Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Domestic Violence Bail topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Bill would require clerks to schedule bail‑revocation hearings within 72 hours in domestic‑violence cases
Summary
Sponsor Rep. Zoe Manos told the Senate Judiciary Committee HB1637 aims to force clerks to schedule hearings on motions to modify or revoke bail within 72 hours (excluding weekends/holidays) in domestic violence, stalking and harassment cases; judicial staff requested a drafting clarification so the rule applies to the circuit court as well as the superior court.
Following a murder cited in testimony, Representative Zoe Manos presented HB1637 as a narrowly focused change to require that when the prosecution or defense moves to modify or revoke bail in domestic‑violence, stalking, or harassment cases, the clerk must schedule a hearing date within 72 hours (excluding weekends and holidays). Manos said the bill would shorten the time between filing a motion and setting a hearing, noting that escalation can be rapid "in cases of domestic violence, stalking, and harassment."
Judicial administrative staff (Attorney Lauren Warner of the judicial branch) had previously reviewed the draft and asked whether the sponsor intended the 72‑hour scheduling requirement to apply in both circuit court and superior court. Manos confirmed her intention that clerks schedule a hearing date when bail conditions are alleged to have been violated, and an amendment drafted by Senator Alt Schiller was presented to clarify coverage for both circuit and superior courts.
Supporters, including former colleagues and victim‑advocacy witnesses, said deadlines are important when safety is at stake and pointed to the Marisol Fuentes case as the impetus for the legislation. Representative David Muse and others urged the committee to pass the bill as one of a small set of measures addressing systemic gaps identified after that homicide.
The transcript shows committee discussion and an amendment offered to expand the scope to circuit court scheduling; no final committee vote was recorded in the hearing.
