HB 2670
In CommitteeHouse
Gross misdemeanor penalties
Increasing the maximum authorized term of imprisonment for certain gross misdemeanor offenses.
This status may be delayed. See Action History below for the latest updates.
How does a bill become law?
- Introduced: The bill is filed and assigned a number.
- Committee: A subject-matter committee holds hearings, takes public testimony, and decides whether to advance the bill.
- Floor Vote: The full chamber (House or Senate) debates and votes on the bill.
- Opposite Chamber: The bill repeats the committee and floor vote process in the other chamber.
- Governor: The Governor reviews the bill and decides whether to sign or veto it.
- Signed: The bill has been signed into law.
AI Analysis
This bill increases the maximum jail term for gross misdemeanors—including assault in the fourth degree and DUI—from 364 days to 365 days, and updates related sentencing rules for DUI offenses to reflect the longer maximum term. It also adjusts monitoring and alternative sentencing options for DUI offenders.
- Increases the maximum jail term for gross misdemeanors from 364 days to 365 days in most cases, including for assault in the fourth degree when domestic violence or sexual motivation is involved.
- Raises the maximum fine for gross misdemeanors to $5,000 (unchanged from current law, but now explicitly tied to the 365-day jail term).
- Modifies DUI sentencing to allow up to 365 days of jail time instead of 364 days for first-, second-, and third-time offenders, depending on prior convictions and alcohol levels.
- Expands the use of electronic home monitoring and 24/7 sobriety program monitoring as alternatives to jail time for certain DUI offenders, with specific minimum requirements based on prior offenses.
- Adds new penalties for drivers with minor passengers in the vehicle, including additional jail time and fines per child under age 16.
Who is affected
- Individuals charged with or convicted of assault in the fourth degree — People convicted of assault in the fourth degree—especially those with prior domestic violence convictions or where sexual motivation is found—may face longer jail terms (up to 365 days instead of 364) and higher fines.
- People convicted of DUI or DWI offenses — People convicted of driving under the influence (DUI) or driving with a prohibited alcohol concentration face increased maximum jail time (up to 365 days instead of 364), higher fines, and stricter monitoring requirements.
- Local governments (counties and municipalities) — Counties and municipalities may face increased costs for electronic monitoring, 24/7 sobriety programs, and jail capacity due to longer sentences and additional monitoring requirements.
- Judicial and court personnel — Courts and probation departments will need to manage more complex sentencing structures, including new monitoring options and expanded assessments.
Pro/Con Analysis
Potential Benefits (5)
Expanding electronic home monitoring and 24/7 sobriety program alternatives to jail for DUI offenders may reduce jail overcrowding while maintaining accountability, and evidence suggests such programs reduce recidivism when coupled with treatment—benefiting public safety and reducing long-term justice system costs.
Public SafetyPeopleRef: Sec. 3(1)–(3), Sec. 3(12)Mandating courts to consider factors like injury, child passengers, and reckless driving when sentencing DUI offenders may lead to more proportionate penalties and better deterrence—especially for high-risk behaviors that endanger others.
Public SafetyPeopleRef: Sec. 3(7)(a)–(d), Sec. 3(11)(a)(v)The bill explicitly includes deferred prosecutions and treatment requirements for substance use disorders, which—if implemented with adequate funding—could expand access to treatment and reduce relapse, benefiting public health outcomes.
HealthcarePeopleRef: Sec. 3(14)(a)(xiv)–(xvii)Raising the maximum sentence for assault in the fourth degree when domestic violence or sexual motivation is proven aligns penalties more closely with severity of harm and may improve victim safety through longer sentencing windows for high-risk offenders.
Public SafetyPeopleRef: Sec. 2(4)(a)Increasing the maximum jail term for DUI from 364 to 365 days—while seemingly symbolic—may close a minor legal loophole that allowed some offenders to avoid mandatory minimums tied to 365-day thresholds in other statutes, improving sentencing consistency.
Public SafetyLean peopleRef: Sec. 3(1), Sec. 3(2), Sec. 3(3)
Potential Concerns (5)
Extending the maximum jail term for assault in the fourth degree from 364 to 365 days—despite appearing minor—creates a procedural and psychological shift that may increase plea pressure on defendants, especially low-income individuals who cannot afford bail, leading to more convictions and longer pretrial detention.
Public SafetyPeopleRef: Sec. 1(2)(b), Sec. 2(4)(a)Mandatory additional jail time and fines for drivers with minor passengers—especially the $1,000–$10,000 per-child fines and 24–120 hours of added jail time—disproportionately harms low-income drivers who cannot pay fines, potentially triggering license suspensions, job loss, and deeper poverty cycles, while not addressing root causes of impaired driving.
Public SafetyPeopleRef: Sec. 3(6), Sec. 3(7)(d)The bill expands electronic monitoring and 24/7 sobriety program use for DUI offenders, but shifts significant costs to counties (e.g., device fees, program administration), straining already limited local budgets—particularly in rural or underfunded counties—without state reimbursement, potentially diverting funds from public health or prevention programs.
Local GovernmentPeopleRef: Sec. 3(1)–(3), Sec. 3(12)License suspensions and revocations—especially multi-year revocations for repeat offenders—can severely disrupt access to employment, housing, and essential services for low-income individuals, increasing housing instability and making it harder to maintain steady employment or secure safe housing.
HousingPeopleRef: Sec. 3(9), Sec. 3(11)(a)(v)Mandatory jail time (e.g., 30–120 days for repeat DUI offenders) and electronic monitoring requirements can interfere with employment, especially for hourly or gig workers, increasing unemployment risk and reducing household income stability—particularly for those in transportation, construction, or service sectors.
Business & EmploymentLean peopleRef: Sec. 3(1), Sec. 3(2), Sec. 3(3)
Who Is Most Affected
Low-income individuals charged with or convicted of DUI face significantly increased financial penalties (e.g., $1,000–$10,000 per child passenger), longer jail terms, and license suspensions that can disrupt employment and housing—making this group disproportionately harmed.
Families with minor passengers in vehicles may benefit from stronger deterrence against impaired driving, but families of convicted drivers face economic hardship from fines, lost income, and potential loss of transportation—making the net impact mixed.
Counties and municipalities face increased costs for electronic monitoring, 24/7 sobriety programs, and jail capacity due to longer sentences and expanded monitoring requirements, without guaranteed state reimbursement—posing fiscal strain.
Courts and probation departments must manage more complex sentencing structures, including new monitoring options and expanded assessments, increasing administrative burden and requiring additional training and resources.
Victims of domestic violence or sexual assault may benefit from longer sentences for assault in the fourth degree when those aggravating factors are proven, but the 1-day increase may not meaningfully improve safety unless paired with robust support services.