[{"_1":2,"_100":-5,"_101":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76,88],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6380168,"mediaKeyId","2133122-1bb812c28dfbc3085156ce3bf5d8a112","parentId",2133122,"title","Panel Debates HB 1178 to End Mandatory Stacking of Weapon Enhancements and Make Enhancements Eligible for Earned Release","audioSeconds",2264,"startMs",4789000,"endMs",7053000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2133122-1bb812c28dfbc3085156ce3bf5d8a112&start=4789&end=7053","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2133122-1bb812c28dfbc3085156ce3bf5d8a112/thumbnail_4789000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6380168/Washington/Panel-Debates-HB-1178-to-End-Mandatory-Stacking-of-Weapon-Enhancements-and-Make-Enhancements-Eligible-for-Earned-Release","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6380168-5ddc33c5a0f38555ba0188506e398cc7/orig.mp4?Expires=1771177716&Signature=jmLEyq1e7Z2CsC4cCa5~jo63-UYxH92Mx6s74c8I9hNO4g8nhIb72usO0A-Z6aeJ0Hvw8T82zUtkrxuCUdhv3xfmVU0hdjIo90SE46X2g~r8xcxkVzGfihpPlMeqrEoTKi6De6oCbIzpDZJFetxJg1Yq3s545eNAv2Kt4rLYYe5GCt2RumJYVpmZGOa1nBvjOPLHEURJKIfF-QBC5kalCok0Tx4agV3wVcaBBPgLAoBpeiSXtPvCSgOIpa1MimkndHB8I1Uq9ijw4V-To9G4kDOmFmOTFafmgrn6ZrQx0kXg9O5BE8w6qbi48ytTCiJF20oPE-cNxlPyerxTnhVFQA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","House Community Safety","date","2025-01-20T00:00:00Z","article","On Jan. 20, 2025 the House Community Safety Committee heard public testimony on House Bill 1178, which would reform sentencing enhancements under Washington’s Sentencing Reform Act by eliminating particular enhancements, removing mandatory consecutive application in many cases (so-called “stacking”), and making enhancements eligible for partial confinement and earned early release in most circumstances.

Staff framed the bill as a package of changes recommended by the Criminal Sentencing Task Force and the Sentencing Guidelines Commission. As summarized by committee staff: the bill would (a) eliminate two specific enhancements (the protected‑zone controlled‑substances enhancement and the enhancement for involving a minor in a criminal‑street‑gang related felony), (b) remove mandatory consecutive service for firearms/deadly‑weapon enhancements and certain meth‑manufacture‑in‑presence‑of‑minor enhancements, and (c) make many enhancements eligible for partial confinement and earned early release; the bill retains an exception that an impaired‑driving enhancement must be served in total confinement if the person has two or more prior alcohol/drug convictions or has certain vehicular homicide DUI convictions.

Witnesses supporting the bill emphasized empirical research and agency reports showing racial disproportionalities and the role enhancements play in producing very long sentences. Dr. Carl Jones, a former DOC principal research statistician, told the committee that enhancements and stacking are the mechanism driving racially disparate sentence lengths, and Department of Corrections and independent research found Black and Latino defendants receive firearm and weapon enhancement at disproportionately higher rates. Heather Evans (University of Washington) and Dr. Lauren Knuth Peterson (OFM Public Safety Policy and Research Center) cited analyses showing Black defendants are overrepresented among cases with weapons enhancements and that weapons enhancements have driven a portion of the growth in very long prison terms.

Advocates and legal aid groups — including the Washington Defender Association, TeamChild, the League of Women Voters, and others — argued for judicial discretion and for making enhancements eligible for earned release so that individuals who engage in programming can gain partial confinement. Percy Levy, a public‑outreach specialist with the WDA and a formerly incarcerated person, described sentences he and others faced under mandatory stacking and said judges had told him they would have sentenced differently if they had discretion.

Law‑enforcement representatives and prosecutors expressed concern and urged negotiation. James McMahon (Assoc. of Sheriffs and Police Chiefs) and Prosecuting Attorneys Association executive director Russell Brown said the committee should be cautious about removing strict rules for firearm enhancements; they signaled willingness to negotiate guardrails such as preserving consecutive time where multiple victims were harmed or where repeated firearm use occurred. The Association of Prosecuting Attorneys also raised technical drafting questions about whether concurrent application could unintentionally eliminate the enhancement’s impact in multi‑count cases if not carefully structured.

Several families and directly impacted people gave personal accounts of long sentences produced by stacked enhancements. Janice Cruz described a husband whose sentence was extended by 15 years in enhancements even though the presiding judge said he would not have stacked the enhancements if given discretion.

