Concurrent and consecutive sentences
Under current law, a court may order any sentence to be served concurrent with
or consecutive to any other sentence imposed at the same time or previously. This
bill specifies how the person will serve the periods of confinement and the periods of
extended supervision and parole under the sentences under the following
circumstances: 1) when the court requires a sentence under which the person may
be placed on extended supervision (a "determinate sentence") to be served concurrent
with or consecutive to another determinate sentence; 2) when the court requires a
determinate sentence to be served concurrent with or consecutive to an
indeterminate sentence; or 3) when the court requires an indeterminate sentence to
be served concurrent with or consecutive to a determinate sentence. The bill also
requires that a person sentenced to consecutive indeterminate and determinate
sentences serve the term of extended supervision under the determinate sentence
before serving the period of parole under the indeterminate sentence, regardless of
the order in which the crimes were committed or the sentences imposed.
Penalties for criminal attempts
Current law specifies that the maximum penalty for an attempt to commit a
felony (other than certain felonies having separate penalties for attempts) is
one-half of the maximum penalty for the completed crime. This bill specifies that
the maximum term of confinement under a bifurcated sentence imposed for an
attempt to commit a classified felony is one-half of the maximum term of
confinement for the completed crime. The bill also specifies that the maximum term
of confinement under a bifurcated sentence imposed for an attempt to commit an
unclassified felony is 75% of the maximum length of the bifurcated sentence for the
attempt.
Other sentencing changes
This bill specifies that, if a court, through the application of one or more
sentence enhancers, decides to sentence a misdemeanant to prison, the court must
impose a bifurcated sentence. In such a case, the term of confinement in prison may
not constitute more than 75% of the bifurcated sentence.
Under current law, the maximum term of probation for a misdemeanor is two
years, and the maximum term of probation for a felony is the maximum sentence
length for the crime or three years, whichever is greater. Under this bill, the
maximum term of probation for a felony or for a misdemeanor for which a court may
impose a bifurcated sentence is the maximum term of confinement in prison for the
crime or three years, whichever is greater.
Under current law, if a person is found not guilty of a crime by reason of mental
disease or mental defect and the crime is not punishable by life imprisonment, the
person may be committed to DHFS for a maximum term of two-thirds of the
maximum sentence length for the crime. Under this bill, the maximum term of
commitment for a felony other than one punishable by life imprisonment or for a
misdemeanor for which a court may impose a bifurcated sentence is the maximum
term of confinement that could be imposed on a person convicted of the crime.
Other criminal law
Crimes related to computers
Under current law no person may willfully, knowingly, and without
authorization modify, destroy, copy, take possession of, or access computer data,
computer programs, or supporting documentation of a computer system. This bill
increases the penalties for violations of these prohibitions that occur under specified
circumstances.
This bill also prohibits intentionally interrupting computer service by sending
to a computer, computer program, computer system, or computer network a message
that is too complex, or multiple messages that are too voluminous, for the computer,
computer program, computer system, or computer network to process. Penalties for
violating this prohibition are the same as those applicable to the computer crime
described above.
In addition, the bill authorizes courts to enhance the penalties for violations of
either of the prohibitions described above if the person committing the violation
accesses another person's computer to commit the violation with the intent to make
it less likely that the offender will be identified with the crime.
Crimes related to images depicting nudity
Current law prohibits producing, possessing, or distributing a photograph,
motion picture, videotape, or other visual representation or reproduction that
depicts nudity if the person depicted nude did not consent to the representation or
reproduction and if the person who makes, possesses, or distributes the
representation or reproduction knows or should know that the person depicted nude
did not consent to the nude depiction. The Wisconsin supreme court has found this
prohibition unconstitutional because it prohibits all depictions of nudity made
without consent, including artistic, political, or newsworthy depictions that are
protected by the First Amendment. State v. Stevenson, 236 Wis. 2d 86 (2000).
This bill narrows the scope of the prohibition against making an original
representation that depicts nudity by requiring that, at the time the representation
is made, the subject of the depiction be both nude and in a place and circumstance
in which he or she can reasonably expect privacy. Reproducing such an original
without the subject's consent is also prohibited if the reproducer knows or should
know that the original was unlawfully made. The bill treats the prohibitions against
possessing and distributing representations depicting nudity similarly to the
prohibition against making reproductions.
