House Judiciary Committee reviews bill to let DOC temporarily hold people on pre-signed extradition waivers

The House Judiciary Committee on April 10 heard testimony on amendments to S.87 that would give the Vermont Department of Corrections (DOC) explicit authority to hold people arrested in Vermont when another state alleges an extraditable offense and the arrested person provided a pre-signed waiver of extradition.

Committee members, the assistant attorney general and the DOC’s extradition manager described a draft (1.1) that: requires an arresting officer to deliver paperwork establishing an extraditable warrant or supervision violation; authorizes DOC to hold the person while documentation is requested and assessed; and limits DOC custody tied to the waiver to 14 calendar days, after which the arresting agency may begin the full extradition process if the demanding state has not taken custody.

The amendment aims to streamline returns in cases where people previously signed waivers agreeing to return if they violate supervision or other conditions. Assistant Attorney General Todd Daley told the committee that the bill’s language would require the arresting officer to provide paperwork “that attests to the fact that a) the person has broken the terms of probation, parole or otherwise in another state that that state has an extraditable arrest warrant,” and that DOC would then assess that documentation before holding or transferring custody.

Morgan Rogers, DOC’s extradition manager, told the committee that in the department’s experience “the majority of these cases are associated with violations of supervision and absconding from that supervision.” She said most pre-signed waivers Vermont encounters are post-adjudication — for people already convicted and then released to supervision — and that custody practices and judicial procedures vary widely by state and county. Rogers said the 14-day limit was chosen as a practical, uniform measure after discussion of varying local practices, and that Vermont lacks local lockups in many counties so DOC often performs the custody role that county jails perform elsewhere.

Committee members pressed several policy and operational questions. Some members and witnesses emphasized that pretrial cases — where an individual has not been convicted — raise greater due-process concerns because the level of judicial screening before a waiver may be lower. Several lawmakers asked whether the statute should build in an expedited judicial review for pretrial waivers; the assistant attorney general and DOC witnesses said the draft treats pre-signed waivers as analogous to administrative interstate processes such as the Interstate Compact for Adult Offender Supervision and the Interstate Agreement on Detainers, which operate without a new judicial hearing in the receiving state.

Kim McManus of the Department of State’s Attorneys and Sheriffs told the committee that the Uniform Extradition Act and related practice expect a judge to confirm that a person understands a waiver where appropriate, and cautioned the committee to preserve that check. “The Uniform Extradition Act does require that, before someone signs away these important rights, a judge runs through and explains to them,” McManus said, adding that the defender general’s office has argued for a court process to examine the validity of an advance waiver.

The draft also includes a safety valve: if DOC finds errors in the paperwork it would notify the arresting officer and require a different legal basis to hold the person; if DOC cannot secure a judge’s order or otherwise effect lawful custody, the person must be released. The draft directs DOC to release a person not taken by the demanding state within 14 calendar days unless the arresting agency begins the full extradition process; committee discussion clarified that “delivered to the demanding state” refers to Vermont’s handoff, and travel time after handoff is controlled by the demanding state.

Committee members asked for data on how often Vermont houses people as fugitives under pretrial versus post-adjudication warrants. Rogers said DOC’s data team could pull counts of people held as fugitive-from-justice cases for the past year but determining pretrial versus post-adjudication status would require case-by-case review.

No formal vote was recorded on April 10. Committee members agreed to call the defender general’s office and other stakeholders back next week to address outstanding due-process concerns and to provide further operational data before any final action.

The committee’s deliberations centered on balancing operational burdens on law enforcement and correctional facilities with safeguards for people arrested in Vermont whose extradition rights may have been previously waived in another jurisdiction.