
the
probation
officer
left
a
few
hours
later.
P
P
She
had
taken
drug
alcohol
spice
test
the
day
before
which
was
negative
and
clean,
and
she
had
to
take
one
the
following
day
as
well.
They
suspected
her
of
smoking
spice,
even
though
she
tested
negative
and
clean
and
would
never
smoke
spice
we're
not
having
her
phone
with
her
when
the
PIO
called
her
and
not
leaving
her
work
unattended
to
go.
Take
a
drug
test,
they
suspected
her
and
I'm
suspecting
her
of
smoking
spice
were
the
reason
why
they
terminated
her
from
the
program.
P
Members
of
the
drug
court
team
have
testified
against
drug
court
people
in
the
past
for
things
that
have
happened
during
the
program
which
in
some
cases
have
gotten
their
kids
taken
away
from
them.
People
in
drug
court
are
not
very
trusting
of
the
help.
The
team
is
there
for.
How
can
you
confide
in
a
therapist
if
they
are
going
to
tell
others
and
use
it
against
you?
Instead
of
helping
you
in
the
last
12
years
or
in
the
last
year,
12
people
have
been
terminated
from
drug
court
or
opted
out.
P
It
is
about
a
70
percent
failure
rate.
Their
model
seems
to
be:
let's
see
if
we
can.
Let's,
let's
set
these
people
up
to
fail.
My
daughter
mr.
high
school
graduation,
they
put
her
in
jail
a
few
days
before
the
principal
from
Central
High
came
into
the
jail
with
her
cap
and
gown,
and
presented
my
daughter
with
her
high
school
diploma
to
show
how
highly
he
thinks
of
her.
They
took
photos
of
him
presenting
her
diploma
in
jail.
P
She
had
letters
from
her
bosses
about
what
great
person
they
feel
she
is
and
the
unjust
treatment
that
they
have
seen.
Dr.
Tom,
Kirk
and
Mary
Jane
Schultz
both
have
wrote
letters
and
did
evaluations
that
she
needs
a
mental-health
treatment,
not
jail
for
many
things
included,
but
not
limited
to
PTSD
sexual
assault,
father
issues,
substance
abuse,
self-harm
and
suicide
prevention.
P
My
daughter
requested
a
reduction
hearing,
so
she
could
go
to
the
Rose
House.
The
rales
house
is
the
great
mental
health
facility
with
an
underlying
focus
in
substance,
abuse,
which
was
referred
to
her
by
the
boundary
judge.
Dad
did
not
want
to
hear
and
says,
of
course
she
wants
to
go
to
treatment
rather
than
jail,
who
wouldn't
but
no
she's
gonna
serve
her
sentence
and
if
she
chooses
to
seek
treatment
after
jail,
there's
plenty
of
time.
For
that
but
I
doubt
she
will.
P
She
got
a
felony.
She
got
a
felony
sentence
for
a
misdemeanor
charge.
People
with
two
or
three
MS
charges
are
serving
less
time.
There's
a
person
in
junk
court
and
drug
court
currently
right
now
with
a
sixer
underlying
sentence
in
our
county
jail.
If
they
don't
succeed
in
the
drug
court
program,
no
presense
investigation
was
done.
Prior
to
her
sentencing.
P
She
has
been
denied
her
psych
meds
that
were
prescribed
to
her
her
seroquel
and
neurontin,
but
yep
there's
a
person
in
jail.
That's
loud
there,
sir.
Well,
every
time
she's
gone
to
jail,
she's
had
to
go
cold
turkey
off
her
psych
meds,
it's
not
being
able
to
be
stable
since
leaving
rehab,
she
has
been
I'd,
been
denied.
Mental
health
and
substance
abuse
help
with
Jill
the
deputies
in
the
jail
have
been
telling
her.
She
doesn't
belong
in
here.
Don't
let
this
place
break.
You
she's,
smart.
You
have
a
level
head.
P
She
wants
to
go
to
prison,
so
she
can
get
mental
health
help
and
be
afforded
an
education.
She
gets
no
exercise,
no
educational
opportunities.
She
should
be
in
college.
She
wants
to
do
pre-law,
I,
wonder
why
if
she
had
got
the
mental
health
substance,
abuse
care
after
her
first
offense
I
could
have
found
out
about
her
trauma
and
treated
it,
and
there
would
have
maybe
been
no
repeat
violations,
she's
locked
down
21
hours
a
day.
P
She
has
talked
to
detectives
a
few
times
about
what
happened
to
her
and
they
are
not
getting
back
to
her
about
her
being
sexually
assaulted
as
a
child,
she's
being
victimized
again
through
the
county
jail
and
her
sentencing,
which
he
has
been
denied.
Many
things
are
County
Jail
is
not
equipped
to
house
people
for
long
periods
of
time.
If
she
would
have
been
sent
to
prison,
her
time
served
will
be
considerably
less.
She
would
have
a
chance
to
start
her
education
and
to
get
mental
health
help
that
she
needs.
P
There
are
a
lot
of
people
that
are
currently
sitting
in
our
county
jail
for
misdemeanor
violations.
What
they'll
help
for
mental
health
substance
abuse
which
is
leading
to
the
overcrowding
in
our
jail?
Yes,
my
daughter
did
break
the
law
and,
yes,
she
should
be
adequately
she
is.
She
has
currently
served
five
months
in
about
three
to
four
months
with
her
sanctions
from
drug
court,
roughly
nine
months
in
total,
but
still
has
two
years
in
her
County
Jail.
P
The
effects
of
no
help
with
her
sexual
abuse,
mental
health
reasons
for
substance
abuse,
the
ingest
and
unfairness
of
our
justice
system
will
have
a
significant
negative
impact
on
her
for
the
rest
of
her
life.
It
will
take
years
of
mental
health
treatment.
Substance
abuse
care
for
her
to
be
able
overcome
any
of
these
traumatic
events
in
her
young
life.
For
her
to
even
to
have
somewhat
of
a
normal
life,
our
system
is
broken
and
something
needs
to
change.
Thank
you.
Thank.
A
D
D
Had
she
been
arrested,
fifty
miles
to
the
west
drug
court
would
have
been
a
completely
different
experience
and
you
know
there
are
counties
with
out
drug
courts
sentences
berry
there
as
well,
but
it's
amazing
to
hear
the
stories
how
things
are
differing
around
the
state
of
Wyoming
because
of
that
and
I
hope
that
everything
works
out
for
your
daughter
as
soon
as
possible.
You
know
wish
you
luck.
Thank.
A
J
J
2006
I
was
a
normal
22
year
old
I
adopted
my
younger
sister
and
worked
at
midnight
oil
field
services
for
six
years.
I
was
engaged
to
be
married,
was
getting
ready
to
buy
a
house
regular
American
story.
I
was
injured
at
work.
Really
bad
I
was
going
to
need
a
series
of
back
operations
that
need
me
leave
me.
Disabled
I
was
prescribed
massive
amounts
of
pain
medication.
Over
the
next
few
years,
first
I
became
physically
dependent
on
them.
Slowly
that
turned
into
an
addiction
becoming
addicted
to
pain.
Medication
was
just
the
start.
J
I
started
abusing
my
medication
running
out
earlier
and
having
self-learn
having
to
self-medicate
self-medicating
was
detrimental
to
my
life.
I
slowly
lost
everything
to
my
addiction,
my
fiancee
left
in
2009.
This
was
also
the
year
I
started.
Having
trouble
with
the
law.
I
developed
an
alcohol
problem
to
coincide
with
my
opiate
addiction.
I
got
a
urinating
in
public
ticket
and
I
got
out
of
jail.
The
day
I
got
out
of
jail
for
public
intox
and
a
breach
of
peace.
Both
times
I
was
arrested
while
in
jail
for
the
public.
J
Intox
I
had
to
wait
the
weekend
to
see
a
judge.
I
began
to
get
extremely
sick
from
coming
off.
All
the
substances
I
was
dodging
my
system
with
the
Sheriff's
Department
did
not
know
what
to
do.
They
called
my
doctor
and
called
an
ambulance.
The
hospital
gave
me
a
prescription
for
percocet
to
take
while
I
was
in
the
jail.
At
this
point,
my
addiction
was
more
than
anyone
wanted
to
handle.
I
knew
I
was
getting
in
too
deep
and
I
couldn't
stop
over
the
next
few
years.
J
I
would
lose
what
little
I
had
I
was
arrested,
probably
half
a
dozen
times
I'm
special
of
a
controlled
substance.
