An act relating to youthful offender proceedings

The full text of 33 V.S.A. 5284 (Youthful Offender Determination and Disposition Order) was present in the passed version but absent from the enacted version. This section established a two-step process: first determining whether public safety would be protected, then assessing amenability to treatment. It listed 11 factors courts must consider, including whether the youth acknowledged harm caused by their alleged conduct (factor K).

The passed version contained a mandatory revocation provision: if a youth on probation was charged with a crime involving an act of violence against another person, the court SHALL revoke youthful offender status and transfer to Criminal Division for sentencing, unless the youth proved by a preponderance of evidence that public safety would be protected AND the youth remained amenable to treatment. The enacted version replaced this with a discretionary framework where the court considers public safety, amenability to treatment, and availability of services as factors in its decision.

The passed version required automatic revocation of youthful offender status if the youth failed to appear at a probation revocation hearing (unless good cause was found). The enacted version instead allows the court to issue an order for an officer to pick up the youth and bring them to court, giving the court more flexibility before imposing the severe consequence of revocation.

The effective date changed from 'on passage' in the passed version to July 1, 2026 in the enacted version, providing a delayed implementation period.

Entirely new Section 1 amending 33 V.S.A. 5284 establishes a two-step youthful offender determination process: first the court must find public safety will be protected (considering 11 specific factors including nature of charge, mental health, substance abuse, housing, employment, criminal record, violence history, firearms involvement, and acknowledgment of harm), then determine whether the youth is amenable to treatment and sufficient services exist. The court must deny the motion if either condition is not met and must grant it if both are met.

New subsection 5285(c)(2) requires the court to revoke youthful offender status and transfer the case to the Criminal Division for sentencing if the youth is charged with a violent crime while on juvenile probation, unless the youth proves by a preponderance of the evidence that public safety will be protected and the youth remains amenable to treatment.

New subsection 5284(c)(2) allows the court to refer a youth directly to an approved community-based provider (including community justice centers or balanced and restorative justice programs) prior to approving a disposition case plan, without requiring probation. If the provider does not accept or the youth fails to complete the program satisfactorily, the youth returns to court.

Subsection 5285(d) changed from allowing the court to 'may' issue a pickup order when a youth fails to appear at a revocation hearing, to requiring the court to revoke youthful offender status and transfer the case to the Criminal Division for sentencing unless it finds good cause for the failure to appear.

New subsection 5284(d) establishes joint responsibility of the Department for Children and Families and the Department of Corrections for supervision and services until the youth reaches age 22, with a designated case manager and lead department having final decision-making authority over the case plan.

The effective date for the new provisions (Sec. 1 through Sec. 3) is changed to 'on passage' rather than July 1, 2026, which was the effective date in the unofficial version.

The entire section amending 33 V.S.A. 5284 (Youthful Offender Determination and Disposition Order) was deleted. This removed the requirement that courts consider whether a youth acknowledged harm caused by their alleged conduct when deciding whether public safety would be protected by youthful offender treatment, as well as all other enumerated factors for that determination.

In 33 V.S.A. 5288(a)(2), the scope of what a victim may address at a hearing was narrowed. The House version allowed victims to express views on 'the offense, the youth, and the appropriateness of youthful offender status.' The enacted version limits this to views 'concerning the offense and the youth,' removing explicit reference to the appropriateness of youthful offender status.

In 33 V.S.A. 5288(b), the court's duty to ask whether a victim is present and would like to be heard was expanded from applying only at hearings on motions for youthful offender treatment status to also applying at hearings on youthful offender disposition.

In 33 V.S.A. 5285(c)(2), the standard for avoiding automatic revocation when a youth is charged with a violent crime was strengthened. The enacted version adds a third prong: the youth must also prove by a preponderance of the evidence that sufficient services continue to exist in the juvenile court system, DCYF, and DOC to meet the youth's treatment and rehabilitation needs.

In 33 V.S.A. 5285(d), the consequence for a youth failing to appear at a probation revocation hearing was changed from automatic revocation of youthful offender status (unless good cause is found) to allowing the court to first issue an order under section 5108(c) for an officer to pick up the youth and bring them to court.

The effective date was changed from 'on passage' (immediate) to July 1, 2026, giving agencies time to prepare for implementation.

A cross-reference in 33 V.S.A. 5285(a)(2) was corrected from subdivision 5103(c)(2)(B) to 5103(c)(2)(D).

The entire amendment to 33 V.S.A. Section 5284 (Youthful Offender Determination and Disposition Order) was deleted. This section had established the criteria courts must consider when deciding whether to grant youthful offender status, including whether the youth acknowledged harm caused by their conduct.

A new subdivision 5285(a)(2) was added providing that when a motion for revocation of youthful offender status is pending, the Family Division's jurisdiction over the youth remains in effect until discharge or revocation, and may be extended beyond the youth's 22nd birthday as necessary.

The mandatory revocation provision was removed. The introduced bill required the court to automatically revoke youthful offender status if the youth was charged with a violent crime while on probation, unless the youth proved by a preponderance of evidence that public safety would be protected and the youth remained amenable to treatment. This is no longer in the passed version.

Section 5285(c)(2) was rewritten from a mandatory revocation trigger into a list of factors the court 'shall consider' when making its discretionary determination under (c)(1): whether public safety will be protected, whether the youth remains amenable to treatment, and whether sufficient services exist. The court retains discretion to maintain status, revoke it, or transfer supervision to the Department of Corrections.

Section 5285(d) was changed from automatic revocation of youthful offender status when a youth fails to appear at a probation revocation hearing (unless good cause is shown) to a discretionary provision allowing the court to issue a pickup order under subsection 5108(c) for an officer to bring the youth to court.

The effective date was changed from 'on passage' to a fixed date of July 1, 2026.