Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Criminal Justice Data topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Staff briefs commission on mandatory-minimums, predatory-offender registration and firearms possession data
Summary
Commission staff presented a fiscal-note scenario and case-count breakdowns showing how changes to the crime-of-violence definition or firearm-eligibility rules could affect prison bed use; staff also described data limitations and recommended materials for commissioners' review.
At the April 10 meeting staff briefed commissioners on two related topics: offenses whose sentencing is complicated by mandatory minimums (commonly called ineligible persons possessing firearms or ammunition) and failure-to-register as a predatory offender. The staff presentation highlighted data, fiscal-note findings and sources commissioners may consult.
Staffer Nate summarized the common features of the two issues: “these offenses basically are failure to register as a predatory offender and certain persons not to possess firearm or ammunition ... they have two very important things in common. One is there are mandatory minimums that apply to these offenses ... and the other is the behavior is not illegal for anybody else to do.”
Fiscal-note scenario and data: staff described a fiscal-note scenario that modeled a change removing drug crimes from the statutory definition of “crime of violence.” That hypothetical, staff said, would reduce the estimated prison bed impact for ineligible-persons-with-firearms cases by roughly 200 beds of an estimated 913 beds currently attributable to those cases. Nate said the analysis showed the second-most-common predicate category was third- or fifth-degree controlled-substance offenses (about 22% of predicate crimes in the staff table presented).
Staff warned commissioners about data gaps. The office produced detailed predicate-crime linkage for firearms possession cases but has not yet compiled equivalent predicate breakdowns for predatory-offender registration violations. The staff packet included links to the Bureau of Criminal Apprehension (BCA) predatory-offender program materials and a working-group report that had minority and majority recommendations about possible statutory changes.
Next steps and deadlines: staff asked commissioners to complete a small follow-up ranking package and proposed a two-week turnaround for that smaller set (staff suggested a deadline of April 28 for the next ranking submissions and reminded the commission the next meeting is May 8). Staff also offered to produce demographic-impact statements for bills that require them and invited commissioners to participate in the data and demographic-impact process.
Commissioners asked clarifying questions about how mandatory minimums interact with guideline rankings and whether departure rules limit courts’ ability to avoid statutorily mandated minimum sentences. Staff explained that some departures are not allowed when the mandatory minimum applies to a subsequent offense but that non-subsequent cases can permit departures under existing rules. Commissioners requested more detailed predicate data for the predatory-offender population and additional breakdowns to show how frequently mandatory minimum penalties are applied.
Closing: staff committed to providing additional breakdowns, demographic-impact materials when appropriate and follow-up packets for the April 28 ranking exercise and the May 8 meeting.