Dui
failure
to
pay
my
fines,
I
was
now
using
methamphetamine
regularly
getting
my
prescription
from
whatever
doctor
I
could
convince
to
give
me
one
then
buying
heroin
when
they
ran
out
drinking
daily
all
day,
no
matter
what
alcohol
was,
the
easiest
to
find
I
needed
help
I
went
to
the
hospital
to
get
it.
They
admitted
me
to
the
fifth
floor
psychiatric
unit
for
five
days,
I
thought
that
they
would
send
me
to
treatment.
J
They
just
released
me
back
onto
the
street.
I
went
a
little
while
and
tried
again.
They
called
the
cops
on
the
ante
er
I
left
before
they
got
there.
So
I
wouldn't
get
arrested.
I
wanted
help,
but
nothing
was
working.
I
became
very
bitter
in
the
winner
of
2015-16
fool,
my
very
close
friends
overdosed
and
died
on
heroin
that
was
going
around
town.
I
didn't
want
that
to
happen
to
me,
I
had
overdosed
a
few
times,
but
not
enough
to
require
medical
attention.
I
was
revived
by
a
friend
and
went
out.
J
My
business
in
July
of
2016
I
was
serious
about
getting
help.
If
the
hospital
and
Gillette
wouldn't
help
me
I
would
go
somewhere
else.
I
got
my
mom
to
help
me.
We
had
to
get
me
into
a
treatment
program.
I
was
staying
in
a
motel
and
using
enough
to
keep
from
getting
sick,
but
seeking
help
treatment
center
said
I
needed
an
ASI.
It
was
a
hundred
and
eighty
dollars
might
as
well
have
been
a
hundred
and
eighty
thousand
dollars.
I
was
at
rock
bottom.
I
was
broken
emotionally
physically
and
financially.
J
I
talked
my
mom
into
paying
for
the
ASI
I
thought
that
would
be
it.
I
would
finally
go
to
treatment.
The
counselor
I
talked
to
you
gave
me
a
4.0
rating.
The
treatment
center
said
that
that
was
too
high.
I
would
have
to
go
to
detox
first,
so
I
drove
to
Johnson
County
Hospital
an
hour
away
in
Buffalo
ami
I
had
kind
of
went
on
a
last
party's
pretty
a
few
days
before
they
admitted
me
and
said
they
would
help.
I
was
so
relieved.
I
was
scared.
J
I
didn't
want
to
experience
the
withdrawal
I
wouldn't
wish
that
on
my
enemies,
I
had
a
lot
of
experience
with
withdrawal.
I
would
try
to
quit,
but
just
by
just
not
using
but
I
would
get
so
sick
I
would
do
anything
to
avoid
getting
that
sick
I
couldn't
keep
going.
I
was
nothing
I,
weighed
145
pounds
I'm
225.
Today
they
really
wanted
to
help
me
in
her
Hospital
in
Buffalo
Wyoming.
After
taking
blood
and
urine,
they
realized
how
bad
off
I
really
was.
J
J
After
the
the
detox
center
didn't
want
to
deal
with
my
detox,
it
was
crazy.
I
was
just
glad
to
finally
be
getting
some
kind
of
help.
After
the
fifth
day,
I
was
called
into
an
office
and
cold
I
would
need
to
call
someone
to
come
and
pick
me
up.
I
was
confused.
Why
wasn't
I
going
to
a
treatment
facility?
They
said
I
would
have
to
go
home
and
wait
for
a
bed
date.
I
I
was
a
lot
of
emotions
at
once.
J
Disappointed
angry
frustrated,
hopeless,
I
called
a
friend
that
would
come
and
get
me
and
I
was
high
again
before
I
left
the
parking
lot
I
was
dead
inside
I
felt
like
God.
Didn't
want
me
to
get
sober,
I
didn't
know
what
else
to
do
all
of
that
work
for
nothing.
Nobody
cared
about.
Helping
me
I
was
just
a
problem.
The
doctor
at
Wellman,
Behavioral
Health,
gave
me
a
prescription
for
oxycodone
as
I
left.
The
building
even
I,
just
laughed
I
was
never
going
to
get
treatment.
J
J
It
was
supposed
to
be
opiate
free
facility,
I,
guess
not
for
me.
I
was
given
a
plea
offer
that
I
could
not
refuse.
It
was,
would
be
two
to
four
years
in
prison,
suspended
with
three
years
of
probation.
I
felt
like
I
could
have
beat
the
charge
in
court,
but
in
order
to
fight
it,
I
would
have
to
recover
from
a
surgery
in
jail
which
I
could
not
do.
Nobody
would
bail
me
out
of
jail,
so
I
could
fight
these
charges.
The
plea
was
my
only
real
option.
J
The
prosecution
knew
this
and
I
decided
to
take
the
deal.
I
would
be
out
on
bond
until
sentencing,
while
out
on
bond
I
continued
to
use.
I
underwent
another
back
fusion
on
April
17th
2017
I
went
to
sentencing
on
June
27th,
while
at
court
I
was
given
a
breathalyzer,
I
blue
hot
and
had
to
spend
the
night
in
jail.
On
June,
28th
I
was
sentenced
to
four
to
six
years
with
five
years
probation
and
mandatory
inpatient
treatment.
The
judge
increased
the
sentence
because
of
my
drug
problem.
J
I
was
not
happy
that
I
was
now
going
to
be
a
felon.
I
was
excited,
though
finally
I
was
going
to
get
the
help.
I
had
been
trying
to
get
for
years,
ordered
by
a
judge.
I
spent
the
next
five
months
in
County
Jail
awaiting
a
bad
day
on
December
18th
2017
I
was
released
with
the
condition
I
show
up
at
treatment
here
in
Cheyenne
Wyoming
I
did,
while
I
treatment,
I
was
put
on
the
suboxone
medicated
treatment
program.
It
worked
great
I
was
a
model
patient
at
TRP.
J
I
stayed
longer
than
I
had
to
I
knew
I
needed
to
stay
longer.
I
graduated
June,
6,
2008
een,
while
in
treatment
I
took
every
class,
they
had
to
offer
MRT
nutrition,
anger
management
and
others.
Today,
I
am
one
year,
four
months
and
six
days,
sober
I'm
completing
my
first
semester
of
college
with
a
4.0
GPA
I'm
on
disability.
Because
of
my
injury
and
active
in
drug
addicts.
Anonymous
drug
addicts,
Anonymous
has
been
instrumental
in
my
recovery.
I
do
need
to
mention
that
I
do
not
represent
here.
J
Today,
though,
they
have
no
opinion
on
outside
matters,
but
I
do
have
an
excellent
sponsor
who
has
guided
me
through
this
I
truly
am
sober
still
with
no
relapses
I'm
enjoying
my
life
I
really
wish.
Treatment
was
easier
to
get
I
know
a
lot
of
people
who
would
love
to
quit,
but
when
you're
not
taken
seriously
or
laughed
at
or
the
police
are
called
on
you
at
a
hospital
you
give
up.
You
stop
seeking
help
I
believe
wholeheartedly
that
my
friends
would
still
be
alive
today.
J
If
help
was
easier
to
get,
if
I
would
have
gotten
help,
I
wouldn't
be
a
felon
right
now.
I
hope
sharing.
My
story
will
help
others
get
help
easier,
I'm,
not
proud
of
the
things
I've
shared
here
today,
I'm
not
bragging,
but
if
I
don't
be
honest
about
it,
then
the
same
thing
will
just
keep
happening.
Thank
you
for
letting
me
share.
Thank.
G
Thank
you
again.
I
know
it
takes
a
lot
of
courage
to
come
and
do
that,
but
the
question
I
have
for
you
specifically,
do
you
think,
based
on
your
experiences
and
where
you're
at
in
life
that
you
could
help
people
navigate
that
system
and
mentor
those
people,
because
it's
only
people
like
yourself
that
have
been
through
it
to
really
understand
it,
so
is
that
something
you've
obviously
expressed
a
desire
to
continue
moving
forward.
But
do
you
think
that
you
would
actually
be
able
to
help
people
in
your
same
situation?
Yes,.
J
A
Q
Why,
mr.
chairman
committee
members,
my
name
is
John
olive
I
am
a
well
okay,
wear
a
lot
of
hats.
Presently,
I
am
a
sentencing
mitigation
specialist,
but
I
have
worked
as
a
state
probation
agent
for
Department
of
Corrections
I
have
retired
after
25
years
as
a
federal,
probation
officer
and
I
also
facilitate
a
bible-based
12-step
study
which
mr.
mittleider
actually
attends
so
wear
a
lot
of
different
hats,
and
my
comments
today
really
are
to
address
the
issue
of
substance
abuse
as
it
relates
to
the
criminal
justice
population.
