New Tax for Diversion Applicants is a Bad Idea

Rep. Eric Watson, Photo by Associated Press

by Lee Davis


The Tennessee House passed a new tax this week that will require people to pay to have their name cleared upon the completion of diversion. HB 2774 (here), sponsored by Rep. Eric Watson, Cleveland, introduces the new tax. The new part is a $100.00 tax that must be paid to the court when requesting diversion. Also added is an increase in taxes that will escalate the amount required to clear one's name to $350.00. Thus, the total cost to have a record expunged after diversion will be $550.00 when the local fee for Hamilton County is added. The house bill has been sent to the TN Senate for passage. If signed by Gov. Haslam, the law will go into effect July 1st. This is a bad idea.Who will this bill affect, and what is diversion? Let's start with diversion; there are two types: judicial diversion and pretrial diversion.

Judicial diversion is a way many minor cases are settled for first time offenders.  Let's say you have a daughter who is home from college and gets arrested for using her sister's ID to get into a club or who actually drinks in the club.  The offending person is potentially guilty of underage drinking and using a false ID, both crimes.  If the person accepts responsibility and has no criminal record, the court may defer court proceedings without entering a judgment of guilty--with the consent of the prosecutor.  Under this example, the student will now pay $100 to be considered for diversion and $350 more (plus $100 local fee) to have their record expunged after completing diversion.  Previously, the person paid $150.

Pretrial diversion is for those with the least culpability who find themselves ensnared in the legal system. Let's say a person writes a check for a service and then disputes the service, placing a stop-payment order on the check.  The merchant then swears out a criminal warrant for theft of services.  Under this scenario each person believes the other is the culprit. The check writer may find herself in court, charged with a crime.  If the district attorney believes the explanation, he may offer the person pretrial diversion with an understanding that the case will be dismissed and expunged.  Most people, completely innocent people, will accept this disposition rather than endure additional trips to the courthouse to prove their innocence. Under the new law, this person will also be forced to pay $550 to have her good name cleared for actions that she believed were completely honest and ethical.

There is good reason to have records expunged.  Background checks are routine for employers, higher education and many other reasons.  A minor charge--even when explained--often will result in a job or school denial when found on a background check. Diversion is granted one time and only for good cause. The result is that many ordinary people may have their records expunged and reputation restored upon successful completion of diversion.  A modest fee for the service has always been the rule.  This week's action by Rep. Watson and the house will place a new heavy financial burden on many. This new tax will effect every citizen who seeks diversion. Without paying the new application tax, there will be no consideration of an application for diversion.  Without payment of the increased tax, no record will be expunged.  Many across the state who cannot afford these new and increased taxes will be harmed.

Georgia Supreme Court Holds Assisted Suicide Legislation Unconstitutional

The Georgia Supreme Court held yesterday that a law banning advertisements for assisted suicide services violates the constitutionally protected right to freedom of speech. The case stemmed from the arrest of members of the Final Exit Network in 2009. Four members of the group were charged with assisting in the suicide of a cancer patient. The members were arrested after they were approached by an undercover GBI investigator posing as someone in need of assisted suicide. According to the testimony of the investigator, as his suicide date was approaching, Ted Goodwin (former President of the group), "walked the agent through the steps and demonstrated how he would hold the agent's hands to stop him from removing the 'exit bag'." The exit bag is a devise used by the group to aid in the suicide.

Once the group members were arrested, they immediately challenged the law's constitutionality arguing that it violated their rights of freedom of speech. Specifically, they argued that the law prescribed punishment for those people involved in assisted suicide only if they spoke publicly about it. The GA Supreme Court agreed. They reasoned that the law does not prohibit the act of assisting in suicide, rather it only prohibits advertising or promoting assisted suicide. This is an obvious ban on a particular type of speech; the very thing the First Amendment is supposed to prevent. The Court stated in part,

"The State has failed to provide any explanation or evidence as to why a public advertisement or offer to assist in an otherwise legal activity is sufficiently problematic to justify an intrusion on protected speech rights."

The Court further suggested that if the State has an interest in the preservation of human life, they would propose legislation which prohibited the act of assisted suicide rather than prohibiting the public speech. Sources believe that the General Assembly is preparing to consider legislation that prohibits assisted suicide within the next term.

New Tennessee Legislation sought to combat gang problem

Local, state, and federal officials held a press conference in Chattanooga yesterday to announce the formation of the Chattanooga Area Gang Enforcement Team ("CAGE").  This team was created to address the recent outbreak in gang-related crime in the city and embraces both outreach and suppression efforts.  Among the options announced was the introduction of new laws including one that would create a criminal offense for being a gang member.  This bill (HB 2869) has just been introduced in the legislature and reads as follows:


(a)  It shall be unlawful for any person to actively participate in any criminal street gang, as defined by § 40-35-121(a) with knowledge that its members engage in or have engaged in a pattern of criminal gang activity as defined in § 40-35-121(a), and to willfully promote, further, or assist in any felonious criminal conduct by members of that gang.  

(b)  A violation of this section is a Class E Felony.  Any sentence imposed 
shall be served consecutively to the sentence for any other offense that is based 
in whole or in part on the same factual allegations, unless the sentencing judge 
or magistrate specifically orders the sentences for the offenses arising out of the 
same facts to be served concurrently.

It will be interesting if this law is passed to see how it is utilized by the police.  Will it be a stand along charge, or will it be added in addition to other crimes?  The provision requiring consecutive sentencing is important because it would have the effect of extending the total sentence if there were other crimes arising out of the same circumstance.  All pending bills in the Tennessee legislature can be tracked here.