This Act expands the definition of a “course of conduct” in the stalking statute and also provides that if the court finds as a matter of law that acts subject to this statute are in fact constitutionally protected activities, then all evidence associated with those activities must be excluded. This Act raises stalking under § 1312(c) from a class F to a class D felony. And also raises stalking under § 1312 (b) from a class G to a class E felony. This Act also makes technical corrections to conform existing law to the standards of the Delaware Legislative Drafting Manual.
This Act makes it a class G felony if a person breaches a no contact provision of the person's sentencing order, where the sentence was for 1 or more felonies. This Act also makes it a class A misdemeanor if a person breaches a no contact provision of the person's sentencing order, where the sentence was for 1 or more misdemeanors and no felonies.
This Act adds intentional interference with the operation of a school bus to the offense of disorderly conduct. Intentional interference with a school bus may include boarding a school bus and refusing to exit after being lawfully ordered to do so by the school bus driver; wrongfully restricting the movement of a school bus; or threatening the school bus driver, a student, or any passenger entering, leaving, or waiting for a school bus. A student or passenger otherwise authorized to be on the school bus in the ordinary course of business may not be guilty of disorderly conduct for intentional interference with the operation of a school bus. This Act requires a greater than majority vote for passage because § 28 of Article IV of the Delaware Constitution requires the affirmative vote of 2/3 of the members elected to each house of the General Assembly to expand the scope of an existing crime within the jurisdiction of an inferior court.
This bill clarifies that only law enforcement officers may petition for emergency relief in the Justice of the Peace Court pursuant to Title 10, Section 7703. The statute is currently ambiguous with regard to who may file pursuant to Section 7703. Section 7701(4) defines a "Petitioner" as a law enforcement officer or any person who would be qualified to file a Petition for Protection from Abuse. Section 7702(a) provides that "a petitioner may request relief under section 7703 (Emergency hearings) or Section 7704 (Nonemergency hearings)." However, Section 7703 only addresses the process a law enforcement officer must follow to procure a Lethal Violence Protective Order ("LVPO") and fails to mention any other class of petitioner. At the time of the passage of the LVPO statute, there was specific discussion and intention to prevent individuals from filing for emergencies in the Justice of the Peace Court for the same reason that citizen warrants are no longer accepted in that Court. This conclusion is borne out by the fact that Section 7703 does not prescribe any procedure or burden of proof an individual would need to meet to prevail in an emergency petition for a LVPO. As with Weapons Relinquishment Orders governed by Section 1448C of Title 11, this proposed bill requires requests for emergency relief to come through a law enforcement agency rather than directly from an individual member of the public. The bill removes the confusion that exists with the current wording of the statute.
This Act creates the crime of “discharging a firearm at a dwelling, place of worship, vehicle, or place of business.” The offense is a class E felony. The offense contains a provision that provides that a person may not be convicted of both a violation of this section and reckless endangering 1st or 2nd with regard to the same conduct. It also exempts a shooting range from the businesses covered by the statute.
Beginning in 2002, schools, school districts, and licensed child care providers have been required to keep binders of community notifications with information about registered sex offenders. This requirement was enacted based on recommendation from the Community Notification Task Force that schools have a role in community awareness. However, this requirement has created financial, administrative, and emotional burdens for staff who maintain the binders. The binders are rarely reviewed by the public and they do not necessarily provide up-to-date information or information on sex offenders in the immediate geographic area of the school, school district, or licensed child care provider. Additionally, in its March 31, 2002, report, the Community Notification School Task Force found that schools do not have the expertise to answer inevitable questions regarding the nature of particular offenses or the risk posed by particular offenders, and that it is not an appropriate role for educators to answer those questions. This Act eliminates the requirement that a school, school district, or licensed child care provider keep community notifications in a binder. Instead, schools, school district, or licensed child care providers are required to provide “school and child care notification” that includes all of the following information: 1. Notification that searchable records available to the public can be obtained at a police agency or the Delaware State Bureau of Identification (“SBI”). 2. Notification that the public can register for community notifications on the Delaware Sex Offender Central Registry website. 3. The URL for the Delaware Sex Offender Central Registry website. The school, school district, or licensed child care provider must provide the school and child care notification upon request from staff, faculty, or a parent or guardian of an enrolled child. Additionally, the school, school district, or licensed child care provider must post the school and child care notification on its website or, if it does not have website, the school, school district, or licensed child care provider must send the information to staff, faculty, and a legal parent or guardian of an enrolled child in writing at least annually. The Act also clarifies that sex offender registry information must be available on the Internet on the Delaware Sex Offender Central Registry website. Federal Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act (“SORNA”) guidelines require law enforcement to keep a registry of sex offenders and to provide public notification. Specifically, the guidelines require law enforcement to notify schools, but do not require schools to provide access to sex offender records. Instead, federal law enacted in 2006, 34 U.S.C. § 20920, requires states to provide public access to sex offender registry information on the Internet. The SBI maintains the Delaware Sex Offender Central Registry on its website, which allows the general public to find information about registered sex offenders by searching the offender’s information or by searching in a geographic radius. The website also allows the public to sign up for e-mail notifications regarding sex offenders who appear on the website. The website is updated every Friday. It is easily accessible to most of the public, including on computers at public libraries. Additionally, the public can request sex offender registry information in-person at a Delaware State Police troop. The public also can call the SBI for information. Certain municipal police agencies, such as the City of Dover Police Department and the Newark Delaware Police Department, also provide access to community notifications for offenders located in the municipality on the agency’s website. Law-enforcement agencies are better equipped than schools or licensed childcare providers to answer questions about the registry. This Act also makes technical corrections to conform existing law to the standards of the Delaware Legislative Drafting Manual.