The hearing closed without a committee vote. Committee members and stakeholders indicated substantial interest in negotiating technical statutory language and guardrails that preserve public safety while restoring judicial discretion and addressing documented racial disparities.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","House Community Safety - 1/20/2025 1:30 PM","oneSentenceSummary","On Jan. 20, 2025 the House Community Safety Committee heard testimony on House Bill 1178, which would eliminate certain sentencing enhancements, end mandatory consecutive application (stacking) for many weapon and controlled‑substance enhancements, and make most enhancements eligible for partial confinement and earned early release.","taxTitle","Community Safety, Justice, & Reentry, House of Representatives, Legislative Sessions, Washington","taxId",20257,"location","Washington","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6380172,"Hearing on HB 1317: Proposal to Expand 'Second Look' for Offenses Committed Before 21 Draws Support and Concern",1915,2806000,4721000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2133122-1bb812c28dfbc3085156ce3bf5d8a112&start=2806&end=4721","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2133122-1bb812c28dfbc3085156ce3bf5d8a112/thumbnail_2806000.jpg","/articles/6380172/Washington/Hearing-on-HB-1317-Proposal-to-Expand-Second-Look-for-Offenses-Committed-Before-21-Draws-Support-and-Concern","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6380172-1f7d35e8fdcabc36e70c131093f563cb/orig.mp4?Expires=1771177716&Signature=MInLCs1lzjYPvlcStfj676t2tHcFrGUpAPcxRDYxva07om648cPaTqz05HWQFzlSr-OQXFNG-Gy8H2rhVqF2moCtEijUtJAv-qiG8gorElIOLnFSWcTkCWU3hh8CAdW8nkElthUEQ-yovA5KcPZAltTyZNQEQKvogFVMTW5tNeF6zTnxrRZDyseb0YOMHK1zKrXeSywX2l0QdzZ0P5gDzojPOj5MHDfJjejSpLmn5hnl4S7xHdK2Nf-xtxklgsgKUqQJOSr9SGQJHNsszLDU8mezM58IxsQy~Rsdui94l2UDCw~dfCp~I4XNdlljdH~i9nK3bJcun~s9xDDjOfPYmg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The House Community Safety Committee held public testimony on House Bill 1317 on Jan. 20, 2025, a measure to extend second‑look sentencing review and adjust sentencing parameters for people who committed offenses before age 21.

Under staff briefing, HB 1317 would (a) require that when aggravated murder in the first degree is committed at ages 18–20, the court must impose a maximum of life with a minimum term of at least 25 years if the court finds Miller mitigating factors apply; (b) allow persons convicted of crimes committed under age 21 to petition the Indeterminate Sentencing Review Board after serving no less than 15 years (rather than 20) of total confinement in many cases (with higher thresholds for murder in the first degree and aggravated murder); and (c) permit currently incarcerated people to petition the ISRB regardless of the date of their offense or conviction.

Proponents described the measure as a scientifically grounded, incremental expansion of existing second‑look processes. Representative David Hackney, sponsor of HB 1317, cited brain‑development research and ISRB recidivism statistics and said the bill \"does not give a guarantee of release\" but would allow professionals to assess a person's growth after decades of confinement. Neuroscientist Catherine Insel discussed adolescent and young‑adult brain maturation, telling the committee that prefrontal control systems and emotional‑reward systems continue to develop into the mid‑20s and that this creates opportunities for change in the 18–24 age range. Formerly incarcerated people — including Eugene Youngblood, Arthur Longworth, and others who served decades in prison — described personal rehabilitation and the benefits to families and communities of providing review opportunities.

Researchers and national comparisons were cited in support. Daniel Landsman (FAM) and witnesses referenced outcomes from Washington and other jurisdictions: low recidivism among people released after long sentences through juvenile second‑look processes, and examples from D.C. and California where expanded review produced very low new-conviction rates. Speakers argued that long, permanent sentences are costly and that age‑based review recognizes developmental science and reduces racial disparities in sentencing.

Opposition and caution came from prosecutors and some law‑enforcement representatives. Russell Brown, executive director of the Washington Association of Prosecuting Attorneys, voiced concerns about proportionality and whether a 15‑year review period is adequate for individuals 18–20 who committed severe violent crimes; he emphasized the need to ensure the seriousness of victims’ harms remains reflected in final outcomes. Several members of the committee and witnesses noted draft language nuances and asked for technical refinements (for example, how aggravated‑murder minimums interact with ISRB review).

