Committee hears corrections request to notify victims when incarcerated people seek name changes

Senator Shelly Vance introduced Senate Bill 65 in the Senate Judiciary Committee on behalf of the Department of Corrections. The one-sentence change on page 2 would permit the department to contact victims "as defined in 46-18-243" to obtain information relevant to the department’s response to a petition to change an incarcerated person’s name.

Scott Eichner, rehabilitation programs chief for the Department of Corrections, told the committee victim engagement is already core to many corrections processes but that the department currently lacks a statutory ability to reach victims when an incarcerated person seeks a legal name change. “We can’t reach out and engage that victim about that name change to get their input…This would give us the ability to reach out to victims and make them aware that their offender intends to change their name,” Eichner said.

Committee members pressed agency witnesses on whether the bill’s discretionary phrasing (“may”) should be changed to a mandatory requirement (“shall”) so victims could not be left unaware of a name change. Senator Smith, who said she has prosecuted crimes and worked with victim engagement in the past, asked whether the department would accept an amendment changing “may” to “shall.” Eichner said the agency would support that change “with consultation with the sponsor.”

Senators also raised operational questions. Senator Benton asked whether a mandatory duty to contact victims could create burdens where victims cannot be located; Eichner acknowledged there are cases where victims are unreachable. Senator Olson asked whether a statutory “shall” could be implemented with a requirement that the department “make reasonable efforts” to contact victims; Eichner said he was not prepared at the hearing to craft exact statutory language but the department and sponsor signaled openness to a “reasonable efforts” formulation.

Committee members and the sponsor discussed a friendly amendment to add language clarifying the department’s outreach obligation and whether to require the department to state reasonable-efforts efforts in its petition response. Senator Vance said she considered a clarifying amendment a “friendly amendment” and expressed support for the department’s engagement approach.

Why it matters: Victim-notification advocates argued victims’ perspectives on name changes can be material to court proceedings and to victims’ safety and sense of closure. The department said the bill would align name-change petitions with other corrections processes that already include victim outreach.

What’s next: The sponsor asked the committee for favorable consideration. At the close of the hearing committee members signaled possible agreement to consider drafting language that clarifies the department’s duty and sets a reasonable-efforts standard; no formal vote was recorded in the transcript.