This Act bans the sale of Tianeptine in the State by identifying it as a Schedule I controlled substance. Tianeptine, also known as “gas station heroin,” is an antidepressant drug that is not approved by the FDA and is being sold as a dietary supplement in gas stations and other shops. This Act requires approval by a two-thirds vote because the statutory change will result in the expansion of an existing misdemeanor.
This Act prohibits arrest or detention by any person who does not have explicit statutory authority to carry out an arrest or detention. The intent of this provision is to eliminate any doubt that a “citizen’s arrest” is not permitted in Delaware. Peace officers have statutory authority to make arrests, as do federal law enforcement agents and out-of-state police under some circumstances. There is also limited authority to detain a person suspected of shoplifting provided to a merchant, store supervisor, agent or employee of a merchant in § 840 of Title 11; to detain a person suspected of unlawful recording by a motion picture theater owner, supervisor, agent or employee under § 858 of Title 11; and to detain a person suspected of unlawful acts with a video lottery machine by a video lottery agent or any of its officers, employees or agents under § 1474 of Title 11. This Act also deletes two outdated provisions of Chapter 65 of Title 11 that reference the exercise of arrest by private detectives. At the present time, private investigators do not have authority to make arrests in Delaware.
This Act expands the criminal offense of impersonating a police officer, firefighter, emergency medical technician, paramedic, or fire officer to also prohibit impersonation of a federal officer. This Act also makes technical corrections to conform to the Legislative Drafting Manual and creates a definition of “law-enforcement official,” which includes all of the state officers already explicitly referenced in the statute, as well as federal officers.
Currently, the Department of Correction (“Department”) biennially reviews individuals sentenced to more than 1 year of incarceration to determine if there is good cause to recommend a sentence modification to the Board of Parole for an individual who is not a substantial risk to the community or the individual’s self. Good cause includes the individual’s rehabilitation, serious medical illness or infirmity, and prison overcrowding. While any individual is eligible for consideration due to a serious medical illness or infirmity, only those who have served at least ½ of their sentence for a violent felony or all of the statutorily mandated term of incarceration are eligible for consideration for rehabilitation, prison overcrowding, or another reason. If the Department recommends an individual for sentence modification, the Board of Parole considers the application and, if the Board approves, the sentencing court then makes a final determination on the sentence modification. This Act, which is named in honor of Richard “Mouse” Smith, a Delaware civil rights leader, who spent decades advocating on issues addressed by this Act, is a substitute for Senate Bill No. 10. Like Senate Bill No. 10, this Act revises the process for sentence modification in 3 ways. First, this Act removes the Board of Parole from the sentence modification process and provides that applications for sentence modification are made directly to the sentencing court. Second, this Act provides that an individual who is sentenced to incarceration for more than 1 year may seek a sentence modification in 3 circumstances: (1) The application for a sentence modification is based solely on the person’s serious medical illness or infirmity. (2) The person is 60 years of age or older, has served at least 15 years of the originally imposed Level V sentence, and the application for sentence modification is based solely on the person’s rehabilitation. (3) The person has served at least 25 years of the originally imposed Level V sentence and the application for sentence modification is based solely on the person’s rehabilitation. Third, this Act provides that an individual who is sentenced to incarceration for more than 1 year and whose sentence is reviewed by the Department, but who the Department does not recommend for sentence modification, may directly apply to the court for a sentence modification. Like Senate Bill No. 10, this Act also makes clear that the Department and sentencing court must consider if a sentence modification resulting in the release of an individual who is incarcerated would constitute a substantial risk to a victim of, or witness to, an offense that is the subject of the sentence modification and that the sentencing court must provide an opportunity for the victim and the Department of Justice to be heard. This Act differs from Senate Bill No. 10 as follows: (1) Providing that a person is not eligible for a sentence modification under this Act if the person is serving a statutorily mandated term of incarceration at Level V for a conviction of any offense under this title and has not yet served all of the statutorily mandated portion of the Level V sentence. Senate Bill No. 10 provided the person was not eligible until the person had served ½ of the statutorily mandated portion of the Level V sentence. (2) Making clear that the person’s attorney may file the sentence modification for the person. (3) Making clear that an application for a sentence modification may be filed by those who have served the period of incarceration provided under paragraph (a)(5) and have good cause. (4) Requiring the Department, on completion of the Department’s eligibility review under paragraph (d)(1), to provide the person with information regarding the person’s right to counsel. (5) Providing that the person may retain a private attorney at the person's own expense or request the court refer the person to the Office of Defense Services, and that the person may proceed without an attorney only as provided under court rules. (6) Requiring the Department to biennially conduct the eligibility review required under paragraph (d)(1). Senate Bill No. 10 would have required the Department to make these determinations annually. (7) Requiring the Department to provide to the court, with an application for sentence modification the Department files, a written statement of the satisfied requirements under this Act that form the Department’s basis for recommending the sentence modification. (8) Requiring the Department to provide to the person, the person’s attorney of record, or the Office of Defense Services a written statement of the Department’s reasons for not recommending a sentence modification, including the unsatisfied requirements of this Act that form the Department’s basis for not recommending the sentence modification. (9) Authorizing the court to summarily dismiss an application that does not include the statements from the Department required by this Act, except for an application based solely on the person’s serious medical illness or infirmity. (10) Authorizing the court to summarily dismiss an application if the court determines summary dismissal is warranted. (11) Giving the court discretion to determine how long a person whose application for sentence modification is denied because the court determines the person constitutes a substantial risk to the community or the person’s application lacks good cause. This Act provides the period set by the court may not exceed 3 years. (12) Making clear that if the court denies an application for sentence modification based on a person’s serious medical illness or infirmity, the person may submit a subsequent application if at least 60 days have passed since the date of the court’s denial and if the application demonstrates a material change in the person’s circumstances.
