NY State Senate Bill 2023-S3066B

Senate Bill S3066B

2023-2024 Legislative Session

Grants superior court judges the authority to issue a temporary order of protection when an action is pending in a local criminal court

download bill text pdf

Current Bill Status - In Senate Committee Codes Committee

Introduced
- In Committee Assembly
- In Committee Senate
- On Floor Calendar Assembly
- On Floor Calendar Senate
- Passed Assembly
- Passed Senate
Delivered to Governor
Signed By Governor

Please enter your contact information

First Name

Last Name

Email Address

A valid email address is required.

Home address is used to determine the senate district in which you reside. Your support or opposition to this bill is then shared immediately with the senator who represents you.

Optional services from the NY State Senate:

Create an account. An account allows you to officially support or oppose key legislation, sign petitions with a single click, and follow issues, committees, and bills that matter to you. When you create an account, you agree to this platform's terms of participation.

Include a custom message for your Senator? (Optional)

Enter a message to your senator. Many New Yorkers use this to share the reasoning behind their support or opposition to the bill. Others might share a personal anecdote about how the bill would affect them or people they care about.

Actions

View Actions

	Assembly Actions - Lowercase Senate Actions - UPPERCASE
Jun 04, 2024	print number 3066b
Jun 04, 2024	amend and recommit to codes
May 16, 2024	print number 3066a
May 16, 2024	amend and recommit to codes
Jan 03, 2024	referred to codes
Jan 27, 2023	referred to codes

Bill Amendments

Original

B (Active)

co-Sponsors

View additional co-sponsors

2023-S3066 - Details

Current Committee:: Senate Codes
Law Section:: Criminal Procedure Law
Laws Affected:: Add §530.15, amd §530.30, CP L
Versions Introduced in 2021-2022 Legislative Session:: S2832

2023-S3066 - Summary

Authorizes courts to hold evidentiary hearings for a temporary order of protection in certain circumstances; grants superior court judges the authority to issue a temporary order of protection when an action is pending in a local criminal court in certain circumstances.

2023-S3066 - Sponsor Memo

                                 
BILL NUMBER: S3066  REVISED 3/10/23

SPONSOR: RAMOS
 
TITLE OF BILL:

An act to amend the criminal procedure law, in relation to the issuance
of temporary orders of protection when an action is pending in a local
criminal court

 
PURPOSE:

This bill will add a section to the Criminal Procedure Law that will
codify recent case law enabling accused parties in criminal proceedings
to request a hearing when temporary orders of protection are issued
against them. These temporary orders can cause homelessness, job loss,
immigration consequences, and family separation. This change will give
judges the opportunity to assess information and determine whether
temporary orders are necessary to protect the parties.

 
SUMMARY OF PROVISIONS:

Section 1 of the bill adds Section 530.15 of the Criminal Procedure Law.

Sections 2 of the bill amends subdivisions 1 and 2 of Section 530.30 of
the Criminal Procedure Law.

Section 3 sets the effective date.

 
JUSTIFICATION:

During New York criminal court arraignments, judges issue full temporary
orders of protection ("TOPs") as a matter of course in nearly every case
where there is a complaining witness. These orders require the person
charged to stay away from the home and place of business of the
complaining witness. Prosecutors ask for TOPs based almost entirely on
the representation of law enforcement officers who act with incomplete
information and biases. As a result, TOPs are often issued against
survivors who were protecting themselves, teenagers and young people
that get into altercations with parents regardless of who is the initial
aggressor, and LGBTQ+ people and populations who present as "other" even
when they are defending themselves. TOPs typically last until the under-
lying case resolves-a process that can take months or even years-and
many are issued against the wishes of the protected parties. Some are
even issued against both or multiple parties.

Unlike many other states and the District of Columbia, New York does not
have a codified process for accused persons or protected parties to be
heard when these orders are issued. Recognizing this, the New York
Appellate Division, First Department recently ruled in Matter of Craw-
ford v. Ally (June 24th, 2021), that when a temporary stay-away order is
issued which implicates a defendant's due process rights, the Criminal
Court should conduct a "prompt evidentiary hearing," thereafter. The
case bears the name of Shamika Craword who was rendered homeless by a
stay away order--removed from her own New York City Housing Authority
apartment and separated from her children for nearly three months. This
hearing would offer an opportunity for a judge to examine the facts more
closely than they could at arraignment to decide if the order should
remain in place, or be limited. However, the Crawford decision leaves

numerous details open to interpretation by the courts, and as a result
the ruling has been undermined and applied in an inconsistent manner.

