Action Committee,
Rebeca Chaiken is a retired probation officer who worked in Washington, D.C. and Minnesota. I asked her opinion of SB 84 Parole and Probation Changes. This is her comment:
From a probation officer’s perspective, technical violations are significant. The Court has allowed the defendant an opportunity to comply and the PO’s responsibility is to enforce the Court’s order. If a defendant violates conditions of release the Court is notified (but not necessarily after the first or second infraction - it kind of depends upon the circumstances). The PO doesn’t necessarily ask for revocation - sometimes it is just a notification. It is when a defendant continues to violate the conditions is when the PO will ask the Court for sanctions or revocation.
It appears that this bill limits the options for the Court - Judges have usually been opposed to being required to do something (like the original federal sentencing guidelines) or required not to do something (like revoke).
Because I don't know much, if anything, about criminal justice in New Mexico, it’s hard for me to comment other than to say I don’t like the idea of being limited in terms of “punishment” for violating the terms of probation. Also technical violations can range from minor (e.g., not working regularly) to drug use and associating with known felons or those involved in crimes. This bill - if I read it correctly - does not distinguish the type of technical violation (or even the number of violations).
Also - drug use as technical violation could endanger the defendant and the public…
Barbara