Louisiana House Bill HCR79

Louisiana 2019 Regular Session

• Introduced: 5/13/19
• Refer: 5/14/19
• Report Pass: 5/21/19
• Engrossed: 5/28/19
• Refer: 5/29/19
• Report Pass: 5/31/19
• Passed: 6/3/19

Caption

Requests the Dept. of Public Safety and Corrections to study alternative means of reporting to a probation and parole officer

Impact

The bill has the potential to significantly influence state laws regarding the supervision of probation and parole. By prompting a study into alternative reporting methods, it could lead to modernized practices that align more closely with contemporary societal dynamics and the employment situations of individuals on supervision. The emphasis on reducing the necessity for in-person meetings could enhance the ability of these individuals to successfully reintegrate into society and maintain their employment, all while ensuring that probation and parole officers can effectively monitor compliance.

Summary

House Concurrent Resolution 79 (HCR79) urges and requests the Department of Public Safety and Corrections to study the feasibility of alternative methods for individuals on probation or parole to report to their probation and parole officers. Currently, Louisiana law does not specify how reporting must occur, which opens the door for exploring different formats that could accommodate the needs of individuals under supervision. The focus of the resolution is to improve compliance with reporting requirements while also considering the practical challenges that in-person meetings may pose for probationers and parolees.

Sentiment

The sentiment surrounding HCR79 is generally positive, particularly among advocacy groups involved in criminal justice reform. Supporters argue that alternative reporting methods can alleviate unnecessary burdens on individuals attempting to transition back into society following incarceration. They highlight the importance of balancing public safety with the need for rehabilitation and reintegration, viewing this resolution as a step in the right direction. However, there may be concerns from those who emphasize the importance of personal interaction between probationers and officers for relationship-building and compliance monitoring.

Contention

While there is an overall supportive atmosphere for the proposed study in HCR79, contention may arise regarding how effectively alternative methods can substitute in-person meetings for oversight purposes. Some critics may question if remote reporting could risk diminishing the accountability that comes from direct interactions. Thus, this study could spark discussions on the effectiveness of technology in managing probation and parole, ultimately impacting future legislative considerations in criminal justice policies.