Hayden v. Pataki Joint Appendix

    04-3886-PR
To be argued by

______________________________________________________________ Janai S. Nelson, Esq.

United States Court of Appeals
for the

Second Circuit

JOSEPH HAYDEN; LUMUMBA AKINW OLE-BANDELE; W ILSO N  ANDINO; GINA 
ARIAS; WANDA BEST-DEVEAUZ; CARLOS BRISTOL; A U G U STIN E CARM ONA; 
DAVID GALARZA; KIMALEE GARNER; M ARK GRAHAM ; R ER A N  HOLM ES, III; 

CHAUJUANTHEYIA LOCHARD; STEVEN M ANGUAL; JAM EL MASSEY; 
STEPHEN RAMON; LILLIAN M. RIVERA; NILDA RIVERA; M ARIO ROMERO; 
JESSICA SANCLEMENTE; PAUL SATTERFIELD; and BA RBA RA  SCOTT, on 

behalf o f themselves and all individuals sim ilarly situated,

-  against -
Plaintiffs-Appellants,

GEORGE PATAKI, Governor o f  the State o f New York, and CAROL BERMAN, 
Chairperson, New York State Board o f  Elections,

Defendant-Appellees.

ON APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

JOINT APPENDIX

NAACP LEGAL DEFENSE AND EDUCATIONAL 
FUND, INC.

Theodore M. Shaw 
Director-Counsel 

Norman J. Chachkin 
Janai S. Nelson 
Ryan Paul Haygood

[Listing of Counsel Continued Inside Cover]

COMMUNITY SERVICE SOCIETY 
OF NEW YORK 
Juan Cartagena 
Risa Kaufman 
105 E. 22nd Street 
New York, NY 10010 
(212) 260-6218



JOINT APPENDIX

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Item Bates No.

DOCKET SHEET................................................................................. ............... ............................ JA 00001

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER OF JUDGE LAWRENCE M. MCKENNA................... JA 00012

AFFIRMATION OF RYAN PAUL HAYGOOD...................................................................... JA 00031

Exhibit A -  Complaint, Underwood v. Hunter, No. CA-78-Mo704S (N.D. Ala., filed June 21,

1978).............................. ................ ............................................... ......................JA 00033

AFFIRMATION OF JOEL GRABER.......................................................................................... JA 00037

Exhibit A -  Governor’s Bill Jacket, N.Y. Laws of 1971, c. 310...................................................... JA 00039

Exhibit B -  Governor’s Bill Jacket, N.Y. Laws of 1973, c. 679...................................................... JA 00053

Exhibit C -  Amended Complaint in this action, dated January 15, 2003....   JA 00098

Exhibit D -  Answer on behalf of defendant the Governor, dated April 14, 2003........................... JA 00118

Exhibit E -  Answer on behalf of defendant Commissioner Carol Berman,

Chairperson of the New York State Board of Elections, dated April 8, 2003 ...JA 00123



CASREF, CLOSED, APPEAL

U.S. District Court
Southern District of New York (Foiev Square)

CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: l:00-cv-08586-LMM-HBP

* "A
Hayden, et al v. Pataki, et ai 
Assigned to: Judge Lawrence M. McKenna 
Referred to: Magistrate Judge Henry B. Pitman 
Demand: SO 
Lead Docket: None 
Related Cases: None 
Case in other court: None 
Cause: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

Plaintiff
— *

Joseph Hayden, on behalf o f himself represented by Joseph Hayden
and all individuals similarly situated PRO SE

Janai Nelson
NAACP Legal Defense & Educ. Fund 
99 Hudson St.
New York, NY 10013 
(212) 965-2200 
LEAD ATTORNEY 
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Joseph A. Hayden, Jr.
Federal Correctional Institution 
P.O.Box 1000 
#05694-158 
Otisville, NY 10963 
LEAD ATTORNEY

Lumumba Akinwole-Bandelle represented by Janai Nelson
NAACP Legal Defense & Educ. Fund 
99 Hudson St.
New York, NY 10013 
(212) 965-2200 
LEAD ATTORNEY 
A TTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Wilson Andino represented by Janai Nelson
(See above for address)
LEAD ATTORNEY 
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Gina Arias represented by Janai Nelson

Date Filed: 11/09/00
Jury Demand: None
Nature of Suit: 555 Prisoner: Prison
Condiction
Jurisdiction: Federal Question

JA 00001



(See above for address)
LEAD ATTORNEY 
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Gina Arias 

Wanda Best-Deveaux

Carlos Bristol

Augustine Carmona

David Galarza

Kimaiee Garner

Kimalee Garner 

Mark Graham

Keran Holmes, III

Chaujuanihevia Lochard

Steven Mangual

Steven Mangua!

represented by Janai Nelson
(See above for address)
LEAD ATTORNEY 
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

represented by Janai Nelson
(See above for address)
LEAD ATTORNEY 
A TTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

represented by Janai Nelson
(See above for address)
LEAD ATTORNEY 
A TTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

represented by Janai Nelson
(See above for address)
LEAD ATTORNEY 
A TTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

represented by Janai Nelson
(See above for address)
LEAD ATTORNEY 
A TTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

represented by Janai Nelson
(See above for address)
LEAD ATTORNEY 
A TTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

represented by Janai Nelson
(See above for address)
LEAD ATTORNEY 
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

represented by Janai Nelson
(See above for address)
LEAD ATTORNEY 
A TTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

represented by Janai Nelson
(See above for address)
LEAD ATTORNEY 
A TTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

■epresented by Janai Nelson

JA 00002



(See above for address)
LEAD ATTORNEY 
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Jamel Massey represented by Janai Nelson
(See above for address)

' LEAD ATTORNEY
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED''N

Stephen Ramon represented by Janai Nelson
(See above for address)
LEAD ATTORNEY 
A TTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Stephen Ramon

Nilda Rivera represented by Janai Nelson
(See above for address)
LEAD ATTORNEY 
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Mario Romero represented by Janai Nelson
(See above for address)
LEAD ATTORNEY 
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Jessica Sanclemente represented by Janai Nelson
(See above for address)
LEAD ATTORNEY 
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Paul Satterfield represented by Janai Nelson
(See above for address)
LEAD ATTORNEY 
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Barbara Scott represented by Janai Nelson
(See above for address)
LEAD ATTORNEY 
A TTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

V

Defendant

George Pataki, Governor of the State 
o f New York

represented by Joel Graber
Dennis C. Vacco
Attorney General for the State of NY 
120 Broadway. Room 24-30 
New York. NY' 10271 
(212)416-8645
Email: joel.graber@oag.state.ny.us

JA 00003

mailto:joel.graber@oag.state.ny.us


Carol Berman, Chairperson, New 
York Board of Elections

LEAD ATTORNEY

Glena S. Coord, Commissioner of 
New York State Department of «,' 
Correctional Services

represented by Joel Graber
(See above for address}
LEAD ATTORNEY

Patricia L. M urray
N.Y. State Board of Elections 
Special Deputy Counsel 
40 Steuben Street 
Albany, NY 12207-2109 
LEAD ATTORNEY

Patricia L. M urray
New York State Board of Elections
40 Steuben Street
Albany, NY 12207-2108
(518) 474-6367

represented by Joel Graber
(See above for address)
LEAD ATTORNEY

Movant

Lillian M. Rivera

Filing Date # Docket Text

| 11/09/2000
| 1 Order endorsed on declaration in support o f request to proceed in forma 

pauperis; I.F.P. request is granted. ( signed by Chief Judge Michael B. 
Mukasey ) (bm) (Entered: 11/21/2000)

t
11/09/2000 2 COMPLAINT filed. Summons issued and Notice pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 

636(c). . (bm) (Entered: 11/21/2000)

11/09/2000
1

Magistrate Judge Henry B. Pitman is so Designated, (bm) (Entered:
11/21/2000)

.................. ..... .....
i
! 12/13/2000 1 J

.

U.S. MARSHAL'S PROCESS RECEIPT AND RETURN OF SERVICE 
EXECUTED o f Summons & Complaint as to George Pataki by Richard 
Platkin on 12/7/00 . Answer due on 12/27/00 for George Pataki . (jp) 
(Entered: 12/14/2000)

j 12/13/2000

i

4 . U.S. MARSHAL'S PROCESS RECEIPT AND RETURN OF SERVICE 
! EXECUTED of Summons & Complaint as to Glenn S. Goord by 
j William Gonzalez on 12/9/00 . Answer due on 12/29/00 for Glenn S.

JA 00004



| Goord . (jp) (Entered: 12/14/2000)

1 12/29/2000 ! 5 j ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF SERVICE as to Carol Berman bv mail on

|
l 12/21/00. Answer due on 1/10/01 for Carol Berman, (kw) (Entered:
j 01/02/2001) ]t j

j 01/03/2001 7 NOTICE of change o f address by Joseph Hayden . (pi) (Entered:
D 1/08/2001) " ' |i

I 01/05/2001 6
1
j

ANSWER to Complaint by Carol Berman (Attorney Patricia L. Murray 1 
from the New York State Board of Elections), (sn) (Entered: i 
01/08/2001) |

01/25/2001 8
{

Memo-Endorsement on letter addressed to Judge McKenna from Joel 
Graber, dated 1/17/01. Reset answer due for 2/28/01 for Carol Berman, 
and for George Pataki. ( signed by Judge Lawrence M. McKenna );
Copies mailed, (kw) (Entered: 01/26/2001)

1

02/08/2001 9
f

APPLICATION by Joseph Hayden for the Court to request counsel . (If) 
(Entered: 02/09/2001)

02/13/2001
■!

10 AFFIDAVIT of due diligence, filed by Carlos Caballero, (jp) (Entered: 
02/14/2001)

02/28/2001 11 ANSWER to Complaint by George Pataki, Carol Berman, Glenn S. 
Goord (Attorney Joel Graber from the Firm: Attorney-General NYS) 
(cd) (Entered: 03/01/2001)

10/24/2001

:

12 NOTICE of address change filed by Joseph Hayden . (yv) (Entered: 
10/24/2001)

02/25/2002 Notice of change of address filed by Joseph Hayden new location: 201 
Ravine Ave, #66 Yonkers, NY 10701. (bai) (Entered: 02/27/2002)

01/15/2003
!

13 NOTICE OF MOTION by Joseph Hayden for leave to file Amended 
Complaint; Return Date not indicated (cd) (Entered: 01/17/2003)

01/15/2003 14 MEMORANDUM OF LAW by Joseph Hayden in support of [13-1] 
motion for leave to file Amended Complaint. (cd) (Entered: 
01/17/2003)

02/24/2003!!
15 Memo endorsed on courtesy copy of motion; granting [13-1] motion for 

leave to file Amended Complaint. No opposition having been received. ( 
signed by Judge Lawrence M. McKenna ): (kw) (Entered: 02/25/2003)

03/18/2003 16 AMENDED COMPLAINT by Joseph Hayden, George Pataki, 
Lumumba Akinwole-Bandelle, Wilson Andino, Gina Arias, Gina Anas, 
Wanda Best-Deveaux, Carlos Bristol, Augustine Carmona, David

of T 1 JA 00005



j Galarza, Kimalee Gamer, Kimalee Gamer. Mark Graham. Keran 
! Holmes HI, Chaujuantheyia Lochard, Steven Mangual, Steven Mangual 
| Jamel Massey, Stephen Ramon, Stephen Ramon. Nilda Rivera, Mario

Romero, Jessica Sanciemente. Paul Satterfield, Barbara Scott (Answer 
due 3/28/03 for Glenn S. Goord, for Carol Berman, for George Pataki ); 
amending [2-1] complaint; Summons issued, (pi) (Entered: 03/27/2003)

03/19/2003 =Memo endorsed on motion; mooting [9-1] motion for the Court to 
request counsel, counsel havings approved for plaintiff. ( signed by 
Judge Lawrence M. McKenna ); (pi) (Entered: 03/20/2003) j

04/15/2003 17 ANSWER to Complaint by Carol Berman, (kw) (Entered: 04/17/2003) |

04/15/2003 18 ANSWER by George Pataki to [16-1] amended complaint. (Attorney
Eliot Spitzer). (jco) (Entered: 04/17/2003) j

1

04/18/2003

I
;i
i
i
j

19 , Memo-Endorsement on letter addressed to Judge McKenna from Janai 
S. Nelson, dated 4/9/03. counsel for plaintiffs request that this Court 
decline Mr. Graber’s request to stay proceedings in this case pending 
adjudication of other litigation. The Court does not perceive any reason 
to stay proceedings at this time, and declines to do so. However, any 
motion by defendants relating to plaintiffs' 42 U.S.C. 1973 claim may be 
filed within 30 days of the Second Circuit's decision in Muntaqim. The 
parties should otherwise proceed with motions on such reasonable 
schedule as they maybe able to agree to, or the Magistrate Judge to 
whom this case will be referred will s e t . ( signed by Judge Lawrence M. 
McKenna); (yv) (Entered: 04/21/2003)

j 05/13/2003
j

l
1|
ii

20 ORDER, that any motion pursuant to FRCP 12(c) for judgment on the 
pleadings shall be served no later than 7/9/03; papers in opposition to 
any motion pursuant to FRCP 12(c) shall be served no later than 9/9/03; 
moving and opposition papers concerning any motion pursuant to FRCP 
12(c) shall be served by hand; no later than 5/16/03 counsel for all 
parties shall submit letters to my chambers with their respective 
proposals for the scheduling of discovery in this matter. ( signed by 
Magistrate Judge Henry' B. Pitman ); Copies mailed by chambers, (die) 
(Entered: 05/14/2003)

05/21/2003i

j

i■
i

21

;

1i
|

Memo-Endorsement on letter addressed to Judge Pitman from Ianai S. 
Nelson, dated 5/16/03. Re: all parties request the following schedules: 
initial disclosures due 7/9/03; motion for class certification due 11/3/03, 
response due 1/5/04, reply due 1/23/04; expert discovery due 8/30/04; 
general discovery due 9/30/04; dispositive motions due 12/1/04, 
response due 1/31/05, reply due 2/28/05. The dates to when the parties 
agree & pltffs proposed schedule for extent disclosures are approved. 
Due to the extraordinarily prolonged schedule proposed above, further 
extensions will not be granted, except for unforeseeable emergencies. 
The press of other cases & vacation schedules will not justify further 
extensions . ( signed by Magistrate Judge Henry B. Pitman ) (db)

JA 00006



Modified on 05/22/2003 (Entered: 05/22/2003)

06/05/2003
•

Letter filed by Carol Berman addressed to Clerk’s Office from Patricia 
L. Murray, re: address change, (yv) (Entered: 06/09/2003)

07/10/2003 23 NOTICE OF MOTION by George Pataki, Carol Berman for an Order 
and judgment pursuant to Rule 12(c) of the FRCP, dismissing the claims 

Hn the amended complaint alleging violations of the First Amendment, 
the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, the Due 
Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, the Fifteenth 
Amendment, 42 U.S.C. 1971(a)(1), 1971(a)(2)(A) and 1971(a)(2)(B), 
and customary international law, on the grounds of a lack of federal 
subject-matter jurisdiction . Return Date not indicated. Affirmation of 
Joel Graber in support attached, (yv) (Entered: 07/11/2003)

07/10/2003 24 MEMORANDUM OF LAW by George Pataki, Carol Berman in support 
of [23-1] motion for an Order and judgment pursuant to Rule 12(c) of 
the FRCP, dismissing the claims in the amended complaint alleging 
violations of the First Amendment, the Equal Protection Clause of the 
Fourteenth Amendment, the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth 
Amendment, the Fifteenth Amendment, 42 U.S.C. 1971(a)(1), 
1971(a)(2)(A) and 1971(a)(2)(B), and customary international law, on 
the grounds of a lack of federal subject-matter jurisdiction . (yv) 
(Entered: 07/11/2003)

07/14/2003 25 Memo-Endorsement on letter addressed to Judge McKenna from Joel 
Graber, dated 7/2/03: Granting defendants' request for a page limit o f 50 
pages, and a 20 page renly . ( signed by Judge Lawrence M. McKenna ). 
(tp) (Entered: 07/15/2003)

09/03/2003 26 Memo-Endorsement on letter addressed to Judge McKenna from Ryan 
Paul Haygood, dated 8/29/03. Granting plaintiffs' request for leave to 
file a brief o f 50 pages . ( signed by Judge Lawrence M. McKenna ); 
(kw) (Entered: 09/09/2003 f

09/09/2003

i

tj

27 MEMORANDUM OF LAW by Joseph Hayden, Lumumba 
Akinwole-Bandelle, Wilson Andino, Gina Arias, Gina Arias, Wanda 
Best-Deveaux, Carlos Bristol, Augustine Carmona, David Galarza, 
Kimalee Gamer, Kimalee Gamer, Mark Graham, Keran Holmes III, 
Chaujuantheyia Lochard, Steven Mangual, Steven Mangual, Jamel 
Massey, Stephen Ramon, Stephen Ramon, Nilda Rivera, Mario Romero, 
Jessica Sanclemente, Paul Satterfield, Barbara Scott in opposition to 
[23-1] motion for an Order and judgment pursuant to Rule 12(c) of the 
FRCP, dismissing the claims in the amended complaint alleging 
violations of the First Amendment, the Equal Protection Clause of the 
Fourteenth Amendment, the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth 
Amendment, the Fifteenth Amendment, 42 U.S.C. 1971(a)(1), 
1971(a)(2)(A) and 1971(a)(2)(B), and customary international law, on 
the grounds of a lack of federal subject-matter jurisdiction . (djc)

JA 00007



| (Entered: 09/12/2003)

09/22/2003

;

i

!

