State of Illinois
92nd General Assembly
Legislation

   [ Search ]   [ PDF text ]   [ Legislation ]   
[ Home ]   [ Back ]   [ Bottom ]


[ Introduced ][ Engrossed ][ Enrolled ]
[ Senate Amendment 001 ][ Conference Committee Report 001 ]


92_HB5652gms

                            STATE OF ILLINOIS
                         OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR
                           SPRINGFIELD, 62706
      GEORGE H. RYAN
      GOVERNOR
                              July 16, 2002
      To the Honorable Members of the
          Illinois House of Representatives
          92nd General Assembly
          Pursuant to the  authority  vested  in  the  Governor  by
      Article  IV,  Section  9(e)  of  the Illinois Constitution of
      1970, and re-affirmed by the People of the State of  Illinois
      by popular referendum in 1974, and conforming to the standard
      articulated  by  the Illinois Supreme Court in People ex Rel.
      Klinger v.  Howlett,  50  Ill.  2d  242  (1972),  Continental
      Illinois National Bank and Trust Co. v. Zagel, 78 Ill. 2d 387
      (1979),  People  ex Rel. City of Canton v. Crouch, 79 Ill. 2d
      356 (1980), and County of Kane v. Carlson, 116  Ill.  2d  186
      (1987),  that  gubernatorial  action  be  consistent with the
      fundamental purposes and the intent of  the  bill,  I  hereby
      return  House  Bill  5652,  entitled  "AN  ACT in relation to
      criminal law," with my specific recommendations for change.
          House Bill 5652 contains three separate  provisions.  The
      first  would amend the Unified Code of Corrections to provide
      that  a  defendant  convicted  of  cannabis  trafficking   or
      controlled  substance  trafficking may receive only a maximum
      of 4.5 days of good conduct credit for each month of  his  or
      her sentence of imprisonment. Secondly, House Bill 5652 would
      further  amend the Unified Code of Corrections to add certain
      reckless homicide offenses involving drugs or alcohol  and  2
      or  more  deaths to the list of offenses for which a prisoner
      may not receive the additional good conduct  credit  that  is
      provided  for  participation  in drug abuse and certain other
      correctional programs. Finally, this  bill  would  amend  the
      Criminal  Code  of  1961  to  clarify  that  the  offense  of
      aggravated  robbery  only  applies  if  the  offender  had no
      firearm or other dangerous weapon in his  or  her  possession
      when he or she committed the robbery.
          The  latter  two of these provisions are needed technical
      changes  to  insure  that  the  law  is  applied  fairly  and
      equitably. However, the first  provisions,  which  would  add
      cannabis  trafficking and controlled substance trafficking to
      the "Truth-In-Sentencing" law (TIS) poses several problems.
          First, when TIS was first considered, it was  known  that
      funds  were  not  available  to  cover  all criminal offenses
      because of costs of incarceration associated with the  longer
      time  spent  in  prison  under  the  Truth-In-Sentencing law.
      Since  covering  only   some   offenses   with   TIS   raises
      constitutional   proportionality  questions,  this  risk  was
      minimized by the decision to  cover  only  the  most  serious
      criminal  offenses  with  TIS.    This  led to TIS for crimes
      committed against the person such as murder, criminal  sexual
      assault,  armed  robbery,  etc. Since TIS was enacted in 1996
      only one new offense has been added, and that was  aggravated
      arson  last year due to its inherent life-endangering nature.
      Because cannabis and controlled substance trafficking is  not
      a  violent  crime  against  the  person,  including  it  in a
      category with only the most violent crimes against the person
      raises potential constitutional issues.
          Furthermore,    the     Federal     "Violent     Offender
      Incarceration-Truth-in-Sentencing"  (VOI-TIS)  program, which
      provided funds to states to pay for additional  incarceration
      costs  and prison construction costs brought on by increasing
      prison time was discontinued last year. As discussed,  adding
      drug  trafficking  to  TIS  would  seem  to  be a significant
      departure from the original intent of VOI-TIS and would  have
      a  significant  fiscal impact particularly given that federal
      funds are no longer available to pay for any of the  existing
      Truth-In-Sentencing offenses, let alone new offenses.
 
          This one component of the bill accounts for the full $3.3
      million fiscal impact (over ten years) that the Department of
      Corrections estimates would result from the enactment of this
      bill  as  written. While proponents of this change are likely
      to argue that the violent nature  of  most  drug  trafficking
      warrants its inclusion in the Truth-In-Sentencing laws, it is
      difficult  to  justify  spending  more money on longer prison
      terms for drug offenders at the  same  time  that  funds  are
      being   cut   at   both  the  federal  and  state  level  for
      incarceration and prison construction. Moreover, there  is  a
      growing   consensus   that  treatment  programs,  not  longer
      incarceration, may offer  better  results  in  combating  the
      scourge  of  narcotics. Further, as noted earlier, the fiscal
      impact becomes  even  more  difficult  to  justify  when  one
      considers  the  inconsistency that this provision would bring
      to the current list  of  Truth-In-Sentencing  offenses  which
      would include only the most violent crimes.
          Finally,  the current trafficking offenses already double
      the minimum time in prison from what the  sentence  would  be
      for  the  actual  delivery  of  that  amount  of  cannabis or
      controlled substance to a person. Consequently, under current
      law  the  sentence  for  high-end   amounts   of   controlled
      substances  under  the  trafficking law is a minimum 30 years
      imprisonment, which means at least 15 years served (less  six
      months  of  potential  meritorious good time). Requiring that
      85% of the 30 years or 25.5 years be  served  in  prison  for
      drug  trafficking  would  result in a longer minimum sentence
      and length of stay than the minimum sentence  and  length  of
      stay  for  murder,  which are both only 20 years. Some judges
      have already criticized the  trafficking  provisions  as  too
      harsh.  Our state's prisons are already overcrowded with drug
      offenders who may be serving more time than warranted by  the
      offense  and  adding these drug trafficking provisions to our
      Truth-In-Sentencing laws only creates the risk of the  courts
      invalidating   Illinois'  other  TIS  provisions.  For  these
      reasons,  I  return  House  Bill  5652  with  the   following
      recommendations for change:
          on  page  1,  line  29,  by replacing "Sections 3-6-3 and
           5-4-1" with "Section 3-6-3"; and
          on page 4, by deleting lines 11 through 20; and
          on page 5, by replacing "or" with "or"; and
          on page 5, by replacing lines 17 through 21 with "date of
           this amendatory Act of the 92nd General Assembly."; and
          on pages  6,  by  replacing  lines  15  through  18  with
           "Assembly, or first degree murder, a Class X"; and
          on page 10, by deleting lines 16 through 33; and
          by deleting all of pages 11 through 16; and
          on page 17, by deleting lines 1 through 24.
          With  these  specific  recommendations  for change, House
      Bill 5652 will have my approval. I respectfully request  your
      concurrence.
                                             Sincerely,
                                             s/GEORGE H. RYAN
                                             Governor

[ Top ]