HB 1648-FN – AS INTRODUCED
2012 SESSION
04/05
HOUSE BILL 1648-FN
AN ACT requiring prosecution of a law enforcement officer for failure to enforce the crime of interference with custody.
SPONSORS: Rep. Oligny, Rock 8; Rep. Krasucki, Hills 26; Rep. Manuse, Rock 5; Rep. Flanagan, Hills 5
COMMITTEE: Criminal Justice and Public Safety
This bill establishes the crime of failure to enforce the law prohibiting interference with custody.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Explanation: Matter added to current law appears in bold italics.
Matter removed from current law appears [in brackets and struckthrough.]
Matter which is either (a) all new or (b) repealed and reenacted appears in regular type.
12-2380
04/05
STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE
In the Year of Our Lord Two Thousand Twelve
AN ACT requiring prosecution of a law enforcement officer for failure to enforce the crime of interference with custody.
Be it Enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives in General Court convened:
1 New Section; Abuse of Office; Failure to Enforce. Amend RSA 643 by inserting after section 2 the following new section:
643:3 Failure to Enforce. A state, county, or local law enforcement officer is guilty of a class B felony for knowingly failing to enforce state law on interference with custody as defined in RSA 633:4.
2 Effective Date. This act shall take effect January 1, 2013.
LBAO
12-2380
12/22/11
HB 1648-FN - FISCAL NOTE
AN ACT requiring prosecution of a law enforcement officer for failure to enforce the crime of interference with custody.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The Judicial Branch, Judicial Council, Department of Justice, Department of Safety, Liquor Commission, New Hampshire Association of Counties, and New Hampshire Municipal Association state this bill may increase state, county, and local expenditures by an indeterminable amount. There will be no fiscal impact on state, county, or local revenue.
METHODOLOGY:
The Judicial Branch states this bill makes it a class B felony for a law enforcement officer to knowingly fail to enforce state law on interference with custody. The Branch states the bill may result in an increase in new class B felony cases or in changes from what were previously unspecified misdemeanors to class B felony cases. The Branch has no information to estimate how many new or increased charges would result from this bill but it does assume that its expenditures would increase per charge by either the cost of processing class B felony cases or the difference between processing either class A or class B misdemeanors and class B felonies, and it has information on the cost for processing these types of cases. All costs are estimated based on case weight information from the last needs assessment completed in 2005. The Branch states a class A misdemeanor will cost $59.11 per case in FY 2013 and $61.31 per case in FY 2014 and each year thereafter, and a class B misdemeanor will cost $43.19 per case in FY 2013 and $44.54 per case in FY 2014 and each year thereafter. The Branch states the felony in this statute would be classified as an average routine felony and treated as an average routine criminal case in the Superior Court. The Branch states an average routine criminal case will cost $389.84 per case in FY 2013 and $401.48 per case in FY 2014 and each year thereafter. Therefore, the cost increase per case from going from a class A misdemeanor to a class B felony is $330.73 ($389.84 - $59.11) in FY 2013 and $340.17 ($401.48 – 61.31) in FY 2014 and each year thereafter, and the cost increase per case from going from a class B misdemeanor to a class B felony is $346.65 ($389.84 - $43.19) in FY 2013 and $356.94 ($401.48 – 44.54) in FY 2014 and each year thereafter. The possibility of appeals increases the likelihood the fiscal impact on the Branch will exceed $10,000.
The Judicial Council states to the extent new charges are created or charges are increased from class A misdemeanors to class B felonies, this bill may result in an indeterminable increase in state general fund expenditures. The expenditure increase would equal either the cost of a felony case or the difference in cost between a misdemeanor and felony, although the Council cannot estimate the number of charges affected. The Council states if an individual is found to be indigent, the flat fees of $275 per misdemeanor and $756.25 per felony are charged by a public defender or contract attorney, for a per case difference of $481.25 ($756.25 - $275). If an assigned counsel attorney is used the fee is $60 per hour with caps of $1,400 for a misdemeanor and $4,100 for a felony, for a maximum per case difference of $2,700 ($4,100 - $1,400). The Council also states additional costs could be incurred if an appeal is filed. The public defender, contract attorney and assigned counsel rates for Supreme Court appeals is capped at $2,000 per case, with many assigned counsel attorneys seeking permission to exceed the fee cap. Requests to exceed the fee cap are seldom granted. Finally, expenditures would increase if services other than counsel are requested and approved by the court during the defense of a case or during an appeal.
The Department of Justice states bill may increase complaints filed with its public integrity unit, which investigates and prosecutes allegations of criminal conduct committed by public officials, including law enforcement officers, in their official capacity. The Department estimates investigation and prosecution of these additional cases would require additional investigative and prosecutorial resources, but it cannot estimate the number of potential instances or the amount of any cost increases.
The Department of Safety is unable to predict either the number of cases or their associated costs that may arise as a result of this bill, although it believes required prosecutions for failure to enforce the statute would be rare and that some technical violations of the statute may occur as law enforcement officers may need to do so in the course of protecting a child from real and imminent danger.
The Department of Corrections states it is not able to determine the fiscal impact of this bill because it does not have sufficient detail to predict the number of individuals who would be subject to this legislation. The Department of Corrections states the average annual cost of incarcerating an individual in the general prison population for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2010 was $32,492. The cost to supervise an individual by the Department’s division of field services for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2010 was $659.
The New Hampshire Association of Counties states to the extent more individuals are charged, convicted, and sentenced to incarceration in a county correctional facility, the counties may have increased expenditures. The Association is unable to determine the number of individuals who might be charged, convicted or incarcerated as a result of this bill to determine an exact fiscal impact. The average annual cost to incarcerate an individual in a county correctional facility is approximately $35,000. There is no impact on county revenue.
The New Hampshire Liquor Commission and New Hampshire Municipal Association state they cannot predict the number of cases to arise as a result of this bill or any potential fiscal impact.
The Fish and Game Department states this bill will not have a fiscal impact.