This Senate Resolution designates March as “Eating Disorders Awareness and Prevention Month” in Delaware and encourages the Department of Health and Social Services to research methods to prevent and raise awareness of eating disorders.
This resolution recognizes the Easterseals/CAI Volleyball Challenge occurring March 2-4, 2018, at William Penn High School, an event that raises funds for an organization providing services and support to Delawareans with disabilities or special needs and their families.
In 2011, as part of a general overhaul of Delaware’s drug laws, this provision was inserted into Title 16 to allow juvenile adjudications to count as prior qualifying offenses for purposes of increasing the sentence of certain drug offenders. Pursuant to this provision, some defendants convicted of certain drug crimes who have one prior adult drug conviction and one prior juvenile adjudication within the past 10 years face a drastic increase in sentence as follows: A defendant convicted of “drug dealing – aggravated possession”, a class D felony, will be sentenced as if he had committed a class B felony. The sentence for a class D felony is up to 8 years imprisonment. For a class B felony the sentence can be up to 25 years, and 2 years is the minimum mandatory. A defendant convicted of aggravated possession – class E will be sentenced as if she had committed a class B felony. The penalty is elevated from a maximum of 5 years incarceration to, again, a maximum of 25 with a 2 year minimum mandatory. A defendant convicted of aggravated possession – class F will be sentenced as though he committed a class C felony. Class C felonies are punishable by up to 15 years, rather than the maximum of 3 years for a class F. There is no other part of the criminal code that uses a juvenile adjudication as a statutory sentence enhancement in an adult conviction. While repeat drug offenses are a legitimate concern for communities and the criminal justice system, the elevation of the punishment for a crime based on a juvenile adjudication, which was not tried before a jury, and which may be relatively remote in time is of questionable legal merit. Furthermore, in two of the above scenarios, the crime is elevated to one which requires a minimum mandatory sentence, thus reducing the discretion entrusted to judges. This bill removes that portion of Section 4751B that allows a juvenile adjudication to be used as a second “prior qualifying Title 16 conviction.” Prosecutors may still apply the sentencing enhancement for the single qualifying adult conviction that meets the criteria set out in that section, and may use the enhancement for two prior convictions where both convictions occurred when the defendant was an adult. Judges will continue to be able to consider the defendant’s juvenile record as a factor in determining the appropriate sentence. Finally, where a juvenile was tried and sentenced as an adult, that conviction may still be used for the sentencing enhancement.
This bill creates the Grant-In-Aid Committee. The Committee is a joint committee of the Senate and House of Representatives. The purpose of the Committee is to review requests for grant-in-aid and to develop the grant-in-aid appropriations bill.
This Act eliminates the Delaware Compensation Commission in its entirety and makes necessary changes to the Delaware Code as a result.
This Concurrent Resolution provides for a Joint Session of the House of Representatives and the Senate to be convened for the purpose of hearing an address by the Honorable John C. Carney, Governor of the State of Delaware.
This Act restores the Delaware Prescription Drug Payment Assistance Program which was eliminated in the Fiscal Year 2018 Annual Appropriations Act.
This Act replaces the prevailing wage survey method of setting the prevailing wage with a method based on payroll information currently being provided to the Department of Labor. Also, this Act removes the prevailing wage lock-in authorized by House Substitute No. 1 for House Bill No. 145 (148th General Assembly). This Act also removes the Prevailing Wage Advisory Committee (“Committee”) from the Delaware Code. The Committee was established to advise the General Assembly how the prevailing wage survey may be improved or if the survey should be eliminated. The Committee reported in January 2016 that “the best option is to continue the survey for 2016 and report back to the legislature in the future.” Because this Act replaces the prevailing wage survey, the Committee is no longer needed. Finally, this Act takes effect on January 1, 2019.
This Act eliminates the Delaware Compensation Commission in its entirety and makes necessary changes to the Delaware Code as a result.
This Act is designed to create procedures in Delaware for making sure firearms are not in the hands of dangerous people while protecting due process and not creating a barrier to care for those suffering from mental illness. This Act intends to put Delaware at the forefront of this important issue by not simply looking narrowly for mental illness. Statistically, mental illness has little to do with homicide perpetration but conversely increases the chance of being a victim of violence. This bill looks instead for propensities of violence, a much more reliable and evidence-based metric. This metric will also ensure that we can provide care to those more likely to commit violent acts and help destigmatize mental illness here in Delaware. Specific components of this Act are set forth below. This Act applies when a person who has been committed to a hospital for treatment of a mental condition by a judge shall be deemed a person prohibited. The current law appears to apply to “any person who has ever been committed for a mental disorder,” but in reality this only applies to persons who have been involuntarily committed and subject to adjudication such as a hearing. It also clarifies that perpetrators of violent crimes who have been found Not Guilty By Reason of Insanity, Guilty But Mentally Ill, or Mentally Incompetent to Stand Trial are persons prohibited, including juveniles who fall into those categories. The provisions of § 1448B will not retroactively apply to any persons adjudicated in the past, which would create undue burden. This Act expands the definition of “persons prohibited” to include those persons who are prohibited from possessing firearms pursuant to a court order under the procedures set forth in § 1448B of Title 11. Newly created § 1448B sets forth a procedure whereby law enforcement, upon receiving a report of a violent person and who is demonstrating behaviors that the provider believes are dangerous can refer the matter to the Department of Justice to petition the Superior Court for an order requiring such person to relinquish the person’s firearms or ammunition. This Act revises and clarifies an existing statute, 11 Del C. § 5402, which currently solidifies the need for mental health professionals to report those with mental illness who may be a threat to others. Currently, the section contains a limited duty of a treating hospital to warn law enforcement of a specific threat, but this clarifies the original intent of the section and requires that to avoid liability that all treating mental health professionals must report dangerous persons to law enforcement. The appropriate law enforcement agency must then determine whether a civil action should be initiated under newly created § 1448C of this Title, to relinquish the person’s firearms or ammunition and to take appropriate investigative action. Pursuant to § 1448C, the Court may order dangerous persons to relinquish to a law enforcement officer, voluntarily or otherwise, any firearms or ammunition owned, possessed, or controlled by such person. The Court may also, in its discretion, issue an order directing any law enforcement agency to forthwith search for and seize firearms and ammunition of any such person prohibited upon a showing of good cause by the petitioner. The court order to relinquish firearms would issue upon a finding that the person was prohibited, without further showing. The order authorizing police to search for and seize weapons would require a further showing, akin to an affidavit in support of a warrant, of “good cause” that the prohibited weapons would be found in a particular place or in the possession of the person prohibited. Any person subject to an order of the Court pursuant to § 1448C may petition the Court for an order to return firearms or ammunition by establishing to a preponderance of evidence that he or she is not a danger to self or others. In addition, as is the case under the current law, any person who is adjudicated to be a person prohibited pursuant to this Act has the opportunity to demonstrate, pursuant to § 1448A of Title 11, that he or she is no longer prohibited from possessing a firearm and therefore is no longer a person prohibited.