The Promoting Pre-Trial (PromPT) Stability Act codifies Crawford's hold-
ing into law while clarifying key details of hearings. This bill ensures
that due process is complied with and that there is uniform application
of the decision across the State. It allows judges to respond to the
unique needs of a particular case or relationship, while also allowing
families to work out their differences, and teenagers and young adults
to stay in their family's homes.  Importantly, judges will make deci-
sions as to the propriety of stay-away orders based upon more complete
information than they have at arraignment.

Notably, this bill will not lead to the vacatur of all TOPs.  Prosecu-
tors are still authorized to ask for TOPs, and judges will have
discretion to issue these orders, or modify them, when they are appro-
priate and necessary for the safety of the protected party.  Further,
this legislation only concerns criminal court TOPs, parties can continue
to petition family court for civil orders of protection.  This bill does
not require protected parties to testify in these hearings, but it does
give them an opportunity to be heard if they choose. Further, this bill
ensures hearings occur expeditiously so that accused parties can avoid
significant harms caused by improper TOPs.

2023-S3066 - Bill Text download pdf

                             
                     S T A T E   O F   N E W   Y O R K
 ________________________________________________________________________
 
                                   3066
 
                        2023-2024 Regular Sessions
 
                             I N  S E N A T E
 
                             January 27, 2023
                                ___________
 
 Introduced  by  Sens. RAMOS, KAVANAGH, MYRIE, RIVERA, SALAZAR, SEPULVEDA
   -- read twice and ordered printed, and when printed to be committed to
   the Committee on Codes
 
 AN ACT to amend the criminal procedure law, in relation to the  issuance
   of temporary orders of protection when an action is pending in a local
   criminal court

   THE  PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, REPRESENTED IN SENATE AND ASSEM-
 BLY, DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS:
 
   Section 1. The criminal procedure law  is  amended  by  adding  a  new
 section 530.15 to read as follows:
 § 530.15 TEMPORARY ORDER OF PROTECTION HEARING.
   WHERE  A  COURT HAS ISSUED A TEMPORARY ORDER OF PROTECTION PURSUANT TO
 SUBDIVISION ONE OF SECTION 530.12 OF THIS ARTICLE OR SUBDIVISION ONE  OF
 SECTION  530.13  OF  THIS  ARTICLE, UPON APPLICATION OF A DEFENDANT, THE
 COURT SHALL HOLD AN EVIDENTIARY HEARING WHERE THE PROSECUTOR MUST  SHOW,
 BY CLEAR AND CONVINCING EVIDENCE, THAT THE TEMPORARY ORDER OF PROTECTION
 IS  THE  LEAST  RESTRICTIVE  MEANS OF PROTECTING A DESIGNATED WITNESS OR
 COMPLAINANT FROM INTIMIDATION OR INJURY.
   (A) THE DEFENDANT SHALL BE ENTITLED TO SUCH HEARING WITHIN THREE  DAYS
 OF  REQUESTING  SUCH  HEARING. NOTICE MUST BE GIVEN BY THE COURT TO BOTH
 PARTIES, AS WELL AS THE PARTY PROTECTED BY THE ORDER OF  PROTECTION,  IN
 ADVANCE  OF  THE  HEARING.    SUCH NOTICE SHALL DETAIL THE RIGHTS OF THE
 PROTECTED PARTY WITH RESPECT TO THE HEARING AND DESCRIBE  THE  DIFFERENT
 TYPES OF TEMPORARY ORDERS OF PROTECTION AVAILABLE.
   (B)  AT  THE  HEARING, THE PROSECUTION MUST PRESENT WITNESS TESTIMONY,
 SUBJECT TO CROSS-EXAMINATION, THOUGH THE WITNESS NEED NOT BE  THE  PARTY
 PROTECTED BY THE ORDER.  HEARSAY IS ADMISSIBLE.
   (C)  THE COURT SHALL STATE ON THE RECORD OR IN WRITING ITS FINDINGS OF
 FACTS AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW, THE REASONS FOR MAINTAINING, VACATING,  OR
 MODIFYING  THE TEMPORARY ORDER OF PROTECTION, AND, WHERE APPLICABLE, WHY
 THE TEMPORARY ORDER OF PROTECTION IS  THE  LEAST  RESTRICTIVE  MEANS  OF
 
  EXPLANATION--Matter in ITALICS (underscored) is new; matter in brackets
                       [ ] is old law to be omitted.
                                                            LBD06035-02-3