Q
Q
If
I
may
comment
just
briefly
on
that
as
well,
what
what
struck
me
is
that
you
could
have
a
presumptive
range
of
say,
42
to
60
months
or
24
to
48
months
and
then
allow
the
judges
to
depart
to
up
to
whatever
you
want
to
say,
maybe
the
statutory
maximum
with
the
finding
of
clear
and
convincing
evidence
so
that
you
have
a
presumptive
range.
That
requires
no
special
findings,
but
if
the
court
wants
to
go
above
or
even
below,
they
can
do
so
with
a
clear
and
convincing
standard.
Q
That's
put
on
the
record
that
can
be
evaluated
just
to
throw
that
out
there.
That's
how
my
mind
works,
but
basically,
the
the
reason
I'm
here
today
is
to
address
the
interplay
between
incarceration,
Corrections
and
treatment,
and
I
really
appreciate
you.
Listening
to
my
comments
and
I'd
be
more
than
happy
to
answer
any
questions
that
you
have.
G
Similar
question
to
the
first
witness,
but
in
your
experiences
with
all
the
parole
and
obviously
it
appears
that
you're
also
involved
with
not
only
from
the
substance
abuse
side
but
on
the
faith-based
side.
So
I'd
like
to
get
your
perspective
this,
if
there's
a
marriage
there,
that
has
a
higher
level
a
success
or
not
well,
okay,.
Q
Q
Q
You
pretty
much
have
a
built-in
internal
probation
officer
that
goes
with
them
for
the
rest
of
their
lives,
and
and
so
that's
what
really,
what
I
attempt
to
accomplish
when,
when
I'm
working
with
individuals
in
a
bible-based
12-step
program,
but
that
doesn't
work
for
everybody,
not
everybody
has
a
motivation
like
that,
and
so
for
them.
You
know
they're
they're
more
externally,
based
in
terms
of
how
do
they
have
you
motivate
them,
and
that
takes
a
different
frame
of
framework.
Q
I
F
Chairman,
thank
you
very
much
for
your
sort
of
assistance
with
our
potential
bill.
Drafting
I
wanted
to
ask
you
again
about
this
presumptive
range
idea.
You
said,
subject
to
a
showing
of
clear
and
convincing
evidence.
I
just
want
you
to
complete
that
thought.
If
you
could,
how
would
you
complete
the
sentence,
say
maximum
range
of
42
months,
subject
to
a
showing
by
a
clear
and
convincing
evidence
of
what
a
blank?
What
what's
what.
A
D
Q
Essentially,
the
the
answer
would
be
that,
based
on
clearing
convincing
evidence
of
a
need
for
a
term
of
probation
that
was
outside
of
that
range
based
on
whatever
factors
the
judge
would
find.
Maybe
you
could
just
enumerate
them
and
his
legend
in
the
statute
or
you
could
leave
it
up
to
the
judge
to
put
those
on
the
record
that
could
be
reviewed
by
an
appellate
court
but
and
sent
in
some
way.
F
Mr.
chairman,
just
to
follow
up
on
that,
and
just
so
that
it's
not
so
that
it
has
some
standards
to
it,
any
suggestions,
because
if
it
just
says
clear
and
convincing
evidence
that
I
think
it's
right,
that's
hard
to
review
right
any
thoughts
on
showing
that
it's
necessary
to
say
prevent
a
probable
recidivist
behavior.
What
would
you
say.
Q
D
Thank
You,
chairman
committee
members,
my
name
is
Frank
Craig
I
am
a
state
director
for
Gateway
foundation
and
we
currently
have
a
contract
with
the
Department
of
Corrections
to
provide
the
substance,
use
disorder,
treatment
institutionally
I
did
commend
the
committee
on
taking
a
look
at
the
judiciary
reforms.
It's
not
anything,
that's
new
for
other
states
that
have
looked
at
it
or
are
looking
at
it
or
need
to
look
at
it,
and
it's
certainly
an
issue
that
requires
quite
a
bit
of
looking
into.
D
What
the
bills
are
intending,
in
other
words,
to
expand
or
and
sometimes
create
some
new
services
to
be
able
to
utilize
in
a
deferment
or
trying
to
minimize
people
coming
into
the
system.
I'm
working
with
some
other
legislative
members
in
the
joint
committee
for
labor
health
and
social
services
and
one
of
those
issues
that
could
be
impacting
what
you're
attempting
to
accomplish
with
these
bills
is
ensuring
that
in
Wyoming
that
we
do
have
the
necessary
qualified
people
to
provide,
in
particular
substance,
use
disorder
treatment.
That's
very
challenging.
D
D
You,
mr.
chairman,
you
said
you
have
eleven
unfilled
positions
out
of
how
many
is
them.
Mr.
chairman,
currently
we
we
hold
residential
treatment
at
the
Women's
Center
at
the
Wyoming,
medium
Correctional
Institute
at
the
New
Castle
boot
camp.
Then
we
were
able
to
bring
back
outpatient
services
that
were
cut
from
previous
budget
years
and
I
do
appreciate
that,
by
the
way
that
that
offered
to
additional
staff
at
all
five
of
those
facilities
and
then
I
have
an
additional
five
vacancies
with
the
current
existing
contracts.
Thank
you.
P
D
Chairman,
yes,
senator
most
of
these
positions
would
fall
under
a
bachelor
level.
Certification.
That's
the
cap.
That's
a
certified
addiction,
professional
interesting
in
Wyoming,
there's,
not
an
in-state
institution
where
you
can
go
and
walk
across
the
stage
with
such
a
degree
to
fulfill
the
requirements
of
the
board
rules
to
be
able
to
apply
and
start
practicing.
D
Individuals
have
to
go
and
gain
significantly
more
coursework
at
their
expense
before
the
certification
requirements
could
be
met
nationally
across
many
other
states
just
holding.
For
example,
a
bachelor's
degree
in
psychology
would
be
sufficient
enough,
and
most
certification
boards
do
built
into
their
rules,
sort
of
a
career
path
to
be
able
to
start
at
point
a
and
then
work
towards
increasing
the
skill
and
knowledge
level
that's
necessary
and
that
meets
national
standards.
D
A
G
Mr.
chairman,
members
of
the
committee,
my
name
is
Paul
temple
I
am
the
CEO
of
northern
Wyoming
mental
health
center
I'm.
Also
a
member
of
Lam
sack
the
ami
association
for
mental
health
and
substance
abuse,
centers,
we're
the
largest
provider
of
mental
health
and
substance
abuse
programs
in
the
state,
including
residential
and
ILP,
certain
intensive
outpatient
services
and
across
mental
health
and
substance
abuse.
G
Most
if
you
you
look
at
some
of
the
CSG
data
when
they
did
some
overlap
with
the
Department
of
Health
clients,
which
is
our
clients
and
the
Department
of
Corrections
clients.
There
is
a
delay
on
people
getting
into
treatment
the
delay.
We
have
the
it's
with
the
exception
of
residential,
because
there
is
delay
there
in
terms
getting
an
outpatient.
You
can
generally
get
in
pretty
quickly.
G
G
Currently,
there's
not
a
big
barrier
in
the
state
of
Wyoming,
none
of
the
mental
health
centers
and
some
of
you
centers
have
this
huge
wait
for
people
to
get
in
because
of
licensure
laws.
Our
problem
is
like
every
other
industry
trying
to
get
people
in
general
back
to
Wyoming,
but
I
look
forward
to
the
the
Mental
Health
Professions
licensure
rule
changes
that's
before
Labor
Health
social
services
next
week
and
with
that
I'll,
just
close
and
saying
lam
sac
is
here
at
the
table
and
ready
to
step
in
and
help
any
way
we
can.
N
Good
morning,
mr.
chairman
committee
members,
my
name
is
Tara
Muir
I'm,
the
legal
director
with
the
Wyoming
coalition
against
domestic
violence
and
sexual
assault,
I
appreciate
that
this
committee
is
working
so
hard
on
criminal
justice
reform
and
we're
here
to
support
this
effort.
In
any
way,
we
can
just
a
couple
of
items
that
we'd
like
to
comment
on
hearing
from
the
Council
of
state
governments
and
all
the
research
they
did
it.
N
Data
is
the
key
empirical
of
a
can't,
be
that
alone.
We
have
to
hear
the
stories
of
the
people
who
are
most
impacted.
