1 | 1 | | |
---|
2 | 2 | | COUNCIL OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA |
---|
3 | 3 | | OFFICE OF COUNCILMEMBER BROOKE PINTO |
---|
4 | 4 | | THE JOHN A. WILSON BUILDING |
---|
5 | 5 | | 1350 PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE, N.W., SUITE 106 |
---|
6 | 6 | | WASHINGTON, D.C. 20004 |
---|
7 | 7 | | |
---|
8 | 8 | | |
---|
9 | 9 | | |
---|
10 | 10 | | March 24, 2025 |
---|
11 | 11 | | |
---|
12 | 12 | | Nyasha Howard, Secretary |
---|
13 | 13 | | Council of the District of Columbia |
---|
14 | 14 | | 1350 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. |
---|
15 | 15 | | Washington, DC 20004 |
---|
16 | 16 | | |
---|
17 | 17 | | Dear Secretary Howard, |
---|
18 | 18 | | |
---|
19 | 19 | | Today, along with Councilmember Anita Bonds, I am introducing the “Pretrial Detention |
---|
20 | 20 | | Amendment Act of 2025.” |
---|
21 | 21 | | |
---|
22 | 22 | | District law generally provides that when a person is arrested and charged with a crime, the person |
---|
23 | 23 | | should be released prior to trial (either with or without conditions) unless a judge finds that the |
---|
24 | 24 | | person either (1) is a flight risk, or (2) presents a danger to the community. |
---|
25 | 25 | | 1 |
---|
26 | 26 | | If a judge finds that |
---|
27 | 27 | | no conditions imposed on a person would reasonably assure the safety of others, or that no |
---|
28 | 28 | | condition would assure the person’s required appearance in court, then the law directs the judge to |
---|
29 | 29 | | order the person detained pretrial. |
---|
30 | 30 | | 2 |
---|
31 | 31 | | |
---|
32 | 32 | | |
---|
33 | 33 | | In certain situations, there is a “rebuttable presumption” that a person presents a flight risk or a |
---|
34 | 34 | | danger to the community and therefore should be detained prior to trial. A rebuttable presumption |
---|
35 | 35 | | is an inference that the court presumes to be conclusive about the facts presented until or unless |
---|
36 | 36 | | that inference is challenged or “rebutted” with counter-evidence. |
---|
37 | 37 | | 3 |
---|
38 | 38 | | In these cases, to release a |
---|
39 | 39 | | person, a court can only release a person if it finds that evidence has rebutted the presumption. |
---|
40 | 40 | | |
---|
41 | 41 | | B25-0395, the Prioritizing Public Safety Emergency Amendment Act of 2023 (“PPSE”), and |
---|
42 | 42 | | subsequently B25-0345, the Secure DC Omnibus Amendment Act of 2024 (“Secure DC”) made |
---|
43 | 43 | | changes to pretrial detention. Previously, before PPSE and Secure DC, there was no general |
---|
44 | 44 | | presumption of detention when a court found probable cause to believe that a person has committed |
---|
45 | 45 | | a crime of violence. Almost all of the situations in which the rebuttable presumption applied |
---|
46 | 46 | | required that the individual committed (or at least had been charged with) a crime prior to the |
---|
47 | 47 | | crime at issue in the case. |
---|
48 | 48 | | |
---|
49 | 49 | | PPSE and Secure DC expanded the rebuttable presumption to apply to all charges of crimes of |
---|
50 | 50 | | violence, regardless of whether the individual has previously been convicted or charged with a |
---|
51 | 51 | | crime. It also expanded detention for youth who have committed an offense while armed, |