The hearing concluded after robust testimony from both sides. No committee vote occurred on Jan. 20; staff and members signaled further drafting and follow-up would be needed before executive action.","House Bill 1317 would expand sentencing review opportunities to people who committed crimes before age 21 and adjust minimum terms for certain first-degree murder cases; testimony included judges, researchers, formerly incarcerated people and prosecutors debating brain science, recidivism data and proportionality.",{"_33":89,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":90,"_41":91,"_43":92,"_45":93,"_47":94,"_49":95,"_51":96,"_53":97,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":98,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":99,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6380177,"Committee Hears Testimony for ‘Youth Hope Act’ to Allow Earlier ISRB Review for People Convicted as Youth",2704,98000,2802000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2133122-1bb812c28dfbc3085156ce3bf5d8a112&start=98&end=2802","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2133122-1bb812c28dfbc3085156ce3bf5d8a112/thumbnail_98000.jpg","/articles/6380177/Washington/Committee-Hears-Testimony-for-Youth-Hope-Act-to-Allow-Earlier-ISRB-Review-for-People-Convicted-as-Youth","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6380177-b853b02f01e1e6ece46af47c5202cc9c/orig.mp4?Expires=1771177716&Signature=JDj5Bmp1uMFWzcUlxDpFhevMUX8jWfujsVQ6EPh2GOjB3uCnSBP80heUyCD25nJlfeLMUHzl8uZSbqjQyhRA9FElvvz7YZrDBLgnsPFmqG0VVVKtTP~zFN3wwjO-f4u78f1h7DCx3chwl-D6I9Iz5o3oLjbmTHuRIuviU6g4mm2pITXjzd5t9lzi2Uqsq1nGWAaszJBeanKi2ebhptyzl7TIVOevFYgHYmp5Oi3hcD54pTV8rZaQ~TaKZH6sYF2Ig2Nrr-R2-G5rbRhyPgo6-PiEBUQbAwydXsh~W52f5Vou175uyaSHcEm6I1rUTxky2piK2vJDw78-0FjBgDYlpw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","House Community Safety Committee Chair Goodman heard public testimony on Monday, Jan. 20, 2025, on House Bill 1111, known in testimony as the Youth Hope Act, a proposal that would change when people who committed offenses as juveniles can petition the Indeterminate Sentencing Review Board for early release.

The bill, presented by Representative Daria Farvar (46th Legislative District), would alter the ISRB petition eligibility for people convicted of crimes committed before age 18: under the proposal a person would need to reach age 24 (instead of serving at least 20 years), could not have a new conviction in the 12 months prior to filing, and would be screened for disqualifying serious infractions as defined by both the Department of Corrections and the Department of Children, Youth, and Family (DCYF). The bill also caps annual ISRB review of newly eligible petitions at 70 per year until July 1, 2035, specifies a prioritization order, authorizes the Department of Corrections to provide rental vouchers for released petitioners, and requires DOC to collect voucher outcome data to evaluate recidivism effects.

Supporters — a mix of currently and formerly incarcerated people, family members, legal advocates and researchers — framed the bill as an evidence-driven opportunity to balance public safety, victims’ voices and rehabilitation. Representative Daria Farvar told the committee she had met young people at Green Hill School and said the bill’s goals were “accountability and genuine rehabilitation,” adding that the ISRB should continue to weigh both incarcerated individuals’ and victims’ perspectives. Several residents from Green Hill and Echo Glen testified remotely and in person about education, diplomas and mentoring programs while confined. Christian DeVeigh, who identified himself as a resident and program participant, described the bill as a “pathway” and said it would add “willpower” and “way power” to give hope to adjudicated youth. Alexis Hale, a resident at Echo Glen, said a 15‑year juvenile-equivalent sentence left people “spending half of my life in prison” and argued long sentences were not reducing recidivism.

Opponents — including a longtime homicide victim advocate and the Washington Association of Prosecuting Attorneys — told the committee that families of homicide victims can experience renewed trauma if a sentence they understood to be final is revisited. Tiffany Bridal, a former homicide advocate in King County, said resentencing or later review can be “incredibly retraumatizing for victim families.” Prosecutors raised concerns about proportionality for very serious harms, noting that some cases become eligible for review relatively soon after conviction under certain timelines and that severe harms should be reflected in sentencing outcomes.

Researchers and judicial officials also appeared. Dr. Esther Matthews, a researcher and member of the Sentencing Guidelines Commission, testified that hope and related treatment participation predict lower recidivism; Judge David Keenan of King County Superior Court said review mechanisms provide “off ramps” and noted ISRB review already includes victim input. TeamChild staff attorney Alisa Cozad urged passage, saying the ISRB process is “rigorous” and does not guarantee release.

The committee asked for clarifications on specifics the bill delegates to agencies. Representative Griffey requested staff provide the DCYF definition of “disqualifying serious infractions.” Sponsor Farvar said she welcomed improvements and cautioned that the bill does not change the ISRB’s role but adds a class of eligible petitioners.

No vote was taken. The public hearing concluded after extensive testimony from more than two dozen witnesses in person and remotely. The committee noted the bill will proceed to executive action later in the process.

The record of the hearing includes numerous personal accounts from currently and formerly incarcerated people and from victim advocates; testimony ranged from appeals to scientific evidence about adolescent development to concerns about victims’ needs and the mechanics of prioritizing ISRB petitions. The committee did not take action on the bill during this session.","Lawmakers and dozens of witnesses debated House Bill 1111, the Youth Hope Act, which would change eligibility and timing for petitions to the Indeterminate Sentencing Review Board for people convicted of crimes committed before age 18; supporters stressed rehabilitation and victims’ voices, opponents warned of retraumatizing families.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Panel Debates HB 1178 to End Mandatory Stacking of Weapon Enhancements and Make Enhancements Eligible for Earned Release

Hearing on HB 1317: Proposal to Expand 'Second Look' for Offenses Committed Before 21 Draws Support and Concern

Committee Hears Testimony for ‘Youth Hope Act’ to Allow Earlier ISRB Review for People Convicted as Youth