We
have
to
do
both,
but
the
data
piece
must
be
clarified
is
whether
it's
the
Council
of
state
governments
looking
at
our
data
or
our
own
systems,
and
that's
just
not
the
Department
of
Corrections
responsibility.
It's
the
court
system,
it's
law
enforcement
is
really
getting
clarity
on
what
is
a
violent
offense
and
get
numbers
for
those.
N
N
Treatment,
for
men
is
very
different
than
treatment
for
women,
whether
that's
mental
health
or
substance
abuse.
You
just
heard
from
a
mom
about
how
important
it
was
that
there
be
gender
specific
treatment
for
the
sexual
abuse.
Her
daughter
had-
and
you
all
did
incredible
work
last
year
on
domestic
violence
bills.
If
we
do
not
have
a
criminal
justice
system
that
will
believe
survivors
and
go
find
out
what
happened
to
this
young
woman
at
the
hands
of
her
stepfather
we're
delaying
and
making
them
felons.
As
you
just
heard,
there's
a
couple
of
tiny
pieces.
N
It
would
be
great
to
add
that
into
217,
also
the
same
page
for
only
talks
about
the
risk
posed
by
the
defendant
to
the
community.
I
think
it's
best
practices
across
this
country-
and
this
goes
to
lumping
all
these
cases
kind
of
into
one
big
puddle-
that
we
very
specifically
look
at
the
risk
of
reoffending
inst
a
victim
in
any
of
our
criminal
justice
system,
work
we're
doing
I.
N
N
What
was
most
surprising
to
me
when
I
first
landed
in
Wyoming
and
and
then
I'll
probably
be
done,
is
looking
at
and
and
I
so
appreciated
the
input
of
all
the
judges
and
how
hard
they
work
to
get
these
sentences
right.
But
there
is
a
lot
of
confusion
in
this
is
version
231
bill
when
we
talk
about
these
three
Oh
one's,
allowing
first-time
violent
offenders
to
not
to
also
be
lumped
in
with
every
other
low-level
crime.
N
There
should
be
a
record
that
they
did
offend,
but
they
should
be
subject
to
a
lot
of
the
things
you're
working
on
getting
the
treatment
getting
the
help
that
they
need
so
I
don't
know
if
there's
a
way
to
be
more
clear,
that
duis
belong
in
der
1037,
which
is
page
four
of
231,
that
there's
drug
and
alcohol
treatment
there
and
keeping
our
301
section
all
about
violent
offenders,
I'm
still
learning
how
this
whole
criminal
justice
system
works
in
Wyoming,
but
from
kind
of
new
eyes
on
the
system.
I
think
that's!
N
And
I'll
just
end
with
what
we
heard
in
Laramie
back
in
September
again
from
the
Council
of
state
governments
they
mentioned
briefly
and
I,
think
it
would
help
all
our
criminal
statutes
and
probably
not
for
next
year,
but
do
we
devise
some
system
that
says
this
is
a
class
4
felony.
This
is
the
class
3
felony,
here's
what
the
penalties
are
and
then
we
can
look
at
our
whole
criminal
justice
set
of
laws
and
make
sure
we're
comparing
apples
to
apples.
N
Do
you
get
a
tougher
sentence
when
you
key
a
car
and
have
more
than
$5,000
worth
of
damage
versus
when
you
sexually
assault
a
child
and
and
look
at
all
those
crimes
so
that
our
data
belongs
to
how
serious
the
crime
is?
It's
a
little
off
topic,
but
I
think
it's
central
in.
If
we
want
empirical
data
that
we
really
have
to
get
into
the
weeds
and
be
very
specific
with
that
data,
thank
you
for
letting
me
be.
A
Okay,
anyone
else
from
the
public
at
large
I,
don't
see
anyone
so
I
will
close
a
public
comment,
though,
as
we
mentioned
yesterday,
as
the
co-chairman
mentioned,
that
when
we
get
into
working
the
bills
it's
afternoon,
we
may
call
on
some
of
you.
You
know
if
the
bill
is
really
in
your
court
and
you
may
have
some
additional
important
input
for
us.
We
may
lean
on
you
again
so
mr.
R
To
see
you
again
a
great
great
to
see
you
too,
mr.
chairman
and
great,
to
see
the
members
of
the
joint
judiciary
committee,
my
name
is
Mark
Belka
and
it's
been
a
real
pleasure,
a
working
on
this
journey
with
you
all
over
the
last
several
months
as
part
of
Wyoming's
justice,
reinvestment
approach-
and
you
might
remember
a
larger
team
represented
last
time.
It's
nothing
to
do
no
commentary
on
Wyoming's
hospitality.
In
fact
we
love
the
state
and
they'd
all
like
to
be
here.
R
R
R
The
work
going
on
through
justice
reinvestment
as
part
of
as
part
of
the
probation
parole
analysis,
the
community-based
program
analysis
and
has
been
a
vital
member
of
the
team,
and
she
works
in
a
variety
of
states
during
the
implementation
of
justice
reinvestment.
And
so
she
sees
a
lot
of
the
work
that
happens
after
the
policies
have
been
enacted
and
implementation
is
happening.
R
R
The
third
item
we
shared
is
a
piece
from
the
while
file
Andrew
Graham's
work
on
North
Dakota
may
hold
key
to
Wyoming's
prison
woes
in
cases
of
use
impressive
that,
while
file
sent
Andrew
to
North
Dakota
to
this,
it
was
a
variety
of
people
involved
in
the
implementation
of
their
free
through
recovery.
Investment
into
community
substance
use
mental
health
treatment.
R
Incidentally,
I
worked
in
North
Dakota
last
year,
so
I
was
on
site
a
great
deal
during
the
analysis
and
policy
development.
I
could
probably
speak
to
questions
about
North
Dakota
and
its
reinvestment
that'll
be
helpful.
Finally,
we
shared
a
lot
a
lot
of
trees
to
come
in
front
of
you
today.
This
is
a
response
memo
to
Brian.
R
I'm
come
so
casual
the
brilliant
attorneys
in
Ellis,
oh
I,
forgotten
full
name.
Brian
fuller.
His
memo
on
the
constitutional
issues
involving
Bill
draft
230,
my
coworker
Carl
Reynolds,
is
our
senior
legal
policy
adviser.
He
used
to
be
that
court
director
for
the
state
of
Texas,
so
much
a
little
sharp
here
and
he
reviewed
some
of
the
questions
and
tried
to
do
some
case
law
inquiry.
I've
read
through
it.
I've
talked
to
Carl.
I
want
to
be
a
resource
to
you
on
those
questions.
R
I'm
not
anywhere
near
approaching
the
legal
expertise
that
you
are
LSO
attorneys
have
work.
My
coworker
Carl
has,
but
we
wanted
to
make
sure
that
we
were
a
resource
to
you
through
that
we
recognize
that
I
tried
to
had
to
adapt
to
the
order
of
the
meetings
and
I
wanted
to
begin
by
just
sharing
what
what
a
privilege
it
was
for
me
to
send
the
audience
this
last
day
or
so,
and
listen
to
the
input
from
stakeholders
in
your
criminal
justice
system.
R
I'm
honored
to
be
sitting
at
the
same
table
as
people
who
had
the
strength
and
courage
to
share
their
personal
still
speak
a
lot
in
data.
I
am
always
reminded
by
the
people
whose
lives
are
affected
by
the
criminal
justice
system
and
I
found
their
testimony
in
the
audience
compelling
heart-wrenching
and
inspiring
the
I
wanted
to
share
sort
of
a
zoom
out
to
the
big
picture.
If
I
could,
with
just
a
kind
of
example,
of
kind
of
what
the
big
picture
holds,
we
wanted
to
talk
about
three
challenges
facing
Wyoming.
R
The
first
is
increase
in
drug-related
offenses
and
case
filings,
contributing
to
an
increase
in
the
volume
of
people
entering
the
criminal
justice
system
with
a
variety
of
drug
offenses,
and
there
are
people
convicted
of
trafficking,
manufacturing
people
involved
in
the
harmful
distribution
of
drugs
and
other
illegal
immaterial,
and
those
people
are
probably
winding
up
in
your
prison
or
in
the
federal
system.
There
are
also
people
coming
in
there
with
substance
use
disorders.
R
Mental
health
needs
co-occurring
needs
and
it's
creating
strain
for
both
your
community
behavioral
health
system
response
and
your
criminal
justice
system
responses
and
number
two.
The
prison
population
is
increased
by
21
percent
in
the
last
ten
years.
