Why they voted this way
The speaker explains that detention officers were removed from a specific reference in the bill because they are already covered under assault statutes elsewhere, and therefore requests support for concurrence.
Peace officers-probation and parole agents.
In one sentence
Not clearly identified in the stored source.
No additional limitations are listed.
Official record
2008 General Session Summary for SF0005 Bill No.: SF0005 Drafter: JHR LSO No.: 08LSO-0034 Effective Date: 7/1/2008 Enrolled Act No.: SEA0041 Chapter No.: Prime Sponsor: Senator Fecht Catch Title: Peace officers-probation and parole agents. Subject: Expands the definition of "peace officer" to include probation and parole officers and supervisors for purposes of the criminal offense of interference with a peace officer. Summary/Major Elements: Under current law, probation and parole officers and supervisors are not considered peace officers for purposes of the criminal offense of interference with a peace officer (including disarming a peace officer). This bill provides a definition of "peace officer" to include persons who are employed on a full-time basis by the Department of Corrections as probation and parole officers or supervisors for purposes of the criminal offense of interference with a peace officer (including disarming a peace officer).
Public statements
Last checked Aug 8, 10:51 PM
Why they voted this way
The speaker explains that detention officers were removed from a specific reference in the bill because they are already covered under assault statutes elsewhere, and therefore requests support for concurrence.
S26
Why they voted this way
The lawmaker argues that detention officers were omitted from the bill's protections despite facing similar risks as peace officers. They state this amendment closes a legal loophole where attacking a detention officer is currently treated less severely than attacking other covered personnel.
Why they voted this way
The lawmaker supports the amendment because he believes it corrects an oversight by including people who are most likely to be placed in dangerous situations but were previously excluded.
S04
Why they voted this way
The lawmaker supports the bill because there is a specific situation in their district involving an asbestos-contaminated property that cannot be cleaned due to a lack of county authority.
If a lawmaker is not listed, we couldn't find a published reason.
Wyoming roll calls
6 roll calls
Official activity
Changes
2 stored
Adopted Standing Committee by H01
Adopted 3rd reading by BEBOUT