Repeals the Missouri Incarceration Reimbursement Act
Summary
SB617 repeals the Missouri Incarceration Reimbursement Act, which had allowed the state to seek reimbursement from offenders for the cost of their incarceration. The bill removes the statutory framework that let the attorney general investigate offenders’ assets, pursue court orders to recover a portion of those assets or income, and place recovered funds into a dedicated revolving fund for correctional costs. It also eliminates related provisions governing asset disclosure, enforcement, priorities against other liens, and the use of recovered money for the attorney general’s expenses and prison operations.
In place of the repealed reimbursement provisions, SB617 enacts a new version of section 650.058 focused on compensation for people who were wrongfully convicted and later proven actually innocent through DNA evidence. Under the bill, an actually innocent person may receive restitution of $100 per day of postconviction incarceration, subject to filing requirements, annual payment limits, and available appropriations. The bill also provides that such individuals are automatically entitled to expungement of the arrest, plea, trial, and conviction records, and it bars them from seeking additional civil claims against the state once restitution is accepted.
Impact
The bill would substantially change Missouri law by removing the state’s authority to recoup incarceration costs from offenders and replacing that policy with a narrower compensation scheme for exonerees. It repeals multiple sections of the Missouri statutes governing offender asset collection and reimbursement, and consolidates the law into a revised section 650.058 addressing restitution for actual innocence, expungement, and related payment procedures. Affected parties include the Department of Corrections, the attorney general, incarcerated or formerly incarcerated offenders, and individuals exonerated by DNA testing.
Sentiment
Based on the bill text and caption, the measure appears to reflect a policy shift away from charging offenders for incarceration and toward limiting state recovery efforts. No committee transcripts or recorded votes were provided, so there is no direct evidence of debate or formal support/opposition in the available materials. The bill’s structure suggests a generally reform-oriented approach, especially in its protection of wrongfully convicted individuals and elimination of the reimbursement regime.
Contention
The main point of contention is the repeal of the state’s ability to seek reimbursement from offenders for the cost of care, which would remove a mechanism intended to offset correctional expenses and recover funds from offenders with assets or income. Opponents of repeal would likely focus on the loss of a revenue source and the reduction of tools available to the attorney general and corrections officials, while supporters would likely emphasize fairness concerns and the burden of incarceration costs on offenders and their families. The bill also contains limits on restitution for the actually innocent, including annual caps, no interest, and a bar on further civil redress, which could be relevant if the measure were debated.
A BILL for an Act to create and enact a new subdivision to subsection 4 of section 12.1-32-07, a new subsection to section 12.1-32-08, and a new section to chapter 39-08 of the North Dakota Century Code, relating to restitution for the child of a victim of criminal vehicular homicide and conditions of probation; to amend and reenact subsection 5 of section 12.1-32-06.1 of the North Dakota Century Code, relating to the extension of probation; to provide a penalty; and to provide for application.