Connecticut Senate Bill SB00460

Connecticut 2016 Regular Session

• Introduced: 3/16/16
• Refer: 3/16/16
• Report Pass: 3/30/16
• Refer: 4/8/16
• Report Pass: 4/14/16

Caption

An Act Concerning Compensation For Wrongful Incarceration.

Impact

The implementation of SB00460 would have significant implications on state laws regarding wrongful convictions. By formalizing the process for claiming compensation, the bill addresses a critical gap in the justice system, ensuring that those who have suffered from wrongful imprisonments have a mechanism to seek redress. This legislation would not only promote accountability within the criminal justice system but also facilitate the reintegration of wrongfully incarcerated individuals into society by providing financial assistance for various needs such as employment training and counseling.

Summary

SB00460, titled 'An Act Concerning Compensation For Wrongful Incarceration,' seeks to establish a framework for compensating individuals who have been wrongfully convicted and incarcerated. The bill outlines eligibility criteria for compensation, which includes individuals who have been convicted of crimes they did not commit, whose convictions have been vacated or reversed by a court. It emphasizes the necessity of proving innocence and provides a structured path for making claims to the state for compensation through the Claims Commissioner.

Sentiment

The sentiment surrounding SB00460 appears to be predominantly positive among proponents who view it as a necessary step towards justice and reparations for the wrongfully convicted. Advocates argue that the bill not only helps individuals economically but also symbolizes the state’s commitment to rectifying injustices. Conversely, some criticisms may arise around the potential for the bill to face challenges in implementation, particularly pertaining to the burden of proof required from claimants.

Contention

Notable points of contention regarding SB00460 could arise from the eligibility requirements for compensation, particularly the need for claimants to demonstrate their innocence and the associated evidentiary burdens. This aspect may lead to debates about what constitutes sufficient proof and concerns that it may disadvantage some wrongfully incarcerated individuals. Furthermore, the stipulation that no additional legal actions can be pursued against the state following compensation could also lead to discussions about the adequacy of rights granted to affected individuals.