 S. 3066                             2
 
 PROTECTING  A  DESIGNATED  WITNESS  OR  COMPLAINANT FROM INTIMIDATION OR
 INJURY.
   § 2. Section 530.30 of the criminal procedure law, the section heading
 and subdivisions 1 and 2 as amended by section 17 of part JJJ of chapter
 59 of the laws of 2019, is amended to read as follows:
 § 530.30 Order of recognizance, release under non-monetary conditions or
            bail OR ISSUANCE OF A TEMPORARY ORDER OF PROTECTION; by supe-
            rior  court  judge  when  action is pending in local criminal
            court.
   1. When a criminal action is pending in a local criminal court,  other
 than  one  consisting of a superior court judge sitting as such, a judge
 of a superior court holding a term thereof in the county, upon  applica-
 tion  of a defendant, may order recognizance, release under non-monetary
 conditions or, where authorized, bail when such local criminal court:
   (a) Lacks authority to issue such an order, pursuant to  the  relevant
 provisions of section 530.20 of this article; or
   (b) Has denied an application for recognizance, release under non-mon-
 etary conditions or bail; or
   (c) Has fixed bail, where authorized, which is excessive; or
   (d)  Has set a securing order of release under non-monetary conditions
 which are more restrictive  than  necessary  to  reasonably  assure  the
 defendant's return to court.
   In  such  case, such superior court judge may vacate the order of such
 local criminal court and release the defendant on recognizance or  under
 non-monetary  conditions,  or  where  authorized,  fix  bail in a lesser
 amount or in a less burdensome form, whichever are the least restrictive
 alternative and conditions that will reasonably assure  the  defendant's
 return  to  court. The court shall explain its choice of alternative and
 conditions on the record or in writing.
   2. WHEN A CRIMINAL ACTION IS PENDING IN A LOCAL CRIMINAL COURT,  OTHER
 THAN  ONE  CONSISTING OF A SUPERIOR COURT JUDGE SITTING AS SUCH, AND THE
 LOCAL CRIMINAL COURT HAS DENIED A REQUEST TO MODIFY OR LIMIT A TEMPORARY
 ORDER OF PROTECTION ISSUED PURSUANT TO SUBDIVISION ONE OF SECTION 530.12
 OF THIS ARTICLE OR SUBDIVISION ONE OF SECTION 530.13  OF  THIS  ARTICLE,
 UPON APPLICATION OF A DEFENDANT, A JUDGE OF THE SUPERIOR COURT HOLDING A
 TERM  THEREOF  IN THE COUNTY SHALL REVIEW THE DETERMINATION OF THE LOCAL
 CRIMINAL COURT DE NOVO AND MAY VACATE OR MODIFY THE ORDER OF  THE  LOCAL
 CRIMINAL  COURT.  A  COURT'S  FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF
 SECTION 530.15 OF THIS ARTICLE IS REVIEWABLE UNDER THIS SECTION.
   3. Notwithstanding the provisions of subdivision one OR  TWO  of  this
 section, when the defendant is charged with a felony in a local criminal
 court,  a superior court judge may not order recognizance, release under
 non-monetary conditions or, where authorized, bail, OR VACATE OR  MODIFY
 A  TEMPORARY  ORDER OF PROTECTION unless and until the district attorney
 has had an opportunity to be heard in the  matter  and  such  judge  and
 counsel for the defendant have been furnished with a report as described
 in  subparagraph  (ii)  of  paragraph  (b) of subdivision two of section
 530.20 of this article.
   [3.] 4. Not more than one application may be  made  pursuant  to  EACH
 SUBDIVISION OF this section.
   § 3. This act shall take effect immediately.

co-Sponsors

View additional co-sponsors

2023-S3066A - Details

Current Committee:: Senate Codes
Law Section:: Criminal Procedure Law
Laws Affected:: Add §530.15, amd §530.30, CP L
Versions Introduced in 2021-2022 Legislative Session:: S2832

2023-S3066A - Summary

2023-S3066A - Sponsor Memo

                                 
BILL NUMBER: S3066A

SPONSOR: RAMOS
 
TITLE OF BILL:

An act to amend the criminal procedure law, in relation to the issuance
of temporary orders of protection when an action is pending in a local
criminal court

 
PURPOSE:

This bill will add a section to the Criminal Procedure Law that will
codify recent case law enabling accused parties in criminal proceedings
to request a hearing when temporary orders of protection are issued
against them. These temporary orders can cause homelessness, job loss,
immigration consequences, and family separation. This change will give
judges the opportunity to assess information and determine whether
temporary orders are necessary to protect the parties.

 
SUMMARY OF PROVISIONS:

Section 1 of the bill adds Section 530.15 of the Criminal Procedure Law.

Section 2 of the bill amends subdivisions 1 and 2 of Section 530.30 of
the Criminal Procedure Law.

Section 3 sets the effective date.