Putting
you
at
full
capacity
and
leading
to
you
so
out
of
state
contract
beds
for
about
80
inmates,
and
with
there
you
have
a
forecast
of
growth
of
nine
percent.
A
part
of
a
part
resulting
from
growth
and
prison
systems
is
the
shifting
of
resources
from
the
community
to
the
facilities
to
accommodate
the
growing
cost
of
Corrections.
R
You
have
a
lot
of
assets
which
you've
heard
about
from
the
people
who
came
in
front
of
you
today,
and
yesterday
you
heard
from
sheriffs
dedicated
in
law
enforcement,
stressing
importance
of
treatment,
judges
reaching
for
options.
You
heard
about
community
behavioral
health
providers
that
want
to
work
with
this
population.
You're,
not
victim,
advocates
trying
to
connect
victims
to
services
and
supports
to
help
recover.
You
heard
from
probation,
parole,
prison
and
so
many
more
about
the
work
they
want
to
do,
and
this
effort
today
is
provide
a
plan
to
you
all
through
these
bill
drafts.
R
You
have
in
front
of
you
and
that's
your
real
asset
that
you've
been
studying
this
issue
during
the
interim.
You
forward
is
five
bill.
You
authorized
five
bills
for
drafting
they're
in
front
of
you
and
you're
doing
the
hard
work
and
working
the
bills,
while
you're
in
this
interim
period
to
to
tackle
it
and
I.
R
Think
that
gives
you
a
lot
of
hope
and
I
hope
that
gives
you
a
number
of
options,
as
you
head
into
the
regular
session
beginning
in
January,
for
how
to
tackle
these
challenges
before
you
and
the
dollar,
the
cost
figure
is.
Is
there
a
Sun
slide?
11
the
cost
figure
is
awaiting
you.
If
nothing
is
done
and
III
think
there
will
be
a
section
coming
up.
The
presentation
later
on,
that
expresses
the
opportunity
in
front
of
you
to
set
a
goal
for
recidivism
reduction.
R
The
importance
of
Swift
and
and
cost
effects
whiffed
and
effect
high
quality
community
behavioral
health
treatment
substance
use
mental
health
treatment.
We
have
so
I
I'm
trying
to
make
sure
I
speed
this
up.
We
don't
quite
have
a
day
you
gave
us
in
September
and
I
know
you
are
facing
a
busy
afternoon
of
work.
I
will
if
it's
okay
with
you
move
more
quickly
through
the
slides
and
I
was
originally
intending.
The
materials
are
all
in
front
of
you
for
further
review.
I
just
want
to
be
mindful
and
respectful
of
your
time.
R
I
like
please
to
cover
section
two
regarding
updated
substance,
use
and
mental
health
analysis.
I
think
it
provides
you
with
some
new
insights
that
very
few
states
have
concerning
the
overlap
between
your
community
mental
health
and
substance
abuse,
centers
and
your
probation,
parole
population
number
two
I'd
like
to
share
the
overall
system
challenges
and
some
impact
estimates
for
tackling
that
and
an
end
with
the
kind
of
build
drafts
and
ways
we
can
connect
to
the
bigger
picture.
R
So
I
mentioned
that
to
kind
of
zoom
out
and
then
home
in
I
went
in
full
respect
to
the
chairs
will
be
guided
by
you
all.
If
you'd
like
me,
to
cut
to
the
chase
or
move
to
the
end,
I
respect
the
work
you're
doing
and
want
to
be
a
resource
we've
assisted.
This
is
on
slide
number.
Thirteen
ceases.
Csu
Justice
Center
staff
have
assisted
about
twenty
eight
states
in
using
the
justice,
reinvestment
approach
and
one
other
state
week.
R
A
document
enabled
this
type
of
analysis
was
North
Carolina
and
we
are
excited
about
this
being
groundbreaking.
Illuminating
information,
especially
with
the
review
of
what
are
the
available
infrastructure
in
Wyoming
for
delivering
effective
community
mental
health
and
substance
use
services
to
people
in
the
criminal
justice
system,
with
the
hard
work
of
the
Department
of
Health,
led
by
Franz
Fuchs
and
the
and
the
the
and
carol
day
and
and
Chris
and
Stefan
undeterred,
the
support
of
the
director
for
participating.
This
analysis
with
the
department
Corrections
Steve
Lindley
and
director
Lambert
probation,
parole
data
over
four
years.
R
Anyone
who's
put
on
probation
or
parole
actively
from
2013
to
2017,
was
matched
with
anyone
who
access
a
service
inside
of
any
of
Wyoming's
18
community
mental
health
and
substance
use
centers
around
the
state
and
there's
the
slides
that
will
come
will
show
some
really
lumen
ating
information
about
what
was
born
out.
From
that
connection,
the
limitations
to
the
study
involved
that
this
is
speaking
about
correlation
association.
We
were
unable
to
control
for
all
the
variety
of
variables.
R
R
If
you
look
at
the
second
row
here,
you
will
see
that
when
we
matched
up
anyone
on
probation
or
parole
actively
over
that
4-year
period,
who
had
a
flag
of
some
mental
health
or
substance,
use,
need
and
matched
it
with.
Anyone
who
access
a
service
in
any
of
Wyoming's
community
mental
health
and
substance
use.
Centers
57%
of
probationers
of
parolees
showed
up
at
some
point.
R
They
make
up
about
10%
of
the
people
accessing
a
service
in
the
mental
health
centers,
but
you
can
see
that
there
is
a
large
volume
of
people
within
the
probation,
parole
supervision
arena
who
have
access
to
service
in
one
of
the
centers.
There
are
some
interesting
variations
across
the
state.
One
thing
that
was
really
intriguing
is
that,
in
the
lower
right
hand
corner
of
the
slide,
there
are
variations
in
what
percent
of
probationers
and
parolees
with
mental
health
or
substance
use.
Flags
appeared
in
the
center's.
R
If
the
we
break
here
at
the
state
of
Wyoming,
up
into
its
various
probation,
parole,
districts
and
80%
of
probationers
and
parolees
with
the
mental
health
or
substance,
use
flag
accessed
a
mental
health
service
or
more
in
the
in
the
third
District,
which
is
roughly
around
Sweetwater
and
the
number
is
lower
in
the
northeastern
part
of
the
state
for
district
nine
were
38%
accessed.
So
you
can
see
sort
of
a
57
percent.
More
than
half
almost
two-thirds
of
probationers
or
parolees
access
the
service
inside
one
of
those
centers
and
that's
a
real
asset
for
Wyoming.
R
Those
centers
are
open
access.
Those
at
those
those
centers
operate,
a
sliding
fee
scale
and
I
met
I've
met
with
virtually
all
the
directors
of
the
center's
and/or
my
co-workers
have,
and
there
is
a
level
of
sophistication
and
awareness
about
working
with
people
in
the
criminal
justice
system
and
a
desire
to
promote
better
and
better
results
for
that
population.
R
R
Does
that
person
wind
up
in
one
year
centers,
and
we
all
know
how
quickly
relapse
can
occur
and
how
important
swift
connections
of
treatment
really
are,
and
we
found
that
54%
of
probationers
and
parolees
with
the
flag
accessing
the
center
came
after
one
month
had
already
passed
only
about
26%
accessed
that
service
within
a
within
a
week
of
beginning
their
supervision
term
and
another
19%
within
the
month.
So
that
could
identify
some
barriers
that
exist
for
creating
a
continuity
of
care
of
people
living
leaving
prison
returning
the
community
and
entering
a
center.
R
It
could
indicate
some
challenges
involving
care
coordination
between
probation
parole
and
the
centers.
When
I
talk
to
the
centers,
they
emphasize
their
importance
of
the
open
access
care
model
that
people
coming
in
during
especially
during
open
office
hours,
should
be
able
to
come
in
and
receive
an
appointment.
The
challenges
we
know
in
a
large
rural
state
of
people
actually
getting
a
ride
to
the
centers
or
making
the
appointment
as
soon
as
possible
or
handling
all
the
variety
of
needs
that
people
have
to
fulfill
as
their
conditions
of
supervision.
R
While
they
were
in
the
center,
they
people
on
probation
and
parole,
accessing
substance,
use,
outpatient
or
substance
use
residential
consumed,
50
percent,
more
than
of
the
center's
services
than
their
numbers
of
representatives
are
over-represented
in
consumption
of
services
than
their
makeup
of
the
population
within
the
center's,
so
for
a
state
looking
at
ways
to
get
a
better
return
on
your
investment
for
your
mental
health
and
substance
use
services.
This
is
a
small
part
of
your
total
population.
