Florida 2017 “Judicial Accountability” Legislative Bills

Inquiry?  Should the data that is collected include whether the sentence is one the judge approved after a negotiated plea between the state attorney’s office and defense counsel in order to also account for plea-offer disparities by state attorneys?  Otherwise, how can one clearly discern judicial disparity without accounting for some of the sentences simply being judicially rubber stamped plea negotiations?

Bills Filed 2/17/2017:

HB 255: Judicial Accountability

SB 382: Judicial Accountability

DATA TO BE COLLECTED IF BILLS PASS:

(a) The judge who presided over each trial;

 (b) The judge who presided over the sentencing phase;

 (c) The circuit and specific location of the court where

 each case was heard;

 (d) Each offense for which the defendant was convicted or

 pled nolo contendere to;

 (e) The range of possible sentences for each offense;

 (f) The sentence imposed for each offense, including, but not limited to, jail time, prison time, probation, a fine, or any other imposed terms; and

 (g) Demographic information about the defendant, including, but not limited to:

 1. Age. 2. Sex. 3. Race. 4. Income. 5. Prior criminal history.

 (2) The Office of Program Policy Analysis and Government Accountability must post the report by March 1 annually on its website.

 (3) Evidence of disparity in sentencing by a judge with regard to any demographic group is grounds for disqualification of that judge from any case involving a member of that  demographic group, pursuant to s. 38.10.

 

Florida You Judge will be following these bills and will report back with committee/lawmaker votes.

 
 
 

» recent comments

» archives

» Subscribe to Blog via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

» Tampa Bay Criminal Defense

» Tampa Bay Criminal Defense

Ad