with defendants’ rights to the exclusion of crime victims' legitimate interests. !© These advocates
Epstein Suite indexes the text; the original document lives at its official source. We don't host the original file — view it on the official release to read it in full.
View the original on the official releaseDocument text
Text is machine OCR and may contain errors. Confirm against the original source above.
Page 4 of 52
2005 B.Y.U.L. Rev. 835, *841
with defendants’ rights to the exclusion of crime victims' legitimate interests. !© These advocates urged reforms to give more
attention to victims' concerns, including protecting the victim's right to be notified of court hearings, to attend those hearings,
and to be heard at appropriate points in the process.
The victims' rights movement recetved considerable impetus with the publication in 1982 of the Report of the President's Task
Force on Victims of Crime. !7 The Task Force concluded that the criminal justice system "has lost an essential balance ... .
The system has deprived the innocent, the honest, and the helpless of its protection ... . The victims of crime have been
transformed into a group oppressively burdened by a system designed to protect them. This oppression must be redressed." 18
The Task Force advocated [*842] multiple reforms. It recommended that prosecutors assume the responsibility for keeping
victims notified of all court proceedings and bringing to the court's attention the victim's view on such subjects as bail, plea
bargains, sentences, and restitution. !? The Task Force also urged that courts receive victim impact evidence at sentencing,
order restitution in most cases, and allow victims and their families to attend trials even if they are also called as witnesses. 7°
In its most sweeping recommendation, the Task Force proposed a federal constitutional amendment to protect crime victims.
The Task Force proposed adding to the Sixth Amendment's protections for defendants’ rights a provision allowing crime
victims to be present and heard: "Likewise, the victim, in every criminal prosecution shall have the right to be present and to be
heard at all critical stages of judicial proceedings." 7!
In the wake of that recommendation, crime victims’ advocates considered how best to pursue a federal constitutional
amendment that would protect victims' rights throughout the country. Recognizing the difficulty of obtaining the consensus
required to amend the United States Constitution, advocates decided to go to the states first to pursue state victims' rights
amendments. This "states-first" strategy °?? met with considerable success. To date, some thirty states have adopted victims’
rights amendments to their own state constitutions. 7? While these amendments take various forms, Arizona's amendment
illustrates the types of rights typically protected. The Arizona constitutional provision gives victims the broad right to "be
treated with fairness, respect, and dignity, and to [*843] be free from intimidation, harassment, or abuse, throughout the
criminal justice process." 74 It also specifically confers a right to "be present at, and, upon request, to be informed of all
criminal proceedings where the defendant has the right to be present." *° The amendment further allows victims to be heard at
bail, plea, and sentencing hearings. 7°
16 See generally Beloof, Cassell & Twist, supra note 15, at ch. 1; Douglas E. Beloof, The Third Wave of Crime Victims' Rights: Standing,
Remedy, and Review, 2005 BYU L. Rev. 255 [hereinafter Beloof, The Third Wave of Crime Victims' Rights]; Cassell, supra note 15, at 1381-
82.
'7 President's Task Force on Victims of Crime, Final Report 114 (1982).
18 Td.
19 Td. at 63.
20 Td. at 72-73.
21 Td. at 114.
2 See S. Rep. No. 108-191, at 3 (2004), as reprinted in 2004 U.S.C.A.N.
2 Alaska Const. art. I, 24; Ariz. Const. art. II, 2.1; Cal. Const. art. I, 12, 28; Colo. Const. art. II, 16(a); Conn. Const. art. I, 8(b); Fla. Const.
art. I, 16(b); Idaho Const. art. I, 22; Ill. Const. art. I, 8.1; Ind. Const. art. I, 13(b); Kan. Const. art. 15, 15; La. Const. art. 1, 25; Md. Decl. of
Rights art. 47; Mich. Const. art. I, 24; Miss. Const. art. 3, 26(A); Mo. Const. art. I, 32; Neb. Const. art. I, 28; Nev. Const. art. I, 8(2); N.J.
Const. art. I, 22; N.M. Const. art. 2, 24; N.C. Const. art. I, 37; Ohio Const. art. I, 10(a); Okla. Const. art. IT, 34; Or. Const. art. I, 42-43; R.I.
Const. art. I, 23; S.C. Const. art. I, 24; Tenn. Const. art. 1, 35; Tex. Const. art. I, 30; Utah Const. art. I, 28; Va. Const. art. I, 8-A; Wash.
Const. art. 1, 35; Wis. Const. art. I, 9(m). These amendments passed with overwhelming popular support.
4 Ariz. Const. art. IT, 2.1(A)(1).
25 Td. 2.1(A)(3).
26 Id. 2.1(A)(4).
DAVID SCHOEN
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017718
Have a question about what this document contains?
Ask the documents