Family or household member; redefines and expands definition. (SB877)
Introduced By
Sen. Roscoe Reynolds (D-Martinsville)
Progress
✓ |
Introduced |
☐ |
Passed Committee |
☐ |
Passed House |
☐ |
Passed Senate |
☐ |
Signed by Governor |
☐ |
Became Law |
Description
Definition of family or household member; penalty. Redefines the definition of "family or household member" to include (1) a person's in-laws regardless of whether the in-laws reside in the same house as the person and (2) any individual who is or was involved in a continuing relationship of a romantic or intimate nature with the person. Expanding the definition of "family or household member" implicates crimes for which a family or household member is a victim (e.g., assault and battery against a family member) and protective orders under which a person may be protected (e.g., protective orders in cases of family abuse). Read the Bill »
Status
01/26/2011: Merged into SB1222
History
| Date | Action |
|---|---|
| 01/10/2011 | Prefiled and ordered printed; offered 01/12/11 11100136D |
| 01/10/2011 | Referred to Committee for Courts of Justice |
| 01/11/2011 | Impact statement from (SB877) |
| 01/11/2011 | Impact statement from VCSC (SB877) |
| 01/12/2011 | Assigned Courts sub: Criminal |
| 01/19/2011 | Impact statement from DPB (SB877) |
| 01/26/2011 | Incorporated by Courts of Justice (SB1222-Barker) (15-Y 0-N) (see vote tally) |
Comments
I am troubled by a definition in a jurisdictional statute that requires the weighing of a lot of different concerns (length of time, depth of relationship, etc.) before deciding which court something should be in. THAT decision, at least, should be clear to the magistrate issuing the warrant, or to the court at the first appearance. Otherwise you get judge-shopping -- "I know that Judge X in J & D Court will throw the son-of-a-bitch" in jail, so I'll file it in J & D, and Judge X will get to decide whether he keeps it." Not good for a jurisdictional question.