Enacts "Cesar's law" to require the retaking of parolees who abscond from the supervision of the state board of parole.
Summary
Bill S05899, known as "Cesar's Law," amends the executive law to mandate the retaking of individuals who abscond from parole or other conditional releases. The bill specifies that when there is reasonable cause to believe that a parolee or conditional releasee has absconded, the parole board must declare the individual delinquent and issue a warrant for their retaking. This change emphasizes a more proactive approach by law enforcement in addressing absconders, ensuring that they are swiftly returned to supervision.
Impact
The enactment of Cesar's Law will significantly alter the procedures surrounding the management of parolees in New York. By changing the language from 'may' to 'shall' regarding the issuance of warrants for absconders, the law imposes a stricter obligation on the parole board and law enforcement agencies. This could lead to an increase in the number of individuals retaken and potentially impact the overall parole system by reinforcing the importance of compliance with release conditions.
Sentiment
The general sentiment surrounding the bill appears to be supportive among its sponsors, who advocate for a stricter approach to managing parolees. However, there may be concerns from civil rights advocates regarding the implications of such measures on individuals' rights and the potential for increased incarceration rates. The lack of recorded votes or extensive committee discussions suggests that the bill may not have faced significant opposition at this stage.
Contention
Notable points of contention may arise from the balance between public safety and the rights of individuals under supervision. Critics may argue that the bill could lead to excessive enforcement actions against parolees, while supporters may contend that it is necessary to ensure accountability and reduce recidivism. The discussions around the bill have not yet highlighted specific opposing viewpoints, indicating a need for further debate as it progresses through the legislative process.
Removing the prisoner review board from the supervision of the secretary of corrections, changing the appointing authority and creating qualifications for the members of the board and requiring parole hearings to be postponed if proper notice of the public comment session is not made to the victim.
Board of Pardons and Paroles; discretion whether to grant or deny parole, further provided; review of parole violations, procedure further provided to require consideration of totality of circumstances; penalties for certain parole-violations, increased
Board of Pardons and Paroles; discretion whether to grant or deny parole, further provided; review of parole violations, procedure further provided to require consideration of totality of circumstances; penalties for certain parole-violations, increased
Relating to the required approval of certain hospital visits as a condition of release on parole or to mandatory supervision for certain releasees and to the hospital's liability for damages resulting from those visits.