Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Criminal Justice Fleeing Elude topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee on Corrections and Juvenile Justice advances bill increasing penalties for repeat fleeing from police
Summary
The committee voted to pass House Bill 2177, which raises penalties for repeat fleeing or attempting to elude a police officer. Members debated deterrence, prosecutorial discretion and prison capacity before approving the bill.
Get email alerts on the Criminal Justice Fleeing Elude topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
At a meeting of the Committee on Corrections and Juvenile Justice, members voted to pass House Bill 2177, a measure that increases penalties for repeat offenses of fleeing or attempting to elude a police officer. Representative Ressman moved the motion; Representative Barrett seconded, and the motion passed favorably.
The bill, described by committee staff Jason (the committee reviser) as “the bill relating to fleeing or attempting to elude a police officer” that “increases the penalties for repeat offenses,” drew extended discussion on whether stiffer penalties would deter dangerous chases or simply expand the prison population.
Supporters said the measure targets repeat offenders. Representative Barrett said the bill keeps the first-time offense at a level 9 felony and “it's still keeping that first time offense at that level 9 felony. So they've already been given 1 chance, and this is just elevating it each time after to, you know, where there's actually some consequences.”
Opponents and cautious supporters said data on deterrence is limited. Representative Schlingensiepen said she looked for evidence that laws of this kind reduced fleeing incidents and did not find clear results, saying, “I wish we had some data… I don't particularly like passing legislation on an anecdotal basis.” Representative Mosley echoed the need for evidence, warning of unintended effects on prison populations and the importance of tying punitive measures to rehabilitative outcomes.
Representative Carmichael said he remained concerned but could support the bill reluctantly: “I remain concerned about this legislation. I honestly don't think that people who are fleeing and eluding a police officer are thinking at all about the penalty… So I'm gonna reluctantly vote for it.” Several members discussed how the existing statutory scheme operates: Jason explained that once an offender accumulates five traffic violations, drives recklessly, goes around a police barricade or drives over stop sticks the offense escalates from misdemeanor to felony and that judges retain sentencing discretion under the sentencing grid.
Committee members also discussed prosecutorial practice across jurisdictions. Carmichael noted the continuing-offense doctrine and possible multiple charges across county lines; others observed that prosecutors often choose the jurisdiction with the strongest case. Representative Neely emphasized public safety: stiffer penalties might save lives by deterring dangerous chases.
The committee recorded several individual votes: Representative Carmichael said his vote was “in the affirmative, reluctantly”; Representative Schlingensiepen recorded a no; Representative Mosley recorded a no; Representative Smith recorded a yes; Representative Schwarzenegger recorded a yes. The chair announced the motion passed.
The measure will move forward on the legislative calendar; the committee indicated the bill passed favorably at the end of the discussion.

