AN ACT to create and enact a new section to chapter 29-26 and a new section to chapter 54-12 of the North Dakota Century Code, relating to the cost of digital forensic examinations and the establishment of an internet crime investigation fund; to provide a continuing appropriation; and to provide a penalty.
Summary
SB 2167 creates a new court-ordered reimbursement for the cost of digital forensic examinations performed on a defendant’s personal electronic devices during the investigation and prosecution of a crime. If a person is convicted of a felony or misdemeanor, the court must assess up to $100 per defendant to cover those examination costs, and the money is collected as part of the sentence.
The bill also establishes the Internet Crimes Investigation Fund in the state treasury. Money collected under the new reimbursement provision is deposited into the fund and is continuously appropriated to the Attorney General for technology hardware, software licensing, digital forensic training, and internet safety presentations. The stated purpose is to support law enforcement and organizations working to prevent technology-facilitated child sexual exploitation and internet crimes against children.
Impact
SB 2167 adds a new sentencing-related cost provision to North Dakota law and creates a dedicated special fund within the state treasury. It affects convicted defendants by allowing courts to impose a reimbursement fee tied to digital forensic work on phones, tablets, computers, and similar devices, capped at $100 per defendant. It also gives the Attorney General ongoing access to the collected funds for investigative tools, training, and prevention efforts related to internet crimes and child exploitation.
Sentiment
The bill appears to have broad bipartisan support and little visible opposition. It passed the Senate 47-0 and the House 88-0, indicating unanimous support among voting members in both chambers. The absence of recorded committee testimony or debate in the provided materials suggests the measure was viewed as a practical law-enforcement funding mechanism rather than a controversial policy change.
Contention
No specific points of contention are reflected in the available transcripts or vote history. Potential areas of concern, if raised, would likely involve the added financial burden on convicted defendants, the use of court-imposed fees to fund law-enforcement operations, and whether the $100 cap is sufficient to offset digital forensic costs. However, the recorded votes show no opposition, and no member or stakeholder objections are documented in the provided materials.