!\

28 MEMORANDUM OF LAW by George Pataki, Carol Berman in support 
of [23-1] motion for an Order and judgment pursuant to Rule 12(c) of 
the FRCP, dismissing the claims in the amended complaint alleging 
violations of the First Amendment, the Equal Protection Clause of the 
Fourteenth Amendment, the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth 
-Amendment, the Fifteenth Amendment, 42 U.S.C. 1971(a)(1), 
1971(a)(2)(A) and 1971(a)(2)(B), and customary'international law, on 
the grounds of a lack of federal subject-matter jurisdiction . (moc) 
(Entered: 09/24/2003) j

11/03/2003
!

I

29 NOTICE OF MOTION by Joseph Hayden, Lumumba 
Akinwole-Bandelle, Wilson Andino, Gina Arias, Wanda Best-Deveaux, 
Carlos Bristol, Augustine Carmona, David Galarza, Kimalee Gamer, 
Mark Graham, Reran Holmes HI, Chaujuantheyia Lochard, Steven 
Mangual, Jamel Massey, Stephen Ramon, Nilda Rivera, Mario Romero, 
Jessica Sanclemente, Paul Satterfield, Barbara Scott, Lillian M. Rivera 
foi^an order for a determination that this case may proceed as a class 
action purs, to Rules 23(a), 23(b)(2) and 23(c)(4)(B) of the FRCP . No 
Return Date. Received in the night deposit box on 11/3/03 at 6:09 p.m. 
(sb) (Entered: 11/07/2003)

1
11/03/2003 30 MEMORANDUM OF LAW by Joseph Hayden, Lumumba 

Akinwole-Bandelle, Wrilson Andino, Gina Arias, Wanda Best-Deveaux, 
Carlos Bristol, Augustine Carmona, David Galarza, Kimalee Gamer, 
Mark Graham, Reran Holmes HI, Chaujuantheyia Lochard, Steven 
Mangual, Jamei Massey, Stephen Ramon, Nilda Rivera, Mario Romero, 
Jessica Sanclemente, Paul Satterfield, Barbara Scott, Lillian M. Rivera 
in support of [29-1] motion for an order for a determination that this 
case may proceed as a class action purs, to Rules 23(a), 23(b)(2) and 
23(c)(4)(B) of the FRCP, (sb) (Entered: 11/07/2003)

01/07/2004
i

Q
31

MEMORANDUM OF LAW in Opposition re: [29] Motion to Certify 
Class. Document filed by Carol Berman, Glenn S. Goord, George 
Pataki. (p s ,) (Entered: 01/16/2004)

01/23/2004

1j
t
i
1|
i:
j|

Q
32

;
ii

REPLY MEMORANDUM OF LAW in Support re: [29] Motion to 
Certify Class. (NDB) Document filed by Lumumba Akinwole-Bandelle, 
Wilson .Andino, Gina Arias, Wanda Best-Deveaux, Carlos Bristol, 
Augustine Carmona. David Galarza, Kimalee Gamer, Mark Graham, 
Joseph Hayden, Reran Holmes III, Chaujuantheyia Lochard, Steven 
Mangual, Steven Mangual, Jamel Massey, George Pataki, Stephen 
Ramon, Nilda Rivera, Mario Romero, Jessica Sanclemente, Paul 
Satterfield, Barbara Scott, (pa, ) (Entered: 01/29/2004)

i 02/25/2004

ii

0 NOTICE of Rule 30(b)(6) deposition of defendant Carol Berman. 
Document filed by Lumumba Akinwole-Bandelle, Wilson .Andino, Gina 
Anas, Wanda Best-Deveaux, Carlos Bristol, Augustine Carmona, David

? 11 JA 00008



1

! Galarza, Kimalee Garner, Mark Graham, Joseph Hayden, Keran Holmes 
! Ill, Chaujuantheyia Loehard, Steven Mangual, Steven Mangual, Jamel 
; Massey, Stephen Ramon, Lillian M. Rivera, Nilda Rivera, Mario 
j Romero, Jessica Sanclemente, Paul Satterfield, Barbara Scott, Received 
j in night deposit box on 2/25/04 at 5:21 p.m. (db,) (Entered: 03/01/2004)

j 02/25/2004
lj

i

!
j

O
34

NOTICE of Rule 30(b)(6) deposition of defendant George Pataki,
! -Governor of the State o f New York. Document filed by Lumumba 

Akinwole-Bandelle, Wilson Andino, Gina Arias, Wanda Best-Deveaux, 
Carlos Bristol, Augustine Carmona, David Galarza, Kimalee Gamer, 
Mark Graham, Joseph Hayden, Keran Holmes III, Chaujuantheyia 
Loehard, Steven Mangual, Steven Mangual, Jamel Massey, Stephen 
Ramon, Niida Rivera, Mario Romero, Jessica Sanclemente, Paul 
Satterfield, Barbara Scott. Received in night deposit box on 2/25/04 at 
5:21 p.m. (db ,) (Entered: 03/01/2004)

04/19/2004
j

a
35 *

'

.
ORDER REFERRING CASE TO MAGISTRATE JUDGE. Order that 
case be referred to the Clerk of Court for assignment to a Magistrate 
Judge for General Pretrial. Referred to Magistrate Judge Henry' B. 
Pitman. (Signed by Judge Lawrence M. McKenna on 4/19/2004) (jp ,) 
(Entered: 04/20/2004) "

04/23/2004

i

i'

Q
36

STIPULATION AND ORDER. The discovery schedule in this matter be 
modified as follows: Initial expert witness reports shall be submitted to . 
opposing counsel on or before 7/2/04 and expert witness rebuttal 
reports, if any, shall be submitted to opposing counsel on or before 
8/16/04. The parties will disclose to each other by letter the subject 
matter of their proposed expert witness testimony no later than 6/1/04. 
(Signed by Judge Henry B. Pitman on 4/20/04) (yv, ) (Entered: 
04/26/2004)

l
05/28/2004 Q

37

;

MOTION for an order allowing the plaintiffs to withdraw without 
prejudice the third, fourth, and fifth claims for relief in their first 
amended complaint to the extent that they are based on the Voting 
Rights Act of 1965, 42 USC 1973. Document filed by Lumumba 
Akinwole-Bandelle, Wilson Andino, Gina .Arias, Wanda Best-Deveaux, 
Carlos Bnstol, Augustine Carmona, David Galarza, Kimalee Gamer, 
Mark Graham, Joseph Hayden, Keran Holmes III, Chaujuantheyia 
Loehard, Steven Mangual, Steven Mangual, Jamel Massey, Stephen 
Ramon, Nilda Rivera, Mario Romero, Jessica Sanclemente, Paul 
Satterfield, Barbara Scott, (d ie,) (Entered: 06/01/2004)

05/28/2004

:!

a
38

MEMORANDUM OF LAW in Support re: [37] MOTION to Dismiss- 
Document filed by Lumumba Akinwole-Bandelle, Wilson Andino, Gina 
Arias, Wanda Best-Deveaux, Carlos Bristol, Augustine Carmona, David 
Galarza, Kimalee Gamer, Mark Graham, Joseph Hayden, Keran Holmes 
III, Chaujuantheyia Loehard, Steven Mangual, Steven Mangual, Jamel 
Massey, Stephen Ramon, Nilda Rivera, Mario Romero. Jessica 
Sanclemente, Paul Satterfield, Barbara Scott, (die,) (Entered:

9 of 1! JA 00009



j i 06/01/2004)

06/14/2004

•
Q

39
ORDER defendants' motion for judgment on the pleadings is granted.
So Ordered. (Signed by Judge Lawrence M. McKenna on 6/14/04) (jco.
) (Entered: 06/15/2004) j

06/16/2004:
Q

40
CLERK'S JUDGMENT granting defendants’ motion for judgment on 

--file pleadings. (Signed by J. Michael McMahon, clerk on 6/16/04) (ml, ) 
(Entered: 06/16/2004)

06/23/2004 a Mailed notice o f Right to Appeal to Attomey(s) of Record: Joel Graber. j 
Joseph A. Hayden Jr., Patricia L. Murray, Janai Nelson, (snu, ) (Entered: j 
06/29/2004)

07/13/2004

i

!
j|i

a
41

NOTICE OF INTERLOCUTORY APPEAL from [39] Order. Document 
filed by Lumumba Akinwole-Bandelle, Wilson Andino, Gina Arias, 
Wanda Best-Deveaux, Carlos Bristol, Augustine Carmona, David 
Galarza, Kimalee Gamer, Mark Graham, Joseph Hayden, Keran Holmes 
HLjEhaujuantheyia Lochard, Steven Manguai, Steven Mangual, Jamel 
Massey, Stephen Ramon, Nilda Rivera, Mario Romero, Jessica 
Sanclemente, Paul Satterfield, Barbara Scott. Filing fee S 255.00, receipt 
number E 514388. Copies o f Notice o f Interlocutory Appeal mailed to 
Attomey(s) of Record: JOEL GRABER, AAG, PATRICIA L.
MURRAY,, (pr, ) (Entered: 07/13/2004)

5
07/13/2004

i
i

a Transmission of Notice of Appeal to the District Judge re: [41] Notice 
of Interlocutory Appeal,,, (pr, ) (Entered: 07/13/2004)

! 07/13/2004
i1

a Transmission of Notice of Appeal and Certified Copy o f Docket Sheet 
to US Court of Appeals re: [41] Notice of Interlocutory Appeal,,, (p r ,) 
(Entered: 07/13/2004)

s
! 08/02/2004tj

it
t1
I1
|
f

42
Appeal Record Sent to USCA (Index). Notice that the Original index-to 
the record on Appeal for [41] Notice of Interlocutory Appeal,, filed by 
Joseph Hayden, Nilda Rivera, David Galarza, Barbara Scott, Wanda 
Best-Deveaux, Gina Arias, Lumumba Akinwole-Bandelle, Wilson 
Andino, Carlos Bristol, Augustine Carmona, Kimalee Gamer, Mark 
Graham, Keran Holmes, Steven Mangual, Steven Mangual, Jamel 
Massey, Stephen Ramon, Mario Romero, Jessica Sanclemente, Paul 
Satterfield, Chaujuantheyia Lochard USCA Case Number 04-3886-pr, 3 
Copies of the index, Certified Clerk Certificate and Certified Docket 
Sheet were transmitted to the U.S. Court of Appeals, ( tp ,) (Entered: 
08/02/2004)

| 08/02/2004

i

i|

i

Appeal Record Sent to USCA (File). Indexed record on Appeal Files for 
[41] Notice of Interlocutor/ Appeal,, filed by Joseph Hayden, Nilda 
Rivera, David Galarza, Barbara Scott, Wanda Best-Deveaux, Gina 
Arias, Lumumba Akinwole-Bandelle, Wilson Andino. Carlos Bristol, 
Augustine Carmona, Kimalee Gamer, Mark Graham, Keran Holmes,

10 of 11 JA 00010



Steven Mangual, Steven Mangual, Jamel Massey, Stephen Ramon, 
Mario Romero, Jessica Sanclemente, Paul Satterfield, Chaujuantheyia 
Lochard USCA Case Number 04-3886-pr, were transmitted to the U.S. 
Court of Appeals, (tp ,) (Entered: 08/02/2004)

11 of I 1 JA 00011



UN I ~; nr COUI
:x OF Ni rOru-

JO :E?H HAY DEN, et <a.

X

0 C C iv- 8 5 3 6 (LMM) 
MEMORANDUM AMO ORDER

GEORGE FATAKJ, Governor of Che 
State of New York, and CAROL 
BERMAN, Chairperson, New York 
State Board of Elections,

Defendants.

McKENNA, D.J.

Joseph Hayden, Lumumba Akinwole-Bandeie, Wilson Andino, Gina 

Arias, Wanda Best-Deveaux, Carlos Bristol, Augustine Carmona, 

David Galarza, Kimalee Garner, Mark Graham, Keran Holmes III,

Chaujuantheyia Lochard, Steven Mangual, Jamel Massey, Stephen 

Ramon, Lillian M. Rivera, Hilda Rivera, Mario Romero, Jessica 

Sanclemente, Paul Satterfield and Barbra Scott, on behalf of 

themselves and all others similarly situated ("plaintiffs"), 

bring this purported class action against George Pataki, Governor 

of the State of New York and Carol Berman, Chairperson of New 

York State Board of Elections ("defendants"; pursuant to 42 

U.S.C. § 1983 seeking to invalidate New York Constitution Article 

II, J§ 3 and New York Election Law § 5-106(2; on federal 

constitutional grounds and as violative of the Voting Rights Act

.965 .

JA 00012



Plaintiffs allege that these provisions "unlawfully denv 

suffrage to incarcerated and paroled felons on account of their 

race" in violation af the United States Constitution, the Votino 

Rights Act of 1965 and customary international law. (Plaintiffs' 

Memorandum of Law in Opposition to Defendants' Motion for 

Judgment on the Pleadings ("PI. Mem.") at 2.) Plaintiffs seek 

declaratory and injunctive relief enjoining defendants from 

implementing and enforcing § 5-106(2). Currently pending before 

the court is defendants' motion for judgment on the pleadings 

brought pursuant to federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(c). For 

the reasons set forth below defendants' motion is granted.

BACKGROUND

Plaintiffs are black and latino individuals who have been 

convicted of felonies under the laws of the state of New York and 

were or are currently incarcerated in the New York prison system 

or on parole. (Am. Comp. If 5-25.) Pursuant to § 5-106(2), as 

incarcerated or paroled felons, plaintiffs are not permitted to 

vote in state or federal elections.

The state of New York has barred incarcerated felons and 

parolees from voting for over one hundred and seventy years. In 

1821 New York adopted a constitutional amendment which stated: 

"Laws may be passed excluding from the right of suffrage persons 

who have been, or may be, convicted cf infamous crimes." N.Y. 

Const. (1821), art. II, § 2. New York's current Constitution,

JA 00013



g g; :ontains ianguacre that; nas re iuciiieu unart

sinee 183 4 and provides: "The Legislator0 s d 5,2. i enact laws
exeluding from the right cf suffrage all psrsena convicted

bribery or of any* infamous crime." N.Y. Const. (1338} , ar

§ 2. it is from this language that the State cf New York create: 

its felon disenfranchisement statute. New York Election Law § 5- 

106(2) provides:

No person who has been convicted of a felony 
pursuant to the laws of this state, shall 
have the right to register for or vote at any 
election unless he shall have been pardoned 
or restore^ to the rights of citizenship by 
the goverrtor, or his maximum sentence of 
imprisonment has expired, or he has been 
discharged from parole. The governor, 
however, may attach as a condition to any 
such pardon a provision that any such person 
shall not have the right of suffrage until it 
shall have been separately restored to him.

The most significant amendment to the statute since its 

enactment occurred in the 1970's. Pursuant to New York Laws of 

1971, c. 310 § 1, the Legislature amended former New York 

Election Law § 152, the predecessor to § 5-106, to eliminate 

disqualification after a felon served his or her maximum sentence 

or had beer, discharged from parole. This change was made, 

according to the Senate Sponsor, because the Legislature decided 

that "the general philosophy of corrections" is not "to continue 

punishment after a person has accounted." (Defendants'

Memorandum of Law in Support of Motion for Judgment on the 

Pleadings at 4 (Quoting 1971 N.Y.S. Legis. Ann. 201).} At the

JA 00014



Tnc nr f»nsrtmer.!-, this amendment was supported by vari

rights organizations in New York including the Cr

The Leaal Aid Socieqy Prisoner's Rights Project and the New Y

Civil Lirert ies Union, as well as the Association of tn 0 Bar

the City of N e w York. (Affirmation of Joel Graber ( __ bar

Aff .") Exs - A a B. )

Plaintiffs contend that New York Constitution Article II, § 

3 and § 5-106(2) "violate the Equal Protection Clause of the 

Fourteenth Amendment, based on an unlawful statutory 

classification (first claim); the Due Process Clause of the 

Fourteenth Amendment (second claim); the Equal Protection Clause, 

based on intentional race discrimination (third claim); the Civil 

Rights Acts of 1957 and 1960, codified at 42 U.S.C. § 1971 (third 

claim); Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, based on § 5- 

106(2)r s disproportionate impact on incarcerated and paroled 

Blacks and Latinos (fourth claim); Section 2 of the Voting Rights 

Act of 1965, based on § 5-106(2)'s dilution of the voting 

strength of Blacks and Latinos and certain minority communities 

in New York State (fifth claim); the First Amendment (sixth 

claim); and Customary International Law (seventh claim)." (PI. 

