Citing the increasing number of false confessions recorded by the National Registry of Exonerations and recent science around adolescent brain development, several states across the nation have passed legislation to ban the use of deceptive interrogation techniques on juveniles. Deceptive tactics is limited to the knowing use of misleading statements about evidence or communications of false promises of leniency to extract a confession or other incriminating evidence from a youth suspected of breaking the law. To date, Delaware has yet to have a wrongful conviction case involving a false confession but according to groups such as the Innocence Project, wrongful convictions can often take decades to be revealed. Three other states, Illinois, Utah and Oregon, have passed similar legislation. Additional states, including Colorado and California, are currently considering similar legislation. This Act mirrors efforts in other states by prohibiting the knowing use of false statements about evidence, or false or misleading promises of leniency during custodial interrogations of persons under the age of 18. Any statement elicited from a person in violation of this section is inadmissible in any subsequent juvenile delinquency or criminal court proceeding.
Sponsored bills
This Act clarifies the scope and protections for individuals with disabilities under the Delaware Equal Accommodations Law (DEAL) and further aligns definitions and scope of DEAL with federal law protecting individuals with disabilities from discrimination by places of public accommodation, including the Americans with Disabilities Act. This Act is consistent with the Superior Court's decision in Ray v. State Human Rels. Comm'n, 2021 Del. Super. LEXIS 668, which held that "[a]ny interpretation to suggest the legislature made a choice to narrow DEAL's protection ignores both the express mandates and comprehensive guidance under DEAL. It takes away the right of a protected class member to be heard. As interpreted, Delaware law would need to reject what has been universally accepted." This alignment with federal law includes all of the following: 1. Using the same terms and definitions for those terms. 2. Clarifying that places of public accommodation must make reasonable modifications in policies, practices, and procedures, sometimes referred to as “reasonable accommodations”, unless doing so would fundamentally alter the program, business, or service. 3. Clarifying that a public accommodation must provide auxiliary aids and services, unless doing so would fundamentally alter the program, business, or service or be an undue burden. 4. Clarifying that places of public accommodation must remove physical barriers if doing so is readily achievable. 5. Clarifying that state investigations of complaints must apply the requirements under state law in a manner consistent with equivalent requirements under federal laws. This Act also does all of the following 1. Clarifies that an individual does not have to use the exact terms in DEAL to request a reasonable modification or auxiliary aids and services for the request to be covered by DEAL. 2. Extends the time to file a complaint under DEAL to 1 year. 3. Allows the Commission to waive the cost of transcript, upon application by a party. 4. Makes corresponding changes to the requirement under § 10006A of Title 29 that a public body allow a member with a disability to use electronic means of communication to attend a meeting because "reasonable modification" is the term now used under § 4504 of Title 6. The term "reasonable accommodation" is retained because that is the term used under state and federal law in employment contexts, which might apply to a member of public body. 5. Makes technical corrections to clarify existing law and conform existing law to the standards of the Delaware Legislative Drafting Manual.
This Act permits a person who has been the victim of non-consensual sexual conduct or non-consensual sexual penetration to apply for a sexual violence protective order if the person has a reasonable fear, based on specific conduct occurring contemporaneously or subsequent to the non-consensual sexual conduct or penetration, that the perpetrator of the sexual conduct will harm the petitioner in the future. An ex parte temporary order may be issued if a petitioner proves by a preponderance of the evidence that the respondent poses an immediate and present danger of causing physical injury to the petitioner. The protective order is a civil remedy available whether or not the respondent has been charged with a crime and whether or not the petitioner reported the respondent’s conduct to law enforcement officials. The Act provides for an emergency ex parte hearing as well as a non-emergency hearing in Superior Court. Possible remedies in addition to an order restraining the respondent from any kind of contact with the petitioner include restraining the respondent form going to, or remaining in, the places a petitioner might frequent including home, school, or work. Violation of a sexual violence protective order is punishable as criminal contempt, either as a class A misdemeanor, or Class F felony if contempt of the order results in physical injury, or involved threatened use, or use of, a deadly weapon or firearm. Petitions under the Act must be verified. If any party falsely swears in a petition or hearing under the Act, the person may be liable for a misdemeanor or felony. A sexual violence protection order is available only for petitioners who would not qualify for a protection from abuse order because there is no family or dating relationship between the victim and perpetrator. The Act also makes technical corrections to existing law to make it conform to the Legislative Drafting Manual. The Act takes effect 6 months after its enactment.
This Act makes substantial changes to clarify and modernize § 2347 of the Workers’ Compensation Act, Chapter 23 of Title 19 of the Delaware Code, as follows: (1) Subsection (a) incorporates recent Industrial Accident Board rulings governing the frequency with which petitions to modify workers’ compensation agreements may be raised. (2) Subsection (e) clarifies pleading requirements for petitions to review, which helps the Department of Labor in docketing of Petitions and attorneys in preparing pleadings for filing. (3) Subsection (h) expands methods of service of process of petitions to permit utilization of private mail services, traditional process servers, and electronic service to respondents who are attorney represented. This subsection also explicitly defines what must be submitted to the Department of Labor as proof of service. (4) Subsection (j) codifies the process by which default or “read-in” hearings have proceeded before the Industrial Accident Board under § 2347 for over 30 years. (5) Subsection (k) clarifies whether and to what extent Workers’ Compensation Fund wage replacement benefits are available to injured workers during the pendency of petitions to review. The clarifications provided for both the Department of Labor and the claimant’s bar will streamline the process so that injured workers will experience fewer interruptions or delays in the payment of benefits than under the current law. Also included are protections for the Workers’ Compensation Fund to ensure that there are not overpayments. This Act is the product of the work of the workers’ compensation claimants bar, defense bar, and the Department of Labor, and the underlying intent of this Act is to streamline processes and limit unnecessary litigation that has occurred in recent years as a result of lack of clarity in § 2347. This Act furthers the public policy behind various changes to the Workers’ Compensation Act in the last 15 years to mitigate insurance rates for Delaware businesses while simultaneously ensuring that the interests of the State’s injured workers are protected.