Crimes relating to providing and describing harmful material to children
Current law prohibits providing and describing harmful material to a child and
possessing harmful material with intent to transfer the harmful material to a child.
Harmful material includes nudity, sexually explicit images, and images of torture
and brutality. Current law does not require that the state prove that the defendant
knows or should know that the recipient of the materials is a child. The law, however,
establishes an affirmative defense under which the defendant may avoid criminal
liability by proving that he or she reasonably believed that the recipient was 18 years
of age or older. The Wisconsin supreme court has ruled that prohibiting exposure of
a child to harmful materials is unconstitutional in cases in which the defendant does
not have face-to-face contact with the recipient. State v. Weidner, 235 Wis. 2d 306
(2000). The supreme court based its decision on the chilling effect that the
prohibition would have on communication protected by the First Amendment.
This bill makes knowledge of the recipient's status as a child an element of the
crime if the defendant does not have a face-to-face contact with the child. The bill
does not add the knowledge-of-age element for cases in which the defendant has
face-to-face contact with the recipient, maintaining for those cases the affirmative
defense requiring the defendant to prove that he or she reasonably believed that the
recipient was at least 18 years of age.
Computer images and current law crimes
Several criminal laws prohibit activities related to images of nudity, or images
and sounds of obscenity or of children engaged in sexually explicit conduct. Those
crimes are: 1) making, possessing, reproducing or distributing images of nudity; 2)
importing, printing, selling, transferring, exhibiting, or possessing for publication,
sale, exhibition, or transfer, obscene material; 3) photographing, filming,
videotaping, or making a sound recording of a child engaged in sexually explicit
conduct, or enticing a child to go into a secluded place to take a picture or make a
sound recording of the child engaged in sexually explicit conduct; 4) exposing a child
to harmful images and sounds; and 5) producing, performing in, profiting from,
importing, possessing, and other activities related to child pornography. These
prohibitions do not specifically apply to stored data version of images or sounds. In
addition, these prohibitions do not uniformly cover digital or magnetic tape
recordings. This bill expands the prohibitions related to images of nudity, and
images or sounds of obscenity or of children engaged in sexually explicit conduct, to
include images and sounds recorded in any manner as well as the data that
represents an image or a sound.
Obscene e-mail
This bill makes it a crime to send an unsolicited e-mail message that contains
obscenity or depicts sexually explicit conduct, if the person sending the e-mail
message does not label the e-mail message as "Adult advertisement" in the subject
line.
Statute of limitations for sexual assault
Under current law, the state must prosecute first and second degree sexual
assault within six years of the date of the crime. The state must prosecute first and
second degree sexual assault of a child, as well as repeated sexual assault of the same
child, before the victim reaches the age of 31.
This bill creates an exception to the time limits for prosecuting the crimes of
sexual assault, sexual assault of a child, and repeated sexual assault of the same
child in certain circumstances if the state has deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) evidence
related to the crime. If the state collects DNA evidence related to the crime before
the time for prosecution expires and does not link the DNA evidence to an identified
person until after that time expires, the state may initiate prosecution for the crime
within one year of making the match.
Club drugs
Current law places restrictions on manufacturing, distributing, delivering, or
possessing with intent to manufacture, distribute, or deliver, many drugs. With
certain limited exceptions, this bill prohibits manufacturing, distributing,
delivering, or possessing with intent to manufacture, distribute, or deliver,
4-methylthioamphetamine (4-MTA or flatliner) or counterfeit versions of 4-MTA.
The bill assigns the same penalties for violating this prohibition as are currently
assigned to crimes involving phencyclidine (PCP).
The bill also increases the penalties for unlawfully manufacturing,
distributing, delivering, and possessing with intent to manufacture, distribute, or
deliver, gamma-hydroxybutyric acid (GHB), gamma-butyrolactone (GBL), 3,
4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine (MDMA or ecstasy), 4-bromo-2,
5-dimethoxy-beta-phenylethylamine (2-CB or nexus), ketamine, and
flunitrazepam to the penalty levels for PCP. In addition, the bill increases the
penalties for unlawfully manufacturing, distributing, delivering, and possessing
with intent to manufacture, distribute, or deliver, counterfeit versions of PCP,
lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD), methamphetamine, GHB, GBL, ecstasy, nexus,
ketamine, and flunitrazepam to the same level as violations involving the genuine
drugs.
