Louisiana Senate Bill SB312

Louisiana 2010 Regular Session

• Introduced: 3/29/10
• Refer: 3/29/10
• Refer: 3/31/10
• Report Pass: 5/18/10
• Engrossed: 5/25/10
• Refer: 5/26/10
• Report Pass: 6/3/10
• Enrolled: 6/16/10
• Chaptered: 6/29/10
• Passed: 6/29/10

Caption

Provides for diminution of sentence for good behavior. (10/15/10) (EN DECREASE GF EX See Note)

Impact

The amendments introduced by SB312 have substantial implications for the state's corrections policy and inmate rehabilitation. It seeks to incentivize good behavior among inmates, thereby promoting a more constructive environment within correctional facilities. By allowing inmates to earn 'good time' credits, the bill aims to alleviate overcrowding pressures in prisons and optimize resource management while fostering rehabilitation over punitive measures. Furthermore, it applies specifically to inmates not convicted of serious offenses such as crimes of violence or sex offenses, thereby carefully balancing the provision of second chances while maintaining protocols for serious offenders.

Summary

Senate Bill 312 focuses on amending the regulations surrounding the diminution of sentence for inmates demonstrating good behavior in the custody of the Louisiana Department of Public Safety and Corrections. The bill specifies that eligible inmates convicted of felony offenses can earn a reduction in their sentences based on good behavior and participation in self-improvement activities, effectively enabling them to earn 'good time'. This calculated reduction is set at the rate of thirty-five days for every thirty days served, which potentially allows for significant early release options for many inmates under specific conditions.

Sentiment

The sentiment around SB312 appears to be generally supportive among reform advocates who view the bill as a progressive step toward criminal justice reform. Proponents argue that it encourages responsible behavior among inmates and supports their reentry into society, while critics are more cautious, expressing concern that such provisions may not adequately differentiate between different classes of offenses. The overall discourse appears to reflect a thoughtful deliberation on the fine line between rehabilitation and public safety, with suggestions that more nuanced approaches may be required for specific cases.

Contention

Notable points of contention arise from concerns about the applicability of the bill to certain categories of offenders. Critics argue that insufficient safeguards exist to ensure that 'good time' does not apply to inmates whose offenses warrant stricter repercussions. The fact that the bill grants no grounds for legal redress for inmates seeking to contest decisions regarding the award of good time remains a contentious issue, as it may restrict inmate rights while allowing the department significant discretion in implementing the rules. This raises broader questions about justice, equity, and the treatment of inmates within the state's correctional system.