This Act requires medical marijuana compassion centers and safety compliance facilities that have 20 or more employees to have a labor peace agreement with 1 more bona fide labor organizations. This Act defines "labor peace agreement" as an agreement between an employer and a labor organization that, at a minimum, includes all of the following: 1. Prohibits the labor organization and members from engaging in picketing, work stoppages, boycotts, or any other economic interference with the business of the employer. 2. Prohibits the employer from disrupting efforts by the bona fide labor organization to communicate with and attempt to organize and represent employees. 3. Provides the labor organization access at reasonable times to areas in which the employees work, for the purpose of meeting with employees to discuss their right to representation, employment rights under state law, and terms and conditions of employment.
This Act prohibits the seller of consumer goods or services from refusing to accept cash payment, except in limited circumstances. Sales covered by this Act are those made at a retail store through an in-person transaction. The Act does not apply to sales of goods or services by electric or gas utilities, telephone, mail or internet sales, or for services provided at parking lots or garages. It creates graduated civil penalties for violations and provides consumers a private right of action to recover double damages, including consequential damages, for a second violation of the law and triple damages for subsequent violations. The Division of Consumer Protection has authority to enforce the law.
Recognizing the negative impact of criminal justice imposed financial obligations on defendants has led to reforms across the country to reduce the financial burdens that disproportionally impact the poor. This type of debt and the collateral consequences of suspending a driver’s license negatively impacts the rehabilitation of those in the criminal justice system and pushes those without an ability to pay further into the system unnecessarily. This Act does all of the following: (1) Prohibits a court from imposing a fine, fee, cost, or assessment on children without the means to pay them. (2) Provides the courts with the discretion to waive, modify, or suspend any fine, fee, cost, or assessment. (3) Prohibits a court or the Department of Transportation from suspending a driver’s license for nonpayment of a fine, fee cost, assessment, or restitution and from charging a penalty, assessment, or fee to a defendant for the cancellation of a warrant issued due to the defendant’s nonpayment of a fine, fee, cost, assessment, or restitution. (4) Prohibits a court from imposing an additional fee on a defendant for payments that are made at designated periodic intervals or late, or when probation is ordered to supervise a defendant’s payment. Nothing in this Act precludes the court from filing contempt charges against defendants who willfully fail to pay their fines. (5) Requires the Judiciary and the Delaware Criminal Justice Information System to report on the sum collected from fines, fees, costs, assessments, and restitution and make a public report of these totals. (6) Eliminates the Public Defender fee and the Probation Supervision fee. The collections from these fees currently go to the General Fund. (7) Creates the Criminal Legal System Imposed Debt Study Group to review the impact that court imposed financial obligations have on defendants and victims and make recommendations to promote access, fairness, and transparency in the imposition and collection of court imposed financial obligations. (8) Makes technical corrections to conform existing law to the standards of the Delaware Legislative Drafting Manual.
This Act adds victims of human trafficking to the Address Confidentiality Act. Under this program, certain crime victims are provided a substitute address by the Department of Justice so as to protect the participant’s actual address from public disclosure. This Act also makes technical corrections to conform existing law to the standards of the Delaware Legislative Drafting Manual.
This Act increases opportunities for federally qualified health centers (“FQHC”) and government-operated dental clinics to serve the indigent and other underserved communities with dental care and improves flexibility with updated provisional licensing processes for FQHC and government-operated dental clinic applicants. This Act assists FQHCs and government-operated dental clinics in recruiting dentists to serve those most in need. This Act adds FQHCs to the Delaware Institute for Dental Education and Research Board. This Act creates the Dental Care Access Task Force (“Task Force”) to examine and recommend a course of action to address all of the following: (1) Dental care access, including for underserved populations and communities. (2) Dental licensure practices and requirements. (3) Dental provider type and scope of practice. (4) Dental provider recruitment and retention strategies. (5) Dental insurance networks and coverage, including for the uninsured and underinsured. The Task Force must submit its report no later than February 1, 2023. This Act also makes technical corrections to conform existing law to the standards of the Delaware Legislative Drafting Manual.
This Act implements some of the recommendations of the African American Task Force's Safety and Justice Subcommittee. Specifically, it requires that cases or charges that are more than 7 years old be treated as “resolved in favor of” a child or adult if there is no disposition available for the case and no outstanding warrants. This clarification will prevent errors in record-keeping in the criminal justice system from stopping an otherwise qualified petitioner from obtaining an expungement that may otherwise be available. It will also require old cases for which no outcome is listed to be removed from a person's record if they are more than 7 years old. In addition, this Act allow an individual with multiple violations or misdemeanors in different cases that would be eligible for a mandatory expungement if they had occurred in a single case, and the individual has no other convictions on their record, to apply directly for a discretionary expungement after 5 years have passed from the most recent conviction. The court would then consider the application under its usual “interest of justice” rubric in determining whether to grant the expungement. This saves applications to the pardon board for multiple minor misdemeanors and increases parity between applicants with similar records.