Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Criminal Justice topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Review staff asks proponents to fix definitions, cross-references in child sex-assault sentencing initiative
Summary
In a review of proposed initiative 216, staff said the draft would impose mandatory indeterminate sentences and raise minimum ranges for multiple child sexual-assault and trafficking offenses; staff asked proponents to correct renamed offense references, resolve overlap with existing statutes (including internet-luring and prostitution provisions), and add an applicability clause after the effective date.
At a legislative review-and-comment hearing, Owen Hatch of the Office of Legislative Legal Services summarized the major purposes of proposed initiative measure 216 and raised a series of drafting flags for the proponents.
Hatch said the initiative would require courts to impose indeterminate prison sentences and prohibit probation for offenders convicted of enumerated offenses against children; it would also raise sentencing minima for a list of offenses (including internet luring, pandering, keeping a place for commercial sexual activity with a child, and human trafficking for involuntary servitude) and would rename certain offenses to use "commercial sexual activity with a child." Proponents Suzanne Taheri and Michael Fields were present to discuss drafting.
Staff asked the proponents to (1) update statutory cross-references to reflect renamed offenses where those names appear elsewhere in the Colorado Revised Statutes; (2) consider whether raising penal classes for internet luring would unintentionally be preempted by other statutes that address similar conduct and carry lower penalties; (3) clarify how crime-of-violence enhancements should apply and whether the initiative unintentionally duplicates existing crime-of-violence listings; and (4) provide a clear definition of "commercial sexual activity." Proponents acknowledged those issues and said they would revise the draft.
Hatch also advised adding an applicability clause after the effective date to give the public notice before criminal provisions take effect, a practice often recommended for legislation that changes criminal penalties. Staff and proponents agreed to review the technical comments together after the hearing closed.
