Louisiana Senate Bill SB213

Louisiana 2018 Regular Session

• Introduced: 3/1/18
• Refer: 3/1/18
• Refer: 3/12/18

Caption

Provides relative to felony probation. (8/1/18)

Impact

The changes enacted by SB 213 are poised to reshape the legal landscape regarding probation management. By mandating the termination of probation for certain offenses after a year, it aims to alleviate the burden on individuals fulfilling their probation requirements while ensuring they meet essential financial obligations. Furthermore, the modification surrounding the hearing for determining financial hardship could streamline processes for defendants struggling to meet their financial obligations, as these hearings become discretionary rather than mandatory.

Summary

Senate Bill 213 aims to amend provisions around felony probation in Louisiana. The bill proposes significant changes to how probation is managed, particularly in relation to the termination and extension of probation for defendants. Most notably, it establishes that for non-violent felony offenses, defendants shall have their probation terminated after one year if they have met all conditions, including any restitution orders. For violent crimes and sex offenses, the probation can be terminated at the discretion of the court, provided that the defendant has made substantial efforts to comply with probation conditions.

Sentiment

Overall, discussions surrounding SB 213 reflect a mixed sentiment. Proponents argue that the bill provides a fairer system for handling probation—especially for those who demonstrate good behavior and compliance—while critics express concerns about the judicial discretion afforded in terminations related to violent crimes, apprehensive that it might lead to inconsistent applications of justice. The sentiment reflects a balance between the need for rigor in enforcement and compassion for those striving to reform.

Contention

A notable point of contention lies in the elimination of 'good time' or 'street credits' previously available to defendants for compliant behavior during probation. Critics worry that removing this incentive may dissuade good behavior among probationers. Additionally, the discretion granted to courts in assessing the completion of probation terms may result in variability that some perceive as unjust, particularly in how restitution obligations are enforced against defendants facing financial hardships.