 
JUSTIFICATION:

During New York criminal court arraignments, judges issue full temporary
orders of protection ("TOPs") as a matter of course in nearly every case
where there is a complaining witness. These orders require the person
charged to stay away from the home and place of business of the
complaining witness. Prosecutors ask for TOPs based almost entirely on
the representation of law enforcement officers who act with incomplete
information and biases. As a result, TOPs are often issued against
survivors who were protecting themselves, teenagers and young people
that get into altercations with parents regardless of who is the initial
aggressor, and LGBTQ+ people and populations who present as "other" even
when they are defending themselves. TOPs typically last until the under-
lying case resolves process that can take months or even years - and
many are issued against the wishes of the protected parties. Some are
even issued against both or multiple parties.

Unlike many other states and the District of Columbia, New York does not
have a codified process for accused persons or protected parties to be
heard when these orders are issued. Recognizing this, the New York
Appellate Division, First Department recently ruled in Matter of Craw-
ford v. Ally (June 24th, 2021), that when a temporary stay-away order is
issued which implicates a defendant's due process rights, the Criminal
Court should conduct a "prompt evidentiary hearing," thereafter. The
case bears the name of Shamika Crawford who was rendered homeless by a
stay away order--removed from her own New York City Housing Authority
apartment and separated from her children for nearly three months. This
hearing would offer an opportunity for a judge to examine the facts more
closely than they could at arraignment to decide if the order should
remain in place, or be limited. However, the Crawford decision leaves

numerous details open to interpretation by the courts, and as a result
the ruling has been undermined and applied in an inconsistent manner.

The Promoting Pre-Trial (PromPT) Stability Act codifies Crawford's hold-
ing into law while clarifying key details of hearings. This bill ensures
that due process is complied with and that there is uniform application
of the decision across the State. It allows judges to respond to the
Unique needs of a particular case or relationship, while also allowing
families to work out their differences, and teenagers and young adults
to stay in their family's homes.  Importantly, judges will make deci-
sions as to the propriety of stay-away orders based upon more complete
information than they have at arraignment.

Notably, this bill will not lead to the vacatur of all TOPs.  Prosecu-
tors are still authorized to ask for TOPs, and judges will have
discretion to issue these orders, or modify them, when they are appro-
priate and necessary for the safety of the protected party.  Further,
this legislation only concerns criminal court TOPs, parties can continue
to petition family court for civil orders of protection.  This bill does
not require protected parties to testify in these hearings, but it does
give them an opportunity to be heard if they choose. Further, this bill
ensures hearings occur expeditiously so that accused parties can avoid
significant harms caused by improper TOPs.

 
FISCAL IMPACT:

None to the State

 
EFFECTIVE DATE:
This act shall take effect immediately.

2023-S3066A - Bill Text download pdf

                             
                     S T A T E   O F   N E W   Y O R K
 ________________________________________________________________________
 
                                  3066--A
 
                        2023-2024 Regular Sessions
 
                             I N  S E N A T E
 
                             January 27, 2023
                                ___________
 
 Introduced  by  Sens. RAMOS, KAVANAGH, MYRIE, RIVERA, SALAZAR, SEPULVEDA
   -- read twice and ordered printed, and when printed to be committed to
   the Committee on Codes -- recommitted to the  Committee  on  Codes  in
   accordance  with  Senate  Rule 6, sec. 8 -- committee discharged, bill
   amended, ordered reprinted as amended and recommitted to said  commit-
   tee
 
 AN  ACT to amend the criminal procedure law, in relation to the issuance
   of temporary orders of protection when an action is pending in a local
   criminal court
 
   THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, REPRESENTED IN SENATE AND  ASSEM-
 BLY, DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS:
 
   Section  1.  The  criminal  procedure  law  is amended by adding a new
 section 530.15 to read as follows:
 § 530.15 TEMPORARY ORDER OF PROTECTION HEARING.
   WHERE A COURT HAS ISSUED A TEMPORARY ORDER OF PROTECTION  PURSUANT  TO
 SUBDIVISION  ONE OF SECTION 530.12 OF THIS ARTICLE OR SUBDIVISION ONE OF
 SECTION 530.13 OF THIS ARTICLE, UPON APPLICATION  OF  A  DEFENDANT,  THE
 COURT  SHALL HOLD AN EVIDENTIARY HEARING WHERE THE PROSECUTOR MUST SHOW,
 BY CLEAR AND CONVINCING EVIDENCE, THAT THE TEMPORARY ORDER OF PROTECTION
 IS NECESSARY TO ACHIEVE ITS PURPOSE OF PROTECTING A  DESIGNATED  WITNESS
 OR COMPLAINANT FROM INTIMIDATION OR INJURY.
   (A)  THE  DEFENDANT SHALL BE ENTITLED TO SUCH HEARING WITHIN FIVE DAYS
 OF REQUESTING SUCH HEARING. NOTICE MUST BE GIVEN BY THE  COURT  TO  BOTH
 PARTIES,  AS  WELL AS THE PARTY PROTECTED BY THE ORDER OF PROTECTION, IN
 ADVANCE OF THE HEARING.   SUCH NOTICE SHALL DETAIL  THE  RIGHTS  OF  THE
 PROTECTED  PARTY  WITH RESPECT TO THE HEARING AND DESCRIBE THE DIFFERENT
 TYPES OF TEMPORARY ORDERS OF PROTECTION AVAILABLE.
   (B) AT THE HEARING, THE  PROSECUTION  MUST  PRESENT  RELEVANT  WITNESS
 TESTIMONY,  OR ADMISSIBLE EVIDENCE, SUBJECT TO CROSS-EXAMINATION, THOUGH
 THE WITNESS NEED NOT BE THE PARTY PROTECTED BY THE ORDER.
   (C) THE COURT SHALL STATE ON THE RECORD OR IN WRITING ITS FINDINGS  OF
 FACTS  AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW, THE REASONS FOR MAINTAINING, VACATING, OR
 MODIFYING THE TEMPORARY ORDER OF PROTECTION, AND, WHERE APPLICABLE,  WHY
 THE TEMPORARY ORDER OF PROTECTION IS NECESSARY TO ACHIEVE ITS PURPOSE OF

