Hb 1134: Amendments to the Georgia Street Gang Terrorism and Prevention Act

• Jurisdiction: Georgia,United States
• Citation: Vol. 39 No. 1
• Publication year: 2022
• topic: Criminal Law

HB 1134: Amendments to the Georgia Street Gang Terrorism and Prevention Act

Alex Norton

anorton11@student.gsu.edu

Sam Collier

scollier20@student.gsu.edu

[Page 21]

CRIMES AND OFFENSES

Street Gang Terrorism and Prevention: Amend Section 4 of Chapter 15 of Title 16 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated, Relating to Participation in Criminal Gang Activity Prohibited, so as to Provide for the Concurrent Authority of Prosecuting Attorneys and the Attorney General to Prosecute Offenses Involving Criminal Gang Activity; Provide for Related Matters; Repeal Conflicting Laws; and for Other Purposes

Code Section: O.C.G.A. § 16-15-4 (amended)

Bill Number: HB 1134

Act Number: 645

Georgia Laws: 2022 Ga. Laws 99

Effective Date: July 1, 2022

Summary: The Act amends the Georgia Street Gang Terrorism and Prevention Act to provide the attorney general with concurrent authority to prosecute criminal gang activity alongside local prosecuting attorneys in Georgia. Modeled after a similar act that created concurrent authority for the attorney general to prosecute human trafficking crimes, the Act seeks to enhance the government's investigation and prosecution of gang crimes in the state by making the effort more corroborative, coordinated, and multi-jurisdictional.

[Page 22]

History

Overview

Gang-related violent crimes present unique problems for prosecutors and local district attorneys (DAs) in Georgia.¹ Gang activity often involves criminal conduct that spans multiple counties, making it difficult for any single jurisdiction to thoroughly prosecute offenders.² As a result, it is likely that many gang-related crimes go unprosecuted, and gang members face no punishment for their crimes.³ The fact that over half of all violent crime in the State of Georgia can be traced back to gang activity intensifies the effect of this "multi-jurisdictional" problem.⁴ The high volume of cases, the vast majority of which require heightened cooperation and informational exchange between local DAs, places an immeasurable strain on prosecutorial resources.⁵

The strain on resources was a main topic of discussion at a spring 2022 anti-gang network meeting in Columbus, Georgia.⁶ At the meeting, the mayor of Columbus, B. H. "Skip" Henderson, expressed his concern with local prosecutors' "struggles" in handling gang-related prosecutions.⁷ Georgia Attorney General Chris Carr (R), who hosted the meeting, attempted to dispel such concerns by touting the anticipated benefits of House Bill (HB) 1134: "When you collaborate and you leverage the resources that local[,] state[,] and federal law enforcement have, you have better success."⁸

[Page 23]

Although perhaps less publicized, gang activity also exists between incarcerated gang members.⁹ This poses unique problems because there is less incentive to prosecute offenders who are already serving time.¹⁰ On average, gangs recruit young Georgian prisoners within mere days of beginning their sentence, yet little is done to curb the rampant gang culture in Georgia's prison system.¹¹ Prosecutors' reluctance to expend their already strained time and resources catalyzed the push to address the deluge of complex gang cases.¹²

Proponents and Benefits

The Georgia General Assembly introduced HB 1134 to combat the above-stated obstacles to the thorough prosecution of gang-related crimes.¹³ Prior to the bill's passage, local DAs were largely on their own when it came to investigating and prosecuting gang members whose conduct spanned multiple jurisdictions.¹⁴ HB 1134 allows the attorney general to ease the strain on local resources and assist in cross-jurisdictional coordination between DAs by exercising concurrent jurisdiction.¹⁵ Concurrent jurisdiction allows prosecutors to combine their specialized knowledge of local crime with the resources of the attorney general's office to achieve more efficient results in gang prosecutions.¹⁶ Lawmakers adopted a concurrent jurisdiction model after its successful use in the prosecution of human trafficking cases.¹⁷ In his remarks to the Senate Committee on the Judiciary, Representative Chuck Efstration (R-104th) emphasized the Office of the Attorney General's success in prosecuting human trafficking cases,

[Page 24]

highlighting their "impressive track record."¹⁸ Because of the model's prior success, HB 1134 passed through both chambers without any significant change.¹⁹

Opponents and Concerns

Despite HB 1134 breezing through the two chambers virtually unchanged, characterizing the legislature as devoid of opposition does not capture the atmosphere encapsulating the bill. For example, some legislators believed the primary motivation underlying the bill was grounded in the Republican political agenda.²⁰ Some of the bill's opponents suggested that, while the bill embodied some sincere desire to keep Georgia's communities safer, it also served a greater political purpose in furthering the "tough-on-crime" agenda characteristic of Governor Brian Kemp's (R) tenure and Republican ideals overall.²¹ Opponents suggest that Attorney General Carr being up for reelection in 2022 strengthened the push for legislation to increase prosecutions.²²

Representative Josh McLaurin (D-51st) shared concerns about the political agenda underlying the bill with Representative William Boddie (D-62nd).²³ Their primary reservation was that the bill is an attempt to mitigate Attorney General Carr's failures to show up for local DAs in cases where they lacked sufficient resources to prosecute effectively.²⁴ Prior to HB 1134's enactment, the Augusta Judicial Circuit was faced with a series of cases in which the local DA had conflicted out, resulting in the cases going unprosecuted.²⁵ Former

[Page 25]

Senator Jesse Stone (R-23rd), now a superior court judge in Augusta, wrote a letter to Attorney General Carr warning him that some gang cases would be thrown out if he did not appoint a prosecutor to handle them.²⁶ Representative McLaurin argued that the attorney general had existing statutory authority under Code section 15-18-5 to take on cases whose local prosecutors had conflicted out, yet Attorney General Carr failed to do so in the Augusta cases and in some others.²⁷

In light of the attorney general's failure to act upon the existing statutory authority, opponents believe HB 1134 is a redundant use of legislative resources.²⁸ Even so, its proposed benefits and support from fellow legislators sufficed to garner the requisite majority votes and push the bill through the Georgia General Assembly.²⁹

Bill Tracking of HB 1134

Consideration and Passage by the House

Representative Chuck Efstration (R-104th) sponsored HB 1134 in the House with Representative Josh Bonner (R-72nd), Representative Jodi Lott (R-122nd), Representative Lauren McDonald (R-26th), and Representative Steven Meeks (R-178th) cosponsoring.³⁰ The bill was placed in the House hopper on February 1, 2022, and the House first read it on February 2, 2022.³¹ That same day, the Speaker of the House assigned the bill to the House Judiciary Non-Civil Committee.³²

The House read the bill for a second time on February 3, 2022, and the Judiciary Non-Civil Committee discussed the bill in a meeting held on February 9, 2022.³³ In that meeting, Representative Josh McLaurin

[Page 26]

(D-51st) expressed his concern over the purpose of HB 1134 and argued that the bill would not have been introduced "if it weren't for . . . the need that the attorney general has right now to put into place new authority that looks like a solution to the Augusta problem when in reality . . . that authority was already there."³⁴

Despite concerns that the bill was political cover for the attorney general, the Committee favorably reported the...