mental-health

End of Biennium Report – Judiciary Committee

lalonde

Public Safety

One of the priorities of House Democrats this Biennium was public safety, a concern raised by Vermonters across the state. In the last Biennium, the legislature made substantial investments in the judicial system to address the court backlog. Reducing the backlog will improve the timeliness and certainty of consequences for criminal behavior.

This Biennium, House Judiciary again prioritized proper funding to ensure that our judicial system continues to have the resources it needs to move cases to a speedy and just resolution. Beyond funding, House Judiciary also passed the following legislation aimed at addressing public safety concerns.

Juvenile Justice. In general, when a person is charged with an offense in Vermont, the court system they enter depends on their age and the severity of the crime. Before passage of Act 4, with some exceptions, if someone age 10 to 18 is charged with a crime, their offenses are addressed in delinquency proceedings in Vermont Family Court. If they are charged with one of the most serious crimes such as murder or arson, their case will commence in Vermont Criminal Court. 

Act 4 addresses the ways our juvenile justice system handles the supervision, care, and rehabilitation of juveniles accused of criminal acts. Among other changes, the Act raises the minimum age of juvenile jurisdiction from 10 to 12 years of age.This change would mean that 10- and 11- year-olds accused of crimes are not subject to any delinquency proceedings. Instead, their behavior may be addressed through a Children in Need of Care and Supervision (CHINS) proceeding in Family Court. The Racial Disparities in the Juvenile and Criminal Justice System Advisory Panel (RDAP) recommended the change based on data connecting racial disparities and disparate outcomes for youth of color. All testimony before the House Judiciary Committee supported this change.

Youthful Offender Law. This law provides an alternative to adult criminal court for youth ages 14 to 22, allowing their cases to be handled confidentially in Family Court if certain criteria are met. A court can place an individual with YO status on juvenile probation, under the jurisdiction of both the Department of Children and Families and the Department of Corrections.

The focus of juvenile probation and YO status is rehabilitation with services like education, treatment, and job training. The goal of YO status is to prevent long-term collateral consequences for the youth and allow them to avoid having a criminal record based on actions taken before their brain has fully developed. If the youth violates their probation, however, a court may revoke their YO status and transfer the individual back to Criminal Court for sentencing. 

Act 140 would change Vermont’s YO law by strengthening provisions related to accountability and by expanding victims’ rights. The law would extend the jurisdiction of the court’s Family Division beyond the youth’s 22nd birthday if there is a motion pending to revoke their YO status. This extended jurisdiction would last either until the court revokes the youth’s probation and sends the case to the Criminal Division or until the court discharges the youth from probation. This new provision addresses the situation where youths have “timed out” of their juvenile probation because they turn 22 while there is a pending motion for revocation of their YO status.

Act 140 also clarifies the factors a court considers when ruling on a motion to revoke YO status; confirms that if a youth fails to appear at the probation revocation hearing, the court may order an officer to pick up the youth and bring them to court; and expands the right of victims to be heard at YO hearings.

Accountability Docket. To deter crime, there must be a real risk of being caught committing a crime and certain and swift consequences for criminal activity. A pilot rapid accountability docket in Chittenden County focused resources on the second deterrence requirement, ensuring certain and swift consequences. The pilot program, which helped clear a backlog of repeat-offender criminal cases, brought together judges, prosecutors, defense attorneys, and human services staff to resolve cases faster and connect offenders to the services they need.

In Act 165, we defined a structure for expanding this accountability docket concept to other Vermont counties. The law sets forth the goals of an accountability docket, including: (1) accelerating court proceedings of repeat-offender cases with consistent and timely availability of judicial, prosecutorial, defense, corrections, and human services resources; (2) connecting individuals with treatment, housing, and social services to reduce the circumstances that may contribute to recidivism; (3) reducing the number of pending criminal cases that involve individuals with multiple pending cases by providing targeted resources for a limited period of time; (4) improving accountability for those individuals by providing immediate follow-up and a court schedule that makes it more likely they will appear; and (5) improving collaboration among law enforcement, prosecutors, and social workers to provide faster resolution of repeat offender cases.

