Minors; certain education records as evidence. (HB1213)

Introduced By

Del. Dave Albo (R-Springfield) with support from co-patrons Del. Lashrecse D. Aird (D-Petersburg), and Sen. Jennifer McClellan (D-Richmond)

Progress

Introduced
Passed Committee
Passed House
Passed Senate
Signed by Governor
Became Law

Description

Disorderly conduct at schools; minors; evidence. Provides that when a minor is prosecuted for willfully disrupting the operation of any school or school-sponsored actions, the minor may present as evidence relevant to whether he acted willfully reports from health care providers or documents that are part of certain educational plans or behavioral assessments. The bill provides that such reports or documents shall be admitted as evidence of the facts stated therein, provided that the minor gives notice of his intent to introduce such evidence and copies of such evidence to the attorney for the Commonwealth at least 10 days before trial. The bill allows such reports or documents to be placed under seal by the court. Read the Bill »

Status

04/08/2016: signed by governor

History

DateAction
01/18/2016Committee
01/18/2016Presented and ordered printed 16103449D
01/18/2016Referred to Committee for Courts of Justice
01/21/2016Assigned to sub: Criminal Law
01/21/2016Assigned App. sub: Criminal Law
01/21/2016Assigned Courts sub: Criminal Law
02/10/2016Subcommittee recommends reporting with amendment(s) (10-Y 1-N)
02/12/2016Reported from Courts of Justice with substitute (21-Y 0-N) (see vote tally)
02/12/2016Committee substitute printed 16104986D-H1
02/12/2016Incorporates HB1200
02/13/2016Read first time
02/15/2016Read second time
02/15/2016Committee substitute agreed to 16104986D-H1
02/15/2016Engrossed by House - committee substitute HB1213H1
02/16/2016Read third time and passed House BLOCK VOTE (99-Y 0-N)
02/16/2016VOTE: BLOCK VOTE PASSAGE (99-Y 0-N) (see vote tally)
02/17/2016Constitutional reading dispensed
02/17/2016Referred to Committee for Courts of Justice
02/29/2016Reported from Courts of Justice with amendment (9-Y 5-N) (see vote tally)
03/01/2016Constitutional reading dispensed (38-Y 0-N) (see vote tally)
03/02/2016Read third time
03/02/2016Reading of amendment waived
03/02/2016Committee amendment agreed to
03/02/2016Engrossed by Senate as amended
03/02/2016Passed Senate with amendment (39-Y 1-N) (see vote tally)
03/03/2016Placed on Calendar
03/04/2016Passed by for the day
03/07/2016Senate amendment agreed to by House (95-Y 1-N)
03/07/2016VOTE: ADOPTION (95-Y 1-N) (see vote tally)
03/08/2016Enrolled
03/08/2016Bill text as passed House and Senate (HB1213ER)
03/08/2016Signed by Speaker
03/10/2016Signed by President
03/11/2016G Governor's Action Deadline Midnight, Monday, April 11, 2016
03/11/2016Enrolled Bill communicated to Governor on 3/11/16
03/11/2016G Governor's Action Deadline Midnight, Sunday, April 10, 2016
04/08/2016G Approved by Governor-Chapter 726 (effective 7/1/16)
04/08/2016G Acts of Assembly Chapter text (CHAP0726)
04/18/2016Impact statement from DPB (HB1213ER)

Video

This bill was discussed on the floor of the General Assembly. Below is all of the video that we have of that discussion, 2 clips in all, totaling 16 minutes.

Transcript

This is a transcript of the video clips in which this bill is discussed.

MR. SPEAKER, I MOVE THE SUBSTITUTE.

Del. Bill Howell (R-Fredericksburg): THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. SUBSTITUTE AGREED TO. GENTLEMAN FROM FAIRFAX.