Theft of rented or leased motor vehicle
Under current law, a theft occurs when a person intentionally fails to return
rented or leased personal property within ten days after the written rental
agreement or lease agreement ends. This bill provides that with respect to a rented
or leased motor vehicle a theft occurs when a person intentionally fails to return the
rented or leased property at any time after the written rental agreement or lease
agreement ends.
Education
Primary and secondary education
This bill requires DPI to designate a school district as a school district with
expanded flexibility if its pupils' scores on the fourth, eighth, and tenth grade
assessments, the third grade reading test, and the high school graduation
examination equaled or exceeded the statewide average scores; its high school
graduation rate at least equaled the statewide average high school graduation rate;
and its attendance rate at least equaled the statewide average attendance rate.
A school district with expanded flexibility is free from many of the
requirements that apply to regular school districts, may create school governance
councils to advise principals, and may reassign staff members without regard to
seniority. Such a reassignment is a prohibited subject of collective bargaining. In
return, a school district with expanded flexibility must, among other things, allocate
85% of all school district revenues for use by principals at their respective schools;
ensure that at least 95% of the school district's pupils who are eligible takes the
fourth, eighth, and tenth grade assessments and the high school graduation
examination; and ensure that each school in the school district prepares an annual
plan that includes performance goals for all pupils, for minority group pupils, for
low-income pupils, and for teachers.
Finally, DPI must award grants on a competitive basis to school districts with
expanded flexibility to help implement school district decentralization plans and to
train principals to be effective administrators in decentralized school districts.
Under current law, school boards may enter into contracts with individuals,
groups, businesses, or governmental bodies to establish charter schools, which
operate with fewer constraints than traditional public schools. Current law also
permits the UW-Milwaukee, the Milwaukee Area Technical College, and the city of
Milwaukee to operate charter schools (Milwaukee charter schools) directly or to
contract for the operation of charter schools. These Milwaukee charter schools must
be located within the Milwaukee Public Schools (MPS) district and only pupils who
reside in the MPS district may attend the charter schools. The operators of the
Milwaukee charter schools receive aid for the regular school term based on the
number of pupils attending the charter schools, as opposed to school districts, which
are entitled to receive state aid for both the regular school term and for summer
school. Employees of the Milwaukee charter schools may not be employed by MPS
and are thus not eligible to participate in the state's retirement system.
This bill allows any four-year UW-System institution, state technical college,
or cooperative educational service agency (CESA) (an agency that facilitates the
provision of services to school districts) to operate charter schools (new charter
schools) directly or to contract for their operation. The bill allows the new charter
schools and the Milwaukee charter schools to be located in any school district in the
state. Only pupils who reside in a school district in which a new charter school is
located may attend the new charter school, unless the charter school is established
or operated by a CESA, in which case pupils who reside in a school district served by
the CESA may attend the charter school. Operators of the new charter schools
receive the same amount of state aid per pupil as do the operators of the Milwaukee
charter schools for both the regular school term and for summer school. Employees
of the new charter schools may not be employed by any school district and are thus
not eligible to participate in the state's retirement system.
This bill directs DPI to make loans to school districts to support the
development of charter schools. The funds may be used for costs associated with the
start-up of a charter school established by a school district.
Current law requires each school board and each Milwaukee charter school to
administer standardized examinations to fourth, eighth, and tenth grade pupils
enrolled in the school district, including pupils enrolled in charter schools (other
than Milwaukee charter schools) located in the school district. Beginning in the
2002-03 school year, each school board must also administer a high school
graduation examination that is designed to measure whether pupils have met the
academic standards adopted by the school board. A school board may either adopt
the examinations developed by DPI or develop its own examinations. Identical
provisions exist under current law for Milwaukee charter schools. DPI provides the
examinations that are adopted, approved, or developed by DPI, and scores those
examinations, free of charge.
Under current law, each school board must administer to all pupils enrolled in
the school district in the third grade, including pupils enrolled in charter schools
(other then Milwaukee charter schools) located in the school district, a standardized
reading test developed by DPI. The Milwaukee charter schools are required to
administer this test to their third grade pupils.