For those counties that will employ an accountability docket, the law requires the county’s State’s Attorney to convene stakeholders to develop a plan to implement the program that meets these goals. It also requires the courts, prosecutors, defense counsel, and the administration to provide resources for 90-day accountability dockets. And it mandates data tracking and reporting to measure the effectiveness of these dockets.

Criminal Justice Data. Act 94 provides current criminal justice data to inform the work of the legislature. The law creates a standardized definition of recidivism in Vermont law. Recidivism rates measure how often individuals previously convicted of a crime commit a new offense. Currently, the definition of recidivism in Vermont is outdated and arbitrary, focusing on a narrow subset of individuals. Act 94 brought stakeholders together to improve the definition, making it relevant and useful in future studies and legislation related to criminal justice in Vermont.

The new law defines recidivism simply as a new criminal conviction following a prior conviction. The relevant period for counting new convictions begins when an individual is released from incarceration or sentenced to a non-custodial sentence. 

Act 94 also establishes a number of annual reports from the Vermont Statistical Analysis Center. The reports will include bail rates and information on individuals held pretrial in Vermont correctional facilities; recidivism rates calculated over three- and five-year periods; arrests and clearance rates organized by offense type; and information on the twenty crimes with the highest number of convictions, including sentencing data and total years of probation and incarceration imposed. The reports are to include demographic information, when available. Act 94 improves consistency in how Vermont measures recidivism and provides clear, comprehensive data on trends in our criminal justice system. 

Forensic Facility. Act 147 directs the Vermont Agency of Human Services (AHS) to establish a plan to develop a forensic treatment facility for certain incarcerated individuals with significant mental health challenges or cognitive disabilities. The law will address longstanding gaps in Vermont’s behavioral health infrastructure. It creates a plan to develop a therapeutic, secure setting designed to provide competency restoration, stabilization, treatment, and care while also maintaining appropriate public safety measures.

The facility is intended to better serve individuals whose needs are not met in typical correctional settings, while improving outcomes for those individuals as well as victims of crime and the broader community. The law primarily applies to two groups: Individuals charged with serious crimes punishable by life imprisonment who are found incompetent to stand trial and individuals found not guilty by reason of insanity for life-sentence offenses. The anticipated population is small —approximately six individuals annually for competency restoration cases. The facility would be operated by AHS, not the Department of Corrections (DOC), except for limited perimeter or intake security functions by DOC.

The Act establishes who can be committed to a forensic treatment facility, the process for committing individuals to the facility and keeping them there, and the paths individuals can take to end their time in the facility. The House Judiciary Committee focused on relevant court processes as well as ensuring due process and equal protection for those who qualify for commitment to a forensic facility in Vermont. The law also sets forth the requirements for the facility’s operation and requires AHS to provide a feasibility plan related to the details of the facility, including where it will be located and who will operate it. The Committee on Corrections and Institutions worked on these aspects of the law and the Committees on Health Care and on Human Services also provided input. The facility is expected to be available by July 1, 2029.

Act 147 also provides an interim competency restoration and forensic program to work with individuals currently in our system who need this treatment while the State develops a permanent facility plan. Because the interim program will be provided within DOC facilities, the Act allows DOC a broader role in providing security for the interim program, including increased involvement monitoring individuals released under supervision. DOC will focus on ensuring public safety while the AHS Medical Director will oversee competency restoration and any other clinical needs.

The inclusion of this interim program recognizes that the status quo is doing a disservice to victims and those charged but found incompetent to stand trial. The alleged offenders are languishing in prison, often for months, receiving no competency restoration treatment and limited mental health services. They are not getting their day in court or other resolution of their case, and the victims are not receiving closure or any sense of justice. It’s important to improve the status quo while the State implements a more permanent forensic facility solution.

Addressing Domestic and Sexual Violence

Act 46 revises Vermont’s civil protection order statutes to provide better relief to victims of domestic violence, sexual violence, and stalking. Protection orders, also called restraining orders, are a critical legal tool for victims. This legislation will help victims of domestic violence obtain the protections they need to get and stay safe.

Act 12 establishes procedures to ensure access to orders against sexual assault after regular court hours or on weekends. Currently, survivors can only request a sexual assault protection order during regular court hours, leaving them at risk when assaults occur on evenings, weekends, or holidays. By ensuring that victims can access orders against sexual assault outside of regular court hours, the law allows for swift action whenever it is needed.