[Unknown]: MR. SPEAKER, I WANTED TO EXPLAIN THIS BILL BECAUSE I THINK A LOT OF YOU WHO HAVE CHILDREN WITH DEVELOPMENTAL DELAYS WILL FIND THIS INTERESTING. A FORMER COLLEAGUE CAME TO ME AND SHE IS A SPECIAL EDUCATION ATTORNEY WOULD TELL ME SCHOOLS WILL BE CHARGING KIDS WITH DEVELOPMENTALLY DELAYS, LET'S USE AUTISM, WITH CRIMES. THERE IS A KID WHO IS ACTING UP AND THROWING STUFF IN SCHOOL. INSTEAD OF SAYING OUR JOB IS TO EDUCATE YOU, HAVE THIS DISABILITY, THE SCHOOL RESOURCE OFFICER CHARGES THE KID CAN DISORDERLY CONDUCT, BRINGS THEM INTO COURT, CHARGING THEM WITH A CRIME. SO I WAS EXPLAINING THIS IN COURTS AND DELEGATE BELL SAID I HAD A SIMILAR CASE, AND THE GENTLEMAN FROM SHENANDOAH HAD A CASE, AND THE GENTLE LADY FROM RICHMOND HAD A SIMILAR CASE. AND THEN, MR. LAROCK HAD A SIMILAR BILL. THIS IS A PROBLEM THAT NEEDS TO BE SOLVED. SO MY BILL SAYS A PERSON HAS A DEVELOPMENTALLY DELAYED ISSUE, THEY'RE ALLOWED TO SUBMIT DOCUMENTS SHOWING THIS DISABILITY. I THINK IT'S BETTER NOT TO CREATE A BAR TO PROSECUTION ON A DISORDERLY CONDUCT. AND WOULD LIKE THE CHILD TO PRESENT EVIDENCE THEY CANNOT CONTROL THEMSELVES AND THEIR DISABILITY IS CAUSING THEM TO BE ABLE TO NOT THROW STUFF. YOU CAN HAVE A PERSON THAT KNOW WHAT'S THEY'RE DOING AND THAT WOULD BE A BAR TO PROSECUTION. I JUST THINK THIS IS A MORE FRUDENT APPROACH.
OUTCOME AND ALSO IT IMPOSES OTHER REQUIREMENTS.

Del. Bill Howell (R-Fredericksburg): THANK YOU, SENATOR. THE QUESTION IS SHALL HOUSE BILL 1110 PASS. ALL IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION WILLS AYE, THOSE ARE THE SENATORS READY TO VOTE? OPPOSED NO. HAVE ALL THE SENATORS VOTED? DO ANY SENATORS DESIRE TO CH ANGE THEIR VOTE? THE CLERK WILL CLOSE THE ROLL.