R
That
really
heartened
me,
because
it
shows
that
Corrections
and
health
and
the
center
directors
at
the
state
level
want
to
work
on
this
and
really
maximize
or
enhance
your
existing
structure
for
connecting
people
to
community
mental
health
and
substance
use
services.
The
following
slide
on
site
number:
21,
you
see
two
lines
going
down.
This
is
at
credit
to
the
sophisticated
analysis
that
Franz
Franz
and
co-workers
at
the
Department
of
Health
carried
out.
This
compares
survival
analysis.
R
The
definition
of
success
was
when
you're
on
probation
and
parole
longer
stays
in
the
community,
meaning
you
didn't
get
revoked
and
wind
up
in
prison,
and
you
can
see
that
the
line
below
involves
the
who
did
not
access
services.
That
line
shows
that
a
smaller
percentage
of
people
on
supervision
who
did
not
access
services
in
the
center
and
needed
services
failed
and
wound
up
in
prison.
The
line
is
higher,
showing
greater
success
for
people
who
need
the
services
and
got
them.
They
stayed
out
of
prison.
R
They
spent
an
average
of
thirty
three
hundred
five
extra
days
in
the
community
and
based
on
an
initial
cost-benefit
analysis.
The
cost
of
connecting
people
to
services,
especially
for
high
risk
high
need
people
exceeds
the
cost
of
prison
days.
So
it
shows
the
fact
that
these
are
two
different
systems:
one
criminal
justice,
one
behavioral
health
that
are
essential
for
promoting
success
of
people
on
supervision,
remaining
crime,
free
and
helping
to
recover
from
their
substance,
use
or
mental
health
disorder.
R
These
are
our
key
takeaways
on
slide
23,
and
this
is
the
kind
of
things
that
we
were
able
to
come
across
in
our
very
initial
analysis
and
I.
Think
a
lot
of
the
work
that
we've
assisted
Wyoming
with
when
its
most
successful
is
identifies
more
areas
for
people
in
your
state
to
delve
into
and
I.
Think
that's
what
I
heard
and
meeting
with
the
WAM
sac
directors.
They
wanted
to
know
why
the
percentages
of
people
in
need
of
treatment
on
probation
and
parole
was
lower
in
some
parts
of
the
state
than
others.
R
Corrections
wants
to
know
how
they
can
prioritize
the
highest
risk
highest
need
people
for
first
and
foremost,
and
so
these
are
the
four
takeaways
that
we
took
that
first
of
all,
that
57%
of
people
on
probation
and
parole
accessing
a
service
is
key
because
it
now
it
shows
you
where
they
are
showing
up
if
they
need
it.
Rates
of
supervision
with
a
indicator
of
need
for
treatment
and
accessing
a
service
varies
across
the
state.
R
You
have
some
areas
where
it's
66,
80
%
others
where
it's
38%
and
that's
a
that's
important
question
to
note,
because
centers
are
a
key
area
for
people
on
supervision
to
access
services,
but
they
may
access
it
elsewhere:
emergency
room,
private,
insurer,
other
areas.
But
now
you
know
there
is
a
large
volume
of
people
who
are
showing
up
in
the
center's
and
accessing
it.
We
know
that
the
results
for
high-risk
individuals
in
need
of
treatment
is
higher
than
people
who
are
low
risk.
R
That
is
very
consistent
with
national
analysis
involving
how
you
prioritize
need
for
treatment,
risk
of
reoffending
resources
to
the
highest
risk
highest
need.
Mental
health
treatment
is
mostly
delivered
in
the
community
and
an
outpatient
basis
through
the
centers,
which
helps
the
results
to
be
less
expensive
and
greater
later.
A
better
cost
ratio
is
interesting
to
note
that
mental
health
is
not
a
criminal
genic
need
it's
not
associated
with
recidivism.
R
In
the
way
the
substance
chooses
or
antisocial
thinking
is,
but
it
is
a
key,
a
responsibility
factor,
it's
very
hard
to
complete
a
condition
of
supervision
of
treatment
plan.
If
you
have
unaddressed
mental
illness,
this
is
powerful
analysis
and
I
sped
it
up,
because
I
really
wanted
to
share
it
and
I
know
your
time
is
short.
I
feel
that
it.
This
analysis
has
really
helped
to
push
forward
clarity
and
and
information
around
how
I
omen
could
best
reinvest
a
portion
of
avoided
costs
into
increasing
enhancing
access
to
community
substance
use
and
mental
health
treatment.
R
R
Mental
health
needs
more
swiftly,
prioritizing
people
at
a
high
risk
to
fail
on
supervision
who
have
a
need
for
treatment
and
tailoring
the
the
strategies
to
meet
the
local
needs
across
Wyoming,
and
what
we've
come
across
is
that,
where
you
are
in
Wyoming,
as
I
represent
Pelkey
mentioned
earlier,
where
you
are
and
where
I
only
can
say
a
lot
about
the
types
of
services
that
are
available,
you
may
be
able
to
get
a
residential
inpatient
in
some
areas,
but
not
in
others.
Some
areas
may
struggle
with
lack
of
coordination
between
probation,
parole
and
treatment.
R
Centers
others
might
have
others.
We've
heard.
Have
it
done
quite
pat,
some
areas
have
peer
support
specialists
who
can
really
help
people
avoiding
relapse
and,
in
some
areas
have
struggles
getting
people
from
where
they
live
to
the
center's.
So
there's
a
chance.
You
have
now
here
that
you've,
isolated
challenges,
you've
become
more
aware.
You've
identified
more
clearly
the
assets
available
and
you
can
set
some
goals,
some
guardrails
around
which
you
can
prioritize
any
investments
in
them
in
the
years
to
come
into
this
critical
area
of
community
substance,
use
and
mental
health
treatment.
R
We
hope
to
quickly
go
review
that
key
challenges
that
are
addressed
in
the
policy
options.
Ultimately,
the
bill
drafts.
The
three
count
of
three
challenges
is
on
slide.
26
that
we've
drawn
out
is
involves
the
insufficient
supervision
and
programming
for
people
or
at
the
highest
risk
of
failing
on
supervision.
You
know,
because
of
your
compass
risk
assessment.
The
rate
of
failure
for
someone
on
a
low-risk
someone's
assesses
low
risk
is
two
to
three
times
less
than
people
who
are
at
a
high
risk
of
recidivism.
R
R
That's
expected
of
probation
and
parole
supervision
term,
and
we've
heard
a
lot
about
in
the
last
couple
of
days,
from
fulfillment
of
legal
financial
obligations
from
providing
an
adequate
representation
of
the
seriousness
of
the
offense
from
complying
with
a
treatment
plan
from
the
from
the
key
priority
question
of
when
to
most
people
fail.
And
how
do
we
move
our
available
resources
to
to
align
with
that
likelihood
of
failure?
That's
what
led
to
the
policy
option
to
front-load
probation
improvement
resources
at
the
early
part
of
the
term.
Mr.
R
H
Thank
You
mr.
chairman
mark,
when
we
talk
about
that
that
scale
and
it
and
it's
a
amazing
scale,
have
you
put
a
dollar
figure
to
the
cost
savings
that
are
available
in
those
in
years
four
and
five
mm-hmm,
so
that
one
of
the
questions
that
came
up
is?
Are
we
really
putting
much
money
into
those
years
of
supervision?
Is
there
significant
resources
by
changing
that
formula
narrowing
that
window?
What's
the
amount
of
money
that
comes
available
to
come
back
and
put
in
two
years,
one
and
two.
R
Mr.
chairman
and
senator
Christensen,
we
did
not
estimate
a
cost
impact
for
this
policy
option.
In
a
way
it
enhances
your
existing
resources.
You
have
a
growing
probation
and
parole
population,
and
this
is
a
way
of
helping
to
avoid
the
cost
that
would
result
to
accommodate
that
increase.
So
the
the
goal
here
is
your
probation,
parole
officers
are
no
longer
supervising
those
higher-end
people
you're,
not
laying
off
officers
you're,
not
stopping
the
work.
You're
doing
yours
moving
it
earlier
on
in
the
term.
R
H
H
There
doesn't
sound
like
that,
and,
and
the
reason
I
asked
a
question
is
one
thing:
I
was
told,
is
in
those
later
years,
when
there's
very
low
low
probability
of
riah
fence
supervision
can
be
as
small
as
a
phone
call
a
month,
and
so
I'm
wondering
how
justjust
what
we're
gonna
have
by
changing
that
formula
to
really
boost,
or
if
it's
all,
about
new
additional
funding,
as
opposed
to
moved
funding
mm-hmm.
