Enacts "Officer Randolph Holder's law"

31 Co-sponsors

• Fredrick J. Akshar II
• George Amedore
• John J. Bonacic
• Phil Boyle
• Thomas Croci
• John A. DeFrancisco
• Hugh T. Farley
• Simcha Felder
• John J. Flanagan
• Rich Funke
• Patrick M. Gallivan
• Joseph A. Griffo
• Kemp Hannon
• Andrew J. Lanza
• William J. Larkin Jr.
• Kenneth P. LaValle
• Betty Little
• Carl L. Marcellino
• Kathleen A. Marchione
• Jack M. Martins
• Terrence P. Murphy
• Michael F. Nozzolio
• Thomas F. O'Mara
• Robert Ortt
• Michael H. Ranzenhofer
• Patty Ritchie
• Joseph E. Robach
• Susan Serino
• James L. Seward
• Michael Venditto
• Catharine Young

Title of bill

An act to amend the criminal procedure law, in relation to enacting the "Officer Randolph Holder's law"

Purpose

The purpose of this law is to honor the memory of Officer Randolph Holder by making necessary reforms to judicial diversion programs to ensure and enhance public safety.

Summary of provisions

Section 1 titles the bill Officer Randolph Holder's law.

Section 2 amends paragraph (b) of subdivision 1 and paragraph (d) of subdivision 2 of section 216.00 of the criminal procedure law.

Section 3 amends subdivision 3 of section 216.05 of the criminal procedure law and adds paragraph (vi) to subdivision 3.

Section 4 provides this act shall take ninety days after it shall have become law.

Justification

On October 20, 2015, NYPD Officer Randolph Holder was on patrol in East Harlem. Responding to a report of gun shots in the area, he was senselessly murdered. The person who senselessly committed this crime has five previous drug convictions, was wanted by the police in connection with a September 1, 2015 shooting, and had a warrant open for failing to participate in court ordered treatment.

Court records show that despite a lengthy criminal history, the shooter was approved by the Court for a drug treatment program over the objections of the prosecutor, who argued in favor of incarceration given the history of violence this criminal had displayed.

Court ordered drug treatment programs are an opportunity for many addicted individuals charged with a crime to rehabilitate themselves. Treatment for drug addiction as an alternative to incarceration should be an option only where the prosecutor and defense attorney agree. Public safety should not be compromised. Those with extensive prior felony convictions should not be set free to commit more crimes.

The proposals in this bill would ensure that diversion programs are available to those most suitable and provide further protections to the public.

This bill would narrow the eligibility requirements for those entering judicial diversion, prohibiting those who have more than two prior felony convictions. It would require the court to consider and make a finding of fact on the record, regarding the risk a defendant might pose to public safety. Additionally, it would require the consent of the district attorney before a defendant is granted entry into a diversion program.

These common sense reforms will ensure that the diversion programs are available to help those who are truly qualified and require this service, but do not needlessly compromise public safety.

Legislative history

None.

Fiscal implications

To be determined.

Effective date

This act shall take effect ninety days after it shall have become law.