BILL NUMBER: S236
SPONSOR: CANZONERI-FITZPATRICK
 
TITLE OF BILL:
An act to amend the criminal procedure law, in relation to setting bail
for defendants that pose a threat to public safety
 
PURPOSE:
To allow greater judicial discretion in setting a securing order with
respect to the dangerousness of a defendant.
 
SUMMARY OF PROVISIONS:
Section 1: Amends subdivision 1 of section 510.10 of the criminal proce-
dure law to allow a court to make an individualized determination
regarding the danger a defendant poses to the safety of any crime
victim, person or community
Section 2: Establishes the effective date.
 
EXISTING LAW:
Currently, except for certain qualifying offenses, courts must release
defendants on their own recognizance pending trial, unless it is demon-
strated and the court makes an individualized determination that the
defendant poses a risk of flight to avoid prosecution, however the court
may not consider the dangerousness of such defendant.
 
JUSTIFICATION:
In United State v. Salerno, the Supreme Court ruled that federal courts
could detain arrestees pretrial if said individual could be p roved to
be a threat to others in the community. The federal government and 49
states allow judges to consider the dangerousness of a defendant when
setting a securing order, however, New York alone does not. In light of
recent reforms that eliminate the ability of judges in New York to
establish securing orders for most offenses, it is critical that judges
be allowed to weigh the threat a defendant poses to victims or others in
the community. With these bail reforms in effect, crimes such as assault
in the third degree or failure to register as a sex offender for level
one and level two sex offenders no longer qualify for bail in the state
and the defendant will be released back into the community to await
their trial date.
When California became the first state in the country to eliminate cash
bail, they provided for safeguards to ensure the protection o f the
community, including allowing courts to order defendants to report to a
court officer or consent to monitoring such as ankle bracelets, as well
as allowing preventive detention for those the court deems too dangerous
to release.
Unfortunately, the reforms passed in the 2019-2020 New York State Budget
did not include any such safeguards. This legislation would rectify this
troubling issue and grant New York courts the ability to better protect
our communities by allowing them to consider the dangerousness of a
defendant when setting a securing order.
 
LEGISLATIVE HISTORY:
2023-24: S5335A Defeated in Codes
2021-22: S6947 Reported to Finance
2019-20: S6840 Referred to Codes
 
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:
None.
 
EFFECTIVE DATE:
This act shall take effect immediately.

Statutes affected:
S236: 510.10 criminal procedure law, 510.10(1) criminal procedure law