H.B. 116 Criminal Fines Amendments: transcript

Thank you, Mr. Chair. You look much better than you usually do in this committee and just the chair. Oh, gotcha. I'm just saying. Okay. Yeah, because normally I'm like, Right. Okay. Now this, uh, one 16 is literally the same bill we passed last year. Uh, we had a coordinating clause problem. Um, and so even though we passed it and signed and all the things didn't work out, so we had to run it again. We were gonna run this in a special and decided to do it during the session. Um, but basically what it does is comes out of, uh, some of those cases where we were dealing with illicit massage parlors and the prostitution issue and folks that were forced into that. Um, it raises the, the penalty meaning the fine, um, of what these look like, um, when they're finally resolved. Happy to answer any questions if there are any, but again, this, this committee and the others, we literally already did this. We're just rerunning the bill.

Thank you Chair member of this committee. My name is Felix Espinoza on behalf of Utah for rational sex offense laws in opposition to HP one 16. Before you vote, I am asking each member here today to answer one question on the record today, what evidence supports the specific amounts 5,000, 10,000 and 20,000 as effective deterrents for these offenses? Not a general belief that fines deter not a theory that hitting the pocketbook works the specific dollar amount in this bill. And what is the evidence I'm asking? Because this bill's, the bill's own supporters cannot answer that question. The Utah Sentencing Commission voted nine to three in favor of this bill. While its members simultaneously stated on the record that the approach is not very evidence-based and that the amounts were selected because they sound reasonable, not because research demonstrates their effectiveness. The Victim Services Commission supported the bill while openly questioning whether it fell within their jurisdiction and acknowledge that mandatory fees, fines and at these levels will not cause prosecutors to will likely cause prosecutors to plea bargain sex offenses charges down to non sack offenses. The conclusion the Salt Lake County Deputy District Attorney delivered directly, let me be precise about that last point. Your, your own prosecutor committee is telling you that this bill will not reduce sex offense convictions. We are asking this committee to oppose not to oppose accountability for sex offenses. We are asking that before you impose a 5,000, uh, mandatory fine on first time misdemeanor offender, you will be able to articulate on the record what this evidence tells you that that amount deters this specific conduct better than existing penalties. Lastly, this bill was framed as a technical correction. It is not it reenacts mandatory minimum fine policy that received minutes of house debate with zero substantive questions. If no member of this committee can name the evidence behind the dollar amount amounts today, that then this is not evidence-based sentencing. It is a political framework attached to a criminal fine. And the fine and the victims, these fines are supposed to serve. Deserve better than that. Thank you. You got one question, rep or Senator Brammer?

Yeah. So if the, if we did provide studies and evidence that it, that 10,000 was more deterrent than five, would you support the bill On the record?

Y yes, I would support the bill. But as

So you would support it at 10,000 if you felt like that?

We had provided evidence of that. If you provide evidence, yes.

But we argue that none of that evidence was provided, uh, Utah for rational sex offense laws very evidence based.

Understand that's your point. I'm just trying to, uh, your point is that there's not evidence, but if there was evidence, if it was 25,000 was deterrent, then you would support it.

It's more just based on the evidence and not that there's a fine.

Is that, is that your position? Yes,

That's correct. Yes. Okay.

Senator Bremmer. Yeah, I would move that we recommend favorably HB one 16.

Uh, only next time. Get it right the first time so that we're not back the second year. Just kidding.

I'd appreciate that. Um, I, I don't know that the goal, I mean, ultimately I suppose the goal is to reduce convictions, but, uh, that, uh, this is much more of a deterrent, especially on the second offense. We're hoping and, and especially on sexual solicitation of a child. We're going growing hard on that one too. Thank you so much. Rep or Senator Brammer. I'll waive.

Yeah, HB one 16 is literally, uh, the same language that we had in the, the organized crime prostitution bill we had last year. Um, we had some conflict ended up in some conflicting language with like two other bills that had passed, and at the end of the day, this was the fix. We thought about doing it during the special session. This is the same policy. We didn't change any of the policy this time around all the, all the same stuff from last year. So, um, happy to answer any questions about it if anybody has any questions, but it's, um, I have been approached about perhaps it altering some of the fines that we're talking about as we're, uh, we're, we'll think about that as we move through, but as it is right now, it's, it reflects what we agreed to already. Okay. So that concludes your presentation. Yep. Okay.

Yes. We don't have a substitute on this one, do we?

Um, I would like to recommend that we pass out HB one 16 with favorable recommendation.

I waive Okay. To the, uh, bill sponsor?

No. Um, I think I'll wave. We're good. Okay. We talked about this a lot last year.

of the motion Representative Hollins, I waive.

Thank you Mr. Mr. Speaker. Um, this one is, uh, really a policy. We decided last year, uh, if you recall, the organized crime subcommittee had worked on, uh, getting a handle on illicit massage parlors and, and traffickers who were bringing young women from Asia primarily into these facilities. Um, this one, uh, targets specifically the, uh, legal prostitution that was taking place, uh, that these young women were forced into. As part of that, we made the policy decision to raise, uh, both penalties for the traffickers as well as fines for those who, um, you know, are committing those crimes at, at the facilities. Um, there was a drafting issue and the bill frankly got caught up. We passed it through both houses. The governor signed it, but there were some conflicts in the, in the drafting on the other side. And so we had to come back. We thought about doing this in a special session since we had already decided this. We haven't changed that portion of this at all, but we have, um, augmented the penalties for the traffickers in this bill a little bit as well. So the policy decision we made last year, we are honoring that fine is still what we already agreed to. Um, but we are, uh, adding some additional tools to target those who are bringing people against their will and forcing them into sexual slavery. So I'm happy to answer any questions if there are any.

I'll waive Mr. Speaker. Thank you.

Thank you Mr. Speaker. Motion to UNC circle HB 24.