[Unknown]: AYES 40, NOS 0. AYES 40. NOS 0. THE BILL PASSES. HOUSE BILL 1213. A BILL RELATING TO MINORS EDUCATION RECORDS EVIDENCE REPORTED FROM THE THE COMMITTEE FROM COURTS OF JUSTICE WITH AMENDMENTS. THE SENATOR FROM ROCKINGHAM. THE SENATOR FROM STAFFORD, SENATOR STUART. I MOVE THE AMENDMENTS BE THE REQUEST HE IS SHALL THE AGREED TO. COMMITTEE AMENDMENT BE AGREED TO. ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. THOSE OPPOSED, NO. THE AYES HAVE IT. THE AMOUNT IS AGREED TO. THE NO ARE FROM STAFFORD. THE MOVE THE BILL PASS AND SPEAKING TO TO THE MEASURE. THE SENATOR HAS THE FLOOR. IT ALLOWS WITH DISABILITIES WHO GET IN TROUBLE TO HAVE THE IEPs OR OTHER DIAGNOSIS ENTER INSIDE THE GUILT STAGE IF IT WAS A MISS EDEMEAN OROR TENSE THEY ARE NEWBERRY NILE, I WOULD TELL YOU AND I KNOW I CAN'T TELL YOU BECAUSE YOU KNOW MORE ABOUT THIS THAN ANYBODY IN IN THIS BODY BUT YOU CAN'T SPEAK TO IT. THIS IS ONE THING WE DESPERATELY NEED BECAUSE THERE ARE CHILDREN IN THE COMMONWEALTH WITH AUTISM ON THE AUTISTIC SPECTRUM WHO SIMPLY DO NOT UNDERSTAND THE WORLD AS YOU AND I SEE IT. THEY RESPOND DIFFERENTLY TO DIFFERENT THINGS. THEY STAY IN A MODE OF FIGHT OR FLIGHT. THEY HAVE TO BE HANDLED DIFFERENTLY. THERE IS A REASON WE CALL THESE CHILDREN SPECIAL NEEDS CHILDREN. BECAUSE THEY HAVE SPECIAL NEEDS. THEY NEED TO BE HANDLED A LITTLE DIFFERENTLY THAN THE REST OF US. THIS BILL RECOGNIZES THAT NEED AND IT ALLOWS THOSE CHILDREN OR THEIR COUNSEL TO INTRODUCE THAT EVIDENCE INTO THE GUILT STAGE OF A PROCEEDING. IT IS INCREDIBLY IMPORTANT. WHEN I WAS THE COMMONWEALTH'S ATTORNEY I HAD OCCASION TO PROSECUTE A CHILD WITH AUTISM AND IT TOOK ME A LITTLE WHILE TO GET TO WHERE I NEEDED TO BE OEN THAT BUT I RAPIDLY UNDERSTAND THAT THIS CHILD JUST DIDN'T SEE THINGS LIKE OTHERS DID. I TOOK THAT INTO CONSIDERATION. THE PROBLEM IS ALL PROSECUTORS DON'T. AND THERE ARE VARIOUS REASONS FOR THAT. BUT THIS WHILE IT IS A SHIFT IN POLICY, IT IS THE RIGHT SHIFT IN POLICY AND SOME OF US HAVE BEEN TRYING TO DO THIS FOR AWHILE. DELEGATE ALBO JUST FIGURE OUT THE RIGHT WAY TO GET IT. I HOPE THAT YOU ALL ABOUT SUPPORT THIS ABOUT I WILL. THE SENIOR SENATOR FROM BATH, SENATOR DEEDS.

Sen. Creigh Deeds (D-Bath): THANK YOU, MR. PRESIDENT. THIS BILL ADDRESSES A SENSITIVE SUBJECT. AND IT IS A SUBSTANTIVE SHIFT IN POLICY AND I. JUST WANT TO OFFERMY TWO CENT W. THE COMMONWEALTH ATTORNEY ASSOCIATION OPPOSED THIS BECAUSE YOU ARE SHIFTING THE INTRODUCTION OF IEPs FROM THE DISPOSITION PHASE OF A JUVENILE COURT PROCEEDING TO THE GUILT STAGE AND REQUIRING THE DEFENSE LAWYER A NOTICE THAT THE EVIDENCE BE INTRODUCED A NUMBER OF DAYS WHICH POTENTIALLY COULD DELAY THE PROCEEDING AND ADDING A LEVEL OF COMPLICATION TO WHAT IS ALREADY A SENSITIVE CASE. I AM IN JUVENILE COURT AND GENERALLY THESE CASES ARE HANDLED SENSITIVELY AND NO MATTER WHICH COURT YOU GO INTO IT AND THAT IS WHY I WILL OPPOSE IT ON THE FLOOR TODAY. THESE MATTERS ARE BEST LEFT TO INDIVIDUAL COURTS OR BEST LEFT WITHIN THE CURRENT CONTEXT WITHIN THE DISPOSITION STAGE. THAT IS WHEN THE EVIDENCE SHOULD COME IN.

[Unknown]: THE JUNIOR SENATOR FROM LOUDOUN, SENATOR WEXTON.

Sen. Jennifer Wexton (D-Leesburg): WOULD THE SENATOR FROM STAFFORD YIELD FOR A QUESTION?

[Unknown]: HE YIELDS, SENATOR.

Sen. Jennifer Wexton (D-Leesburg): I WOULD INQUIRE OF THE SENATOR FIRST WHETHER GENERALLY FOR EVIDENCE TO BE ADMITTED IN A CRIMINAL PROCEEDING MUST THAT EVIDENCE NOT BE RELEVANT?

