Subcommittee narrows SB 148 to first-degree murder, agrees forfeiture rules apply post-conviction

A Judiciary subcommittee agreed April 22 to narrow proposed Senate Bill 148 to apply only to first‑degree murder and to require any forfeiture or recovery of assets to occur after a criminal conviction.

The decision followed an extended line‑by‑line discussion about whether family members should be allowed to bring civil suits before a criminal charge or conviction, and whether the attorney general’s office should be able to seek a stay of civil proceedings while it decides whether to bring criminal charges.

Chair (Speaker 1) opened the session saying, "I'm gonna open up the subcommittee work session on s b 1 48," and framed the group's task as reconciling two competing amendment drafts on probate, pre‑conviction suits and who qualifies as a victim.

The subcommittee members discussed two main questions: whether the bill should cover first‑degree murder only or also include second‑degree and related federal offenses, and whether a person’s estate or immediate family may sue before criminal charges are filed. Speaker 2 argued the earlier language allowing civil suit before conviction posed serious due‑process and practical problems, describing scenarios in which heirs could tie up assets while a prosecutor has an undecided, ongoing investigation.

Several members raised the same concerns: a civil suit before conviction can force a defendant to choose between invoking constitutional protections or defending property in civil court, and stays sought by the attorney general’s office could be indefinite without a statutory timeline. One participant suggested a 60‑ to 90‑day stay as a compromise, but members noted murder cases have no statute of limitations and a 90‑day limit would not bar later criminal charges.

After reviewing the competing drafts, the subcommittee agreed to the following changes: - Limit SB 148 to murder in the first degree (language specifying second‑degree murder and related federal offenses will be removed). - Eliminate the pre‑conviction civil‑suit procedure and references that would direct third parties (publishers, insurers, payors) to remit funds to probate where no criminal proceeding existed. - Make forfeiture and recovery of funds or property contingent on a conviction (post‑conviction forfeiture). - Clarify the definition of “victim” for the chapter to mean the estate of a person who was murdered or the immediate family of the person murdered, but explicitly exclude a person convicted of the murder from being treated as a victim under the chapter.

Participants also agreed to remove several probate‑only procedural references that would have asked payors and other third parties to hold or turn over proceeds before a conviction. The group discussed practical examples — insurance payouts and a book publisher holding proceeds — and concluded those third‑party protections are simpler and fairer when keyed to post‑conviction authority.

The subcommittee did not record a formal roll‑call vote on the floor; members instructed staff to prepare a consolidated amendment that would carry the three members’ names and reflect the agreed edits. Chair (Speaker 1) said the members would return a revised amendment for review; later in the session a participant summed up, "We got it," as the group concluded its edits.

The session included recurring legal references to RSA 631‑B and to the applicable chapter definitions; participants asked counsel to place the agreed victim definition in the definitional section of the chapter rather than scattered mid‑text.

No final bill text was filed on the record in this session; the subcommittee’s direction was to have staff produce a single redraft incorporating the agreed deletions and clarifications for further consideration.