Mem. at 2-3.)

DISCUSSION

I. Standard of Review
When deciding a motion for judgment on the pleadings under

-4-

JA 00015



Rule 12 (c), the court must "'apply r n 8 SaiTlS s z

applicable to a motioii under Rule 19 / b ) fn ■ a c-
insertions contained in the compiaini as trns d va G —” Cl J_

Wesner, 366 E

• roth- * II.

iranees in f aver of the nonmoving oartv.
161, 163 f2d Cir. 2004)(cuoting Bu

F. 3d 52, 5:• 6 (2d Cir . 19S 9))

A complaint should not be dismissed for failure to state a 

claim unless it appears beyond doubt that the plaintiff can prove 

no set of facts in support of his or her claim which would 

entitle plaintiff to^relief. Conlev v. Gibson. 355 U.S. 41, 45-

46 (1957). However, conclusory allegations that merely state the 

general legal conclusions necessary to prevail on the merits and 

are unsupported by factual averments wij.1 not be accepted as 

true. See De Jesus v. Sears, Roebuck & Co. , Inc.. 87 F.3d 65, 70 

(2d Cir. 1995), cert, denied, 519 U.S. 1007 (1996) ("A complaint 

which consists of conclusory allegations unsupported by factual 

assertions fails even the liberal standard cf Rule 12(b)(6),").

II. Equal Protection Under the Fourteenth and Fifteenth
Amendments
Plaintiffs argue that their Amended Complaint sufficiently 

alleges a claim under the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments 

because "New York State's extensive history of racial 

discrimination in voting dates as far back as the State's

provisions in its constitution regarding suffrage" and 

"[t]hroughout the New York Constitutional Conventions addressing

-t-

JA 00016



rt
 

rt
th e n g n t  o f s u f f r a g e ,

i n t e :nt to  d i s c r im in a te

41. } The d i s e n f r a n p h i:

ono a s p e c t  o f thigs e f f t

v o te ( I d .  'S 42. )

The Sudt;=me C o u rt

cxG^ r the cramers mace exoiicin statements
against minority voters." (An. Cont. Z 

ament cf felons, plaintiffs contend, "was 

rt to deprive minorities of the richt to

ias held that the language of section 2 of 

the Fourteenth Amendment expressly allows a state to prohibit 

felons from voting.1 Richardson v. Ramiret. 418 U.S. 24, 55 

(1974) (" (section 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment], in dealing with 

voting rights as it jioes, could not have been meant to bar 

outright a form of disenfranchisement which was expressly 

exempted from the less drastic sanction of reduced representation 

which § 2 imposed for other forms of disenfranchisement"}.

However, that does not mean states can pass disenfranchisement 

statutes for the purpose of discriminating againsc any particular 

class of persons based on race. See Hunter v. Underwood, 471 

U.S. 222 (1985) (holding Alabama's disenfranchisement: statute 

unconstitutional under the Equal Protection Clause because it was

1 In fact, at the time the Civil War Amendments (Fourteenth 
and Fifteenth Amendments) were enacted "29 [out cf 36] States had 
provisions in their constitutions which prohibited, or authorized 
the legislature to prohibit, exercise of the franchise by persons 
convicted of felonies or infamous crimes." Richardson v.
Ramirez. 413 U.S. 24, 48 (1974). Therefore, the prevalence of 
his practice prior to these Amendments being passed "indicates 
hat felon disenfranchisement was not an attempt to evade the 
requirements of the Civil War Amendments or tc perpetuate racial 
discrimination forbidden by those amendments." Baker v. Pataki, 
85 F.3d 919, S28 (2d Cir. 1966)(opinion of Mahoney, J.).

-6-

JA 0001



cleany snactea with the intent no Giscrirninate soair.st blacks'
Trisrefore, a S uS 18 W tha is racial-iy neutral on its ZSCc W111
vielate the F’ourtee.n  *-> 8110 i fv n +2 p 0 T' 0T p  Grt “ ]y - - i ti s
gnactmenc was motivated bv discriminaterv n T 0 p  — 3 o 0 Villaae of
L. r1ing zon Keichts v.. Me ITO Hious . Dev. Corn., 429 U. q q5 z. T 2 64*"Cj
(1577} (hoiding that "CP ] roof of racia llv discriminatc-ry intent cr

purpose is required to show a violation of the Equal Protection

Clause"); see also Romsu v. Cohen, 265 F.3d 118, 133-34 (2d Cir.

2001)("Only intentional discrimination is barred by these

amendments."). Accordingly, plaintiffs' equal protection
*■«

challenge will survive defendants' motion for judgment on the 

pleadings only if plaintiffs sufficiently allege that New York's 

decision to disenfranchise incarcerated and paroled felons was 

motivated by discriminatory intent.

A. Discriminatory Intent

Plaintiffs allege that "New York State and governmental 

jurisdictions within the state have historically used a wide 

variety of mechanisms to discriminate against minority voters in 

violation of the Constitution and laws of the United States, 

including, inter alia, literacy tests, English-only election 

procedures, and racially discriminatory rules for purging voters 

from registration iisrs." (Am. Comp. SI 39.) Plaintiffs claim 

that throughout New York's Constitutional Conventions beginning 

in 1777 "framers made explicit statements of intent to

JA 00018



disc rxmxnat6 

rsauirements
against; minority voters" and "created certain votir- 

that expressly applied only to racial minorities."
(Id, 35 41-42.)

In their Amended Complaint plaintiffs describe at ienath he 

laws were enacted in the early to mid-iSGGs creating onerous 

t Owing iCLjuirciiier.̂ s, such as racially discriminatory property 

qualirications, m  an effort to deny suffrage to blacks. (id. 1

43-48, 50, 54.) However, just because some laws were enacted in

the early to mid-1800s with the intent to discriminate against 

blacks and other minorities does not necessarily mean New York
e

Constitution Article II, § 3 and § 5-106(2) or their predecessors 

were similarly enacted with such intent. The majority of 

allegations that plaintiffs provide in the Amended Complaint to 

show New York State sought to disenfranchise felons for the 

purpose of discriminating against blacks and other minorities are 

entirely conclusory in nature. In fact, the only factual 

allegation that could possibly support a finding of 

discriminatory intent is plaintiffs' allegation that during the 

1846 Constitutional Convention the delegates were "[a] avocatina 

for the denial of equal suffrage" and they "continued to make 

explicit statements regarding Blacks' unfitness for suffrage 

including a declaration that the proportion of 'infamous crime' 

in the minority population was more than thirteen times that in

-8-

JA 00019



the white population ft 2 (Am. Comp. S 51.) However, this one

allegation is simply an insufficient basis, ever, under the

1 ■i be ’■si atandards of a Rule 12(c) motion, from which to --- — v, -aw wi;5

inference that these provisions or their predecessors were 

enacted with discriminatory intent.*

B. Disenfranchising Only Felons Incarcerated or on Parole 

Plaintiffs also contend that "New York's non-uniform 

practices of disenfranchising only those felons sentenced to 2

2 The Amended Complaint seems to suggest that the term 
"infamous crime" wa,p'' added to the New York State Constitution 
after 1846 as a result of the debates at the 1846 Constitutional 
Convention. However, the State legislature had been empowered to 
enact laws excluding from the right of suffrage those who had 
been convicted of "infamous crimes" since 1821. See N.Y, Const. 
(1821), art. II, § 2 ("Laws may be passed excluding from the 
right of suffrage persons who have been-, or may be, convicted of 
infamous crimes.").

*’ Plaintiffs attempt to analogize their case to Hunter v. 
Underwood where the Supreme Court invalidated part of the Alabama 
Constitution relating to the disenfranchisement of persons 
convicted of, among other offenses, "any crime . . . involving
moral turpitude" as violative of the Equal Protection Clause.
471 U.S. 222, 233 (1985). There the Court found that because the 
disenfranchisement of blacks was a major purpose behind Alabama's 
1901 Convention during which this provision was adopted, and 
because this provision would not have been enacted in absence of 
the racially discriminatory motivation, it was held 
unconstitutional. Id. 229-233. However, the facts of this case 
are very different from Hunter. First, in Hunter the Court 
invalidated a statute that denied suffrage to those who had 
committed certain misdemeanors, not felonies. Second, the 
plaintiffs in Hunter provided strong factual support showing a 
long history of racial discrimination including actual testimony 
of specific discriminatory statements made during the 1901 
Constitutional Convention where a "zeal ror white supremacy ran 
rampant". Id. at 229. Here, plaintiffs have not alleged any 
such facts with respect to the enactment of New York Constitution 
Article'*!!, § 3 and’§ 5-106(2) or their predecessors.

-9-

JA 00020



incarceration or serving parole are neither compelling nor 

rational" and thus violate the Equal Protection Clause of the 

Fourteenth Amendment. (Pi. Mem. at 21.)

While plaintiffs are correct that section 2 of the 

Fourteenth Amendment does not remove "all equal protection 

considerations from the state-created classifications denyrng the 

right to vote tc some felons while granting it to others, " see 

Williams v. Tavlor, 677 F.2d 510, 516 (5th Cir. 1982)(funding 

that "[n]o one would contend that section 2 permits a state to 

disenfranchise all felons and then re-enfranchise only those who 

are, say, white") , it is also true that "equal protection does 

not mean that a state must treat all persons identically." Id. 

Equal Protection simply "demands that when the state draws 

distinctions between similarly situated individuals it must show 

that the distinction is rational, not arbitrary." Id. (citing 

Stanton v. Stanton, 421 U.S. 7, 14 (1975)).

Here, as explained in the Bill Memorandum to the 1971 

amendment of § 5-106(2), the New York State Legislature's 

justification for the proposed amendment was that

disenfranchising felons after they had served their maximum term 

of imprisonment or were released from parole was inconsistent 

with the primary concerns of the penal system, which is 

rehabilitation of the offender. (See Graber Aff. Ex. A at 8 ("It 

is inconsistent with the general philosophy cf corrections to

- 1 0 -

JA 00021



evidenced by the letters written in succcrt cf the amendment 

many.New York civile rights organizations thought this was at 

least a step in the right direction. {Id. at 12; see also Ex. E 

at 25-21, 25-36.) Furthermore, distinguishing between felons who 

are incarcerated or on parole with those serving susoended 

sentences or probation is entirely rational. Parole is "{t]he 

release of a prisoner from imprisonment before the full sentence 

has been served" and is "usually granted for good behavior on the 

condition that the parolee regularly report to a supervising

officer." Black's haw Dictionary (8th ed. 2004). "Parole is not 

freedom." Id, Alternatively, probation is "[a] court-imposed 

criminal sentence that, subject to stated conditions, releases a 

convicted person into the community instead cf sending the 

criminal to jail or prison." Id. Therefore, while both felons 

on parole and felons on probation are released into society, 

parolees are still technically serving a prison sentence, just in 

the outside world. Denying suffrage to those who have received 

more severe punishments, such as a term of incarceration, and not 

to those who have received a lesser punishment, such as 

probation, is certainly not arbitrary. Furthermore, the 

determination of whether to sentence a felon to prison as opposed 

to probation is a decision made by a sentencing judge after 

consideration of many factors including the nature of the crime

-11-

JA 00022



and tne criminal history of the defendant. Where a more severe 

punishment is warranted it is entirely rational that that person 

should lose more rights and vice versa.4

Accordingly,^plaintiffs' claims challenging New York 

Constitution Article il, § 3 and § 5-106(2} under the Fourteenth 

and Fifteenth Amendments are dismissed.

III. Voting Rights Act of 1965, 42 O.S.C. § 1973
Plaintiffs' claims under Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act 

of 1965, codified at 42 O.S.C. § 1973, must be dismissed in light 

of the Second Circuit;/s recent holding in Muntacim v. Coombe, 366a
F.3d 102 (2d Cir. 2004). There the Second Circuit held that "§ 

1973 cannot be used to challenge the legality of § 5-106." Id. 

at 104.

IV. Civil Rights Act of 1957 and 1960, 42 U.S.C. § 1971
Plaintiffs argue that New York's felon disenfranchisement 

statute violates the Civil Rights Acts of 1957 and 1960, codified 

at 42 U.S.C. § 1971(a) (1), § 1971(a) (2) (A) and § 1971(a) (2) (B) . 

However, as the majority of courts addressing civil rights claims 

brought under § 1971 have held, this section does not provide for 

a private right of action and is only enforceable by the United

4 Plaintiffs allege that blacks and other minorities are 
prosecuted, convicted, and sentenced to terms of incarceration at 
a much higher rate than whites convicted of similar crimes. (Am. 
Comp. 61—68.) Even if this contention is correct, whether 
convictions and sentencing determinations are made in a 
discriminatory fashion is not an issue that can be resolved by 
challenging New York's election laws.

-12-

JA 00023



Stic t:es in an action trought by the T\ d. o rnsv General See 42
u. s.C. § 1971(c); see also McKav rr iT* r*.m-n-a * Ci'.Lk;son , 22 6 F•3d 752, 756
(6th r. 2000)("section 1971 is enT' ioy • the Attorney
General., not by private citizens'");■ f(ixcr. v. State of Ohio, 1 S3
F. 3-d 389, 407 (6th Cir. 1999} (42 u.S.c . § IS"71 "is r;ot part of
the er.forcement provisions of the vot.ing Rights Act and only the
At to:m e y General can bring a cause of action under this
sect:ion Gilmore v. Amitwills1 Union Free Sch. Dist., 305 F.
Supp..2d 271, 279 (E.D.N.Y. 2004) (the pro visions of section 1971
"are only enforceable by the United 5tates of America in an

action brought by the Attorney General and may not be enforced by 

private citizens"}; Cartagena v. Crew, No. 96 Civ. 3399, 1996

U.S.. Dist. LEXIS 20178 , at *13 n .8 (E.D.N V Sept. 5, 1996) ("To

the extent that plaint iffs allege a cause of action under 42

U.S. C. § 1971 in their memorandum of law, sueh claim is precluded

since a private right of action has not been recognized under 

this section."); Willing v. hake Orion Community Sch. Bd. of 

Trustees. 924 F. Supp. 815, 820 (E.D. Mich. 1996)("Section 1971 

is intended to prevent racial discrimination at the polls and is 

enforceable by the Attorney General, net by private citizens."); 

Spivey v. Ohio, 999 F. Supp. 987, 996 (N.D. Ohio 1SS8) ("The terms 

of § 1971(c) specifically state that the Attorney General may 

institute a civil action to remedy a. violation of the Voting 

Rights Act. An individual does not have a private right of

JA 00024



action unaer § 1971."). But se? Schwier y. Cox. 340 F.3d 1284, 

1297 (lltft Car. 2003)("the provisions of section 1371 of the 

Voting Rigans Act may ne enforced by a private right of action

under § 1983").

Regardless, ever, if plaintiffs could assert a private right 

of action under § 1571, their claim would still fail since thev 

are not "otherwise qualified to vote." See Texas Supporters of 

Workers, v. Strake, 511 F. Supp. 149, 155 (S.D. Tex. 1981) (citing 

Richardson v. Ramirez, 418 U.5. 24 (1974)(holding that 

plaintiffs, convicted felons who had not been pardoned, did not 

possess one of the prerequisites to asserting a § 1971 cause of 

action: they were not "otherwise qualified to vote" because the 

"constitutionality of disenfranchising convicted felons has been 

firmly established")). Accordingly, plaintiffs' claim under 42 

CJ.S.C. § 1971 must be dismissed.

V. First Amendment

Plaintiffs also contend that New York Constitution Article 

II, § 3 and § 5-106(2) violate their rights guaranteed under the 

First Amendment. However, the case law is clear that the First 

Amendment does not guarantee felons the right to vote. See 

Farrakhan v. Locke, 987 F. Supp. 1304, 1314 (E.D. Wash. 1997) 

rev'd in part on other grounds, 338 F.3d 1009 (9th Cir.

2003) (holding that in order to uphold a First Amendment claim 

"the Court would have to conclude that the same Constitution that

-14-

JA 000



Amendment also prohibits disenfranchisement under other 

amendments . . . The Court is not inclined to interpret the

Constitution in this internally inconsistent manner or to 

determine that the Supreme Court:'s declaration cf the facial 

validity cf felon disenfranchisement laws in Richardson v. 

Ramirez was based only of the fortuity that the plaintiffs 

therein did net make their arguments under different sections of 

the Constitution"); Johnson v. Bush, 214 F. Supp.2d 1333, 1338 

(S.D. FI. 2002) rev'd in mart on other grounds 353 F.3d 1287V
(11th Cir. 2003)("it is clear that the First Amendment does not 

guarantee felons the right to vote"). Accordingly, plaintiffs' 

claim under the First Amendment is also dismissed.