---|
52 | 52 | | carjacking, sexual abuse or unarmed murder. Secure DC was amended to sunset those provisions, |
---|
53 | 53 | | which are currently set to expire on July 15, 2025. This bill would remove the sunset and make |
---|
54 | 54 | | these changes permanent. |
---|
55 | 55 | | |
---|
56 | 56 | | 1 |
---|
57 | 57 | | D.C. Code § 23-1321(a)-(b). |
---|
58 | 58 | | 2 |
---|
59 | 59 | | D.C. Code § 23-1322. |
---|
60 | 60 | | 3 |
---|
61 | 61 | | Legal Information Institute, Rebuttable presumption, available here. |
---|
62 | 62 | | |
---|
63 | 63 | | |
---|
64 | 64 | | |
---|
65 | 65 | | Should you have any questions about this legislation, please contact my Committee and Legislative |
---|
66 | 66 | | Director, Linn Groft, at lgroft@dccouncil.gov. |
---|
67 | 67 | | |
---|
68 | 68 | | Thank you, |
---|
69 | 69 | | |
---|
70 | 70 | | |
---|
71 | 71 | | |
---|
72 | 72 | | Brooke Pinto |
---|
73 | 73 | | Ward 2 Councilmember |
---|
74 | 74 | | Chairwoman, Committee on the Judiciary and Public Safety |
---|
75 | 75 | | Council of the District of Columbia |
---|
76 | 76 | | |
---|
77 | 77 | | |
---|
78 | 78 | | _____________________________ _____________________________ 1 |
---|
79 | 79 | | Councilmember Anita Bonds Councilmember Brooke Pinto 2 |
---|
80 | 80 | | 3 |
---|
81 | 81 | | 4 |
---|
82 | 82 | | 5 |
---|
83 | 83 | | 6 |
---|
84 | 84 | | 7 |
---|
85 | 85 | | A BILL 8 |
---|
86 | 86 | | 9 |
---|
87 | 87 | | _________________________ 10 |
---|
88 | 88 | | 11 |
---|
89 | 89 | | IN THE COUNCIL OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 12 |
---|
90 | 90 | | 13 |
---|
91 | 91 | | _________________________ 14 |
---|
92 | 92 | | 15 |
---|
93 | 93 | | 16 |
---|
94 | 94 | | To amend the Secure DC Omnibus Amendment Act of 2024 to remove the sunset date of certain 17 |
---|
95 | 95 | | pretrial detention provisions. 18 |
---|
96 | 96 | | 19 |
---|
97 | 97 | | BE IT ENACTED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, That this 20 |
---|
98 | 98 | | act may be cited as the “Pretrial Detention Amendment Act of 2025”. 21 |
---|
99 | 99 | | Sec. 2. The Secure DC Omnibus Amendment Act of 2024, effective June 8, 2024 (D.C. 22 |
---|
100 | 100 | | Law 25-175; 71 DCR 2732), is amended as follows: 23 |
---|
101 | 101 | | (a) Section 18(c)(2) is repealed. 24 |
---|
102 | 102 | | (b) Section 30(k) is repealed. 25 |
---|
103 | 103 | | Sec. 3. Fiscal impact statement. 26 |
---|
104 | 104 | | The Council adopts the fiscal impact statement in the committee report as the fiscal 27 |
---|
105 | 105 | | impact statement required by section 4a of the General Legislative Procedures Act of 1975, 28 |
---|
106 | 106 | | approved October 16, 2006 (120 Stat. 2038; D.C. Official Code § 1- 301.47a). 29 |
---|
107 | 107 | | Sec. 4. Effective date. 30 |
---|
108 | 108 | | This act shall take effect after approval by the Mayor (or in the event of veto by the 31 |
---|
109 | 109 | | Mayor, action by the Council to override the veto), a 30- day period of congressional review as 32 provided in section 602(c)(1) of the District of Columbia Home Rule Act, approved December 33 |
---|
110 | 110 | | 24, 1973 (87 Stat. 813; D.C. Official Code § 1- 206.02(c)(1)), and publication in the District of 34 |
---|
111 | 111 | | Columbia Register. 35 |
---|
112 | 112 | | 36 |
---|