  EXPLANATION--Matter in ITALICS (underscored) is new; matter in brackets
                       [ ] is old law to be omitted.
                                                            LBD06035-05-4
 S. 3066--A                          2
 
 PROTECTING  A  DESIGNATED  WITNESS  OR  COMPLAINANT FROM INTIMIDATION OR
 INJURY.
   § 2. Section 530.30 of the criminal procedure law, the section heading
 and subdivisions 1 and 2 as amended by section 17 of part JJJ of chapter
 59  of  the  laws  of  2019,  the  closing paragraph of subdivision 1 as
 amended by section 7 of subpart A of part VV of chapter 56 of  the  laws
 of 2023, is amended to read as follows:
 § 530.30 Order of recognizance, release under non-monetary conditions or
            bail OR ISSUANCE OF A TEMPORARY ORDER OF PROTECTION; by supe-
            rior  court  judge  when  action is pending in local criminal
            court.
   1. When a criminal action is pending in a local criminal court,  other
 than  one  consisting of a superior court judge sitting as such, a judge
 of a superior court holding a term thereof in the county, upon  applica-
 tion  of a defendant, may order recognizance, release under non-monetary
 conditions or, where authorized, bail when such local criminal court:
   (a) Lacks authority to issue such an order, pursuant to  the  relevant
 provisions of section 530.20 of this article; or
   (b) Has denied an application for recognizance, release under non-mon-
 etary conditions or bail; or
   (c) Has fixed bail, where authorized, which is excessive; or
   (d)  Has set a securing order of release under non-monetary conditions
 which are more restrictive  than  necessary  to  reasonably  assure  the
 defendant's return to court.
   In  such  case, such superior court judge may vacate the order of such
 local criminal court and release the defendant on recognizance or  under
 non-monetary  conditions,  or  where  authorized,  fix  bail in a lesser
 amount or in a less burdensome form, or order non-monetary conditions in
 conjunction with fixing bail, including fixing bail in a  lesser  amount
 or  in a less burdensome form, the determination for which shall be made
 in accordance with section 510.10 of this title. The court shall explain
 the basis for its determination and choice  of  securing  order  on  the
 record or in writing.
   2.  WHEN A CRIMINAL ACTION IS PENDING IN A LOCAL CRIMINAL COURT, OTHER
 THAN ONE CONSISTING OF A SUPERIOR COURT JUDGE SITTING AS SUCH,  AND  THE
 LOCAL CRIMINAL COURT HAS DENIED A REQUEST TO MODIFY OR LIMIT A TEMPORARY
 ORDER OF PROTECTION ISSUED PURSUANT TO SUBDIVISION ONE OF SECTION 530.12
 OF  THIS  ARTICLE  OR SUBDIVISION ONE OF SECTION 530.13 OF THIS ARTICLE,
 UPON APPLICATION OF A DEFENDANT, A JUDGE OF THE SUPERIOR COURT HOLDING A
 TERM THEREOF IN THE COUNTY SHALL REVIEW THE DETERMINATION OF  THE  LOCAL
 CRIMINAL  COURT  DE NOVO AND MAY VACATE OR MODIFY THE ORDER OF THE LOCAL
 CRIMINAL COURT. A COURT'S FAILURE TO COMPLY  WITH  THE  REQUIREMENTS  OF
 SECTION 530.15 OF THIS ARTICLE IS REVIEWABLE UNDER THIS SECTION.
   3.  Notwithstanding  the  provisions of subdivision one OR TWO of this
 section, when the defendant is charged with a felony in a local criminal
 court, a superior court judge may not order recognizance, release  under
 non-monetary  conditions or, where authorized, bail, OR VACATE OR MODIFY
 A TEMPORARY ORDER OF PROTECTION unless and until the  district  attorney
 has  had  an  opportunity  to  be heard in the matter and such judge and
 counsel for the defendant have been furnished with a report as described
 in subparagraph (ii) of paragraph (b)  of  subdivision  two  of  section
 530.20 of this article.
   [3.]  4.  Not  more  than one application may be made pursuant to EACH
 SUBDIVISION OF this section.
   § 3. This act shall take effect immediately.

