Utah 2022 Regular Session

Utah House Bill HB0123

Introduced
1/18/22  
Refer
1/24/22  
Report Pass
2/11/22  
Engrossed
2/17/22  
Refer
2/18/22  
Report Pass
2/24/22  
Enrolled
3/10/22  

Caption

Use of Force Revisions

Impact

The implementation of HB 0123 is likely to modernize the way officer-involved incidents are investigated in the state. By stipulating that a separate agency not affiliated with the officer involved conducts investigations, the bill aims to reduce potential biases in these inquiries. Furthermore, with a mandated completion timeline of 180 days for findings to be published, the legislation endeavors to provide timely closure to affected parties and the broader community. The requirement for law enforcement agencies to publicly post their protocols further supports a culture of accountability and transparency.

Summary

House Bill 0123, known as the Use of Force Revisions, aims to reform the protocols surrounding how law enforcement agencies handle investigations into officer-involved critical incidents, specifically those involving the use of deadly force. The bill emphasizes a swift completion timeline for such investigations and mandates certain information related to these incidents to be accessible online, thereby enhancing transparency and accountability in law enforcement operations. This legislative measure seeks to ensure that the actions of officers are subject to thorough external scrutiny, promoting public trust in law enforcement agencies.

Sentiment

The sentiment around HB 0123 appears to be largely supportive among advocates for police reform and accountability. Proponents argue that the bill will lead to fairer investigations and restoration of public confidence in law enforcement. However, there are some concerns voiced by law enforcement bodies about the practical implications of the legislation, particularly regarding resource allocation and the administrative burden associated with compliance. This divergence in opinion indicates a broader discussion about balancing law enforcement needs with public accountability.

Contention

Notable points of contention include concerns regarding the timeline for investigations and the operational implications for law enforcement agencies. Some critics argue that the 180-day requirement might be overly ambitious in more complex cases. Additionally, while the bill promotes transparency, some law enforcement groups worry it could unintentionally hinder cooperative relationships between agencies during investigations. The debate reflects larger issues around law enforcement practices, community relations, and the necessity for systematic change in the wake of public demands for greater accountability.

Companion Bills

No companion bills found.

Previously Filed As

UT HB0561

Use of Force Reporting Requirements

UT SB795

Modifies provisions relating to law enforcement officer use of force

UT SB1151

Modifies provisions relating to use of force by law enforcement officers

UT SB445

Modifies provisions relating to use of force by law enforcement officers

UT AB1022

Peace officers: use of force.

UT HB0362

Juvenile Justice Revisions

UT SB1252

Justification; physical; deadly force; sentencing

UT SB230

Law enforcement: use of deadly force: training: policies.

UT HB0369

Defensive Force Amendments

UT SB332

In employees, providing for use of force and deadly force policy for law enforcement agencies; and making an editorial change.

Similar Bills

NJ A813

Codifies AG directive concerning criminal investigations of law enforcement use-of-force and in-custody deaths.

NJ S1093

Codifies AG directive concerning criminal investigations of law enforcement use-of-force and in-custody deaths.

CA AB31

Whistleblowers: California State Auditor.

MS SB2036

DA criminal investigators; revise allocation and compensation of.

CA AB718

Peace officers: investigations of misconduct.

CA AB1179

Child custody: allegations of abuse: report.

CA AB1911

Residential care facilities: complaints.

CA SB1069

State prisons: Office of the Inspector General.