VI. Due Process Under the Fourteenth Amendment
Plaintiffs argue that disenfranchising felons without notice 

violates the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

(PI. Mem. at 45.) Plaintiffs claim that "New York courts 

regularly pronounce sentences after trial and accept guilty pleas 

from defendants without providing notice that a sentence 

including a term of incarceration will automatically lead to a 

termination of their voting rights" and if the Court does not 

invalidate the disenfranchisement statute this practice will 

continue. (Id. at 46.)

First, as defendants point out, criminal defendants are

-15-

JA 00026



advised by counsel throughout the piss bargaijiyrjjj and ss
passes or a criminal prosecution. Second, the
this claim, as plaint! fs argue, as a statutory requiremen at
sentencing judges advise criminal defendants of all the riahts

they might lose, including their richt zo vote they were
plead guiity to a criminal charge. However, even if this

is misguideci. What plaintiffs are essentially suggesting is a 

proposed change to New York's criminal procedure laws. A federal 

district Court is nof the proper venue to sugaest an amendment to 

state statutory law since this Court obviously could not direct 

the New York State legislature to institute a new criminal 

procedure law. Accordingly, there is np real basis for 

plaintiffs' due process claim nor an appropriate judicial remedy.

VII. Treaties and Customary International Law

Finally, plaintiffs allege, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1331 

that New York Constitution Article II, § 3 and § 5-106(2) violate 

customary international law, Article 5, Section (c) of the 

Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial 

Discrimination ("CERD") and Article 25 of the International 

Covenant on Civil and Political Rights ("ICCPR"), because felons 

are "denied the enjoyment of guaranteed political rights, such as 

the.right to vote and participate in the political process."

(Am. Comp. IS 9"-98.)

16-

JA 0002



A . Customary International Law

Customary international law alone does not provide a cause 

of action in federal court in the absence of a federal statute.

See Kacic v. Karadzic, 70 F.3d 232, 246 (2d Cir. 1SS5)(citinc-r '■ .w
Tel-Oren v. Libyan Arab Republic, 726 F.2d 774, 778 (D.C. Cir. 

1954) (Edwards, J. concurring) ("The law of nations generally does 

not create private causes of action to remedy its violations, but 

leaves to each nation the task of defining the remedies that are 

available for international law violations.")); see also Friedman 

v. Bave.r Coro., No. 99-CV-3675, 1999 WL 33457825, at *3 (E.D.N.Y 

Dec. 15, 1999) (citing In Re Estate of Ferdinand Marcos, Human 

Rights Litigation, 25 F.3d 1467, 1475 (9th Cir. 1994)("Like 

international treaty law, customary international law prescribes 

norms of conduct among nations but does not create private rights 

of action for individuals.")); White v. Paulsen, 997 F. Supp.

1380, 1383 (E.D. Wash. 1998) (holding that the law of nations 

itself does not give rise to a private right of action because 

"'international law does not require any particular reaction to 

violations of law . . . .  Whether and how the United States 

wishes to react to such violations are domestic questions"). 

Because plaintiffs have not provided any statutory basis upon 

which this court has jurisdiction under 2d U.3.C. § 13j1 to 

remedy an alleged violation oi customary international ~aw, this 

claim must be dismissed.

-17-

JA 00028



E . Treaties of the United States: ICCPR and CERD

With respect to plaintiffs' claims under the ICCPR and the 

CERD, "the United Spates expressly declared upon ratification 

that 'the provisions of the Convention are not self-executing,'" 

United States v, Perea, No. 3:02 Cr 7, 2004 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 

7500, at *52 (D. Conn. Apr. 29, 2004) (citing International 

Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial 

Discrimination, adopted by the U.N. General Assembly Dec, 21, 

1965, 660 U.N.T.S. 195 (ratified by the United States June 24, 

1994); U.S. Senate Resolution of Advice and Consent to 

Ratification of the CERD, 140 Cong. Rec. S7634-02 (June 24,

1994); see also U.S. Senate Resolution of Advice and Consent to 

Ratification of the ICCPR, 138 Cong. R^c. S4781, S4783 (daily ed. 

Apr. 2, 1992)(declaring.that "the provisions of articles 1 

through 27 of the Covenant are not self-executing.") ) ; see also 

White. 997 F. Supp. at 1386 (holding that no court that has 

considered the ICCPR has found it to be self-executing) . 

Therefore, "[t]he United States thus clarified that the ICCPR and 

the CERD did not create a private right of action enforceable in 

U.S. courts." Perez, 2004 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 7500, at *52 (citing 

Flores v. Southern Peru Cooper Coro., 343 F.3d 140, 163 (2d Cir. 

2003)("Self-executing treacles are those that 'immediately create 

rights and duties of private individuals which are enforceable 

and [are! to be enforced by domestic tribunals.' Non-self-

-18-

JA 00029



executing treaties 'require implementing action by the political 

branches of government or . . , are otherwise unsuitable r0r 

judicial application. "') (citations emitted}}. Accordingly, this 

Court does net have the authority under § 1331 to hear plaintiffs 

claims under the ICCPR or CERD.

CONCLUSION
For the reasons set forth above defendants' motion for 

judgment on the pleadings is granted.5

SO ORDERED.
A

Dated: June /f, 2004
New York, New York

A- —   — . /{s -—  

Lawrence M. McKenna 
U.S.D.J.

5 In the wake of the Second Circuit's decision in Muntaqim 
v. Coombe. supra, plaintiffs have moved for voluntary dismissal 
of their third claim in part and their fourth and fifth claims in 
their entirety, without, prejudice. Defendants have opposed 
voluntary dismissal unless it is with prejudice. In view of the 
above, the application for dismissal without prejudice is denied 
as moot.

Plaintiffs' motion for class certification is also denied 
as moot.

- 1 9 -

JA 00030



IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
FO R  THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

JOSEPH HAYDEN; LUMUMBA 
AKINWOLE-B ANDELE;WILSON ANDINO; 
GINA ARIAS; WANDA BEST-DEVEAUX; 
CARLOS BRISTOL; AUGUSTINE 
CARMONA; DAVID GALARZA;
KIMALEE GARNER; MARK GRAHAM; 
RERAN HOLMES, ID; CHAUJUANTHEYIA

Case No.: 00 Civ. 8586 (LMM)(HBP)

LOCHARD; STEVEN MANGUAL; JAMEL 
MASSEY; STEPHEN RAMON; LILLLAN M. 
RIVERA; NELDA RIVERA; MARIO 
ROMERO; JESSICA SANCLEMENTE; 
PAUL SATTERFIELD; and BARBARA 
SCOTT, on behalf of themselves and all 
individuals similarly situated,

AFFIRMATION

Plaintiffs,

v.

GEORGE PATAKI, Governor of the State of 
New York and CAROL BERMAN, 
Chairperson, New York State Board of 
Elections,

-

Defendants.

Ryan Paul Haygood, an attorney duly admitted to practice in the State of New York and before 

this Court, under penalty of perjury affirms:

1 i 3^  an Assistant Counsel at the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc., 

counsel for plaintiffs in this action, and I respectfully submit this affirmation m support of Plaintiffs 

Memorandum Of Law In Opposition To Defendants’ Motion For Judgment On The Pleadings, for 

purposes of providing the Court with the following exhibit:

JA 00031



Exhibit A: Amended Complaint, Underwood v. Hunter. CA78 Mo704S (filed June 21, 1978).

Dated: New York, New York 
September 9, 2003

NAACP Legal Defense 
and Educational Fund, Inc.

JA 00032



Ch
>
oooUJ

At
IN T H E  U N I T E D  S T A T E S  D I S T R I C T  C O U R T  

FOR T H E  N O R T H E R N  D I S T R I C T  OF ALABAMA 
S O U T H E R N  DIVISION

V I C T O R  U N D E R W O O D  and )
C A R M E N  EDWARDS,  for them- )
selves and all oilier* similarly )
.situated )

)
PLAIN TIFFS .  )

)
vs. J )

)
NF.f ' I . H U N  TER, JO SEPH  J. )
T R U C K S ,  individually and as mem- )
hers of the,Board of Registrars of )
Jefferson Co., anti 1 I IOMAS A. )
JE R N IC N A N ,  C LARIC E U. )
A I, TEN,  CI.EO E. CHAMBER S.  )
individually and as members of )
the Board of Registrars of Mont- )
gontery Co., on Behalf of till other )
members of Boards of Registrars )
in the State of Alabama )

)
DEFENDANTS.  )

CA7H M07IVIS

C O M P L A I N T

I. Thi s  action arises tmtler the First. Filth, I hirteenth.  
Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments ol the Const it tit ion of 
the Uni ted States and *12 U.S.C. 8S107I, 10711. IWI and U)R!I. 
jurisdiction is vested in this Court by 211 U.S.C. f$UPU(n) ,  
l.'H;!(;!) ami (-1), ami 2201. T h e  mallet in controversy ex- 
needs, exclusive of interests and costs, the sum of ten thousand 
dollars. 'This is an action lot appropriate equi table relief and 
declaratory judgment of the tttteonsiitulioitalily of Ain. Const., 
Art, VIII,  (1001). to the extent that it disqualifies from



TA 00034

A-2

l,eing registered or v o t i n g  persons convicted of certain offenses, 
and to prevent deprivation under  color of stale law. statute, 
ordinance, regulation, custom or usage of rights, privileges and 
immunities set tired to plaintiff, including the rights to tine 
process, etpial protection, and the unabridged participation in 
the electoral process protected by the First, Fifth, Th ir t ee n th ,  
Fourteenth, and Fifteenth Amendments  of the Consti tut ion of 
the United States and try T i t le  12 of die Uni ted States Code. 
tj§|f)7l, 1 **73, Hitt I and HIH.H.

2. Plaintiff Victor Underwood is a white citizen til Ala­
bama. over die age of 21 years, and a resident of Jefferson 
County.

;i. plaintiff Carmen Fdwards is a blac k citizen of Alabama, 
over (lie age of HI years, and a resident of Montgomery County.

1. Defendants Nell Hun ter  and Joseph J. 'Frin ks are m em ­
bers of die Hoard of Registrars of Jefferson County.  T h e r e  is 
presently a vacancy on said board. Defendants Thom as  A. 
Jernignait, Clarice II. Allen, and Cleo F. Chambers  arc m em ­
bers of the Board of Registrars of Montgomery County.  AH 
defendants ate sued individually and in their official capaci­
ties as members of the Boards of Registrars, and as representa­
tives of the class of all members of the Boards of Registrars of 
the counties of the State ol Alabama.

!>. Attorney Crucia l  Will iam Baxley shall be served a copy 
of this complaint so dial be may defend the constitutionality 
of die Slate Consti tution provision challenged herein. 28 
U.S.C. §21()?l(b) ; Ala. Omit:, §li-(i-227 (H.I75).

fi. T he  plaintiffs bring ibis action on their own behalf and 
on behalf of all others similarly situated and against the de­
fendants in their official capacities, as individuals anti as rep­
resentatives of their class pursuant to Rule 215 of the F.R.Civ.P. 
The plaintiffs' class includes all persons disqualified from be­
ing registered or voting by operat ion of Ala. Const., A n .  VIII,  
§182 (11)01). T h e  defendants’ class includes members of 
boards of registrars of Alabama. T h e  prerequisites of subsec­
tions (a) and (l>) (2) of Rule 28 arc satisfied. T h e r e  are 
common questions of law and fact affecting the several rights

A - ! !

of citizens to register and to vote. T h e  members of the classes 
are so numerous  as to make it. impracticable to bring them all 
before this Court.  T h e  claims or defenses of the parties are 
typical of the claims or defenses of the classes as a whole. A 
common relief is sought. T h e  interests of each class ate .ade­
quately represented by the named parties, and the parties op ­
posing each class have acted <n vet used to act on grounds  gen­
erally applicable to the class, thereby making appropr ia te  final 
injunctive and declaratory relief with respect to the class as a 
whole.

7. A!n. (.oust., z\rt. VIII,  §IB2 (H)OI), disenfranchises per­
sons who have been convicted of certain named offenses, any 
cr ime punishable by impiisoumem in the penitentiary,  or any 
infamous crime or crime involving mora f  turpi tude .  Because 
any crime carrying a maximum penally of more than one year 
is "punishable by imprisonment  in the peni tent iary,” o n l y  cer­
tain offenses carrying a penalty of 12 months or  less, or a fine 
(hereinafter referred to as misdemeanors and minor  felonies) 

are disenfranchising offenses, namely, the ones listed in §182 
and those "involving moral turpi tude."

8. Victor Underwood was a duly qualified and registered 
voter in Jefferson County.  Because of a conviction for issuing 
a worthless check, his name was purged from the registration 
mils by the Jefferson County Board of Registrars. Carmen 
Edwards is otherwise qualified to register to vote in Montgom­
ery County but  lias been denied registration by the Montgom­
ery County Board til Registrars because of her conviction for 
issuing a worthless check, an ollensc which is considered to be 
a "crime involving moral turpi tude,"

0. 1 here is between the parties an actual controversy as
herein set forth. T h e  plaintiffs and others similarly situated 
and affected on whose behalf this suit is b r o u g h t  suffer irrep­
arable injury by reason of the acts herein complained of. Rhhn- 
tiffs have no plain, adequate or complete remedy to redress the 
wrongs and unlawful acts herein complained of other than this 
action for a declaration of rights and an injunction. Any , rm  
edy to which plaintiffs and those similarly situated could be



JA
 00035

A  -i

remitted would he attended with such uncertainties and delays 
as to deny substantial relief, would involve multiplicity of suits 
and cause them further irreparable injury, damage and incon­
venience.

f i r s t  c a u s e  o f  a c t i o n

10. Th e misdemeanors and minor  felonies listed in §182 as 
disenfranchising offenses unconstitutionally impinge upon the 
franchise because they deny the franchise without a compelling 
state interest in violation of the First, Fifth, and Fourteenth 
Amendments of the Constitution of the United States.

SI'CON I) CAUSE OF A CTIO N

11. T he  misdemeanors and minor felonies listed in §182 as 
disenfranchising offenses deity plaintiffs and the class they rep­
resent the equal protection of the laws as guaranteed by the 
Fourteenth Amendment  of the Consti tution of the United 
States because more serious offenses are not disabling.

T H I R D  CAUSE OF ACTION

12. Disfranchisement for conviction of a 'crime involving 
moral turpitude” is based on a definition that is vague and in­
definite and denies plaintiffs and the class they represent the 
right to register and to vote in violation of the First, Fifth, and 
Fourteenth Amendments of the Consti tution of the United 
States.

F O U R T H  CAUSE OF ACTION

13. Th e list contained in §182 was speedically adopted be­
cause of its supposed disproportionate impact on blacks, with 
the intent to disfranchise blacks.

H. T he  disfranchising provisions of §182 abridge the right 
to vote on the basis of race, in violation of the First, Fifth. 
Thirteenth, Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments of the 
Constitution of the United States, and 42 U.S.C. §§1981 and
1983.

A -5

RELIFT

W H E R E F O R E ,  Plaintiffs respectfully pray that this Court  
will take jurisdiction of this cause and do the following:

A. Find that the named plaintiffs and defendants are ade­
quate representatives of their respective classes and allow this 
cause to proceed as a class action;

B. Grant  the plaintiffs a preliminary injunction,  to he made
permanent  later, requir ing that, they and the (lass tltey repre­
sent be restored to the rolls of those registered to vote or he 
allowed to register without regard to Ala. Const., Art. VIII,  
§182 (1901); J

C .  Declare Ala. Const., Art. VIII ,  §182 (1901),  to be un ­
constitutional insofar as it applies to offenses carrying a penalty 
of one year or less, and enjoin its further application;

1). Grant  the plaintiffs their costs and reasonable attorneys' 
fees and expenses.

Submitted by,

h i  E d w a !u > S t i i .l

Edward Still
(.01 Ti t le  Building
Birmingham, Al,  35203
205/322-1094

Of Counsel 
Laugidin McDonald 
Neil Bradley 
Christopher Coates 
52 Fairlie Street, NW 
Atlanta, GA 30303



CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that true and correct copies of Plaintiffs’ Memorandum of Law In 
Opposition to Defendants’ Motion For Judgment On The Pleadings and the affirmation of Ryan 
Paul Haygood, dated September 9, 2003, were furnished to the following counsel by U.S. First- 
Class Mail, and by Federal Express, on September 9, 2003:

Eliot Spitzer, Esq.
Attorney General of State of New York 

Joel Graber, Esq.
Assistant Attorney General of State of New York 

120 Broadway — 24th Floor 
New York, New York 10271-0332

Patricia L. Murray, Esq. ,, *
First Deputy Counsel
New York State Board of Election
40 Steuben Street
Albany, New York 12207-2109

B J
1 Haygood

JA 00036



UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK 
----------------------------------------------------------------- X

JOSEPH HAYDEN, et al„ etc., : 00 Civ. 8586 (LMM) (HBP)

Plaintiffs,

-against-

GEORGE PATAKI, Governor of the State
of New York, and CAROL BERMAN, : AFFIRMATION
Chairperson, New York State Board o f Elections,

Defendants.