Act 89 modernizes Vermont’s laws addressing image-based abuse and digital exploitation, in part by expanding the statute of limitations for some cases and by recognizing that not all harm from such crimes is physical. These updates follow a Vermont Supreme Court decision that highlighted limitations in existing law related to nonconsensual recording in private spaces.

Act 89 also creates a new criminal offense prohibiting sexual extortion, or “sextortion,” a form of online exploitation that disproportionately impacts young people. Together, these reforms strengthen accountability for digital forms of abuse and provide clearer legal protections and recourse for victims.

Government Accountability and Transparency

Another priority for House Democrats this Biennium was responding to the ever-changing federal landscape due to the actions of the Trump administration. Vermonters across the political spectrum have been concerned about the administration’s orders and decisions related to undocumented and immigrant members of our Vermont communities, as well as the erosion of respectful political discourse and targeting of our most vulnerable communities. 

House Judiciary passed several bills that aim to protect targeted communities and restrict how Vermont law enforcement may cooperate with federal law enforcement. 

Through the establishment of standby guardianships, Act 31 clarifies a process that allows immigrant parents to identify trusted adults who can step in as temporary guardians if the parent is detained or deported. This proactive step can provide some measure of comfort to immigrant parents and their children because they will know in advance who would care for the kids in the event their parents are detained. This process helps ease traumatic separations or confusion in emergency situations. It also avoids the necessity for the Department of Children and Families to take legal custody of the children in these situations. 

The confirmatory adoption provision in Act 31 provides a clear and expedited process for Vermonters who became parents through the use of assisted reproduction technology (who are already parents under Vermont law) to obtain a court order declaring their status as parents. This change provides a necessary level of protection for families who may travel to destinations that do not recognize the legal parenthood of LGBTQ parents and others who have used assisted reproduction technology.

Vermont law had allowed an exception to the Governor’s exclusive authority to enter into certain agreements with federal Immigrations and Customs Enforcement (ICE): State and local authorities could consent to such an agreement if there was a declaration of a state or national emergency. Act 28 eliminates this exception and keeps the Governor as the sole authority in Vermont to enter into ICE delegation-of-authority agreements. This change will keep the State accountable to Vermonters regarding how our law enforcement interacts and cooperates with ICE. Currently no such agreements exist in Vermont.

Act 8 expands Vermont’s hate-motivated crimes statute. It more accurately captures the conduct that such a statute is intended to penalize by expanding the scope of who can be considered a victim of a hate crime. Hateful conduct is not acceptable. Act 8 helps ensure that such conduct can be named and prosecuted effectively. 

Act 87 creates a legal claim for damages against a state, local, or federal official who violates the U.S. Constitution. Under the law, any resident of the State of Vermont, or any other person within the jurisdiction of Vermont, could sue to allege a constitutional violation that infringes their rights. They could bring such a suit against a person acting in an official capacity if that person deprives someone in Vermont of any of their federal constitutional rights, or if they cause someone in Vermont to be deprived of those rights.

For example, under this law, individuals could bring claims for violations of the Fourth Amendment related to unreasonable searches and seizures. Such claims could cover police brutality, excessive force during arrest, false arrest, and unlawful searches of homes or property. Claims may arise under the First Amendment if government officials attempt to suppress the right to free speech or the right to peaceably assemble. Claims could arise under the Fourteenth Amendment for violations of due process or equal protection. These violations could involve deprivation of life, liberty, or property without proper legal procedures. 

Act 150 expands protections against civil arrests without a judicial warrant in sensitive locations across Vermont. Prior law protected individuals attending or traveling to and from court proceedings. This new law broadens those protections to include individuals accessing educational institutions as well as those present at healthcare facilities, polling places, and government buildings, to name a few.

The Act addresses concerns related to civil immigration enforcement actions conducted pursuant to administrative warrants (versus judicial warrants) and seeks to ensure that individuals can safely access essential public institutions and services without fear of warrantless civil arrest.

