Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Criminal Procedure topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Panel backs summons-first approach for certain delayed charges; SB 110 clears committee
Summary
The committee unanimously recommended favorable action on 1st Substitute SB 110, which would create a presumption in many cases that prosecutors should issue a summons before seeking a warrant when charges are filed after a prolonged delay following release under Rule 9.
The Senate Judiciary Committee unanimously moved 1st Substitute Senate Bill 110, the summons-modification measure, to the Senate floor after testimony from the bill sponsor and public commenters.
Senator Karen Pitcher, the sponsor, told the committee the bill addresses cases in which an individual released after the initial statutory charging window later learns charges will be filed and finds themselves arrested on a warrant months after compliance with pretrial conditions. "What the bill seeks to address is following that process, you may have an individual who was released rule 9...they have been completely compliant with pretrial services...the bill creates a procedure where we presume that a summons should be issued first to bring that person into court," Pitcher said.
Under the first substitute, the presumption in favor of issuing a summons can be overcome where prosecutors demonstrate good cause to seek a warrant — for example, if there's a risk to public safety or no known address — or where a prior summons failed or could not be served after good-faith efforts.
Public commenters included Mark Moffett of the Criminal Defense Lawyers Association, who described repeated instances in his practice where delayed charging followed by a warrant was disruptive to clients who had complied with pretrial requirements. "For the folks who are not in trouble ... to have them rearrested again is incredibly disruptive," Moffett said. Jeff Beaman, representing the Statewide Association of Public Attorneys and Prosecutors, told the committee the association worked with the sponsor and that the substitute addresses prosecutors' concerns by retaining authority to seek warrants when appropriate and by adding a 60-day threshold and court justification for warrants in some circumstances. A third public commenter, defense attorney Steve Burton, gave examples of screening delays in some prosecutor offices and supported the policy to start with a summons when conditions allow.
Committee members pressed about why a summons presumption is appropriate; Pitcher argued that a warrant is an "incredibly disruptive" tool and that in the absence of articulable public-safety risks it is better practice to attempt service by summons first.
The committee adopted the first substitute and then voted to favorably recommend 1st Substitute SB 110 to the Senate floor on unanimous voice votes.