V--------------------------------------- -x
JOEL GRABER, an attorney duly admitted to practice in the State of New York and before 

this Court, under penalty of peijury affirms:

1 . I am an Assistant Attorney General, of counsel to ELIOT SPITZER, Attorney General

of the State of New York, attorney for defendant the Governor of the State of New York, and I am

respectfully submitting this affirmation, in support of defendants’ motion for an order and judgment,

pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(c), dismissing certain claims in this action, for the purpose of furnishing

the Court with the following exhibits in support of the motion:

Ex. A -  Governor’s Bill Jacket, N.Y. Laws of 1972, c. 310.

Ex. B -  Governor’s Bill Jacket, N.Y. Laws of 1973, c. 679.

Ex. C -  Amended Complaint in this action, dated January 15, 2003.

Ex. D -  Answer on behalf o f defendant the Governor, dated April 14, 2003.

Ex. E -  Answer on behalf o f defendant Commissioner Carol Berman, Chairperson
of the New York State Board of Elections, dated April 8 , 2003.

JA 00037



2. The attached bill jackets are true and correct copies of bill jackets maintained by the 

Library of the New \  ork State Legislature, located in the Legislative Office Building in Albany.

3. As set forth in defendants’ memorandum of law submitted herewith, dated July 9. 

2003, legislative historyis subject to judicial notice on a motion to dismiss without the motion being 

converted into one for summary'judgment and disposed of as provided in Rule 56. See Terri tow of 

Alaska v. American Can Company, 358 U.S. 224, 226-27 (1959).

Dated: New' York, New York
July 9, 2003

JOEL GRAEER (JG-3337) 
Assistant Attorney General 
Special Litigation Counsel

-2-

JA 00038



e x h ib it  a



11«< le
rtt'&
BxW'

C h a p t e r -

4675

5 / A

1971-1972 Regular Sessionsj

IN ASSEMBLY
February 16, 1971

N«!

InBE^-ri5d ™

j AN ACT
To amend the ejection law, in relation to the right of a convicted 

felon to register tor or vote at any election upon expiration of 
maximum sentence or discharge from parole

C om  p a r  6 ?

x ~cP A 1-

Apprcrved

NEW YORKSE te LIBRARY

\ 0000001

MICROFILMED

bate.. ........
No. of printed Billi —  
No. of espo«urc* 
kirJuaivc iof bill* ...

• H*4U

Li
JA 00039



THIS original bill to be'
S5 *. rs ssa& T  r k

4675

1971-1972 Regular Sessions

IN ASSEMBLY
February 16, 1971

I n t r o d u c e d  b y  M r . " V V E M P L E — M u lt i- S p o n s o r e d  b y — M r . C O R ­
B E T T — r e a d  o n c e  a n d  r e fe r r e d  io  th e  C o m m itte e  on  J u d i c i a r y

AN ACT
To amend the election law, in relation to the right ot a convicted 

felon to register for or vote at any election upon expiration ot 
maximum sentence dr discharge from parole

Tk* People of the S ta te of New Y ork , represented m  Senate and
A a e n b ly , do enact a t folloict:

^ S e c tio n  1. S e c t io n  o n e  i h u n d r e d  n i t y - t w o  o f  th e  e le c t io n  la w ,

2  s u b d iv is io n  s ix  t h e r e o f  h a v in g  b e e n  a m e n d e d  b y  c h a p t e r  e le v e n  o f

3  th e  la w s  o f  n in e te e n  h u n d r e d  s ix t y - t w o ,  is  h e r e b y  a m e n d e d  t o  r e a d

^  a s  f o l l o w s : I

g  §  152. P e r s o n s  e x c lu d e d  fr o m  t h e  s u f f r a g e ,  

g  1. N o  p e rs o n  w h o  s h a l l  r e c e iv e , a c c e p t ,  o r  o ffe r  to  r e c e iv e ,  o r  p a y ,  

1  o ffe r  o r  p r o m is e  to  p a y ,  c o n t r ib u t e ,  o ffe r  o r  p r o m is e  to  c o n t r ib u t e  

g  to  a n o th e r , to  b e  p a id  o n  u se d , a n y  m o n e y  o r  a n y  o t h e r  v a lu a b lei
9 t h in g  a s a c o m p e n s a t io n  o r  r e w a r d  f o r  t h e  g i v i n g  o r  w it h h o ld in g  

10  a  v o te  * t  an e le c t io n ,  o r  fo r  r e g is t e r in g  o r  r e f r a i n i n g  f r o m  r e g is te r -

t u u U T i a i  — U t l i r r  »  M & s  L  mrw: m »tl*r i*  b e x i r u  (  )  ■» to U

000000

JA 00040



,r* » h •. * * * • r.; •4 *-• t • ^ * 1 ■ --»'*■■***• ’ ‘ * „ . -- - - - -o ‘.-J; ’ ‘
• --4 * - 4  j  ?  j  * * T  ^  ■•w’ * ,  , ■ m‘

2  i n ?  aa  ffvofitr, or who shall make any promise to influence toe giving 
2  or withholding any such vote or registration, or who she.!: make or 
g  b e c o m e  directly or indirectly interested in any bet or wager depend-
4  i n g  u p o n - th s  r e s u lt  o f  a n  e le c t io n ,' s h a l l  v o t e  a t  su c h  e le c tio n .

5 2. No person who has been convicted o f  a felony, pursuant to the 
g  la w s  o f  t h is  state, shall have the right to register for or vote at a n y  

7  e le c t io n  u n le s s  he shall have been pardoned or restored to the rights 
g  o f  c it iz e n s h ip  by th e  g o v e r n o r ,  tor r e c e iv e d  x c e r t if ic a te  of go o d  

9  c o n d u c t  g r a n t e d  by th e  b o a r d  o f jp a r o i e  p u r s u a n t  to  th e  p r o v is io n s

1 0  o f  t h e  e x e c u t iv e  law tu r e m o v e ! th e  d i s a b i l i t y  u n d e r  th is  sectio n  

2 b e c a u s e  o f  s u c h  conviction̂, or ia lien  his maximum  se n te n c e  has

12 expired  or he^has been discharged  from  parole^ T h e  governor, h ow -

i{\ |

13 a v e r , may a tt a c h  a s a  c o n d it io n  to  a n y  su c h  p a r d o n  a  p r o v is io n  th a t

I
14 a n y  a u c h  p e r s o n  s h a ll  n o t  h a v e  th e  r ig h t  o f  s u f f r a g e  u n t i l  i t  s h a ll

15 h a v e  been , s e p a r a te ly  r e s t o r e d  t o  L  itn,

16 3. N o  p e r s o n  w h o  h a s  b e e n  c o n v ic te d  o f  a fe lo n y  in  a  fe d e r a l

17 c o u r t ,  i f  t h e  o ffe n se  w o u ld  c o n s t i t u t e  a  f e lo n y  u n d e r  t h e  la w s  o f  th is  

16 s t a te ,  s h a l l  h a v e  th e  r ig h t , to  r e g is te r  f o r  o r  v o te  a t  a n y  e le ctio n

19 u n le s s  h e  s h a l l  h s v e  b e e n  p a r d o n e d  o r  re s to re d  to  th e  r ig h t s  o f

20 c i t iz e n s h ip  b y  t h e  p r e s id e n t  o f  th e  U n it e d  S ta te a ^ o r  unless his max-
i

2 1  tm u ro  sentence has expired  or kd, has been discharged from parole-

22 4. N o  p e rs o n  w h o  h a s  b e e n  c o n v ic te d  o f  a  fe lo n y  in  a  fe d e r a l 

28 c o u r t  o f  a n  o ffe n se  o f  w h ic h  s u c h  c o u r t  h a s  e x c lu s iv e  ju r is d ic t io n ,

24 s h a l l  h a v e  th e  r ig h t  to  r e g i s t e r  f o r  o r  v o t e  a t  Rity e le c tio n  u n le ss  h e

25 s h a l l  h a v e  b e en  p a r d o n e d  o r  r e s to r e d  to  t h e  r ig h t s  o f  c it iz e n s h ip  

36 b y  t h e  p r e s id e n t  o f  t h e  U n i t e d  S t a t e s ^ o r  unless his maximum sen-
: i

27 fence has expired-or he has beentdischarged from parole.

n Q 0 0 0 r .1
JA 00041



s
1  5. N o  p erson  w h o  h a *  b een  c o n v ic t e d  in  a n o t h e r  s t a ts  l o r  a  m i n e

2  w h ic h  w o u ld  c o n s t itu te  a f e lo n y  u n d e r  th e  la w *  o f  th is  s ta te  s h a ll

3  h a v e  th e  r ig h t  to  r e g is te r  fo r  o r  v o t e  a t  a n y  e le c t io n  i n  th is  s ta te

4  u n le s s  h e  sn a il h a v e  been  p a r d o n e d  o r  r e s to r e d  to  th e  r ig h t s  o f  c it i-

5 tenship by the governor or other appropriate authority of such 
g other state, or unless his maximum unlever, hjis expired or hf. ha* 

>j been discharged from parole^

g  6. N o  person w h o  h a s  b een  a d ju d g e d  in c o m p e te n t  o r  c o m m itte d  

9  t o  a n  in s t itu t io n  f o r  th e  c a r e  and: t r e a t m e n t  o f  th e  mentally i l l  o r  

2Q m e n t a l ly  d e fe c t iv e  b y  o r d e r  o f  c o m p e te n t  j u d i c i a l  a u t h o r i t y  s h a l l  

22 h a v e  th e  r ig h t  to  r e g is te r  f o r  o r  jvote  a t  a n y  e le c t io n  in  t h is  s t a t e

2 2  u n le s s  th e r e a ft e r  h e  sh a ll h a v e  b een  a d ju d g e d  c o m p e te n t  o r, in  t h e

2 3  c a s e  o f  a  p e rso n  so  c o n fin e d , ( 1)  f o u n d  to  h a v e  r e c o v e r e d  a n d  b e en

24 d is c h a r g e d  fr o m  su ch  in s t i t u t io n ! a s  p r o v id e d  b y  l a w ;  o r  (2) c e r -  

1 5  t i f ie d  b y  th e  h e a d  o f  su ch  in s t i t u t io n  to  h a v e  b een  r e le a s e d  o r  d is -

28 c h a r g e d  th e r e fr o m  in  a c c o r d a n c e  w ith  r e g u la t io n s  o f  t h e  com -
1

1 7  m is s io n e r  o f m e n ta l h y g ie n e  a n d i t o  h a v e  a  m e n ta l c o n d it io n  w h ic h

I
2 g  f u l l y  w a r r a n ts  h is  p r o p e r  e s e r c is e  o f  h is  r ig h t  to  v o te .

2 p  § 2. T h is  Ret sh a ll ta k e  e f fe c t  im m e d ia te ly .

0000004
JA 00042



\V\ ^r/^/7/

PRINT NO,
Departments & Agenda

L t . G o v e rn o r  
Attorney General 
Budget 
Comptroller 

wZ7rJMr. Douglass 
-^Sponsor (s)

Ag. & Mkts.
Banking 
Civil Service 
Commerce -Correctional Services--''' 
Education 
Environmental Conservation 

‘ ’ Health
I n s u r a n c e
Labor
Mental Hygiene ;
Motor Vehicles 

" Public Service Comm. j 
Social -Services 
State
Tax & Finance i

___ Transportation i

INTRO. NO
/

L e e a l  Grouns
_  J u d i c i a l  C o n fe r e n c e  

Law R e v i s i o n  Comm.
P e n a l  Law R e v i s i o n  Comm. 
A sso c ,  o f  Bar* NYC 
N .Y .C o . Law yers 
N.Y. S t a t e  Bar 
N a ssa u  Co. Bar 

'  N.Y. C r i m in a l  C t s .  A s s e e ,  
D.A. A sso c .
Magistrates Assoc.
Co. J u d g e s  A sso c .  
S u r r o g a t e s  A sso c .

“ “  F a m i ly  C o u r t  J u d g e s  
S h e r i f f s  A sso c .

Municipal Officials & Groups 
Mayor of ________

Co. Bd. of Supervisors or 
Co. Bd. of Legislators

Atomic & Space Development' 
Civil Defense 
Community Affairs 
Employee Relations , 
Equalization & Assessment 
General Services j
Housing & Community Renewal 
Human RightsIdentification & Intelligence 
Investigation 
Liquor Authority 
Local Government 
Military & Naval Affairs 
Narcotic Addiction Control 
Parks & Recreation 
Parole
Planning Coordination 
Probation State Police State University 
Thruway
Veterans Affairs 
Youth Division
"Advlsoj
Joint "Legia. comm, on 
Temporary Utate Comm, on

Town Supervisor of

Co. A t t y .  o f

Conference of Mayors 
County Officers* Assoc, 
Association of Towns

A
-  ^ I

0000005
JA 00043



1 9 7 1
BUDGET KSPOHT OH BILLS 
NO RECOMMENDATION

j j 4^ k / -
Session Yeax_
ASSEMBLY 

No. 4675

B -2 0 3  (6 /6 8 )

SENATE

NO. :

el'CW0" lto,„ „,nti« the right of

froffl parole-* : ------------------- ' ■
•me above b i l l  has been referred  to the W v i s l o n ^ t h e  ^ J KU f e ° t

conment. “ ter  carefu l r e v ie v , ! «  £  n i!  no ap p reciab le  e f f e c t  « j J “ g k
S tate  fin ances « d l( e >  th is  o f f ic e  hoes not have th e t e  » w  .
E X S t t S i t f S —  » reccnaendatlon on the b i l l .  ■ -

We t h e r e f o r e  make no re c o m m e n d a tio n .

~ ~

5/ 3/71

O O O O O O G
JA 00044



Multiple memorandum received from the 
State Comptroller dated MAY 5  B71 

stating the following bill is of
i"No Interest" to the~ Department of 

«Xudit and Control.l

Intro. No. Print No.
I

p\ t-4 (tj / Zj
The original Itnemorandum filed with: S 'd "? 03

I

r e

i

000000.7

I JA 0004



: B I L L  MEMORANDUM

/Mr..
1 .  INTRODUCER.  M r .  W e m p l e .  M u l t i - s p o n s o r e d  b y  H r ,  C o r b e t t .

I I .  TITLE OF BILL, An! A ct t o  amend t h e  e l e c t i o n  l a w ,  i n  r e ­
l a t i o n  t o  t h e  r i g h t  o f  a c o n v i c t e d  f e l o n  t o  r e g i s t e r  f o r  
o r  v o te  a t  any e l e c t i o n  up o n  e x p i r a t i o n  o f  maximum s e n  
t e n c e  o r  d i s c h a r g e :  from  p a r o l e .

I I I .

IV .

V..

SUMMARY OF PROVISIONS. T h i s  b i l l  w o u ld  g i v e  a  p e r s o n  c o n -  
v i c t l ' d ' o f  a f e lo n y ;  t h e  r i g h t  t o  v o t e  upon  t h e  e x p i r a t i o n  
o f  h i s  maximum s e n t e n c e  o r  when h e  i s  d i s c h a r g e d  f ro m
p a r o l e .  ]

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY. The b i l l  was s u g g e s t e d  by^m any^ w i t -  
n e s s e s "  who t e s t i f i e d  b e f o r e  t h e  h e a r i n g  o f  t h e  A s s e m b ly  
C o d e S 'C o m m i t t e e , S u b c o m m it t e e  on C o r r e c t i o n a l  S e r v i c e s  
h e l d  t o  i n v e s t i g a t e  p r o b l e m s  i n v o l v e d  i n  c o r r e c t i o n s . ;

! i
JUSTIFICATION. One o f  t h e  p r i m a r y  c o n c e r n s  o f  t h e  p e n a l  
s y l t ~eir ~£i~~tne r e h a b i l i t a t i o n  o f  t h e  o f f e n d e r .  O n c e  t h e  
o f f e n d e r  h a s  s e r v e d  h i s  s e n t e n c e  o r  h a s  b e e n  d i s c h a r g e d  
f ro m  p a r o l e ,  h e  i s  I p r e s u m e d  t o  b e  c a p a b l e  o r  r e  j o i n i n g  
s o c i e t y  The c o u r s e  o f  r e h a b i l i t a t i o n  e n d s  a b r u p t l y , i  how - 
e ^ e r !  due t o  v a r i o u s  d i s a b i l i t i e s .  One o f  t h e s e  i s  t h e  
r T a h t  t o  v o t e .  I b i s  i n c o n s i s t e n t  w i t h  t h e  g e n e r a l  p h i l ­
o so p h y  o f  c o r r e c t i o n s  t o  c o n t i n u e  p u n i s h m e n t  a f t e r  a  p e r s o n  
has* a c c o u n t e d .  T h i s  b i l l  w o u ld  h e l p  e f f e c t u a t e  t h e  o f f e n  
d e r 1 ^ t r a n s f e r  i n t o  s o c i e t y  i n  a m o s t  f a v o r a b l e  w a y .