Act 126 provides that no one can intentionally or recklessly intimidate, threaten, coerce, or attempt to intimidate, threaten, or coerce others for the reason of obstructing their right to cast a vote or their right to choose who to vote for. It imposes possible criminal penalties for such interference. The Vermont Secretary of State and town clerks strongly supported this part of the law, which originated in House Judiciary.

Other House Judiciary Work

Act 118 provides comprehensive reforms to Vermont’s animal cruelty statutes and procedures. The law expands and modernizes the definition of animal cruelty, updates criminal penalties to better reflect the seriousness of abuse and reworks the civil animal forfeiture procedures to improve protections for animals at risk of harm.

Act 118 will also streamline the process for removing abused animals from dangerous conditions while helping reduce the financial and logistical burdens placed on shelters, humane organizations, and volunteers assisting with animal protection efforts – something that is currently a significant issue in Vermont.

Act 134 is a firearms storage and safety law that improves the system for ensuring compliance with court-ordered firearms surrender. It does not create any new restrictions on possession or ownership of firearms.

Firearm injury is the leading cause of domestic violence-related homicide in Vermont. But all too often, protection orders requiring firearm surrender are not effectively implemented. When firearms are not properly relinquished, survivors’ safety is at risk. Uncertainty about whether an abusive partner still has access to firearms can prevent survivors from feeling safe enough to return home, go to work, or continue daily life. A court order (such as a relief from abuse order) can only protect survivors when its conditions are clearly communicated, consistently followed, and reliably enforced. Act 134 provides practical updates needed to make that possible. The process created by the law also applies to relinquishment as part of an extreme risk protection order, which may be issued when a person is shown to be a risk of danger to themself or others. 

Act 60 takes key steps to modernize the system for criminal record clearance in Vermont. Record clearance is an important part of our criminal justice system as it addresses significant barriers that exist for those with criminal records, barriers specifically related to housing, employment, and educational access.

Act 60 creates a uniform, simplified system of sealing – rather than completely erasing or “expunging” – criminal records. It allows criminal records for certain crimes to be sealed automatically if the offender receives no additional criminal convictions over a defined time period. The individual would no longer have a criminal record, eliminating overly punitive obstacles to obtaining housing, employment, and education. Sealing rather than expunging these records would also ensure access to them for law enforcement and criminal justice purposes as well as for background checks necessary to ensure public safety.

Public Safety Update and Protective Orders

lalonde

Vermonters continue to be concerned about public safety. In the last biennium, the legislature sought to mitigate these concerns. We passed laws related to retail theft, auto theft and trespass into an auto, drug trafficking, the proliferation of ghost guns (those without serial numbers), conditions of release and bail, pre-trial supervision, and pre-charge diversion.

Our most important initiative in the last biennium, however, was advocating for and obtaining an increase in resources for the criminal justice system. The boost in resources for the courts, prosecutors, defense counsel, and victim advocates paves the way for quicker and surer consequences for criminal activity, which are critical for deterring crime.

Data from the courts allows the legislature to measure their progress on resolving criminal cases. Clearance rates measure the number of new filings compared to the number of cases the courts dispose of each month. If the clearance rate is over 100%, that means the courts are making progress on reducing the backlog of cases that has clogged the courts and caused delays in disposing of cases. Through June of this year, Vermont courts have achieved a 12-month clearance rate of 110%. Although this shows improvement, it is still short of our goal of achieving a clearance rate of 125%. 

The courts also track how long it takes to resolve criminal cases and have set out specific goals for the length of time to disposition. For example, 98% of standard misdemeanor cases should be resolved in 180 days and 98% of standard felonies should be resolved in 365 days. At the end of 2023, approximately 60% of criminal cases met these timeliness standards. As of the end of June of this year, 70% of pending criminal cases met the timeliness standards.  This trend is in the right direction, but the consequences for many alleged criminal offenders are still far removed from the offense, diminishing their deterrence value. There is more work to be done.

This session, public safety continued to be one of the governor’s and legislature’s top priorities. The House Judiciary Committee again prioritized proper funding of the criminal justice system so our judicial system can keep improving how quickly it resolves cases. Although resources were more limited this year, the budget did include additional resources for courts, prosecutors, and the pre-charge diversion program created last year in Act 180. 

