Bills › 89th General Assembly
Relating to remote testimony in civil and criminal court proceedings
Sponsored by the Senate Judiciary Committee
Where it is now
- Done: IntroducedJanuary 25, 2022
- Done: SubcommitteeJanuary 25, 2022
- Done: Senate committeeFebruary 8, 2022
- Stopped: Passes the SenateDied when the General Assembly ended
- Next: House committee
- Next: Passes the House
- Next: To the Governor
- Next: Signed into law
Died when the session ended The 2022 session adjourned on May 24, 2022, the General Assembly’s last regular session. Bills that didn’t pass both chambers died. What’s a funnel?
What’s in it
AI summary People involved in certain civil and criminal court cases could give their testimony through video or phone instead of appearing in person. Judges must allow remote testimony in cases that aren't being fought by both sides if the right technology is available. In cases where both sides are arguing, the judge can allow remote testimony only if everyone agrees and the technology works.1
Read the official explanation
This bill authorizes the use of remote testimony in civil trials, noncontested criminal proceedings, and contested criminal proceedings in certain circumstances. Under current law, all testimony needs to be taken in open court, except for depositions.2d 740 (Iowa 2001). The bill is also, in part, a response to the supreme court of Iowa’s decision in State v.2d 495 (Iowa 2014), where the court held that remote testimony of a witness in a criminal proceeding would violate the Sixth Amendment’s confrontation clause. The bill provides that oral evidence taken in open court includes remote testimony of a witness. The bill establishes that remote testimony requests in noncontested civil and criminal court proceedings shall be granted by the court if appropriate technology is available. In contested civil and criminal proceedings, the court may grant the request for remote testimony if the appropriate technology is available and all parties consent.
Senate subcommittee
Named January 25, 2022 (as SSB 3061). On February 4, 2022 it recommended amendment and passage.
Three legislators hear a bill first and recommend what the committee should do; it’s the best time to weigh in. How to take part
Fiscal note
AI summary This bill allows certain civil and criminal court proceedings to be held remotely through video or telephone if all parties request it and technology is available. The Office of the Attorney General is estimated to save approximately $15,000 per fiscal year. The Office of the State Public Defender could save between $88,000 and $264,000 annually from the State General Fund depending on how many noncontested proceedings are held remotely. The fiscal impact on the Judicial Branch and counties cannot be estimated at this time.3
Read the fiscal note
Description
Senate File 2246 provides that in noncontested civil and criminal court proceedings, if all parties and the parties’ attorneys request that the proceedings be held by videoconference, telephone, or other remote means of communication, the court shall grant the request if appropriate technology is available.
Senate File 2246 provides that in contested civil and criminal court proceedings, if all parties and the parties’ attorneys request that the proceedings be held by videoconference, telephone, or other remote means of communication, the court may grant the request if appropriate technology is available.
The Bill also provides that oral evidence taken in open court includes remote testimony of a witness.
Background
Currently, Iowa Code section 624.1 provides that all issues of fact in ordinary actions shall be tried upon oral evidence taken in open court, except that depositions may be used as provided by law.
During the COVID-19 pandemic, the Judicial Branch temporarily allowed certain judicial proceedings to be conducted by videoconference or telephone.
Assumptions
- The Office of the State Public Defender and the Office of the Attorney General pay mileage expenses for their attorneys to travel to judicial proceedings.
- Approximately 40.0% of proceedings for adult criminal and juvenile cases will be deemed noncontested. Many of these proceedings will be held remotely under this Bill.
- Judicial proceedings held remotely will incur no mileage expenses to Office of the State Public Defender attorneys and contract attorneys and Office of the Attorney General attorneys.
- Due to the COVID-19 pandemic’s impact on the scheduling of judicial proceedings, future mileage expenditures for Office of the State Public Defender attorneys and contract attorneys would more closely resemble FY 2019 mileage expenditures than those of more recent fiscal years.
- In FY 2019, $794,000 was expended from the Indigent Defense Fund on mileage reimbursement for adult criminal and juvenile proceedings. In FY 2019, $86,000 was expended from the Office of the State Public Defender operating budget for adult criminal and juvenile proceedings.
- The Office of the Attorney General estimates cost savings of approximately $15,000 per fiscal year.
- Contested judicial proceedings may be conducted remotely, but it cannot be estimated how often this will occur.
Fiscal Impact
Many noncontested judicial proceedings will be conducted remotely under SF 2246. Table 1 below shows estimated annual cost savings to the Office of the State Public Defender if 25.0%, 50.0%, or 75.0% of the noncontested judicial proceedings that it is a party to are conducted remotely. This cost savings is composed of savings to the Office of the State Public Defender operating budget and the Indigent Defense Fund. Both are funded through the State General Fund.
Table 1 — Estimated Annual Savings to the Office of the State Public Defender Senate File 2246 is also estimated to have an annual cost savings of approximately $15,000 to the Office of the Attorney General. This cost savings is primarily to the Area Prosecutions Division, which is funded through the Consumer Education and Litigation Fund. Senate File 2246 may also result in beneficial reductions in the need for continuances and enhanced operational efficiency for the Judicial Branch, but the fiscal impact cannot be quantified at this time. Additionally, counties may experience cost savings from reduced transport of defendants to court proceedings by sheriffs, but the extent of these savings cannot be estimated due to a lack of data.Mileage Expenses
Per Year
Percent of
Proceedings Deemed
Noncontested
Percent of
Noncontested Proceedings
Held Remotely
Cost Savings
Per Year
State Public Defender
Operating Budget 86,000$ 40.0% 25.0% 8,600$ Indigent Defense Fund 794,000$ 40.0% 25.0% 79,400$ Total 880,000$ 88,000$
State Public Defender
Operating Budget 86,000$ 40.0% 50.0% 17,200$ Indigent Defense Fund 794,000$ 40.0% 50.0% 158,800$ Total 880,000$ 176,000$
State Public Defender
Operating Budget 86,000$ 40.0% 75.0% 25,800$ Indigent Defense Fund 794,000$ 40.0% 75.0% 238,200$ Total 880,000$ 264,000$ If 25.0% of Noncontested Proceedings Are Conducted Remotely If 50.0% of Noncontested Proceedings are Conducted Remotely If 75.0% of Noncontested Proceedings are Conducted Remotely
Sources
- Judicial Branch
- Office of the State Public Defender
- Office of the Attorney General
- Iowa State Association of Counties
- Iowa State Sheriffs & Deputies Association
- Legislative Services Agency
- Remote Testimony · February 21, 2022
Family tree
89th General Assembly