: i
VT_ ’FISCAL IMPLICATIONS. N o n e .

i
V I I .  EFFECTIVE DATE. I m m e d i a t e l y .

secs
2 /5 /7 1

f?3

JA 00046



S T A T E  o r  N E W  Y O R K

Honorable Michael Whiteman 
Counsel to  the Governor 
S ta te  C ap ito l 
Albany, New York

Re: A$Sembly 4675

Dear Mikes I
S ub ject b i l l ,  by amending sec tio n  152 of the 

E lec tio n  Law, seeks to  [res to re  the r i g h t  to  r e g is t e r  
and vote to  a co n v ic ted  fe lo n  whose "maximum sentence 
has expired or he has been d ischarged  from p a ro le " .

Although I  have no o b jec tio n  to  the m erits  of 
t h i s  b i l l ,  th e re  i s  p re sen ted  th e  question  as to  i t s  
le g a l e f f e c t ,  i f  enacted  in to  law, in  l i g h t  of the 
p ro v is io n  of se c tio n  3 o f A r t ic le  I I  of the  S ta te  
C o n s titu tio n  re q u ir in g  .the ex c lu sio n  from the r ig h t  
o f su ffrage of any person convicted  of b rib e ry  or o f  
any infamous crim e. '

JPLasc •

• '4

00-00009

JA 00047



Apaablyiaau Peter H. Bioadn 
Chairman

Senator Join H, CaUadra 
V iet Chairman

AnaemBljrtnan Anthony J, Merwr^la 
Secretary

COMMITTEE MEMBEhs
Awcutbif

Qjarica D- Henderson 
John T. BucVicr 
DoiuU L  T trio r 
Ksjnnond J- Lili

Senate
Bernard G. Gordon 
ju re*  H. Don err an 
Bernard C  Smith 
Albert B. Lewi*
John J. Santucel
William E. Mariano 

Counsel

. STATE OF NEW YORK

JO IN T  LEG ISLA TIV E COM M ITTEE  
ON

; E L E C T IO N  LAW

**BEKatY CHAUSt»-■STATI CAPfTCL 
AkSANY. NSW T03K 1JLU4

May 12, 1971

Hon. Michael Whiteman :
Executive Chamber j
State Capitol ,
Albany, New York ; Re: Assembly bill 4675
Dear Mr. Whiteman: I
We recommend that the Governor act favorably on this legislation." 
Under present law a person who has completed paying his debt to 
society as a result of having been convicted of a crime must 
still receive a pardon or bejrestored to the rights of citizenship 
beofre he is permitted to vote.
Assuming that the ultimate goal of our penal system is rehabilitation 
of the person convicted of a| crime, we cannot see any further ! 
benefit to be gained by reminding a person of the fact of his past 
errors after he has acquitted himself to the correctional system 
by again reminding him to seek permission to vote. j
We believe that once a person has served his sentence and where j 
his parole has terminated hei should be accepted back into the community 
and not be constantly reminded of the fact of his past errors*

Sincerely yours-J /“““ N

-rn r\-,
5eter R. Biondo

0000010

w 5

i JA 00048



S T A T ; £ 0 E V; Y O R

DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONAL SERVICES
^ i

G O V .  A . S ' .  S M I T H  

S T A T E  O F F I C E  B U I L D I N G  

A L B A N Y ,  N . Y .  1 2 2 2 5
May 1 0 ,  1971

RUSSELL G. OSWALD 
COMMISSIONER

Honorable Michael Whiteman
Counsel to the Governor approved
Executive Chamber j 
State Capitol 
Albany, New York

» " ‘
Re: Assemblv #46751 ""

Dear Sir: i
i

This bill,amends the Election Law 
Section 152, Subdivision 6, relating to the right 
of a convicted felonjto register and vote.

This is not a Department bill, but 
the Department of Correctional Services supports 
this proposal, j

The bill will permit convicted felons 
to register and vote!after the expiration of the 
maximum term imposed by the court, ox when he
has been discharged from parole.»iThis is a great stride in the right 
direction. If we believe in the rehabilitation of 
prisoners and their return to society, we roust 
support this bill. j

The Department of Correctional Services 
strongly urges the Governor to sign this measure 
into law.

Sincerely yours,

COUNSEL
as

0 0 0 0 0 JI

JA 00049



1 1 f / / (
P : £ ' . V  Y O R ! ^  U R B A N  C O A L I T I O N  I N C . .  5 2  F f c T H  A V E N U E ,  N E W  Y O R K ,  N .Y .  1 0 0 0 3  2 1 2 - f l B  1 - B

May 20, 1972

The Honorable Michael Whiteman 
Executive Chamber 
State Capitol 
Albany, New York 12224

Dear Mr. Whiteman:

j Re: 4675 - Wemple

' Although our consents were not specifically requested on th is  b i l l ,  I 
would like  to go on record, ion behalf of the New York Urban Coalition  as being 
strongly in.^avor of i t s  enactment.

This amendment to the Election Law would be an important step in the d irec­
tion of acknowledging that ex-offenders can re-enter the mainstream o f so c ie ty . 
Having served his sentence and been discharged from parole, he has presumably 
oaid his debt to society for his crime, and the right to vote should be restored  
to him. This d isa b ility  is  Ian especially important one to ex-offenders who l ive  
in small towns, where the vqting records are more v is ib le  to neighbors .than they 
are -in big c it ie s ,  and a man who is  trying to make a new start 1s often  impeded 
because his past becomes known when he does not register to vote.

Many New York organizations and individuals support th is  
riqht to vote— Citizens Union, Correctional Association, C iv il l ib e r t ie s  Union, 
Board of Elections Commissioner O’Rourke— and you may knew that Governor- C ah ill 
is  expected to sign a sim ilar b i l l  recently passed by the New Jersey le g is la t io n .

law.

We strongly urge that you recommend that the Governor sign th is  b i l l  in to: \ 
i

Sincerely,

t u ^  •
Eugene S. Callender

ESC:bw

i 1 ' f

I L O W U  *  L . ~  C * Y i . .  O i v l  ‘  »  Z . , , h T -  c W w i . r ,  U M -  *  t U U m i ,  U * H S i  .

E * - l n  « * « « " ♦  * T ?  l u t .  J n ,  T i m . .  R . y  ! " " * • ,  C O R E  •  & • » > « •
> » » ■ - « >  P « "  Ammtlcmr  *  *  -  7 c , f f „ T  j  i * c C . I 1R  D u n V w  •  C f c w l e #  V .  V ,

p—  o--». nr:: *£77LK~Lt  n*v t* M 9  C # v  »  t im tm r j  " *  .  ,  . . .  i  5 7 0 1  btm rd C*mp  ! • *  *  I n r i n f  A m tiim m m m wc«,.« v  r̂jnir̂  v«, k.t.c.c— i l*-,
*  T h « ~ *  W I S e m ,  F l » « »  C i t y  a . n i  ■  H » » W t  W a W m c n ,  * " * > * *  C m *.

„  j - V  * ' •" ' 1

0 0 0 0 0 ] 2
JA 00050



t h e  a s s o c i a t i o n  o f  t h e  j a r  ;

a r  t h e  c r r r  or n e w  t o * k  /  /

4 2  W l I T  A A T w  S T R E E T  

MCW YORK JOC>e
C O M M I T T E E  o n  s t a t e  l e g i s l a t i o n

MICHAEL u. MANET . CHAIRMAN*9-wall rr*crr ^
M E W  Y O « K  I 0 C 0 5

T 3 L .  H A  3 - 3 1 0 3
May 7 , 1971

H . » L A N C  M I C H A E L  secretary 
JUS W A L L  r T R E E T  

N E W  Y C r n K  5 0 C C f #  

T E 1 - .  H A  * - 3 I O C

He: A; 4675 - A p p r o v e d

Dear Mr. Whiteman: i

I n  r e p l y  t o  y o u r  i n q u i r y > we a p p r o v e  t h e
r e f e r e n c e d  b i l l .  •

. , The b i l l ,  t o  t k k e  e f f e c t  i m m e d i a t e l y ,  w o u ld  
amend S e c t i o n  152 o f  t h e ! E l e c t i o n  Law w h ic h  now p r o v i d e s ,  
i n t e r  a l i a ,  t h a t  p e r s o n s } c o n v i c t e d  o f  a f e l o n y  p u r s u a n t  
I s t L t Z ^ ' o E t h i s  S t a t k ,  o r  o f  c e r t a i n  f e l o n i e s  i n  t h e  
f e d e r a l  c o u r t s  o r  i n  t h e ] c o u r t s  o f  a n o t h e r  s t a t e ,  s h a l l  
n o t  h a v e  t h e  r i g h t  t o  r e g i s t e r  o r  v o t e  m  an y  e l e c t i o n  
t h e r e a f t e r  u n t i l  t h e y  s h h l l  h a v e  b e e n  p a r d o n e d  by  t h e  
a p p r o p r i a t e  a u t h o r i t y  o f j t h e  c o n v i c t i n g  j u r i s d i c t i o n  o r  
s h a l l ^ h a v e  r e c e i v e d  a  c e r t i f i c a t e  o f  g o o d  c o n d u c t  g r a n t e d  
J v  t h e  New Y ork  B oard  o fl  P a r o l e .  T he  e f f e c t  o f  t h e  p r e s e n t  
law i s  t o  d e p r i v e  a p e r s o n  c o n v i c t e d  o f  a  f e l o n y  o f  t h e  
r i a h t  t o  r e g i s t e r  and  v o t e  f o r  t h e  r e s t  o f  h i s  l i f e  u n l e s s  
t h e  p a rd o n  o r  c e r t i f i c a t e  p r o c e d u r e s  h a v e  b e e n  c o m p l i e d  
S t h  The b i l l  w ould  ad d  t o  e a c h  o f  t h e  s u b s e c t i o n s  o f  
n h is 'b i l l  a p r o v i s i o n  t h a t  t h e  d i s q u a l i f i c a t i o n  f r o m  
r e g i s t r a t i o n ^ a n d  v o t i n g  s h a l l  a u t o m a t i o a l l y  and u p o n  t h e ^  
e x p i r a t i o n  o f  t h e  maximum s e n t e n c e  o r  u p o n  d i s c h a  g 
p a r o l e .

I t  i s  an anachronism in t h e  law  t h a t  a c o n v i c t e d  
f e l o n  who h a s  p a i d  h i s  d e b t  t o  s o c i e t y  s h o u l d  c o n t i n u e  t o  
b e  d e r i v e d  o f  t h e  m o s t  b a s i c  r i g h t ^ u c f k T t  s ^ u X  = n ly

i n  t h i s  b i l l  c a r r y  o u t  t h e  b a s s o  concept that t h e  r i g h t  
t o  v o t e  i s  t o  b e  p r o t e c t e d  a n d  p r o m o t e d .



Hon. Michael Whiteman - 2 -

F o r  the r e a s o n s  s t a t e d ,  w e  a p p r o v e  tne b i l l

Sincerely,

H o n . M i c h a e l  W hitem an j 
E x e c u t i v e  C ham ber
S t a t e .  C a p i t o l  j ; ' . * ..
A l b a n y ,  New York 12224  ,

This letter «as p r e p a r e ?  by the Association's M t M
on  C i v i l  Rights. !

il

i
!I

/I. f-.f
'• -i

00000J 4
JA 00052



EXHIBIT B



C H A P T E R & l /
Cal. No. 701 2111—E

1973-1974 Regular Sessions

IN SENATE-
J a n u a r y  3 0 ,  1 9 7 3

X.

Itilrnelurrrf hv v>,.llK nr.VXK (i i , .• ,

... ™,'"V‘r,,' r.....,,,r.....1 ...... ~

AN-ACT
T o  a m e n d  the e le c t io n  la w .  in r e l a t io n  to the r i g h t  o f  a  c o n v i c t e d  

fe lo n  io r e g i s t e r  to r  o r  v o te  a t  any e je c t io n

C ' l M T I f  l !  f «  J  h".

A l '\‘t rM-t'i!

0 0 0 0 0 0 1
'5/- I

JA 00053



7- a-Q5:1': 2. 9 :CHPT. l

c t  a T F. OF N E W  YORJC

*Cal. No. 7 01 2 1 1 1 — 3

1 9 7 3 - 1 9 7 4  R e g u l a r  S e s s i o n !

a n  a c t
TO amend in . eleclinn »  " •» " « > <° * »  riaM * **'*** i f  

felon to register lor or vote at any eleniion

n. r..pie./ .»• w . 1 » -  T"‘' ... . ™ S,“ “ “ *..do e*«*ct « f

a i- * *  * r  -  *"
,  of •-« <«»" '■*• ”  *“ "arf b? 'h,P'" ,h'" i.’
a «.< .* u ~  m .h—  “ * -
4 by arm’iided to read m  f o l i o s :
5 ‘ 2. No p ™  «h» t o  * »  ronviet.d  of *•>«■"«<  ’*

. » „  a,  rot# At any election unlfw  be 
1 *h.ll hare the r.*** *  « ^ “ trT fDr °r ™ ?

. a » w-*- « !«. * *■ »• *-*-*
S  « » A n « »  —  *

0  0 0  0 0  0 2  I . . . . . . . . . . i , ---7 ■ J A  0 0 0 5 4



s - m  u

i

<

4
5 

S 
7

9

10

11
12

13

14

15 

I S  

17 

I S  

19 

»

2
» im ii Im v <- U-P11 p a n l o i i r - i !  nr r m t n r m l  n , t h r  r i g h t s  o f  r i t i * r - i , * h i p  

t'.V tin - i f m  m in r ,  g [u r ' c r r i v t - d  n c e r t i f i c a t e  o f  g n * x j c o n d u c i  g r a n t e d  

I iy  tin - I w o in i  *if f m r u l c  p u r s u a n t  f o  t h e  p m -  s „ f  fj,,. e x e c u t i v e  

l.rw ' t o  r e m o t e  t ie -  i l i M i t i i l i i y  u n d e r  t h i s  ( a c t i o n  b e c a u s e  it!  c o n -

v p ’ lH O i.J  n r  t t lil 'rw i l i U  m a x i m u m  « c i i t r n r c  u j  i m /> runpanent  Il u  

e x p i r e d  n r  In- I n is  b e e n  d w c h n r j r e d  f r o n t  p a r o l e .  T i m  g o v e r n o r ,  h o s t -  

o v .- r .  m i i y  u l f iK - h  AM » m u d  if n u t in  m y  « u e h  p n r d im  a p r n v i * h m  t h a t  

im y  M U 'ii p e r w  -t * J u d l n n (  h a w  t h e  r i g h t  o f  s t o r a g e  u n t i l  i l  s h a l l  

h a v e  I jj 'i 'ii  u r p n r n tr 'y  r e s to re d  in  h i m .

1!. N'n p m m i  « l x i  bru t b i 'i 't i  c o n v i c t e d  o f  a n d  i . tn ic n c .t l  to  d iostk  or  

im p r is o n m e n t  fo r  n f e l o n /  in  a  f e d e r a l  c o u r t ,  i f  t h e  n f f r n x -  a r t n d d  

I 'o i m t i f u t e  n  f c l o n j  u n d e r  t h e  l a w s  o f  t h i s  s t a t e ,  *Jw>U h a v e  i h '  r i j r h i  

t o  r e g i s t e r  / n r  o r  v o t e  a t  a n y  e l e c t i o n  t n h s t  h e  * v c  b e e n  

p a r d o n e d  o r  r e s t o r e d  t o  t h e  r i g h t s  o f  r i t i i e n s h i p  h y  t h e  p , -n t o f  

t h e  r u t t e d  S t a t e n ,  o r  u n l e s s  h is  m a x i m u m  s e n t e n c e  n j im p r is o n m e n t  

h a s  e , \ , i i r e d  n r  l ie  b a a  b e e n  d i s c h a r g e d  f r o m  p a r o l e .  A sen ten ce  of  

im p r is o n m e n t nfton w h ich  ex ecu tio n  is  su sp e n d e d  is  not a sentence 

o f  im p r is o n m e n t  w i th in  the. m e a n i n g  o f this su b d iv is io n .