Beyond funding, this year the legislature passed other bills aimed at addressing public safety concerns, particularly related to domestic and sexual violence.

Act 46 revises Vermont’s civil protection order statutes to improve relief to victims of domestic violence, sexual violence, and stalking. Protection orders – civil court orders requested by a victim – are a critical legal tool. They offer important protective measures to prevent future harm, including requiring a perpetrator of violence to maintain physical distance from the individual they victimized.

The Act revises Vermont’s civil stalking order to better capture device-related stalking. The definition of “stalking” in Vermont’s civil stalking statute requires the victim to show the perpetrator’s “course of conduct” – meaning two or more acts over a period of time, no matter how short the time – to meet the threshold for obtaining a protection order. It was challenging to apply this definition in cases of device-related stalking. For example, when a device like an Airtag or a tracking app is set in place and then used to continuously monitor someone, it was not clear whether those activities met that definition of “course of conduct.” 

Act 46 now provides that a stalking victim may establish a perpetrator’s “course of conduct” by their “use of any electronic, digital, or precise geolocation device or software or application to surveil a specific person or a specific person’s internet or wireless activity continuously for 12 hours or more or on two or more occasions over a period of time, however short, without authorization.” 

Also under Act 46, courts can now grant temporary possession of a vehicle to the relief available in a domestic violence relief from abuse order. A vehicle can be a lifeline when escaping violence and leading an independent life immediately afterwards. Explicitly stated forms of relief available to victims included primary possession of a residence or pets, or custody of shared children. This law adds primary possession of a vehicle as a form of relief. 

Finally, Act 46 adds completion of a domestic violence accountability program to the forms of available relief listed in the domestic violence relief from abuse order statute. Domestic Violence Accountability Programs, commonly referred to as DVAPs, are community-based treatment programs designed to address the needs of people who use violence in their intimate partner relationships. DVAPs understand that abusive partners are, in most cases, capable of change, and these programs seek to modify behaviors and develop skills to prevent future abuse.

Many victims have reported that an accountability program to change behavior would be extremely helpful as part of a civil protection order. Victims may want to reduce the risk of violence for their shared children, a future partner, or themselves if they want to maintain the relationship.

Vermont has 12 community-based DVAPs that offer in-depth group programming and are certified by the Vermont Council on Domestic Violence. While DVAPs are not the sole vehicle for holding abusive partners accountable or changing behavior, they are a critical component to our response to domestic violence and can improve outcomes for both victims and those who have used violence against them.

The legislature also passed Act 12, which establishes procedures to ensure access to orders against sexual assault after regular court hours or on weekends. Prior to the passage of this law, survivors could only request a sexual assault protection order during regular court hours, leaving them at risk when assaults occur on evenings, weekends, or holidays. By ensuring that victims can access orders against sexual assault outside of regular court hours, the bill allows for swift action to protect them from further harm. In the next legislative session, starting in January 2026, the House Judiciary Committee will continue to monitor progress on improving public safety in Vermont. I anticipate that we will continue to review safety issues that occur when alleged offenders await trial, including those related to pre-trial conditions and bail, repeat offenders, and the pre-trial supervision program established last year. We will also continue to advocate for the appropriate resourcing of our criminal justice system and will seek other ways to reduce the time it takes to resolve criminal cases.

Mental Health in the Courts

lalonde

The following is my welcoming address delivered at the September 26 Summit of the Commission on Mental Health and the Judiciary.

************************

Thank you, Justice Reiber. It’s an honor to be here with all of you representing the legislative branch in the important work of mental health and substance use prevention and treatment. I appreciate the work of our Chief Justice in removing the silos from the three branches to bring all of us together to think through needs and celebrate successes. I’m thankful for the relationships with the executive branch and the work we do together throughout the legislative session. It’s imperative that the House and Senate continue working together to create policy that is informed by the expertise and experience of the judicial and executive branches and, most importantly, informed by the lived experiences of Vermonters.

This past year the House and Senate worked closely together to continue passing policy that not only invests in the growth of our workforce but also ensures that our providers have a safe working environment.