Under current law, the third grade reading test, the fourth, eighth, and tenth
grade examinations, and the high school graduation examination are not required
to be administered to pupils participating in the Milwaukee Parental Choice
Program (MPCP), under which certain low-income pupils who reside in the city of
Milwaukee may attend participating private schools in Milwaukee at state expense.
Beginning in the 2002-03 school year, this bill allows a private school participating
in the MPCP to choose to administer the grade examinations (the third grade reading
test and the fourth, eighth, and tenth grade examinations) or the high school
graduation examination, or both, to the pupils attending the private school under the
MPCP. The bill requires that DPI provide all of the examinations administered to
MPCP pupils, and score the examinations, free of charge. The bill also generally
prohibits DPI from disclosing the results of the examinations administered to MPCP
pupils.
Under current law, beginning on July 1, 2002, each pupil must be given at least
two opportunities to take the fourth and eighth grade examinations. This bill
eliminates the requirement that each pupil be given two opportunities to take each
examination; the bill requires only that the examinations be administered to all
pupils in the appropriate grades.
Current law directs DPI to make available upon request, within 90 days after
the date of administration, any of the required pupil assessments. This bill requires
the person to submit the request in writing and provides that the person may view
the examination but not receive a copy. The bill also directs DPI to promulgate rules
that, to the extent feasible, protect the security and confidentiality of the
examinations.
Currently, DPI annually must identify those school districts that are low in
performance and those schools in which there are pupils who do not meet the state
minimum performance standards. This bill requires DPI to publish and report a list
of the school districts and schools to the governor and the legislature. The bill also
requires the identified school districts to develop improvement plans.
Under current law, a school board may enter into a five-year, achievement
guarantee (SAGE) contract with DPI. In exchange for reducing class size and
meeting certain performance criteria designed to improve academic achievement in
grades kindergarten to three, a school board receives $2,000 for each low-income
pupil enrolled in a school participating in the SAGE program.
This bill allows DPI to renew a SAGE contract for one or more terms of five
years. The bill also provides that a school board that entered into a SAGE contract
in the 2000-01 school year on behalf of a school with a low-income enrollment of less
than 50% is required to maintain the reduced class size in kindergarten and first
grade, as opposed to reducing class size in grades kindergarten to three.
Under current law, DPI must arrange for an annual evaluation of the SAGE
program. This bill requires DPI to select the evaluator of the SAGE program by using
a competitive process that ensures impartiality.
This bill creates a five-member board on education evaluation and
accountability (BEEA) attached to DOA and headed by an executive director. On
July 1, 2002, the bill transfers the pupil assessment program, the school performance
report program, and the responsibility for arranging an evaluation of the SAGE
program from DPI to BEEA. The bill also authorizes BEEA to conduct a study of the
MPCP if BEEA receives sufficient funds from private sources.
Currently, a private school must notify DPI of the school's intent to participate
in the MPCP by May 1 of the previous school year. This bill changes the date to
February 1. The bill also directs DPI to notify the private school by March 1 whether
the private school is eligible to participate in the MPCP. If DPI determines that the
school is ineligible, the notice must include an explanation. The bill allows a private
school 14 days to appeal a negative determination to DPI and requires DPI to decide
the appeal within seven days.
Under current law, a pupil is eligible to participate in the MPCP if he or she is
a member of a family that has a total family income that does not exceed 175% of the
federal poverty level. This bill raises that threshold to 185% and provides that a
pupil who participates in the MPCP may continue to participate in subsequent years
even if the pupil's family income rises above the threshold.
Under current law, only private schools located in the city of Milwaukee may
participate in the MPCP. This bill provides that a private school located outside the
city that is situated on property any portion of which is located in the city may also
participate in the MPCP.
Under current law, a person must hold a license to teach granted by DPI in order
to teach in a public school in this state. In general, licensure requires completion of
a professional education program approved by DPI, including completion of a certain
number of credits in specified subjects, student teaching, a criminal background
investigation, and payment of a fee.
