Fiscal Note & Local Impact Statement

126 th General Assembly of Ohio

Ohio Legislative Service Commission

77 South High Street, 9th Floor, Columbus, OH 43215-6136 ² Phone: (614) 466-3615

² Internet Web Site: http://www.lsc.state.oh.us/

BILL:

H.B. 284

DATE:

November 15, 2005

STATUS:

As Introduced

SPONSOR:

Rep. Raga

LOCAL IMPACT STATEMENT REQUIRED:

No —

Minimal cost

 


CONTENTS:

Increases the penalties for pandering obscenity involving a minor, pandering sexually oriented material involving a minor, and illegal use of a minor in nudity-oriented material or performance

 

State Fiscal Highlights

 

STATE FUND

FY 2006

FY 2007

FUTURE YEARS

General Revenue Fund

     Revenues

- 0 -

- 0 -

- 0 -

     Expenditures

Potential incarceration cost increase,

magnitude uncertain

Potential incarceration

cost increase,

magnitude uncertain

Potential incarceration

cost increase,

annual magnitude uncertain

Note:  The state fiscal year is July 1 through June 30.  For example, FY 2006 is July 1, 2005 – June 30, 2006.

 

·        Incarceration expenditures.  Because of the bill’s penalty enhancements, it appears likely that additional offenders may be sentenced to prison or sentenced to a longer prison term than might otherwise have been the case under current law and sentencing practices.  Assuming all other conditions remain the same, either outcome theoretically at least carries the potential to increase the Department of Rehabilitation and Correction’s (DRC) GRF-funded incarceration costs.  As of this writing, however, whether DRC’s incarceration costs could experience an increase in excess of minimal is uncertain.  In this context, “in excess” of minimal means an estimated cost of $100,000 or more per year for the state.

·         Court cost revenues.  The bill should have no effect on locally collected state court costs that are deposited in the state treasury to the credit of the state's GRF and the Victims of Crime/Reparations Fund (Fund 402).


Local Fiscal Highlights

 

LOCAL GOVERNMENT

FY 2006

FY 2007

FUTURE YEARS

Counties

     Revenues

Potential gain in fines, likely to be no more than minimal

Potential gain in fines, likely to be no more than minimal

Potential gain in fines, likely to be no more than minimal

     Expenditures

Potential criminal justice system cost increase, not likely to exceed minimal

Potential criminal justice system cost increase, not likely to exceed minimal

Potential criminal justice system cost increase, not likely to exceed minimal

Note:  For most local governments, the fiscal year is the calendar year.  The school district fiscal year is July 1 through June 30.

 

·        Local criminal justice expenditures.  The bill could increase a county’s criminal justice system costs related to investigating, prosecuting, adjudicating, defending (if the offender is indigent), and subsequent sanctioning of certain offenders, as such offenders may work harder to avoid the imposition of a term, or a longer term, of incarceration in jail or prison.  As the number of criminal cases likely to be affected by the bill in any given local jurisdiction appears to be relatively small, then any potential increase in criminal justice system expenditures seems unlikely to exceed minimal on an ongoing basis.  For the purposes of this fiscal analysis, a minimal expenditure increase means an estimated cost of no more than $5,000 per year for any affected county.

·        Fine revenues.  The possibility of an enhanced penalty means that a county could gain more fine revenue from certain criminal cases than might otherwise have been the case under current law and practice.  As the number of criminal cases that could be affected by the bill’s penalty enhancements in any given county appears likely to be relatively small, then any potential gain in fine revenues seems unlikely to exceed minimal on an ongoing basis.  For the purposes of this fiscal analysis, a minimal revenue gain means an estimated increase of no more than $5,000 per year for any affected county. 


 


 

Detailed Fiscal Analysis

 

Fiscally notable provisions

 

The bill increases the penalties for the following three sex offenses generally by one level:

 

·        Pandering obscenity involving a minor.

·        Pandering sexually oriented matter involving a minor.

·        Illegal use of a minor in a nudity-oriented material or performance.

 

Table 1 below summarizes the penalties for aforementioned sex offenses both in terms of current law and as proposed by the bill.  Under current law, depending upon the circumstances, a violation of these offenses is either a felony of the second, third, fourth, or fifth degree.  Under the bill, depending upon the circumstances, the existing penalties for a violation are increased by one degree to either a felony of the first, second, third, or fourth degree.