[Unknown]: THE SENATOR FROM STAFFORD. THAT THAT IS EXACTLY CORRECT. AND THIS WOULD BE OFFERED AND THE JUDGE WOULD CONSIDER ITS RELEVANCE AND GIVE IT THE PROPER WEIGHT IT SHOULD BE GIVEN IN THE CATES. THE SENATOR FROM LOUDOUN. MR. PRESIDENT, WOULD THE SENATOR YIELD FOR A FOLLOW-UP YES. YES. HE YIELDS, SENATOR. MR. PRESIDENT, I WOULD INQUIRE WHETHER THIS EVIDENCE STANDING ALONE WOULD REALLY PROVIDE ANY PROBATIVE VALUE IN RELATION TO THE ISSUES DECIDED BY THE FACT FINDER? THE SENATOR FROM STAFFORD. MR. PRESIDENT, I BELIEVE IT DOES BECAUSE ALL COURTS, ALL PROSECUTORS EVERYBODY DOESN'T UNDERSTAND THE DIFFERENCE IN THESE CHILDREN AND IT IS HARD TO UNDERSTAND. THEY ACT OUT SOMETIMES BECAUSE IT IS THE ONLY WAY THEY KNOW HOW TO RESPOND. AND YOU AND I WOULD KNOW BETTER BUT THEY DON'T. SO THIS IS HOW THEY BEHAVE BECAUSE IT IS INATE IN THE WAY THEIR MIND IS MADE UP. AND PROSECUTORS AND JUDGES NEED TO KNOW THAT. BECAUSE THERE MAY BE AN INSTANCE WHERE THIS CHILD DIDN'T MEAN TO DO ANYTHING, IT WAS JUST A MATTER OF THEY ACT THE BECAUSE IT IS THE WAY THEY ARE PROGRAMMED TO ACT. IT IS VERY IMPORTANT THAT EVERYBODY INVOLVED IN THE CASE UNDERSTAND IT AND UNDERSTAND THE SIGNIFICANCE OF HOW -- OF THEIR MENTAL CAPACITY. THE NO ARE FROM LOUDOUN. I WOULD ASK IF THE SENATOR WOULD YIELD FOR A THIRD AND FINAL QUESTION. YES. HE YIELD IS, SENATOR. DOES THE SENATOR ANTICIPATE THIS WOULD CHANGE THE SUBSTANTIVE ELEMENTS THAT WOULD HAVE TO BE PROVEN FOR ANY GIVEN GIVENCRIME OR DELINQUENT ACT? WHAT IT ALLOWS PARTICULARLY IN JUVENILE COURT THERE ARE VAST PROVISIONS WHICH IN JUVENILE COURT WHICH IN ONE IS A CHILD IN NEED OF SUPER VISION WHICH THE SENATOR FROM BATH WHICH HE PRACTICES IN WOULD BE VERY FAMILIAR WITH IT. IT GAVES JUVENILE COURTS GREAT LATITUDE FOR DISPOSITIONS WITH REGARD TO JUVENILES ANYWAY. THIS IS ONE MORE PIECE OF INFORMATION TO HELP A JUDGE UNDERSTAND WHY THAT CHILD MAY HAVE DONE WHAT HE DID. IT HAS NO BEARING ON THE ELEMENTS, THE PROOF OF ELEMENTS IN AN OFFENSE. THANKS. MR. PRESIDENT, WOULD THE SENATOR YIELD FOR ONE FINAL FINAL QUESTION. YES, MR. PRESIDENT. HE YIELDS, SENATOR. IS THERE ANYTHING IN THE CURRENT STATE OF THE LAW THAT WOULD PROHIBIT PARENTS OR THE CHILD'S EASTERN FROM PRESENTING THE IEP EVIDENCE AS PART OF THE DISPOSITION PHASE OF ANY OF THESE CASES? THE SENATOR FROM STAFFORD. MR. PRESIDENT, I BELIEVE THERE MAY BE AND I BELIEVE THAT IS WHY THIS BILL IS NEEDED. I THANK THE GENTLEMAN, MR. PRESIDENT,. THE SENATOR FROM WESTERN FAIRFAX COUNTY, SENATOR MARSDEN.