co-Sponsors

View additional co-sponsors

2023-S3066B (ACTIVE) - Details

Current Committee:: Senate Codes
Law Section:: Criminal Procedure Law
Laws Affected:: Add §530.15, amd §530.30, CP L
Versions Introduced in 2021-2022 Legislative Session:: S2832

2023-S3066B (ACTIVE) - Summary

2023-S3066B (ACTIVE) - Sponsor Memo

                                 
BILL NUMBER: S3066B

SPONSOR: RAMOS
 
TITLE OF BILL:

An act to amend the criminal procedure law, in relation to the issuance
of temporary orders of protection when an action is pending in a local
criminal court

 
PURPOSE:

This bill will add a section to the Criminal Procedure Law that will
codify recent case law enabling accused parties in criminal proceedings
to request a hearing when temporary orders of protection are issued
against them. These temporary orders can cause homelessness, job loss,
immigration consequences, and family separation. This change will give
judges the opportunity to assess information and determine whether
temporary orders are necessary to protect the parties.

 
SUMMARY OF PROVISIONS:

Section 1 of the bill adds Section 530.15 of the Criminal Procedure Law.

Sections 2 of the bill amends subdivisions 1 and 2 of Section 530.30 of
the Criminal Procedure Law.

Section 3 sets the effective date.

 
JUSTIFICATION:

During New York criminal court arraignments, judges issue full temporary
orders of protection ("TOPs") as a matter of course in nearly every case
where there is a complaining witness. These orders require the person
charged to stay away from the home and place of business of the
complaining witness. Prosecutors ask for TOPs based almost entirely on
the representation of law enforcement officers who act with incomplete
information and biases. As a result, TOPs are often issued against
survivors who were protecting themselves, teenagers and young people
that get into altercations with parents regardless of who is the initial
aggressor, and LGBTQ+ people and populations who present as "other" even
when they are defending themselves. TOPs typically last until the under-
lying case resolves-a process that can take months or even years-and
many are issued against the wishes of the protected parties. Some are
even issued against both or multiple parties.

Unlike many other states and the District of Columbia, New York does not
have a codified process for accused persons or protected parties to be
heard when these orders are issued. Recognizing this, the New York
Appellate Division, First Department recently ruled in Matter of Craw-
ford v. Ally (June 24th, 2021), that when a temporary stay-away order is
issued which implicates a defendant's due process rights, the Criminal
Court should conduct a "prompt evidentiary hearing," thereafter. The
case bears the name of Shamika Craword who was rendered homeless by a
stay away order--removed from her own New York City Housing Authority
apartment and separated from her children for nearly three months. This
hearing would offer an opportunity for a judge to examine the facts more
closely than they could at arraignment to decide if the order should
remain in place, or be limited. However, the Crawford decision leaves

numerous details open to interpretation by the courts, and as a result
the ruling has been undermined and applied in an inconsistent manner.

The Promoting Pre-Trial (PromPT) Stability Act codifies Crawford's hold-
ing into law while clarifying key details of hearings. This bill ensures
that due process is complied with and that there is uniform application
of the decision across the State. It allows judges to respond to the
unique needs of a particular case or relationship, while also allowing
families to work out their differences, and teenagers and young adults
to stay in their family's homes.  Importantly, judges will make deci-
sions as to the propriety of stay-away orders based upon more complete
information than they have at arraignment.

Notably, this bill will not lead to the vacatur of all TOPs.  Prosecu-
tors are still authorized to ask for TOPs, and judges will have
discretion to issue these orders, or modify them, when they are appro-
priate and necessary for the safety of the protected party.  Further,
this legislation only concerns criminal court TOPS, parties can continue
to petition family court for civil orders of protection.  This bill does
not require protected parties to testify in these hearings, but it does
give them an opportunity to be heard if they choose. Further, this bill
ensures hearings occur expeditiously so that accused parties can avoid
significant harms caused by improper TOPs.