 

Table 1

Penalties for Offenses Modified by the Bill

Offense

Degree of Offense

Current Law

H.B. 284

Pandering Obscenity involving a Minor

F2

Unchanged

With a specified previous offense

Does not exist

F1

Pandering Obscenity involving a Minor where the offense is procuring, possessing, or controlling said material

F4

F3

With a specified previous offense

F3

F2

Pandering Sexually Oriented Matter Involving a Minor

F2

Unchanged

With a specified previous offense

Does not exist

F1

Pandering Sexually Oriented Matter Involving a Minor where the offense involves creating, directing, or producing said matter

F4

F3

With a specified previous offense

F3

F2

Illegal Use of a Minor in a Nudity-Oriented Material or Performance

F2

Unchanged

With a specified previous offense

Does not exist

F1

Illegal Use of a Minor in a Nudity-Oriented Material or Performance where the offense involves possessing or view said material or performance

F5

F4

With a specified previous offense

F4

F3

 


Sentences and fines for felonies generally

 

Table 2 below summarizes the existing felony sentences and fines, which are unchanged by the bill.  Under current law, felonies of the fourth and fifth degree generally carry a preference against the imposition of a prison term, felonies of the third degree carry a presumption neither for nor against the imposition of a prison term, and felonies of the first and second degree carry a presumption for the imposition of a prison term.

 

Table 2

Existing Sentences and Fines for Felonies Generally

Offense Level

Maximum Fine

Prison Term

Felony of the 1st degree

$20,000

3-10 years definite

Felony of the 2nd degree

$15,000

2-8 years definite

Felony of the 3rd degree

$10,000

1-5 years definite

Felony of the 4th degree

$5,000

6-18 months definite

Felony of the 5th degree

$2,500

6-12 months definite

 

County criminal justice systems

 

Expenditures

 

The bill could increase a county’s criminal justice system costs related to investigating, prosecuting, adjudicating, defending (if the offender is indigent), and subsequent sanctioning of certain offenders, as such offenders may work harder to avoid the imposition of a term, or a longer term, of incarceration in jail or prison.  As the number of criminal cases likely to be affected by the bill in any given local jurisdiction appears to be relatively small, then any potential increase in criminal justice system expenditures seems unlikely to exceed minimal on an ongoing basis.  For the purposes of this fiscal analysis, a minimal expenditure increase means an estimated cost of no more than $5,000 per year for any affected county.

 

Revenues

 

The possibility of an enhanced penalty means that a county could gain more fine revenue from certain criminal cases than might otherwise have been the case under current law and practice.  As the number of criminal cases that could be affected by the bill’s penalty enhancements in any given county appears likely to be relatively small, then any potential gain in fine revenues seems unlikely to exceed minimal on an ongoing basis.  For the purposes of this fiscal analysis, a minimal revenue gain means an estimated increase of no more than $5,000 per year for any affected county.  Also of note is that courts appear to rarely impose or collect the maximum potential fine.


State fiscal effects

 

Incarceration expenditures

 

Because of the bill’s penalty enhancements, it appears likely that additional offenders may be sentenced to prison or sentenced to a longer prison term than might otherwise have been the case under current law and sentencing practices.  Assuming all other conditions remain the same, either outcome theoretically at least carries the potential to increase DRC's GRF-funded incarceration costs.  At this time, however, the Department of Rehabilitation and Correction (DRC) has not had the opportunity to provide any information to LSC fiscal staff on their estimation of the bill’s potential effect on the size of its institutional population and related incarceration costs.  Thus, as of this writing, whether DRC’s incarceration costs could experience an increase in excess of minimal is uncertain.  In this context, “in excess” of minimal means an estimated cost of $100,000 or more per year for the state.

 

Court cost revenues

The bill should have no effect on locally collected state court costs that are deposited in the state treasury to the credit of the state's GRF and the Victims of Crime/Reparations Fund (Fund 402).

 

 

 

LSC fiscal staff:  Laura A. Potts, Budget Analyst

 

HB0284IN.doc/lb