HB630: (New Title) relative to enhanced penalties for assault on law enforcement officers, firefighters, emergency medical care providers, and national guard members.

HB 630-FN - AS AMENDED BY THE HOUSE

25mar03... 0764h

2003 SESSION

03-0386

09/10

HOUSE BILL 630-FN

AN ACT relative to enhanced penalties for assault on law enforcement officers, firefighters, emergency medical care providers, and national guard members.

SPONSORS: Rep. Thomas, Belk 31

COMMITTEE: Criminal Justice and Public Safety

AMENDED ANALYSIS

This bill permits extended terms of imprisonment for persons who commit assault on on-duty law enforcement officers, firefighters, emergency medical care providers, and national guard members.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Explanation: Matter added to current law appears in bold italics.

Matter removed from current law appears [in brackets and struckthrough.]

Matter which is either (a) all new or (b) repealed and reenacted appears in regular type.

25mar03... 0764h

03-0386

09/10

STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

In the Year of Our Lord Two Thousand Three

AN ACT relative to enhanced penalties for assault on law enforcement officers, firefighters, emergency medical care providers, and national guard members.

Be it Enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives in General Court convened:

1 Extended Term of Imprisonment. Amend RSA 651:6, I(h) to read as follows:

(h) He has knowingly committed or attempted to commit any of the crimes defined in RSA 631 where he knows the victim was, at the time of the commission of the crime, a law enforcement officer, firefighter, emergency medical care provider or national guard member acting in the line of duty; or

2 Effective Date. This act shall take effect January 1, 2004.

LBA

03-0386

Amended 3/28/03

HB 630 FISCAL NOTE

AN ACT relative to enhanced penalties for assault on law enforcement officers, firefighters, emergency medical care providers, and national guard members.

FISCAL IMPACT:

The Judicial Branch, Judicial Council and the Department of Corrections have determined this bill, as amended by the House (House Amendment #2003-0764h), will increase state expenditures by an indeterminable amount in FY 2004 and each year thereafter. There will be no fiscal impact on county and local expenditures or state, county and local revenues.

METHODOLOGY:

The Judicial Branch stated this bill would make it a class B felony to commit simple assault on on-duty law enforcement officers, firefighters, emergency care providers, and national guard members. This bill adds no new crime but moves a class of crimes from a misdemeanor to a class B felony. Despite adding no new crime, the fiscal impact of this proposal on the Judicial Branch could be substantial. In calendar year 2001, 8,190 cases of simple assault were brought in the district courts. The Judicial Branch has no statistics on how many of these alleged assaults were on on-duty law enforcement officers, firefighters, emergency care providers, or national guard members. However, some indication of the number can be gleaned from looking at the statistics on resisting arrest, also currently a misdemeanor. The reason to look at resisting arrest statistics is that many resisting arrest charges could also give rise to simple assault charges against a law enforcement officer, which this bill makes a felony. In calendar year 2001, the district courts recorded 1,713 resisting arrest charges. If a significant number of these were charged as felonies, which involve a much increased potential for jury trial in the superior court due to the substantially more severe penalties for a felony, the fiscal impact could be large. The cost of a full day's trial in the superior court, without considering juror expense, is $950.48 as follows, based on a seven and one-half (7 1/2) hour day:

Judge $481.95

Court Monitor 151.05

Deputy Clerk 247.50

Bailiff 69.98

$950.48

Adding the cost of a jury, time to write a charge to the jury, and for clerical processing would make the cost of a felony trial well in excess of $1,000. Should a decision be appealed, several thousand dollars of additional costs would be incurred in judge, law clerk, and staff time at the supreme court. Thus, the potential cost to the Judicial Branch of each simple assault against on-duty law enforcement officers, firefighters, emergency care providers, or national guard members brought as a felony is several thousand dollars. As the numbers above indicate, there is the potential for many of these cases to be brought as felonies. Based on this analysis the bill could have a substantial fiscal impact on the Judicial Branch.

The Judicial Council stated this bill establishes new second degree assault penalty for assault on law enforcement officers, firefighters, emergency medical care workers, and national guard members. Under current law, anyone who purposely or knowingly causes bodily injury or unprivileged physical contact with a law enforcement officer, firefighter or any other person would be charged with simple assault. Simple assault is one of the most frequently charged offenses, which is usually coupled with resisting arrest and the initial reason for charging an individual. By raising the level of these offenses from their current status as simple assault charges, a misdemeanor to a felony B, there could be significant implications for indigent defense representation costs. For purposes of payment and recouping of costs, the most serious charge within a series of related charges constitutes a "case" for the purposes of payment. By raising one of the most frequently "charged" offenses which is almost always connected to other charges, including violations (which in themselves do not warrant appointment of counsel) to a felony B level, the result will be a greatly increased number of felony cases entering the system. These simple assault charges are most often part of a negotiated plea on the totality of the case, now we will be paying more for charges that are usually nol pros. Due to the historical frequency of the prior simple assault charge in connection with law enforcement officers, there is a significant potential here for major cost implications for representation if the law enforcement community uses this statute rather than the existing simple assault misdemeanor statute whenever they would previously have only been able to charge the simple assault misdemeanor. Otherwise, the usual assumptions apply to the creation of this fiscal note. It is assumed that the individual so charged has been determined to be indigent, at which time the court will proceed to appoint an attorney to represent the defendant. If a public defender or contract attorney is appointed to the case, the fixed contract rate of $687.50 (rather than the previous $250 misdemeanor rate will apply to each case so charged. If assigned counsel attorneys must be used, the $60 per hour rate will apply to the case, with a fee cap of $3,000, rather than $1,000 for the prior misdemeanor charge cap. This fee cap may be waived upon motion filed in advance with the court. If any "services other than counsel' are filed as

a necessary part of the defense of a case, they would also be payable from Indigent Defense Funds. Since it is not possible to accurately predict the number of cases that may result from the enactment of this new felony B charge, the Council is unable to place an exact dollar figure on the potential fiscal impact of this bill.

The Department of Corrections stated agencies such as fire departments, emergency medical care providers, and national guard do not keep track of assaults. It is estimated that no more than three persons per year would be sentenced to a state prison as a result of this bill. At an average cost of incarceration of $24,866 per inmate per year, the Department estimates increased state expenditures of $74,598 per year.

The Department of Justice stated the Department seldom becomes involved in questions of law concerning second degree assault, and it is assumed the Department would continue not to be involved. If the Department were involved, the number of instances would be negligible and the cost of prosecution would not increase as a direct result of this bill.