2023-S3066B (ACTIVE) - Bill Text download pdf

                             
                     S T A T E   O F   N E W   Y O R K
 ________________________________________________________________________
 
                                  3066--B
 
                        2023-2024 Regular Sessions
 
                             I N  S E N A T E
 
                             January 27, 2023
                                ___________
 
 Introduced  by  Sens. RAMOS, KAVANAGH, MYRIE, RIVERA, SALAZAR, SEPULVEDA
   -- read twice and ordered printed, and when printed to be committed to
   the Committee on Codes -- recommitted to the  Committee  on  Codes  in
   accordance  with  Senate  Rule 6, sec. 8 -- committee discharged, bill
   amended, ordered reprinted as amended and recommitted to said  commit-
   tee  --  committee  discharged,  bill  amended,  ordered  reprinted as
   amended and recommitted to said committee
 
 AN ACT to amend the criminal procedure law, in relation to the  issuance
   of temporary orders of protection when an action is pending in a local
   criminal court
 
   THE  PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, REPRESENTED IN SENATE AND ASSEM-
 BLY, DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS:
 
   Section 1. The criminal procedure law  is  amended  by  adding  a  new
 section 530.15 to read as follows:
 § 530.15 TEMPORARY ORDER OF PROTECTION HEARING.
   WHERE  A  COURT HAS ISSUED A TEMPORARY ORDER OF PROTECTION PURSUANT TO
 SUBDIVISION ONE OF SECTION 530.12 OF THIS ARTICLE OR SUBDIVISION ONE  OF
 SECTION  530.13  OF  THIS  ARTICLE, UPON APPLICATION OF A DEFENDANT, THE
 COURT SHALL HOLD AN EVIDENTIARY HEARING WHERE THE PROSECUTOR MUST  SHOW,
 BY CLEAR AND CONVINCING EVIDENCE, THAT THE TEMPORARY ORDER OF PROTECTION
 IS  NECESSARY  TO ACHIEVE ITS PURPOSE OF PROTECTING A DESIGNATED WITNESS
 OR COMPLAINANT FROM INTIMIDATION OR INJURY.
   (A) THE DEFENDANT SHALL BE ENTITLED TO SUCH HEARING WITHIN ONE HUNDRED
 TWENTY HOURS OF REQUESTING SUCH HEARING OR, IN THE EVENT THAT  A  SATUR-
 DAY,  SUNDAY,  OR  LEGAL  HOLIDAY  OCCURS, WITHIN ONE HUNDRED FORTY-FOUR
 HOURS OF REQUESTING SUCH HEARING.  NOTICE MUST BE GIVEN BY THE COURT  TO
 BOTH PARTIES, AS WELL AS THE PARTY PROTECTED BY THE ORDER OF PROTECTION,
 IN  ADVANCE  OF THE HEARING.  SUCH NOTICE SHALL DETAIL THE RIGHTS OF THE
 PROTECTED PARTY WITH RESPECT TO THE HEARING AND DESCRIBE  THE  DIFFERENT
 TYPES OF TEMPORARY ORDERS OF PROTECTION AVAILABLE.
 
  EXPLANATION--Matter in ITALICS (underscored) is new; matter in brackets
                       [ ] is old law to be omitted.
                                                            LBD06035-06-4
 S. 3066--B                          2

