DRAFT ONLY - APPROVAL PENDING
Wyoming Legislature

Committee Meeting Summary of Proceedings

Legal Process Subcommittee of the

Select Committee on Juveniles

July 17, 2003

Western Wyoming Community College

Rock Springs, Wyoming

Meeting Attendance (Present)

Committee Members

Senator Ken Decaria, Chairman;

Representative Ed Buchanan;

Governor's Appointees:

Dr. Diane Galloway, Ph.D., Department of Health, Substance Abuse Division;

Honorable Nena James, Third Judicial District Court Judge;

Scott Sargent, Wyoming County and Prosecuting Attorney's Association.

Legislative Service Office

John Rivera, Senior Staff Attorney.

Others Present

Please refer to Appendix 1 to review the Committee Sign-in Sheet for a list of other individuals who attended the meeting.

Meeting Attendance (Absent)

None.

Written Meeting Materials and Handouts

All meeting materials and handouts provided to the Committee by the Legislative Service Office (LSO), public officials, lobbyists, and the public are referenced in the Meeting Materials Index, attached to the minutes. These materials are on file at the LSO and are part of the official record of the meeting. 

Call To Order

Chairman Decaria called the meeting to order at 9:00 a.m.  The following sections summarize the Committee proceedings by topic.  Please refer to Appendix 2 to review the Committee Meeting Agenda.

Approval of Minutes

Chairman Decaria asked if there were any changes to the minutes of the previous meeting. Hearing none, Dr. Galloway moved for approval of the minutes. The motion carried unanimously.

Renumbering of Statutes

Donna Sheen, Department of Family Services (DFS), explained the reason the Title 14 Review Committee proposed moving criminal offenses from Title 14 of the statutes was to improve the flow of the statutes.  Mr. Rivera explained that Wyoming, like most other states, places provisions, if either the offender or the victim belong to an identifiable class, in the appropriate title to ease research by practitioners. This avoids cluttering the criminal code with offenses that could easily be found in a more relevant title of the statutes.

After discussion, Mr. Sargent moved, seconded by Judge James, to table further consideration of the proposal to renumber criminal offenses as proposed by the Title 14 Review Committee.

Family Courts

Chairman Decaria explained he had visited with Utah officials to discuss that state's family court system. He advised that Utah had created the  family courts through the judiciary, rather than by the legislative process.

Ms. Sheen explained that statutory changes would also be necessary for Wyoming to effect a family court system.  She shared several studies that have been conducted in the past and distributed an executive summary of an evaluation by the Attorney General's Office regarding the juvenile justice system in Wyoming (Appendix 3). Currently in Wyoming, a juvenile may go into the municipal, circuit, district or juvenile court system.  Since juveniles often go into the municipal court system, she provided an example of the Juvenile Code enacted by the city of Cheyenne (Appendix 4).  Ms. Sheen distributed Appendix 5, with permission from Professor John Burman, Wyoming College of Law, which contained a survey of juvenile jurisdiction and the intake process. Wyoming and Louisiana are unique in that there is no gatekeeper to ensure a juvenile matter is heard in the appropriate court.

Chairman Decaria and Ms. Sheen explained the differences between family courts and family treatment courts. The family court would hear a variety of issues relating to the entire family, not just the juvenile. The family treatment court would operate more like the drug court system to address family issues relating to alcohol and substance abuse. The family treatment court would not function as a full evidentiary court, but would act more in the nature of a post-dispositional court to ensure appropriate services are provided to the family to address those issues that render the family dysfunctional. To avoid the confusion of different types of family courts, DFS is studying the creation of a juvenile court enhancement project and has invited the participation by courts in the development of the concept.

Judge James advised that courts already have the authority Ms. Sheen described. The issue has more to do with the lack of resources to ensure the necessary services are provided.

Donald Reardon, Wyoming State Hospital, stated what is needed is a treatment system with consistency, follow through and simplicity.

Ms. Sheen distributed Appendix 6, containing three proposals she wanted the Subcommittee to consider. Those proposals included: recommending legislation that allocates authority and resources to develop and implement a uniform juvenile justice system by 2007; funding for a family court project; and, immediate enactment of specified statutory changes to begin moving the system toward uniformity. After discussion, the Subcommittee decided the proposals were too vague and, without further information, should not be developed further. Ms. Sheen was asked to provide the Subcommittee with more information with respect to the cost of implementing a family treatment court pilot project and whether an accountability and research component is to be required as is the case for drug courts. Ms. Sheen added that perhaps she should first speak with Chief Justice Hill to see if the Supreme Court would be willing to advocate on behalf of the pilot project proposal.

Ms. Sheen distributed Appendix 7, a report submitted by the Commission on Juvenile Justice to the Joint Judiciary Interim Committee, dated October, 1994.

Proposed Draft Legislation

Chairman Decaria asked Ms. Sheen to explain the draft legislation that was being considered by the Subcommittee and if the proposals from Mark Hardin of the American Bar Association's (ABA) Center on Children and the Law could be incorporated into the draft bill. The Subcommittee discussed the potential impact of the proposed changes contained in the bill as they were presented by Ms. Sheen

After discussion of the draft bill, the Subcommittee then began considering which proposals the Subcommittee would recommend to the Select Committee and the how those proposals should read, including:

• The creation of an intensive supervision program for juveniles as proposed in the draft bill, except deleting W.S. 14-6-314(b)(iii);
• Deletion of the definition of "judicial officer" and making the necessary conforming changes throughout the bill;
• Staff should confirm if the changes proposed to the first three lines of W.S. 14-3-409(a) are included in draft legislation that the Child Protection/Multidisciplinary Team Subcommittee may be recommending and delete the proposed language referencing W.S. 14-3-414 at the end of the subsection;
• Reinsertion of the 72 hour time limit for informal shelter care hearing, but adding the proposed language which would exclude weekends and holidays from the computation;
• Reinsertion of the 60 day time limit for holding an adjudicatory hearing, but to include language allowing postponement for good cause as provided in W.S. 14-3-426(b);
• Revise the proposed time line for a shelter care hearing to 48 hours, excluding weekends and legal holidays;
• Delete proposed language regarding the Indian Child Welfare Act from the delinquency provision in W.S. 14-6-212;
• Make similar revisions in the corresponding delinquency and CHINS statutes as necessary.

The Subcommittee then returned to consideration of the recommendations Ms. Sheen made in Appendix 6.  After Subcommittee discussion, Ms. Sheen stated she would speak with the Division of Criminal Investigation about the feasibility of expanding its repository of juvenile justice data and with Chuck Kratz, State Advisory Counsel on Juvenile Justice (SACJJ)  to see if SACJJ has suggestions with respect to Ms. Sheen's recommendations contained in paragraph 3 of Appendix 6.

If  necessary, the Subcommittee could have a telephone conference call to discuss the draft bill as revised prior to the meeting of the Select Committee on Juveniles scheduled for August 15, 2003.

Meeting Adjournment

There being no further business, Chairman Decaria adjourned the meeting of the Committee at 3:50 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,

Senator Ken Decaria, Chairman