Chang, Novakhov, Smullen, Brabenec, Brown K, Tague, McDonough
MLTSPNSR
Amd §§60.06 & 70.00, Pen L; amd §400.27, CP L
Provides that the sentence for committing murder in the first degree when the victim is a police officer, peace officer or correction officer shall be either death or life imprisonment without parole.
NEW YORK STATE ASSEMBLY MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF LEGISLATION submitted in accordance with Assembly Rule III, Sec 1(f)
BILL NUMBER: A5522
SPONSOR: Brook-Krasny TITLE OF BILL:
An act to amend the penal law and the criminal procedure law, in
relation to sentencing for the commission of certain provisions of
murder in the first degree
PURPOSE:
To reinstate the death penalty for the intentional murder of .a police
officer, peace officer or an employee of the Department of Correctional
Services.
SUMMARY OF PROVISIONS:
Section 1 sets forth the legislative intent to address the holding of
the New York Court of Appeals holdings in People v. LaValle, 3 N.Y.3d
388 (2004) and People v. Taylor, 9 N.Y.3d 129(2007)and reinstates the
death penalty for those who intentionally murder a police officer, peace
officer, an employee of a State correctional institution, or an employee
of a local correctional facility.
Sections 2, 3 and 4 amend provisions of current law to provide that any
person who is convicted of the intentional murder of a police officer,
peace officer, an employee of a State correctional institution, or an
employee of a local correctional facility pursuant to provisions of
current law defining the crime of 1st degree murder shall, if the jury
elects not to impose the sentence of death, be sentenced to life impri-
sonment without parole.
Section 5 of the bill provides that the legislation shall take effect
immediately and shall apply to acts committed on and after such date
EXISTING LAW:
The current deadlock instruction prescribed in Criminal Procedure Law
section 400 27(10) was held to be unconstitutional by the Court of
Appeals in People v. LaValle.
JUSTIFICATION:
In 2004, the Court of Appeals in the case of People v. LaValle held that
the deadlock instruction given to a jury in a capital case to inform the
jury that if it is deadlocked, the defendant is automatically sentenced
to an indeterminate sentence with a minimum term of between 20 and 25
years and maximum term of life imprisonment, impermissibly inserts
concern regarding the defendant's future dangerousness into the jury
deliberations, and thereby potentially coerces a juror, who might prefer
a sentence of life without parole, to vote instead for a sentence of
death so as to preclude the defendant's future release. The Court of
Appeals did not hold that the death penalty was inappropriate for cases
in which aggravating circumstances which are grounds for death penalty
are present, but rather held that the procedure-for imposing the death
penalty was flawed.
In 2007, the Court of Appeals, in People v. Taylor, relied upon the
precedent set in People v. LaValle to vacate the death Sentence even
though the defendant was convicted of multiple first degree murders and
there was no possibility that he would be released from incarceration
before his death. While the concerns regarding the deadlock instruction
that existed in LaValle were not present in Taylor, the Court could not
4> allow the death sentence to stand because the Court, in LaValle, held
that the death penalty could not be imposed under the existing statute.
Chapter 765 of the Laws of 2005 enacted the "Crimes Against Police Act".
Part of that law created the new crime of aggravated murder, which is
deemed to occur when a person intentionally murders a police officer,
peace officer; an employee of a State correctional institution; or an
employee of a local correctional facility. The only sentence which may
be imposed for the crime of aggravated murder is life imprisonment with-
out parole. Because of the holding in the LaValle case, current law•does
not allow the imposition- of the death penalty upon a person who is
convicted of intentionally murdering a police officer, peace officer, an
employee of a State correctional institution, or an employee of a local
correctional facility.
In Taylor, the Court stated "Indeed, the needed correction may be as
simple as enacting a sentencing statute that provides for life without
parole if the jury cannot unanimously agree on death." This bill adopts
the Court's suggestion for the correction to the deadlock instruction
and fashions a new deadlock instruction using the Court's suggested
language.
LEGISLATIVE HISTORY:
2023-2024; A.6399, HELD in Codes
2015-2016: A.3630, Referred to Codes
2013-2014: A7613 - Referred to Codes
2011-2012: A8390-A - Referred to Codes
2011 A.B71 - Referred to Codes/Enacting Clause Stricken
2009-2010: A.1070 - Referred to Codes
2007-2008: A.7799 - Referred to Codes
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:
None to the State
EFFECTIVE DATE:
This act shall take immediately and shall apply to offenses committed on
or after such effective date.