 
   (B)  AT  THE  HEARING,  THE  PROSECUTION MUST PRESENT RELEVANT WITNESS
 TESTIMONY, OR ADMISSIBLE EVIDENCE, SUBJECT TO CROSS-EXAMINATION,  THOUGH
 THE WITNESS NEED NOT BE THE PARTY PROTECTED BY THE ORDER.
   (C)  THE COURT SHALL STATE ON THE RECORD OR IN WRITING ITS FINDINGS OF
 FACTS AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW, THE REASONS FOR MAINTAINING, VACATING,  OR
 MODIFYING  THE TEMPORARY ORDER OF PROTECTION, AND, WHERE APPLICABLE, WHY
 THE TEMPORARY ORDER OF PROTECTION IS NECESSARY TO ACHIEVE ITS PURPOSE OF
 PROTECTING A DESIGNATED WITNESS  OR  COMPLAINANT  FROM  INTIMIDATION  OR
 INJURY.
   § 2. Section 530.30 of the criminal procedure law, the section heading
 and subdivisions 1 and 2 as amended by section 17 of part JJJ of chapter
 59  of  the  laws  of  2019,  the  closing paragraph of subdivision 1 as
 amended by section 7 of subpart A of part VV of chapter 56 of  the  laws
 of 2023, is amended to read as follows:
 § 530.30 Order of recognizance, release under non-monetary conditions or
            bail OR ISSUANCE OF A TEMPORARY ORDER OF PROTECTION; by supe-
            rior  court  judge  when  action is pending in local criminal
            court.
   1. When a criminal action is pending in a local criminal court,  other
 than  one  consisting of a superior court judge sitting as such, a judge
 of a superior court holding a term thereof in the county, upon  applica-
 tion  of a defendant, may order recognizance, release under non-monetary
 conditions or, where authorized, bail when such local criminal court:
   (a) Lacks authority to issue such an order, pursuant to  the  relevant
 provisions of section 530.20 of this article; or
   (b) Has denied an application for recognizance, release under non-mon-
 etary conditions or bail; or
   (c) Has fixed bail, where authorized, which is excessive; or
   (d)  Has set a securing order of release under non-monetary conditions
 which are more restrictive  than  necessary  to  reasonably  assure  the
 defendant's return to court.
   In  such  case, such superior court judge may vacate the order of such
 local criminal court and release the defendant on recognizance or  under
 non-monetary  conditions,  or  where  authorized,  fix  bail in a lesser
 amount or in a less burdensome form, or order non-monetary conditions in
 conjunction with fixing bail, including fixing bail in a  lesser  amount
 or  in a less burdensome form, the determination for which shall be made
 in accordance with section 510.10 of this title. The court shall explain
 the basis for its determination and choice  of  securing  order  on  the
 record or in writing.
   2.  WHEN A CRIMINAL ACTION IS PENDING IN A LOCAL CRIMINAL COURT, OTHER
 THAN ONE CONSISTING OF A SUPERIOR COURT JUDGE SITTING AS SUCH,  AND  THE
 LOCAL CRIMINAL COURT HAS DENIED A REQUEST TO MODIFY OR LIMIT A TEMPORARY
 ORDER OF PROTECTION ISSUED PURSUANT TO SUBDIVISION ONE OF SECTION 530.12
 OF  THIS  ARTICLE  OR SUBDIVISION ONE OF SECTION 530.13 OF THIS ARTICLE,
 UPON APPLICATION OF A DEFENDANT, A JUDGE OF THE SUPERIOR COURT HOLDING A
 TERM THEREOF IN THE COUNTY SHALL REVIEW THE DETERMINATION OF  THE  LOCAL
 CRIMINAL  COURT  DE NOVO AND MAY VACATE OR MODIFY THE ORDER OF THE LOCAL
 CRIMINAL COURT. A COURT'S FAILURE TO COMPLY  WITH  THE  REQUIREMENTS  OF
 SECTION 530.15 OF THIS ARTICLE IS REVIEWABLE UNDER THIS SECTION.
   3.  Notwithstanding  the  provisions of subdivision one OR TWO of this
 section, when the defendant is charged with a felony in a local criminal
 court, a superior court judge may not order recognizance, release  under
 non-monetary  conditions or, where authorized, bail, OR VACATE OR MODIFY
 A TEMPORARY ORDER OF PROTECTION unless and until the  district  attorney
 has  had  an  opportunity  to  be heard in the matter and such judge and
 S. 3066--B                          3
 
 counsel for the defendant have been furnished with a report as described
 in subparagraph (ii) of paragraph (b)  of  subdivision  two  of  section
 530.20 of this article.
   [3.]  4.  Not  more  than one application may be made pursuant to EACH
 SUBDIVISION OF this section.
   § 3. This act shall take effect immediately.

Comments

Open Legislation is a forum for New York State legislation. All comments are subject to review and community moderation is encouraged.

Comments deemed off-topic, commercial, campaign-related, self-promotional; or that contain profanity, hate or toxic speech; or that link to sites outside of the nysenate.gov domain are not permitted, and will not be published. Attempts to intimidate and silence contributors or deliberately deceive the public, including excessive or extraneous posting/posts, or coordinated activity, are prohibited and may result in the temporary or permanent banning of the user. Comment moderation is generally performed Monday through Friday. By contributing or voting you agree to the Terms of Participation and verify you are over 13.

Create an account. An account allows you to sign petitions with a single click, officially support or oppose key legislation, and follow issues, committees, and bills that matter to you. When you create an account, you agree to this platform's terms of participation.

Senate Bill S3066B

Share this bill

Sponsored By

Current Bill Status - In Senate Committee Codes Committee

Bill Amendments

co-Sponsors

2023-S3066 - Details

2023-S3066 - Summary

2023-S3066 - Sponsor Memo

2023-S3066 - Bill Text download pdf

co-Sponsors

2023-S3066A - Details

2023-S3066A - Summary

2023-S3066A - Sponsor Memo

2023-S3066A - Bill Text download pdf

co-Sponsors

2023-S3066B (ACTIVE) - Details

2023-S3066B (ACTIVE) - Summary

2023-S3066B (ACTIVE) - Sponsor Memo

2023-S3066B (ACTIVE) - Bill Text download pdf

Comments