Entitles defendants charged with an offense the ability to telephone any number located in the United States or Puerto Rico

42 Co-sponsors

• Rory Lancman
• Karim Camara
• Peter Abbate
• Alan Maisel
• Joan Christensen
• Felix Ortiz
• Keith L.T. Wright
• Andrew Hevesi
• William Boyland
• Jeffrion Aubry
• Adriano Espaillat
• Grace Meng
• Micah Kellner
• Adam Clayton Powell IV
• Audrey Pheffer
• Frank Skartados
• Dennis H. Gabryszak
• Hakeem Jeffries
• Nettie Mayersohn
• José Peralta
• Alec Brook-Krasny
• J. Gary Pretlow
• Daniel O'Donnell
• Joseph Lentol
• Harvey Weisenberg
• Inez Barron
• Carl Heastie
• Margaret Markey
• Andrew Raia
• Joan Millman
• Mike Spano
• David Koon
• William Colton
• Michael Benjamin
• William Scarborough
• Crystal Peoples-Stokes
• Ginny Fields
• David McDonough
• Nelson Castro
• Vivian Cook
• N. Nick Perry
• Kenneth Zebrowski

16 Multi-sponsors

• James Bacalles
• James F. Brennan
• Nancy Calhoun
• Sandy Galef
• Deborah Glick
• Richard Gottfried
• George Latimer
• Charles Lavine
• John McEneny
• Catherine Nolan
• Thomas F. O'Mara
• Jack Quinn III
• Joseph Saladino
• Michelle Schimel
• Robert Sweeney
• Matthew Titone

BILL NUMBER:A8530E

Title of bill

An act to amend the criminal procedure law, in relation to providing defendants the ability to call any telephone number located in the United States or Puerto Rico for the purpose of obtaining counsel and informing a relative or friend that they have been charged with a crime

Purpose or general idea of bill

To establish the right to make a local or long distance phone call and to access phone numbers stored in one's cell phone upon arrest.

Justification

While most police departments already permit arrested persons to make "one phone call," this right is not codified in statute. Current statute guarantees the right to a free phone call only upon arraignment. In large cities, where there often is a delay of 24 hours or more between arrest and arraignment, the law should guarantee the right to a phone call before arraignment, during arrest processing procedures.

Additionally, some law enforcement agencies restrict the free phone call to the local area code of the specific agency. For example, in New York City's 71st Precinct, a man arrested for biking on the sidewalk was subjected to 35 hours of detention without his wallet, and could not contact his panic-stricken family, because he was not familiar with any local phone numbers; his wife's cell phone had an out-of-state area code. With the rapid decline in the cost of domestic long-distance call- ing, and the fact that on cell phones, the location of the parties normally does not affect the cost of the call at all, restricting a prisoner to one "local" phone call has become obsolete. One advantage of cell phones is that they may be purchased in one place, and assigned that location's area code, but used anywhere in the country.

Finally, the increasing number of persons who rely exclusively on cell phones often do not memorize their friends' and relatives' phone numbers, or keep them on paper. Instead, they use the cell phone's tech- nical features to retrieve the phone number. As arrestees typically have their personal property, including cell phones,, seized and vouchered by the police for safekeeping, the right to a free phone call can only be effectuated for some arrestees if they have the right to access the cell phone to locate the number of the relative or friend they wish to call.

In short, the law must keep pace with technology to assure an individ- ual's right to make the one critical phone call at the time it is needed most.

Prior legislative history

New Bill.

Fiscal implications

Minimal cost to law enforcement agencies.

Effective date

This act shall take effect on the sixtieth day after it shall have become law.