Sen. Dave Marsden (D-Burke): THANK YOU, MR. PRESIDENT. I RISE IN SUPPORT OF THE BILL. THE EARLIER YOU GET INFORMATION INVOLVED WITH A JUVENILE TO THE PROPER AUTHORITIES THE COURT THE BETTER OFF YOU ARE. AND MISDEMEANORS ARE ALL ABOUT DISCRETION AND WE LEARNED WITH YOUNG PEOPLE AND THE REASON WE ARE HAVING SO MUCH LESS JUVENILE CRIME IS THAT WE LEARNED A NUMBER OF LESSONS THAT THE LEAST IN KEEPING WITH GOOD PUBLIC SAFETY THE LESS WE ALLOW SOMEONE TO PENETRATE THE JUSTICE SYSTEM USUALLY THE BETTER OFF YOU ARE. THIS JUST ALLOWS FORBETTER DECISION-MAKING RIGHT UP FRONTIS TO YOU ARE GOING TO CHARGE SOMEBODY IN THE FIRST PLACE. IT IS ALL ABOUT DISCRETION AND THIS WILL HELP THE COMMONWEALTH ATTORNEY AND THE POLICE AND THE SCHOOL PEOPLE DECIDE WHETHER TO PROCEED WITH THE CASE BECAUSE SOMETIMES JUST PROCEEDING INTO THE COURTROOM IS IN AND OF ITSELF NOT THE RIGHT THING TO DO. I HOPE YOU VOTE FOR THIS LEGISLATION.

[Unknown]: THE SENATOR FROM ROANOKE CITY, SENATOR EDWARDS.

Sen. John Edwards (D-Roanoke): THAT WAS MARKED AS HAVING NO VOTED. I DON'T THINK I WAS PRESENT AND I THINK MY DISCRETIONARY PROXY WAS LEFT AND THAT IS PROBABLY WHY I VOTED NO. WOULD THE SENATOR FROM STAFFORD YIELD FOR ONE QUESTION?

[Unknown]: HE YIELDS.

Sen. John Edwards (D-Roanoke): YES, MR. PRESIDENT.

[Unknown]: AS I READ THIS, MR. PRESIDENT, THIS ONLY DEALS WITH MISDEMEANORS CRIMES THAT WOULD BE A MISDEMEANOR COMMITTED BY AN ADULT BUT IN JUVENILE COURT CALLED AN ACT OF DELIN WENTCY. THE IEP WOULD BE INTRODUCED ON THAT ISSUE. THAT MAY UNDERSTANDING. THAT CORRECT? FEN RALLY THAT IS THE WAY I READ THE BILL AND I WOULD TELL HIM THAT THE SENATOR FROM BATH DID IT TO HIM, VOTE THE HIM NO. HAVING, SPEAKING TO THE BILL. THE SENATOR HAS THE FLOOR. HAVING THE HEARD THE DEBATE AND HAVING READ THE BILL I THINK IT IS A GOOD BILL. I WOULD HOPE THE BODY WOULD VOTE FOR THIS BILL. I COULD SEE WHY IT WOULD BE USEFUL IN JUVENILE COURT ON THE QUESTION OF INTENTIONAL ACT OR WILLFUL ACT FOR AN IEP. WE ARE TALKING ABOUT A JUDGE NOW ONLY. THERE IS NO JURY IN THE JUVENILE COURT PROCEEDING. I THINK WOULD BE HELPFUL IN TERMS OF MAKING THE DECISION WHETHER OR NOT JUVENILE IS DELINK WENT OR NOT. THE SENATOR FROM ROCKINGHAM, SENATOR OBENSHAIN.