Mr.
R
Cope
mr.
chairman
and
Senator
Christensen,
the
I,
the
great
it's
a
great
question
and
I
think
that
two
two
different
ways
of
cause
first,
four
point:
one
I
mentioned
two
points
point
one:
is
that
the
two
different
ways
of
measuring
supervision?
The
first
is
quantity
of
interactions
and
quality
of
interaction
and
someone
who
is
even
at
lower
supervision
level,
stills
on
a
caseload
and
still
is,
could
spring
up
and
take
up
time.
So
number
of
business
might
be
down,
but
the
quality
of
time
that
could
be
on
that
person
could
be
disproportionate.
R
It's
a
question
of
cost
to
the
overall
system.
If
someone
remains
on
supervision,
long
after
they
may
room,
they
will
remain
subject
to
the
conditions
that
are
over
their
heads
and
if
they
commit
a
minor
violation,
their
conditions
of
supervision,
they
could
wind
up
being
revoked
and
be
put
back
into
prison.
So
they
are
a
liability
even
if
they
are
no
longer
receiving
the
same
intensity
of
supervision
as
years.
One
through
three.
Thank
you.
Okay,.
D
D
R
For
example,
in
in
my
oming,
you
can
receive
a
other
statutes,
indicate
the
maximum
sentence
length
and
the
statutes
also
guide
how
the
men
must
relate
to
that.
Those
states
have
established
a
base
and
a
ceiling
for
how
long
the
probation
terms
can
last
it's
a
matter
of
what
the
states
have
selected
in
what
criteria
they
set
for
that
length
of
the
probation
term.
R
R
Thank
you
very
much,
mr.
Felker,
and
so
with
those
other
states
that
you
have
data
on
it.
Do
they
pretty
much
settle
in
at
the
three
and
a
half
year
mark,
or
do
you
find
more
at
a
different
place?
It's
four
years.
Also
a
common
number,
mr.
chairman
and
representing
winners
of
five
years,
is
the
most
common
of
all
the
states
that
have
established
them.
A
feature
of
states
that
have
established
caps
include
having
a
level
of
three
a
while
include
the
by
removing
caps
for
particular
offenses
of
conviction.
R
So
there
is
no
kind
of
categories
they.
It
becomes
more
scattered
once
I
go
below
the
five
years
and
the
states
that
I'm
mentioning,
but
some
features
of
states
that
have
provided
tiers
or
different
levels,
what
they
have
included,
as
perhaps
a
removal
of
a
cap
at
all
on
people
with
sex
offenses,
they
might
have
said
established
a
three-year
cap
for
offenses,
except
for
those
involving
violence
or
DUI
or
others,
and
those
will
be
up
to
five.
So
there
are
two
different
dimensions
to
look
at
this.
R
The
first
is
the
information
on
the
slide,
which
looks
at
risk
of
reoffending
risk
assessment,
telling
you
based
on
that
grouping.
What
chances
ovary
offense
are
this.
The
second
measure
is
offense
type,
which
speaks
to
the
ways
that
systems
are
structured
to
provide
responses
based
on
the
offense
of
conviction
is
a
way
of
punishing
the
behavior.
So
the
cap
serves
to
purposes
in
terms
of
how
you
selected,
based
on
when
mostly
recidivism,
occurs,
and
that
helps
you
focus
your
supervision
resources
and
then
using
the
offense
information
which
is
not
associated
with
risk
of
recidivism.
R
It's
a
different
measure
altogether,
which
helps
you
set
kind
of
how
long
the
range
is
you
want
to
provide
for
available
supervision,
lengths
the
states,
the
19
states
that
don't
have
any
caps
on
probation
parole
they
allow
they
are
similar
to
how
Wyoming
structures,
which
is
that
the
length
of
the
probation
term
may
be
as
long
as
the
maximum
sentence
length
for
that
sentence.
I
think
that,
as
the
science
has
evolved
around
effective
criminal
justice
practice,
greater
awareness
has
come
forward
because
of
national
analyses
of
when
most
recidivism
occurs
and
they've
seen.
R
S
Thank
you.
Mr.
chairman
members
of
the
committee,
Jennifer
Costello
with
the
CSG
Justice
Center,
you
know,
I
I,
think
it's
helpful.
To
reiterate.
You
know
some
of
with
the
data.
You
know.
There's
little
net
gain
past
five
years
right,
so
there's
very
little.
Public
safety
risk
past
five
years
of
supervision
when
it
comes
to
sex
offenders
and
sex
offender
risk
in
particular.
S
That
tends
to
be
kind
of
the
most
discussed
population
in
terms
of
extending
past
that
five-year
mark,
and
when
you
take
a
look
at
the
research
in
regards
to
sex
offenders
and
particularly
those
who
score
high
risk
on
sex
offender,
specific
assessments
such
as
the
static.
Ninety
nine
are,
it
looks
at
once.
A
person
is
successful
for
ten
years
as
a
sex
offender.
S
Their
risk
of
recidivism
is
really
at
the
same
amount
as
a
first-time
offender
on
supervision
and
so
anything
past
that
there's
kind
of
very
little
net
gains
in
terms
of
public
safety
and
cost,
and
so
we
have
seen
some
extensions
for
sex
offenders
in
terms
of
public
safety
and
being
able
to
have
a
little
bit
of
ex
flexibility
and
monitoring.
But
the
analysis
is
looking
at
all
offenses
kind
of
total
lumped
together
and
showing
kind
of
where
the
resource
allocation
is
most
beneficial.
Mr.
G
He
does
mr.
chairman
first
answer
representative
winters's
question
because
that's
the
motion
I
made
42
months-
that's
where
that
come
from,
but
it
was.
It
was
based
on
it's
not
important
to
look
at
the
peaks
and
the
valleys
of
the
data,
but
the
average
over
that
period
of
time.
And
so
when
you
look
at
that
36
to
48
that
that
three
to
four
year
period
we
have
a
nine
percent
recidivism
rate,
and
then
you
get
to
the
four
to
five
year
period.
G
It's
a
four
percent,
so
it
was
saying:
look
where
do
you
make
that
net
break?
But
then
the
number
was
tried
to
kind
of
take
an
average
of
that.
But
the
question
I
have
is
is
because
it
because
senator
and
other
cop
brought
this
up
and
I
think
that
all
the
testimony
that
we
had
and
the
judges
floated
to
it
and
I
think
that
you
guys
have
provided
some
clarification.
G
G
So
the
quote
the
reason
that
I'm
asking
the
question
is
because
if
we
move
this
bill
forward,
there
had
been
extremely
valid
point
made
by
the
judges
on
the
public
safety
side,
and
even
your
own
data
has
suggested
that
these
most
likely
ones,
even
four
and
five
years
out,
are
sex
offenders.
Do
you
have
enough
data
to
help
us
identify
that
so
had
this
bill
moves
forward,
we
can
make
those
modifications
now
in
committee
before
it
would
hit
the
full
floor.
I.
S
Don't
mr.
chairman
members
of
the
committee
I,
don't
know
that
the
data
I
don't
know
if
the
data
is
rigor
and
rigorous
enough
to
isolate
out
offenses
in
which
type
of
offense
was
on
supervision.
I.
Think
it's
helpful
to
note
that
you
know
with
this.
This
is
looking
at
recidivism
and
return
to
incarceration
in
not
necessarily
what
the
person
was
returned
for,
so
it
may
not
necessarily
be
a
new
offense,
a
new
violent
offense,
a
new
sex
offense.
It
could
be
missing
office
appointments,
it
could
be
failure
to
comply
with
treatment.
S
A
G
If
we
lack
the
data
to
ascertain
which
one
of
those
types
of
offenses
that
we
need
to
hone
in
on
I'm,
assuming
based
on
your
testimony,
that
other
states
have
looked
at
this
already
and
set
different
levels
for
different
types
of
offenses,
is
that
data
available
to
readily
take
a
look
at
so
that
for
this
offense
ex
state
has
a
three
year
four
year
five
year.
Probationary
limit
is
that
data
available
that
you
could
aggregate
or
compile
for
us
to
consider.
Mr.
R
That
only
leaves
11
percent,
so
he
took
initially.
He
did
that
11
percent
and
said:
what's
up,
what's
the
distribution
within
that
cohort
and
he
it
was
fairly
even
on
his
first
number
across
property
drug
DUI
sex
violent.
But
he
said
you.
