Risk Assessment Regulation, Juvenile Interrogation Bills Introduced in Del. House
Both bills, if enacted, would add language to Title 11, the section of Delaware law dealing with crimes and criminal procedure.
June 19, 2020 at 02:40 PM
3 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Delaware Law Weekly
Two bills involving transparency of investigative and pretrial processes for people accused of crimes were introduced Thursday in the Delaware House of Representatives.
House Bill 360 proposes requiring all interrogations of accused and detained juveniles to be recorded, while the passage of House Bill 356 would require risk-assessment evaluations for people accused of crimes to be tested for bias and publicly transparent.
Both bills, if enacted, would add language to Title 11, the section of Delaware law dealing with crimes and criminal procedure.
Primarily sponsored by Rep. Melissa Minor-Brown, D-New Castle, H.B. 360 would add a chapter to Delaware code mandating recording, with some exceptions, of the entire time a detained child believed to have been involved in illegal activity is being questioned, including the time in which that child is being informed of their rights and in which they might waive those rights.
Law enforcement officers would not be required, based on the language in the bill, to tell a child they're being recorded or to get their permission to do so. However, the interrogation would not have to be recorded if the child indicates they wouldn't participate on electronic record or if there are safety or identification concerns associated with recording.
The bill lays out several specific circumstances that would exempt an interrogation from the proposed law, such as malfunctioning equipment or officers not having probable cause to suspect the person being questioned has committed a crime or delinquent act, but interrogating officers would generally be required to submit a report detailing why they didn't record the interaction and what exempted it from recording.
If H.B. 360 were to become law, Delaware's attorney general would have to implement regulations on how state law enforcement agencies would be required to make, store and review recorded interrogations, as well as the chain of custody for those recordings and administrative sanctions for unjustified noncompliance.
With the proposal of adding several new paragraphs into an existing section of Delaware law, H.B. 356 would regulate which evaluation methods could be used to determine an accused's person's risk of committing a separate offense, failing to appear in court or otherwise not being successful pretrial.
Sponsored by Rep. Stephen Smyk, R-Milton, the bill would define a "risk-assessment instrument" as being a pretrial process that weighs factors to determine the likelihood of that risk, which can then be used to make recommendations on bail or conditions of release.
While the bill doesn't list specific assessments that could be used, it would add a section to the existing law requiring any assessment tools used to have been tested for bias, with no tools being used "until testing for bias has been shown not to increase or magnify bias against a person in a protected class or classes as defined by an empirically recognized standard for testing for such bias, including but not limited to the error rate balance test."
The bill would also add language requiring transparency in those risk-assessment tools, with information on the tools' structures and usage policies open for public inspection, which would prevent builders from using intellectual property protections as protection from being subject to discovery.
If passed into law, H.B. 356 would go into effect immediately, while H.B. 360 would become effective six months after its passage.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllEagle Pharma Founder Sues Company to Recoup Cost of SEC Investigation
2 minute readTrending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250