This bill directs DPI, upon the request of a school board, to grant a temporary
initial teaching license to any person who satisfies all of the requirements for an
initial license other than the educational requirements if the school board making
the request intends to employ the person as a teacher and the school board
determines that the person has a bachelor's degree, or at least five years of practical
experience, in a field that is related to the subject that he or she will be teaching, or
served at least five years in the U.S. armed forces and has practical or teaching
experience in a field related to the subject he or she will be teaching. The temporary
license is valid for two years and may not be renewed unless the licensee completes
an alternative teacher training program during the two-year period, in which case
DPI must grant a five-year, renewable, initial teaching license to the person that is
considered retroactively effective to the date that the temporary license was granted.
Recent administrative rules promulgated by DPI establish three levels of
teacher licensure: initial educator, professional educator, and master educator. This
bill directs DPI to grant an initial license to teach to any person who holds a valid
license as a teacher issued by another state and also directs DPI to grant the highest
level of license (currently, the master educator license) to any person who holds a
valid license as a teacher issued by another state and is certified by the National
Board for Professional Teaching Standards.
Under current law, DPI awards grants to Wisconsin residents who are licensed
by DPI and employed as teachers in Wisconsin and who are certified by the National
Board for Professional Teaching Standards. This bill eliminates the grant program's
residency requirement.
With certain exceptions, current law requires that bilingual-bicultural
education programs be taught by bilingual teachers. This bill eliminates this
requirement for programs in grades kindergarten to eight.
Current law requires DPI to revoke, without a hearing, a license granted by DPI
if the licensee is convicted of any of a number of specified crimes. In addition, DPI
may revoke a license, with a hearing, if the licensee is incompetent or behaves
immorally. This bill requires DPI to revoke a license, without a hearing, if the
licensee is convicted of a crime in another state or another country that is
substantially similar to one of the specified crimes and allows DPI to impose
conditions or restrictions on a license or suspend a license, with a hearing, if the
licensee is incompetent or behaves immorally.
Current law prohibits DPI from granting a license to a person convicted of a
number of specified crimes or of crime in another country or state that is equivalent
to one of the specified crimes. This bill prohibits DPI from granting a license to a
person convicted of a number of specified crimes or of a crime in another state or
country that is substantially similar to one of the specified crimes.
Under the common law, a court may deny public inspection of a record created
or maintained by a public entity if the custodian of the record demonstrates that the
public interest in nondisclosure of the information contained in the record outweighs
the strong public interest in disclosure. This bill requires an educational agency (in
general, a school district or a CESA) to release to DPI all records relating to an
employee or former employee of the educational agency who is licensed by DPI if DPI
has commenced an investigation to determine whether to initiate license limitation,
suspension, or revocation proceedings. The bill also requires DPI to keep this
released information confidential.
Current law generally prohibits the disclosure of the results of criminal
background investigations conducted by DOJ or the federal bureau of investigation
for DPI. This bill requires DPI to disclose the results of criminal background
investigations to an educational agency if the subject of the criminal background
investigation is employed by or applying for employment with the educational
agency and if the educational agency requests the information and the employee or
applicant consents. The bill also requires the educational agency to keep this
released information confidential.
Under current law, school districts, CESAs, counties, and operators of
Milwaukee charter schools are eligible to receive aid to reimburse them for certain
costs of providing special education, such as the cost of salaries of special education
teachers and the cost of transporting special education pupils to school. When
distributing special education aid, DPI must first distribute aid for the full cost of
special education for children in hospitals and convalescent homes for orthopedically
disabled children. If the remaining sum of money appropriated to reimburse other
special education costs is insufficient, DPI must prorate the remaining aid, leaving
some eligible entities with unreimbursed special education costs.
This bill provides that a portion of the aid paid to school districts and the
Milwaukee charter schools for special education is based on the number of pupils
enrolled in the school district or charter school, and a portion is based upon the
number of pupils enrolled in the school district or charter school who are eligible for
a free or reduced-price lunch under federal law.
The bill also provides supplemental special education aid to school districts,
CESAs, counties, and Milwaukee charter school operators if their special education
costs per pupil equals or exceeds $50,000. The amount of this supplemental aid for
a "high-cost" special education pupil equals 50% of the difference between $50,000
and the unreimbursed special education costs. In addition, DPI must first distribute
the supplemental aid, along with the aid for children in hospitals and convalescent
homes, before distributing aid for other special education services.