4 . No ?tcrson w h o  h a s  been convicted of and se n te n c e d  to d e a th  o r  

imprisonment for  n felony in n federnl court of HD offense of which

s u c h  c o u r t  h a s  e j e l u a i v e  j u r i s d i c t i o n ,  s h a l l  h a v e  ( h e  r i g h t  t o  r e g i s t e r

22
fur nr v o t e  a t  a n y  e l e c t i o n  u n J e w  h e  s h a l l  h a v e  b e e n  p a r d o n e d  o r

23
r e s t o r e d  t o  t h e  r i g h t s  u f  c i t i x c n a h i p  b y  t h c p r e s i d e n t  o f  t h e  H n i t e d

24
Stales, or unless his m an m u m  sememe* of in p n x n i> ,rR<' h to  ex-

SS
p ir e d  or  h r  h a a  b e e n  d i a c h a r g r d  f r o m  p a r o le .  A  sen ten ce  o f  net

88
p r u o n m e n l upon uhich execution r  su sp e n d e d  u  sot a sentence a f

87
■ mprsionment within tke messmng af this subdivision

0 0 0 0 0 0 3

JA 00055



S--2JU-B
3

1
1
I
4
5
6 

7 
g  

9

10
11

a. N o  p e r s o n  w h o  h a s  b e e n  c o n v i c t e d  and s e n t e n c e d  to  d e a t h  o r  

i m p r i s o n ,  in  a n o t h e r  s t a t e  f o r  a c ? irn (. w h i c h  w o u l d  c o n s t i t u t e  

n f  f i n n y  u n d e r  t h e  l a w s  o f  t h i s  s t o l e  s h a l l  h a v e  t h e  r i j r h i  In  r e g i s t e r  

f o r  o r  v o t e  n t  any r a t i o n  in  t h is  s t a t e  u n l e s s  h e  s!l(ln luv,  bp,„  

p a r d o n e d  o r  r e s t o r e d  to  t h e  r i g h t s  o f  c i l i z w u b j p  b y  t h e  g o v e r n o r  

o r  o t h e r  a p p r o p r i a t e  a u t h o r i t y  o f  s u c h  o t h e r  s t a t e ,  n r  u u l e w  h i s  

m a x i m u m  s e n t e n c e  o f i m p r i s o n m e n t h a s  e x p i r e d  o r  h f  h a s  b e e n  

d i s c h a r g e d  f r o n t  p a r o l e .  A  s . n t e n e e  o f  i m p l e m e n t  u p o n  u h . c h

e x e c u t i o n ^  su s p e n d e d u no, a  sen tence  o f i m p r i s o n m e n ,  un ik in  Ike  

m e a n in g  a f  th is  su b d iv is io n .

§  2 . if i is a c t  shall f a k e  effect immediately.

0 0 0 0 0 0 4

JA 00056



O'
State of Ttew

In Senate
f a  & .

OUliHi-
'ReviVi o4 \ \ \  Vh* KewwVt} cwcuiV Tft»v * T*%ye*\W\ m tu a tt \ »  e r * . \  V *  tjoNetej* hŵ jovWŝ

Us* return to th« ierit* of the Senitt olil 80................  a z / A . ' f . .............................................

(of the parpen® of am̂ ndewraS.



State of New York

Executive Chamber

To the Senate:

Albany

May 13, 1973

S r t in l r  unit A w m h l y ,  h r n u r t th

,V uinbrtr 2111-A

I 'm  <nuitl h> ro/u  in  i m l  m o l u h i u t  nj tin '  

(' i r lu i i i r t l  lot i i tn tn ih r i f i t /  S f i ln t r  Mill.

Entitled “An Af t

to amand the election lav, in relation to 
the right of a convicted,, felon to register 
for or vote at any election’

Counael to the Governor

o o o o o o s

JA 00058



W jftM! Scntie bii( returned from Governor. .umendrtl ana repossed.

. 19* 73.

Pu
''S"H,lt t7 D,iCUrm,t reso!uti°» of th« Senate am! AB.-n.Ufc-. the  C .vert,or retu rned

S r n a t c  b i l l  n n . 2111-A
, entitled*'

AN ACT To amend t h e  e l e c t i o n  l a w ,  i n  r e l a t i o n  
t o  t h e  r i g h t  o f  a c o n v i c t e d  f e l o n  
t o  r e g i s t e r  f o r  o r  v o t e  a t  any  e l e c t i o n

Thr vote upon the final paw aire o f th e  aaitn-
S en s .

On motion of J t t o : . , . . Dunne ,  G s t c I b.

n iirM H H t

rhi* 5iime uns Amended an follows : **
.md In’ uii;uunii<u> ('undent,

3v S e n s .  Du nce ,  C a r c i a

-a-nenci S e n a t e  a m  lVo. 21U-A as £oUow, :

S t r i k e  o u t  e v e r y t h i n g  a f t e r  t h
e,1-icC  i  rj; > c i . a u s . i n s e r t

0 0 0 0 0 0 7

u e o d i v i s r o c s  c- . o,  t h r e e ,  f a u r

r  “  S CC C i 0 n  00 6  hUnd" d £ i ^ y - t u o  o f  t h e  e l e c t i o n
aw.  a s  a mended b y  c h a p t e r  c h r e e  ^  ^  ^ ^  ^  *

^  nineCCen y —  . are hereby feuded Co
r e a d  a s  f o l l o w s :

2’ *>« boon coov.cct of ond sen_
~ Ced t o  . d e a t h  o r  i m p r i s o n m e n t  f n r  .  r . ,  
r  ---------------------- — ^ - 1 2 1  a f e l o n y ,  p u r s u a n t
CO t h e  l a w s  o f  t h i s  s t a t e  s h a l l  h

* S n a U  o J v e  t h e  r i g h t  CO
- c g i s t c r  f o r  o r  v o t e  n r  an v  e l s c t - ’on’ leCUon wn.css ihaii
h a v e  b e e n  p a r d o n e d  o r  r e s t o r e d  t o  t h e  r i g h t s  o f  e r t i -

z e n s h i p  by  t h e  g o v e r n o r ,  f o r  r e c e i v e d  a c e r t i f i e s

.Of g oo d  c o n d u c t  g r a n t e d  by cha  b o i r d  r. F
* Da rd  o f  P a r o l e  p u r s u a n t

to tto provision, „f the e,ecuciv, U u  „  ^

d i s a b i l i t y  u o d . 1  t h i s  s e c t  i o n  b e c a u s e  o f  s u c h  o o n v i t -

t i o n ,  ) o r  u n l e s s  h i s  maximum s e n t e n c e  o 1-ac u i - c i i c e  Ov i c i p r i s o n a e n r

iw  i  ii i.  - , - h . i t : . . r\ r~ ..~  ......... J A  0 0 0 5 9



■ T h e  v o te u p o n  th e  final pa?savre of the **ine

L y * * Dunne .  G a r c i aOn m o tio n  o f  H X X ------“ u i ' “ = '........

Ihe 'HfDP w a s amended a* f o l lo w * ;

ifi;

B y S e n s .  D un ne ,  G a r c i a

.'cnenci S e n a t e  B i l l  N o .  2 1 1 1 - A

L ;
S t r i k e o u t  e v e r y t h i n g  a f t e r

V '

*

and

S e c t i o n  1.  S u b d i v i s i o n s  t w o ,  t h r e e ,  f o u r  

a n d  f i v e  d £ s e c t i o n  one  h u n d r e d  f i f t y - t w o  o f  t h s  e l e c t i o n  

l a w ,  a s  ame nd ed  b y  c h a p t e r  t h r e e  h u n d r e d  t a n  o f  t h e  l a w s  . 

o f  n i n e t e e n  h u n d r e d  s e v e n t y - o n e ,  a r e  h e r e b y  a r s e i . d ed  t o .  

r e a d  a t  f o l l o w s :

2 .  No p e r s o n  who ha s  b e e n  c o n v i c t e d  o f  and s e n - . 

t e n c e d  t o  d e a t h  o r  i m p r i s o n m e n t  f o r  a f e l o n y ,  p u r s u a n t  

t o  t h e  l a w s  o f  t h i s  s t a t e ,  s h a l l  h a v e  t h e  r i g h t  t o  

r e g i s t e r  f o r  o r  v o c e  n r  any  e l e c t i o n  u n l e s s  h e  s h a l l  

h a v e  b e e n  p a r d o n e d  o r  r e s t o r e d  Co t h e  r i g h t s  o f  c i t i ­

z e n s h i p  by  t h e  g o v e r n o r ,  ( o r  r e c e i v e d  a c e r t i f i c a t e  

o f  g o o d  c o n d u c t  g r a n c e d  by  t h e  b o a r d  o f  p a r o l e  p u r s u a n t  

t o  t h e  p r o v i s i o n s  o f  t h e  e x e c u t i v e  law t o  r e m o v e  t h e  

d i s a b i l i t y  u n d e r  t h i s  s e c t i o n  b e c a u s e  o f  s u c h  co c iv L c -  

t i o n , ]  o r  u n l e s s  h i s  maximum s e n t e n c e  o f  i m p r i s o n m e n t  

w . ■ ■ !u-v»< : oh.r .  g e d  f r o m  p a r o l e .

T n a  g o v e r n o r ,  h o v i ' . v r , . .ay ■ ■■■ n a:; .. J.w

-n-.' ;:>.ich n a t d o n  r > ra v i s i u : i  l i -,.* awv m u i  h p e r s o n  s h a l l  

n o t  h a v e  t h e  r i g h t  of s u i t  rage u n c i  l i t  s h a l l  h a v e  been 

s e p a r a t e l y  r e s t o r e d  t o  h im .

3 .  No p a r s o n  who ha s  ba en  c o n v i c t e d  o f  f i nd  s e n -

t c n c c c 1 co d tir. o r  ir?.,prxscj ' ■raent f o r  a f e l o n y  i n  a  f e d ­

e r a l  c o u r t ,  i f  t h e  o f f e n s e  wo u l d  c o n s t i t u t e  a  f e l o n y  

u n d e r  the law::  o f  t h i s  s t a t e - ,  s h a l l  h a v e  t h e  r i g h t  t o  

.vr t o r o r vuf.'j any - 1 - cc ; jnL'tr: s hall
!;r 'j u  p.'irdvC.cci o r  rersco r  od co c . i -  V i y c t Z. C ' j Z f

l
residue oi r.he Uniter

1C*.' :
or i*

.•'3 ci
b-;*en c l s c r u i T ^ s d  t r e r .  ;A . 1 :ol:

A t o s ,  o r n n -

hii& c :;p  Lr e d
; * V— •* >S J A  0 0 0 6 0

0 0 0 0 0 0 3



V-

i n n r  i  s o r j a e n t  arson -which e x e c u t i o n  i s  s u s p e n d e d  i s  n e t  
n s e n t e n c e  o f  imn r i s o n a e n '  w i t h i n  t h e  m e a n i n g  o f  t h i s  

s u b d i v i s i o n .
4 .  N c  person who has been convicted of a n d sen- 

I tencea to death or 1 trorisonnent for a felony in a fed­
eral court of on offense of which such court has ex­
clusive jurisdiction, shall haye Che right to register 

for or vote at any election unless he shall have been 
pardoned or restored to the rights of citizenship by 
the president of the United States, or unless his mas- 
irrum sentence of iroprIsonmant has expired or he has 
been discharged from parole. A sentence -.f imprison­
ment upon which execution is suspended is not a sen­
tence of imprisonment within the meaning of this gub- 
divls ion.

5« No person who has been convicted and sentenc­
ed to death or imprisonment in another state for a crims 
which would constitute a felony under the laws of this" 
state shaiL have the fight cn register for or vote at 
any election in this stace unless he shall have been 
pardoned or restored Co the rights of citizenship by 
the governor or other appropriate authority of such 
other state, or unless his maximum sentence of impri­
sonment has expired or he has been discharged from 
parole. A sentence of imprisonment upon which execu- 
tion is suspended is not a sentence of imprisonment 

within the meaning of this subdivision.
§ 2. This act shall Cak.e effect immediately,

•Said bill as amended Ixxomine Senate itsprml h’o. . . .®! . .............was reprinted,

rc-eiijtrossed and, harm* been on the desks of the member* in it* Tina! form at least three cat. 

.»ririur- letfi*1.1tivc (Java, whs passed and ordered *enl to the Assembly for concurrence.

By order of the Senate,

0 0 0 0 0 0 9

JA 00061
fo rm  Mo. 33 Hr*,J / » / M



AS5SD'»/ /:■' /  r

7 DATS SOLICITS! Lr/SCBIV.

L t . • Gove rnor  
A t t o r n e y  General 

' - C o m p t r o l l e r
S e c r e t a r y  t o  .the Gove rnor  

Budget  ■
l a n n l n g  S e r v i c e s ^

S p o n s o r

.dlrendack Park Agency 
Aging
Agriculture 4 Markets
Architecture
Arts
Atomic 4 Space Development 
Banking
Cable Television l .w .
Civil Service 
Commerce
Consumer Protection Board 
■Correctional Services 
Crime Victims Compensation 
Criminal Justice Services 
Dormitory Authority 
Education Department 
Employee Relations 
Environmental Conservation 
Environmental Facil.Corp. 
Equalization & Assessment 
General Services 
Health
Realth 4 MenHyg-Fac . ImpCorn.
Hous ing 4 Community Renewal
Housing Finance Agency
Human Rights
I n s u r a n c e  Department
Job Development
Labor
Local Government 
Mental Hygiene 
Metropolitan Trans.Auth. 
Military 4 Naval Affairs 
Mortgage Agency 
Motor Vehicles 
Municipal Bond Bank Agency 
Narcotic Addiction Control 
Parka 4 Recreation 
Pension Commission 
Port Authority 
Power Authority 
Probation
Public Employment Bel. 
Public Service 
Social Services 
Social Welfare, So^d o. 
State Department /
State Investigation fonm. 
State Liquor Authority 
State Police 
State University 
Taxation 4 Finance 
Thruway Authority 
Transportation 
Urban Development Corp. 
Veterans’ Affairs 
Waterfront Commission 
Welfare Inspector General 
Workmen ’ a Comp . Bd.
Tout ft

Reprint A'___________
Judicial Conference 

~~ Law Revision Commission \ 
Ear Association 

il̂ fl.Y.S. Trial Lawyers Assju 
~J^fCasn. of Bar of N.Y

'Bar Assn, of ________ ___-County
District Attorneys Assoc.* 
nTy . Civil Liberties Unior

fCounty Judges Assn. 
\wetr.ily Court Judges 
^ _,gistrates Assn.
Supreme Court Justices 
Surrogates Assn.

AFL-CIO
__  A s s o c i a t e d  I n d u s t r i e s  >

Commerce 4 Industry Assn;; 
~u/Community Se; /ice Society*

s s o c l a t l o n  o f  Towns s 
T K c c u n t y  O f f i c e r s  A s s n m  
^ C o n f e r e n c e  o f  Ma y or s  i

' B i g  S i x  M a y o r s

Mayor

Town Sup.

Co. Leg.

Co. A t t y .

Co. Exec.

Del.

Temp. State Com. on:

A d v i s o r y  C o u n c i l  o n:

J $ \ olnt" 'Leg. Comm.

t:\tjUJuZ L O ^

on:

cn S<TUL^‘

0000010

JA 00062



j:
'MBBiinriimiiiiiM , ji ■ 11

PILL # / / / i2.

-*T>S

7£L5CTIDNS

iNT5 Election Coirsaissioners Ass 1 r, 
league of Mcmen Voters of NYS 

■̂ Honest Ballot Ass’n 
r crt1 s Union

l^W^%iipub licaa State Commit tee

Reprint

NIC Board of Elections

Sih:
gfegfclC SERVICE

l&fi. • Brooklyn Union Gas Co.
’Central Hudson Gas § Electric Corp. 
"Consolid a ted' Edison

Gas' Co.
””̂ isfli#snd lighting Co.

a Hofayk Power Corp.
_ Gms (J 'liectric Corpj 
'Orange 8 Rockland Utilities, Inc. 
Rochester Gas 5 Electric Corp.

New York Telephone Co.

: Empire State Petroleum Ass ’n Inc, 
ur ?TfS Petroleum Council

Conavaaex Action Nc*w
Gpn#Vjs®x ■'Atfaira Clearing House for Western N<sw York' 

union
____  Consumer Assembly
SgfUv'■&&*&§r Committee on Electric Hatea, Inc.

hfoaU-'TOi^sioa
m mSKi,' ' Itox York S ta te  CATV Aa* >n

Cntile T e le v is io n  A a s ’ n 
s- nr Bureau i ——• PCC

t̂ f®«!fc::--Ifa'fOraatio«. Canter 
i»l. ■
A ii'ir  o f  Thaat^re 0»nera 

ia n a l A si'n  o f B road casters  
TfOrt S ta te  B road casters Aaa ’n 0 0 0 0 0 1 1

e s s ' .■ ■ •. -j .......
JA 00063



/
J

Appellate Div, Dent,Presiding" justice,
Asnn. of'supreme Court Judges
>Sar Assn, of ______ ______ County ..

i^^pivisicn of Original Justice of O.p, s, i f J  
.Criminal Justice Coordinating Council of H.Y.C.. D. A, , Counties of 

s-^Legel Aid Society -* / Queens, Brooklyn
Civil Liberties Union 
N.Y.S. Trial Lawyers Assn,

_;lnternational Assn, of Chiefs of Police 
-'•'yl.Y.S, Assn, of Chief 
■T^colice Conferen: e o;

Police Commissioner, 
Waterfront Commission

H.
of Police v ,
Y. Citv

rrectional Assn, of N,

3 ?
Council of ILLS. Probation A d m i n i s t r a t o r s  
vJj.Y.S. Probation & Parole Officers Assn., Inc. 
Probation & Par'ole Officers Assn, of Greater N.Y. y 
N.Y.S. Div.of the International Assn, for Identificatit 
National Council on Crime & D e l i n q u e n c y

Community Service Society 
N.Y.C. Urban Coalition 
N.Y.S. Council of Chapters, Nat'1. Assn, of Social Wkrqii|

Michael R. Juviler, Esq 
William Hellerstein,Esq. 
Richard Denser, Esq.
Hon, Peter McQuillan

115 Willow St.,Apt. 60 
Brooklyn,N. Y. 11201 ;b:#|gj
Chief,Appeals Bureau,legal y.3| 
Aid Soc. ,119 5th Ave. , N.Y'̂ sT" Fordham Univ.Sch.of Law 
Lincoln Center, IT. Y.
194-30C 65 Crescent
Flushing, N.Y., 11365

jail

Empire State Beer Dist., Inc,
Finger Lakes Wine Museum
Greater N.Y.Wholesale Liquor Dlrs.Assn.Inc» 
Metropolitan Package Stores Assn.
N.Y.Importers & Distillers Assn., Inc,
N.Y.S. Brewers Assn.
N.Y.S. Wholesale Beer Distributors Assn,, Inc. 
N.Y.S. Wholesale Liquor Assn., Inc.
Restaurant League of New York, Inc.
State Rest. Liquor Dealers Assn.
United Restaurant Liquor Dealers of Manhattan,Inc, 
Westchester Retail Liquor Dealers Assn,, Inc.