What
we
do
is
standard
operating
procedures
run
it
with
by
Department
corrections
to
ensure
were
analyzed
incorrectly
I
sure
that
just
indicate
that
we
can,
with
we
have
confidence
that
we
can
complete
that
analysis
and
share
it.
For,
for
you,
thanks
are
the
long
winded,
very
healthy.
A
A
R
Sir,
the
members
of
the
committee
on
mr.
chairman
slide
28
is
a
reminder
of
your
use
of
the
compass
risk
assessment
at
sentencing
groups,
people
in
two
categories
of
when
recidivate
of
likelihood
of
recidivism
your
low-risk
people
assesses
low-risk,
fail
at
one-third
the
rate
of
high
risk,
so
high
risk
people
fail
triple
the
rate
of
low-risk
people
and
on
for
people
beginning
leaving
prison
entering
the
community.
People
assess
as
high-risk
fail
at
double
the
rate
of
the
low-risk
people.
When
your
high-risk,
you
have
more
needs,
you
need
more
supervision.
R
You
need
prioritization
of
your
programming
right
now.
Wyoming
has
a
couple
different
options
available,
intensive
supervision,
probation
is
P
and
there's
a
policy
option
reflected
in
House
bill,
230
that've.
That
involves
admission
into
the
ISP
and
the
reason
why
that
policies
before
word
is
that
you're
ISP
is
structured
in
a
way
that
ensures
more
surveillance
and
monitoring.
It
does
not,
however,
assure
programming.
People
who
are
an
ISP
around
Wyoming
are
waiting
in
line
along
with
everyone
else
to
access
community
substance,
use
mental
health
services
and
other
programs.
R
You
are
prioritized
for
cognitive,
behavioral
therapy
groups,
but
accompanying
that
intensive
supervision.
You're
not
getting
that
assured
programming
and
the
failure
rates
out
of
isp
are
significantly
higher
than
people
on
a
centered
supervision.
So
a
probationer
who
begins
probation
in
isp
has
a
sunny
6%
of
them
fail.
20%
of
people
on
probation
center
supervision
will
fail.
R
Isp
is
shown
in
the
research
to
work
with
people
who
are
high
risk
high
need
people
who
are
low
risk
and
put
into
isp
are
more
likely
to
get
connected
and
be
pulled
deeper
into
the
criminal
justice
system
and
to
have
been
found
of
violating
a
condition
of
supervision
or
not
meeting
some
other
need.
They
are
unlikely
to
benefit
from
that
intensive
supervision
and
programming,
because
the
reason
they're
low
risk
is
they
don't
have.
R
The
types
of
needs
at
isp
is
best
suited
for
so
the
reason
that
House
bill
230
has
that
on
policy
in
there
to
prioritize
your
ISP
admissions
or
people
who
are
high-risk
is
to
make
sure
that
that
valuable
resource
is
prioritizing
people
who
will
benefit
most
from
that
intervention.
Sometimes
the
best
thing
to
do
with
low
risk
people
is
to
leave
them
alone,
I,
not
not
pulled
them
deeper.
You
also
have
the
adult
community
correction
programs
on
slide
number
30,
which
is
your.
They
play
an
integral
role
in
your
criminal
justice
system.
R
They
are
located
in
Gillette,
Caspar
and
Cheyenne.
They
provide
about
300
beds,
which
are
rare
in
your
community
in
your
state
and
they
provide
the
ability
to
work,
pay
a
restitution
earn
some
money
access
some
programming,
but
right
now,
they're
not
funded
to
deliver
a
shirt
programming.
They
also
are
set
up
not
to
respond
recidivism,
but
rather
to
sort
of
enhance
we
are
already
on
in
terms
of
supervision.
R
The
text
at
the
bottom
indicates
that
only
5%
of
your
ACCC
population
are
people
who
violated
supervision,
so
you
only
have
5%
of
your
entire
beds
to
being
used
for
people
who
violate,
and
that's
why
the
90
day,
policy
and
age
guild
draft
to
30
was
created
to
really
augment
the
available.
The
use
of
your
ACC's,
those
are
beds
that
are
available,
but
they're
being
used
or
people
beginning
probation,
beginning
parole
or
an
inmate
status.
R
D
S
Think
that
would
be
a
great
question.
Mr.
chairman
and
representative
winners
for
I
do
see
teh
answer
I
know
there's
currently
in
some
transition
and
pilot
program
for
modifying
their
ISP
program.
You
know
with
ISP
and
the
research
in
general.
Around
ISP
programs
ISP
with
increased
surveillance
alone
is
not
effective
at
changing
behavior.
It
has
to
involve
some
behavior
change
strategies
in
addition
to
that,
whether
that
be
inclusive
of
substance,
abuse
treatment,
but
also
primarily
cognitive
behavioral
interventions
to
change
criminal
thinking
and
criminal
behaviors.
S
R
The
design
mr.
chairman
and
represented
winners,
the
design
in
general
of
ISP,
is
a
term
lasting
365
days.
It's
divided
up
into
three
120
day
levels
as
you
move
through
those
levels
once
you've
completed
them.
You
then
transfer
to
sender
supervision.
So
it's
sort
of
the
super
super
in
a
highly
intensive
supervision,
beginning
for
as
long
as
a
year,
320
day
intervals,
and
you
move
your
way
on
to
supervision.
R
So
the
design
of
the
policy
option
reflected
in
bill
draft
230
is
to
begin
someone
on
standard
supervision
unless
they
have
a
high
risk
to
Aria
fend
off
to
fail
on
supervision
and
then
use
is
P
is
a
sanction.
If
you're
not
working
on
center
supervision
for
violating
your
conditions,
prison
and
revocation
may
not
be
the
right
response.
Even
going
into
an
ACC
may
not
be
the
right
response.
R
R
And
the
reason
why
and
should
note
that
there
was
a
you
know,
our
role,
our
role.
Mr.
chairman
members
of
the
committee
was
to
assist
LSO
with
translating
the
policy
ideas
that
we
put
forward
as
policy
options
and
laramie
and
put
them
into
build
rafts.
It
was
truly
my
fault
in
a
in
a
suits
I
had
put
you
know,
I'd
offered
up
the
policy
option
based
on.
We
had
covered
to
prioritize
your
ACC
s
for
high-risk
people.
R
That
only
was
reflected
in
the
bill
draft
for
ISP
and
that's
entirely
my
fault
for
failure
to
know
your
statutes
and
to
as
I
need
a
CCS,
whether
it's
today
or
in
the
future.
There
is
a
similar
benefit
to
what
is
expressed
for
ISP
in
terms
of
prioritizing
for
high-risk
to
fail
people
for
the
ACC's.
There
are
a
variety
of
measures
that
can
be
provided
to
help
to
ship
your
ACC
population,
from
working
with
people
or
beginning
probation
and
parole
terms
to
people
who
are
not
complying
with
supervision
who
otherwise
would
go
to
prison.
R
That
makes
sense
for
a
recidivism
perspective,
because
currently,
according
to
this
slide
here
number
31,
the
only
people
who
enter
an
ACC
at
the
beginning
of
probation
and
parole
and
do
better
than
people
who
do
standard
probation
or
your
high-risk
to
fail
parolees,
and
so
so
there
are
a
variety
ways
to
change
that,
but
the
it
shows
you
an
credible
opportunity.
You
have
to
rely
less
on
ACC's
for
people
beginning
terms
and
shift
them
to
responding
to
recidivism.
They
can
fill
that
need
on
that.
R
A
G
R
Mr.
chairman,
it
it
could
be,
the
contracting
is
the
way
these
are
all
contract
centers,
so
yeah
I
would
I
would
ask
the
the
do
C
to
to
clarify
whether
that
could
happen.
I
can
explain
the
rationale
for
the
policy
option,
so
the
the
measures
to
affect
your
ACC
population
seem
to
be
statutes.
Administrative
rules
and
how
you
contract
with
them
statutes
would
help
you
to
us
close
or
seal
off
the
valve
of
people
coming
in
at
the
game.
R
R
I,
remember
thank
you,
sir
mr.
chairman
and
yes,
number.
One
is
reflected
in
a
variety
of
the
bill
drafts
in
front
of
you
from
2:30
regarding
the
use
of
your
isp
program
to
the
policies
regarding
probation
and
the
goal
through
those
policy
options
is
to
focus
your
existing
resources
on
high-risk
high
need
to
fail.
People
at
the
early
part
of
their
probation
term.
Recidivism
is
the
highest
and
to
refocus
your
existing
community
and
resources
where
they
will
have
the
best
impact
on
recidivism
reduction
and
on
avoiding
use
of
a
prison
bed.