BILL NUMBER: S6271A
SPONSOR: RAMOS
 
TITLE OF BILL:
An act to amend the criminal procedure law, in relation to the issuance
of temporary orders of protection when an action is pending in a local
criminal court
 
PURPOSE:
This bill will add a section to the Criminal Procedure Law that will
codify recent case law enabling accused parties in criminal proceedings
to request a hearing when temporary orders of protection are issued
against them. These temporary orders can cause homelessness, job loss,
immigration consequences, and family separation. This change will give
judges the opportunity to assess information and determine whether
temporary orders are necessary to protect the parties.
 
SUMMARY OF PROVISIONS:
Section 1 of the bill adds Section 530.15 of the Criminal Procedure Law.
Section 2 of the bill amends subdivisions 1 and 2 of Section 530.30 of
the Criminal Procedure Law.
Section 3 sets the effective date.
 
JUSTIFICATION:
During New York criminal court arraignments, judges issue full temporary
orders of protection ("TOPs") as a matter of course in nearly every case
where there is a complaining witness. These orders require the person
charged to stay away from the home and place of business of the
complaining witness. Prosecutors ask for TOPs based almost entirely on
the representation of law enforcement officers who act with incomplete
information and biases. As a result, TOPs are often issued against
survivors who were protecting themselves, teenagers and young people
that get into altercations with parents regardless of who is the initial
aggressor, and LGBTQ+ people and populations who present as "other" even
when they are defending themselves. TOPs typically last until the under-
lying case resolves-a process that can take months or even years-and
many are issued against the wishes of the protected parties. Some are
even issued against both or multiple parties.
Unlike many other states and the District of Columbia, New York does not
have a codified process for accused persons or protected parties to be
heard when these orders are issued. Recognizing this, the New York
Appellate Division, First Department recently ruled in Matter of Craw-
ford v. Ally (June 24th, 2021), that when a temporary stay-away order is
issued which implicates a defendant's due process rights, the Criminal
Court should conduct a "prompt evidentiary hearing," thereafter. The
case bears the name of Shamika Craword who was rendered homeless by a
stay away order--removed from her own New York City Housing Authority
apartment and separated from her children for nearly three months. This
hearing would offer an opportunity for a judge to examine the facts more
closely than they could at arraignment to decide if the order should
remain in place, or be limited. However, the Crawford decision leaves
numerous details open to interpretation by the courts, and as a result
the ruling has been undermined and applied in an inconsistent manner.
The Promoting Pre-Trial (PromPT) Stability Act codifies Crawford's hold-
ing into law while clarifying key details of hearings. This bill ensures
that due process is complied with and that there is uniform application
of the decision across the State. It allows judges to respond to the
unique needs of a particular case or relationship, while also allowing
families to work out their differences, and teenagers and young adults
to stay in their family's homes. Importantly, judges will make deci-
sions as to the propriety of stay-away orders based upon more complete
information than they have at arraignment.
Notably, this bill will not lead to the vacatur of all TOPs. Prosecu-
tors are still authorized to ask for TOPs, and judges will have
discretion to issue these orders, or modify them, when they are appro-
priate and necessary for the safety of the protected party. Further,
this legislation only concerns criminal court TOPS, parties can continue
to petition family court for civil orders of protection. This bill does
not require protected parties to testify in these hearings, but it does
give them an opportunity to be heard if they choose. Further, this bill
ensures hearings occur expeditiously so that accused parties can avoid
significant harms caused by improper TOPs.
 
LEGISLATIVE HISTORY:
2023-24: S3066B - Referred to Codes
 
FISCAL IMPACT:
To Be Determined
 
EFFECTIVE DATE:
This act shall take effect immediately.