While the creation of a forensic facility has proved controversial, all three branches continued forward progress by enabling the Commissioner of Mental Health to seek treatment for individuals at a secure residential recovery facility, regardless of a previous order of hospitalization – while still keeping an open dialogue on future needs. We are also moving forward on a peer certification program for those interested, while not forcing certification on anyone.

Our collective work, and especially the legislative work, can sometimes take years to yield results. But we have seen many successes across the state, including programs established through the collaborative work of the Department of Mental Health, our providers, and the legislature. We have mental health urgent care homes opening in various regions of our state, including a partnership between UVMHN, Pathways Vermont, the Howard Center and Community Health Centers, opening an urgent care center in Burlington. Newport, too, has Front Porch, a mental health urgent care home.

Vermont now has a sustainable funding source for the 988 suicide and crisis line. We are implementing a statewide mobile crisis program to help people where they are. And the waiting period for firearms purchases that we established with Act 45 of 2023 has saved lives. All these initiatives are helping Vermonters obtain help before they enter the judicial system.

As Chair of the House Judiciary Committee, I have a particular perspective on mental health challenges.

When defendants are caught up in the criminal justice system because of an underlying mental health issue or substance use disorder, society is failing these individuals. We have not provided the supports or systems of care to keep them out of the criminal justice system. Indeed, in the past few years, we have seen a significant increase in the percentage of criminal defendants who present with mental health issues and substance use disorder.

We need to continue the work to help keep these individuals out of the criminal justice system.

But we must also help prosecutors, defenders, victim advocates, the courts, and other actors to address the current situation in the criminal justice system. We need to support efforts to address cases with defendants who have mental health issues, substance use disorder, or co-occurring disorders.

I’m pleased to report that Act 28, passed last year and relating to competency to stand trial and insanity as a defense, has helped alleviate some of the problem. That law has reduced the backlog of competency evaluations and shortened the time to obtain such evaluations. This year, Act 161 extends the permission for doctoral-level psychologists with training in forensic psychology to conduct the initial examination of a criminal defendant’s competency to stand trial. It also allows a psychiatrist or psychologist to testify remotely in such proceedings.

In the coming Biennium, the legislature may address the issue of competency restoration.  To that end, Act 137 directs the Agency of Human Services to submit a report to the General Assembly that provides a fiscal estimate for implementing a competency restoration program operated or under contract with the Department of Mental Health. I expect that in the upcoming Biennium, we will also be continuing to consider how to best serve victims of crimes perpetrated by individuals who are found to be incompetent to stand trial or not guilty by reason of insanity.

The legislature has also focused on shortening other delays in the criminal justice system. As you are undoubtedly aware, the Courts, prosecutors, and defenders are currently facing a significant backlog of cases due, in part, to the COVID pandemic. When the processing of cases involving those with mental health issues or substance use disorder are delayed, the individuals may not receive the treatment that they need in a timely manner. While treatment can be ordered as a pretrial condition of release, it is difficult to ensure that a defendant attends treatment during the pretrial period. It is critical that the courts and other actors in the criminal justice system shorten the time to disposition of such cases.

To help accomplish this, the legislature boosted the resources to the prosecutors, defenders, victim advocates, and courts, including three additional judges. This year, in Act 180, we also established a state-wide pre-trial diversion program under the Office of the Attorney General that should take some pressure off the courts and should also lead to quicker and often better outcomes. The program provides diversion to restorative justice processes, not to mental health or substance use treatment. But perhaps it can serve as a model or a starting point for diversion to treatment.

We will be monitoring the progress in clearing the backlog and shortening the time to disposition and will push for the necessary resources to the criminal and restorative justice systems to achieve speedier and just outcomes.

The criminal justice system should not be the place where we address mental health issues. Rather, to improve outcomes, we as a State need to provide more treatment opportunities. We also need to continue efforts to reduce food insecurity, inadequate housing, sexual and other abuses, and economic insecurity.

We also need to continue working together to understand the stressors facing all of you in the work you do every day. Your work is imperative to the lives of Vermonters, and we need to ensure your needs are being met.

In closing, and on behalf of the House and Senate, I thank you all for your work. The other legislators and I look forward to working with you to continue to make progress on addressing the challenges in our mental health and criminal justice systems.