Sen. Mark Obenshain (R-Harrisonburg): I WANTED TO POINT OUT A COUPLE OF FACTORS. I AM NOT ARGUING FOR OR AGAINST THE BILL REALLY. I DID VOTE AGAINST IT. A COUPLE OF POINTS THAT WERE MADE IN COMMITTEE WERE, NUMBER ONE, IT IS INTRODUCING A SIGNIFICANT CHANGE IN VIRGINIA LAW IN THAT IT IS CREATING A DIMINISHED CAPACITY DEFENSE REALLY FOR THE FIRST TIME IN VIRGINIA. AND THAT IS A BIG CHANGE. SECOND OF ALL, IT IS IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT WE ARE RECRATING IS FOR A SMALL CATEGORY OF CASES. YOU MAY WANT TO CONSIDER WHETHER IT SHOULD BE CREATED ON A BIGGER SCALE OR NOT AT ALL. THIS BILL IS ONLY APPLICABLE TO OFFENSES COMMITTED BASICALLY ON SCHOOL PROPERTY AND ONLY ADMISSIBLE FOR THOSE CASES. AND SOME CONCERNS WERE EXPRESSED BY PROSECUTORS AS TO WHETHER THIS IS SOMETHING THAT IS BETTER ADDRESSED IN TRAINING OF EDUCATORS AND THOSE CHARGED WITH SCHOOL SECURITY ON CAMPUS. THIRD AND FINALLY A POINT WAS MADE THAT IEPs REALLY AREN'T DEVELOPED FOR CRIMINAL JUSTICE PURPOSES AND THEY ARE INDIVIDUALALLIZED EDUCATIONAL PROGRAMS DEVELOPED AS PART OF THE SPECIAL ED PROGRAM AND MAY VERY WELL BE DEVELOPED IN A CHILD IS IN KINDERGARTEN AND FIRST GRADE OR SECOND GRADE AND THE OFFENSES MAY BE COMMITTED BEHAVIORAL HEALTH THEY ARE A JUNIOR AND MAY HAVE BEEN IN EFFECT FOR 10-11 YEARS AND THE BEEN IN EFFECT BECAUSE THE FAMILIAR IT PLEASED WITH THE COY COME DAYS MADE FOR THE CHILD. IF THEY DON'T REVISIT IT THEY STAY IN PLACE WHETHER THEY ARE MEANINGFUL OR NOT WITH RESPECT TO THE CURRENT CAPACITY OF THE CHILD. I POINT THOSE ITEMS OUT FOR THE BODY CONSIDERATION.

[Unknown]: THE SENATOR FROM STAFFORD, SENATOR STEWART. IF NO ONE ELSE WISHES TO SPEAK AND I WILL BE BRIEF. I THINK IT THE IMPORTANT TO KNOW THAT IEPS ARE REVIEWED TWICE A YEAR. AT LEAST ONCE-A-YEAR AND PROBABLY TWICE A YEAR IN MOST CIRCUMSTANCES AND THERE IS A VAST BODY OF PROFESSIONALS WHO PARTICIPATE IN THE IEP, PEOPLE WITH DOCTORATES IN FACT. IT IS NOT AS IT WAS PRESENTED. AGREE IT IS A SIGNIFICANT CHANGE OF POLICY IN VIRGINIA AND IT LONG OVERDUE. I HOPE YOU WILL VOTE FOR IN. THE SENATOR FROM PETERSEN, SENATOR DANCE.

Sen. Roz Dance (D-Petersburg): THANK YOU, MR. PRESIDENT. SPEAKING TO THE BILL I WILL BY REAL BELIEF.

[Unknown]: THE SENATOR HAS THE FLOOR.

Sen. Roz Dance (D-Petersburg): THIS IS ONE AREA I DO KNOW A LITTLE SOMETHING ABOUT AS DEALING WITH THOSE WITH INTELLECTUAL ABILITY ESPECIALLY THOSE WITH AUTISM AND THOSE WHO REQUIRE AN INDIVIDUAL EDUCATION PLAN BECAUSE THAT IS WHAT I SPENT MY LIFE DOING BEFORE RETIRING. IT IS TRUE THAT IT IS EDUCATION LOOK FOR THE PLAN WHEN THEY SAY IEP BUT IT ADDRESSES ALL OF THE NEEDS OF THE CLIENT AND IN PARTICULAR THE BEHAVIORS AND HOW TO ADDRESS THAT AS WELL. IT IS NOT JUST THE EDUCATION. IT WAS WHOLISTICALLY ADDRESSING THE WHOLE CHILD AND I WANT TO COMMEND THE PATRON FOR BRINGING THIS BILL FORWARD. THANK YOU.

Del. Bill Howell (R-Fredericksburg): THANK YOU.