WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

A 4674

Enacts the "criminal court opinion transparency act"

2025 Regular Session Introduced by Chris Burdick

Establishes the Criminal Court Opinion Transparency Act to publicly publish and make criminal court opinions searchable, with safeguards to redact sensitive information.

REPORTED REFERRED TO RULES
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · A 4674

Summary: Bill A 4674 – Criminal Court Opinion Transparency Act

Overview

  • Bill Number: A 4674
  • Title: Relates to enacting the "criminal court opinion transparency act"
  • Sponsor: Chris Burdick (primary)
  • Status: REFERRED TO JUDICIARY
  • Introduced: February 4, 2025
  • Related Bills: A 10394 (prior-session); S 3864 (companion; listed twice)

What the bill appears to do

  • The bill’s title indicates the creation of a new statute termed the “criminal court opinion transparency act,” intended to govern transparency around criminal court opinions. The specific text of provisions is not provided in the information available.

Key provisions (not specified in the provided content)

  • The exact requirements, duties, and mechanisms would be set forth in the enacted text. Typical elements in a transparency-focused bill (not confirmed for this measure) might include:
    • Requirements for public access to criminal court opinions (publication and/ or online posting)
    • Timelines for when opinions must be issued or made publicly available
    • Standards for redacting sensitive information (e.g., victims, minors, confidential data)
    • Format, indexing, and searchability standards for opinions
    • Procedures for exemptions or sealed materials
    • Cost and funding considerations for implementation
    • Roles and responsibilities of courts, clerks, and state oversight bodies
    • Compliance, enforcement, and potential penalties for noncompliance

Note: The exact provisions are not included in the provided bill summary.

Who is affected

  • Judicial system entities: trial and appellate courts, court clerks, and legal-record-keeping offices responsible for publishing opinions.
  • Public and stakeholders: attorneys, researchers, journalists, and members of the public seeking access to criminal court opinions.
  • Potential privacy considerations for individuals named or described in opinions (depends on enacted safeguards).

Procedural and timeline aspects

  • The bill has been referred to the Judiciary Committee. No further committee actions or floor votes are listed in the provided information.
  • The companion and related bills (A 10394, S 3864) suggest parallel or similar proposals in other sessions or chambers, which may influence final language and adoption if consensus emerges.

Relationship to related bills

  • A 10394 (prior-session): Indicates a previously introduced version related to the same subject.
  • S 3864 (companion): Indicates a companion measure in the Senate, signaling cross-chamber interest and potential coordination.

Potential impact and considerations (high-level)

  • Increased transparency of criminal court opinions could enhance public understanding and judicial accountability.
  • Could raise concerns about privacy and safety if sensitive information is not adequately redacted.
  • May require funding for publishing systems, redaction processes, and accessibility features.
  • The bill’s fate will depend on committee review, any amendments, and alignment with companion measures.

Next steps for readers

  • Monitor Judiciary Committee proceedings for hearings, amendments, and voting updates.
  • Review the text of attached companion bills (S 3864) and prior-session A 10394 for alignment and potential changes.
  • Consider an impact assessment on privacy, court operations, and public access once the bill’s full provisions are available.

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.