0 0 0 0 0 1 2

JA 00064



'W c^ . ,
'A S S S D ^ A - '^ T  SOLICIT
Lt. Governor*'— ^
A tto rn e y  G enera l  
C o m p tr o l l e r
S e c r e t a r y  t o  the Governor 
Budget
P la n n in g  S e rv ic e s  
S ponsor

_ Adirondack Park Agency . Aging -h
. Agriculture & Markets 
Architecture Arts
Atomic § Space Development Banking

. Cable Television Comm. Civil Service 
Commerce
Consumer Protection Board 
Correctional Services 
Crime Victims Compensation Criminal Justice Services

____ Dormitory Authority
~ Education Department___ Employee Relations

. - Environmental Conservation
___  Environmental Facll.Corp.
___ Equalization A Assessment
—  _ General Services
___ Health
___  Health A MenHyg.Pac.ImpTcrp.___  Housing It Community Renewal
- Housing Finance Agency
__ Human Rights___ Insurance Department

Job Development 
_ Labor

— ___ Local Government
Mental Hygiene

__ Metropolitan Trans.Auth.__ Military k Naval Affairs
.• Mortgage Agency 
■ ' Motor Vehicles 

___ Municipal Bond Bank Agency
__ Narcotic Addiction Control__ Parks & Recreation
' Pension Commission__ Port Authority
_Power Authority

Probation
Public Employment Rel. Ed.

__ Public Service
__ Social Services 
jf Social Welfare, Board of 
r State Department 
T  State Inveetigation Comm.
_  State Liquor Authority
_ State Police
_  State University
_ Taxation A Finance_ Thruway Authority 

Tranaportatlon 
_  Urban Development Corp. 

Veterans' Affairs 
Waterfront Commission

_ Welfare Inapector General^Workmen’s Comp. Bd .Touth

ED bill

R e p r in t  $

* x ±
J -**

__  J u d i c i a l  C o n fe r e n c e  I
5 Law R e v i s i o n  Co/msiaeion i 

rr.f.S. E ar  A s s o c i a t i o n  i • 
H - f .S .  T r i a l  Law yers Assn. 
Assn, o f  Bar c f  N .Y .C . ; ' ! :

• • 'Ear A ssn ,  o f  ________  . r-f
. ^  __________ Couiiti
%  , D i s t r i c t  A t t o r n e y s  AsaoeV:
^  ^ • C i v i l  L i b e r t i e s  Unipir

___  County J u d g e s  A ssn .
___  Fam i ly  C o u r t  J u d g e s  '
___ M a g i s t r a t e s  A ssn .  '-.5
___  Supreme C o u r t  J u s t i c e s  ' me
____ S u r r o g a t e s  A asn . ;

•A
.-a, AFL-CIO

A s s o c ia te d  I n d u s t r i e s  I  
Commerce & I n d u s t r y  k a s n + H  
Community S e r v i c e  S o c l e t •»>'•<

• . ■
A s s o c i a t i o n  o f  Towns 
County O f f i c e r s  Aaan 
C o n fe ren ce  o f  Mayors 
■Big S i i  Mayors

'm

;

Mayor ■ V
-?V4

M
Town Sup. . '■*#

Co. Leg. '

Co. A t t y .

Co. E x e c .

r__ TempT S t a t e  Com. o n :

A d v iso ry  Council o n :  

Joint Leg. Comm. onT

4

0000013

JA 0006



:rv :r '
W-& -. ''' - ' ' / / ..— ' 1 ’

t 21Ii_SUPPL£?»gN:?AL SHEET ON CRIMINAL JIT^rr? ~ ;r'-i-

-NYS Sheriffs Association 
XYS Assn, of Chiefs of Police 
Police Conference of H. Y. 
Police Commissioner, N. Y. City

A t

Correctional Assn, of N. J.
NYS Council of Probation Administrators 
NTS Probation & Parole Officers Assn., Inc. 
Probation i Parole Officers Asan. of Greater N.Y,

NYC Urban Coalition
Council of Chapters, Nat’1.Assn, of Social WkrsV-; 

NYS Dlv.of the Internat'l Assn, for Identiflcation^

___ Criminal Justice Coordinating Council of NYC
& • : D . A . ,  Counties of N.Y. S

• • Legal Aid Society ----
ffc". j'
jtapfe-. Michael R. Juviler, Esq.| '

1?I111 am Hellersteln.Esq. 
Bichard Denzer. Eaq.

S-f; , •

___ Hon. Peter McCuillan

•115 Willow St., Apt. SG 
Brooklyn, N.Y. 11201
Chief.Appeals Bureau, _ _
Aid Soc. U S  5th Ave.,N.%il* 
Ford ham Univ. Sch. of La«;'£̂  
Lincoln Center, N.Y.
19li-30C 65 Crescent
Flushing, N.Y. U 365

-v -»•
141 i mji

: ■ - , v. ■ 1 -A-**p

1*
7§

0000014

•7. -a- •>

4

MMMlMkMMMM JA 00066



B-203 (6 /68 )

SENATE

No. ?in -
• elec •: 1 o -■

T i t l e :

v BUDGET REPORT ON BILLS Session Year ?
NO REC OKKBND ATI ON ASSEMBLY

Mr* ’ • ' •••”* Ho. MAY .< nfC'C

••el? *1 o-. to t te  r i r  a c o n v ic te d  feTor. to

r f t ' r i b t e r  f o r  o r  v o t e  p t  e r r  e l e c t 5 or ,

The above bill has been referred to the Division of the Budget fat 
comment. After careful review, we find that (a) the hill does not affect 
State finances in any way, (b) the bill has no appreciable effect on Stat 
programs or administration, and (c) this office does not have the technic 
responsibility to make a recommendation on the bill.

We therefore make no recommendation.

c /of7 2
0000015 .

JA 00067



3-203 (6/68} 
SENATE

:3g-DayiBlIl 
HJDG^T.REPORT OH BILLS

N O :REC OMHENBATIOK
Senators Dunne & Garcia

Session^Ye«tr‘  ̂£ 9 7 3

ASSEMBLY
No.No. 2111-B 

Law: Election
litle: ---- ?jg..!!ilation to the right of a convicted felon to register for
or vote at any election

The above bill has been referred to the Division of the 
comment. After careful review, we find that (a) the b m  does ^ t ^ e c t  
:tate flnances in any way, (b) the bill has no appreciable effect on State 
programs or administration, and (c) this office does not have the ?echn?cll responsibility to make a recommendation an the bill.

We therefore make no recommendation.

6/1/73
0 0 0 0 0 1 6

Charles D. Palmer

JA 00068



Lcuia J . L c p « o w it 2Arro«irr» Grnr*n

j' • .! •

S t a te  or N e »  Yor x

D f.p a h t .m e s t  or Lavr
A xS a NY 1 2 2 2 4

5 5 1 1 1 - B

MEMORANDUM FOR THE GOVERNOR

Re: Senate 2111-B

TLas bill, to take effect immediately, would amend t h e  
^l®ttion Ltiv, § (152, subdivisions 2* 3, 4, and 5 so as to 
provide that a “convicted felon who has viiated the laws of 
this State shall have the right to register and vote at any 
election if the court imposed a sentence other than imprison­
ment and loss of suffrage was rot a apecific condition of the 
disposition.

This bill is violative of the s£ate Constitution, 
article II, § 3, which provides that.“the legislature shall 
snact laws excluding from the right of suffrage all persons 
convicted of bribery or any infamous crime.”

A similar bill was introduced last year as A-12097 and 
fas referred to the Rules Committee.

I recommend that this bill be disapproved.

iated: June 13, 1973
Respectfully submitted,

< £ ,  / > / &
LOUIS J. LErXDWITZ v
Attomey General

0000017



D E P A R T M E N T  O P  S T A T E

STATE o r  N E W  Y O R K

ALBANY

JOHN P. LOHENIO
1EC*XT̂*T or JfAT* Hay 4, 1973

Honorable Michael Whiteman 
Counsel to the Governor 
State Capitol 
Albany, Hew York
Rs 3 Senate 2111-A
Bear Mike*

Subject bill amend* subdivisions 2, 3, 4 and 5 of Section 
152 of the Election Law to extend the franchise to those persons 
convicted of a felony who have received a tentence other than 
inprisorsoent and whoso sentence did not include the loss of suffrege.

In 1971 tho'Legislature 'amended Section 152 to return the 
franchise to felons v^ose sentence bed expired or who had been 
discharged from parole. However, no provision was made to include 
tha parson who eras given a sentence other than imprisonment, thus 
creating an inequity in the law since the latter jars or,, under present 
law, has no way to qualify to vote tther than to be pardoned by tha 
Governor or receive a certificate of good conduct from the Board of 
Parole, Subject"bill appears to correct such inequity.

3 do, however, wish to note certain technical defects in 
the bill. On page 2, line 6, lines 20-21 and page 3, lines 6-7, 
line s it appears that language has been used which necessitates 
an interpretation other than that intended. As presently stated, 
the person dho "vielated the laws* was, prior to such violation, 
a "convicted felon". !I believe that the intent is to consider the 
conviction as the result of the violation to which the bill refers. 
Such phrase should read, "A person has been convicted of a ’ 
felony ••••■

Purthsrscre, in language following that referred'to above 
the bill grant* to those persons covered by. the amendment the 1 
unaiulifted right to "register for or vote at any election." 
i^^SgiTshould have been included which would naks such right; 
conditional on the person's ability to satisfy the general voting 
qualifications prescribed by the Election Law.

m

0 0 0 0 0 1 3



Bhile I  support  the purpose of subject b i l l ,  
to  Tecosssand approval In  i t s  present  f o n u

v
JPUse

0;5

0 CO CO! 3

JA 00071



J O H N  P .  U 0 M C N 2 0  or ST*Ta
June 4, 1973

Honorable Michael Uhltsfnar) 
Counsel t© the Governor 
State Capitol 
Albany, Mew York
Aej Senate 2111-1
Dear Mikes

Subject bill spends lubdivisions 2, 3, 4 and 
5 of Section 152 of the Slectdon Lew to * stand the 
franchise -to those persona convicted of a felony who 
have received a sentence other than imprisonment and 
whosa sentence did not' include the loss of suffrages

On May 4, 197 J j transmitted to you ay comam*-®, 
on Senate 2111-A In i&ieh I stated that the puxpose of 
said bill appears to correct certain Inequities 
presently existing in {the Ilsstion Lae in regard to 
voting by convicted felons, but noted that the bill 
contained technical defects.

The Legislature haa corrected such defects in 
the bill now before you and I therefore reeotseend 
approval. :

JTLisc

0 O Q O O 2 O
JA 00072



Dear Mr, Whitea»n:
I believe that Iche enclosed memorandum 

provides a good explanation of the purport 
of S. 2111-A and the! necessity for its 
enactment into lav. j

If I may be of laaaistance in answering 
questions concerning thi» bill, pleaae dc

fv

JA 00073



m r. m  o n a m n u m

ASSEMBLY: } 470 BY: Mr. Harris
SENATE: BY :

AN ACT to amend the election law, 
in relation to the right of 
a convicted felon to regis­
ter for or vote at any elec­
tion

Purpose of the Bill: ' 4J ’ ■.
• This legislation provides that a convicted felon shall have 

the right to register for or vote at'any election, if the court 
has suspended the imposition of sentence; and, the loss of suff­
rage was not a specific condition of the revocable disposition.
Justification of the Bill; . -

Under Section 152 of' the election law, a convicted felon is , 
denied the right to register or vote at any election while the-' 
individual is in prison dr until his or her maximum sentence or 
parole has expired. The present law is silent with respect to persons upon whom no sentence has been imposed where their sen- 
tence has been suspended.'

Some municipalities have noted problems as to whether or not- , 
a convicted felon under suspended sentence has the . right to vote.
In order to clarify this matter, it is proposed that such felons :. 
be permitted to register jcr vote until they are either sentenced. .,-.; 
or their suspension is lifted.
Fiscal Implication cf the Sill: * i

- None. " -'
Effective Date of the Bill: A'

This act shall take :effect immediately. 1 • - ^

0000022
i

f

JA 00074



CA.CNH H . HARRIS
J u n e  5, 1973

H o n o ra b le  Nelson A . ^ R o c k e f e l l e r  
Governor, State of New Y ork  
Executive Chamber 
State Capitol 
Albany, New York 12224
Attention: Hbn, Michael Whiteman

Counsel to the Governor
Dear Governor Rockefeller:

There is presently pending before you for executive action four 
bills which I sponsored in the Assembly; numbers S-21L1-B (A-47Q-A), 
A -563-A , S—4564 (A -6 8 E 2 5, and A-7805, copies of which are attached
together with their respective memorandum.

Senate 2111-B - allows a convicted felon the right to register 
for or vote at any election, if: the federal court shall have suspen­
ded the imposition of sentence:: and, the loss of suffrage was not a 
specific condition of a revocable disposition.

. *

-• ."is *; • *\4.

Assembly 563-A provides that where a town does not have a 
planning board, the town board pay act as such.

Senate 4564 - enables the [New York State American Revolution 
Bicentennial Carnal s b ion to accept gifts and donations for use in 
furthering Commission purposes. In addition, the Commission, would 
be allowed to use moneys realized as a result of contracts and a< 
ments as seed money for bicentennial projects.

Assembly 7805 - establishes the City of Amsterdam Industrial] 
Development Agency pursuant to title two of Article 18-A of the
General Municipal Law. j1

I respectfully request that the four above mentioned bill be 
signed into law.

igjree-

000002

ely,

GLENN E. HARRIS 
Majority Whip

J

EjiClOBUTQS

ytf '̂v~ '•■•v ,** «

r* 3»;'.V '• Ciii-' JA 00075



MEMORANDUM

ASSEMBLY: 4 <70 -A BY: Mr. Harris
SENATE: BY:

ASS ACT - to amend the election 'lwi - 
in relation to the right of 

• #* a convicted felon to regis- 
•' ter for or vote at any elec*- 

tion
Purpose of the Bill: ■

This .legislation provides that' a eonvieted felon shall- have 
the right to register for. or vote at any election, if the court 
has suspended,,the imposition of sentence; and, the loss of ' auf f 
rage was not a specific condition of the revocable disposition.
Justification of the Bill: .

' i

:v-.« » *.5

..Ohdex>Seetioii 151 of ;the election law, a'convicted felon
denied'the'-right-to register.or vote at any election While 
individual ;id in prison or ! until his or her. aaatiaua sentence' or parole The preaent law is. silent with .respect/to;. ‘
persons upon where no sentence has -been imposed where their spn-<- 
t e n c e  S S f  i e s s  s u s i « a d « d .  i

. X .
•s* -f-: .

, t

... some ajunicipalities hive nested̂  problems as to 
a convicted felon under suspended sentence has-the 
In order to clarify this matter, it ia proposed that 
belpeittltted to register -dr. .vote until they are either aenidftehd"' " 
or their sruhpeofiiô  i« l'ifjtdd. . ' ~• <-5- ■I

Flaps! luplication of the Bill;
flone,

affective Date of the Bill
This'act shall take effect iaaediately.

t -

.00000^4
'■J

JA 00076



TO: Honorable Michael Whitesan

i W m

FROM: Senator John R, Dvnae

RE: Senate 2111-A

FOTKSE OF BILL:

This legislation provides that a convicted felon shall have the rtsh? 
to register for or vote at any electicra, if the court has suspended the 
imposition ,of; sentsaca; sad, the lose of su ff r age  vss not a s p e c i f i c  
condition of the revocable d i s p o s i t i o n .

JUSTITICATICW -OF' m i:
Under Section 152 of the election law, a convicted felon i* denied 

the right to register or vote sc any elsctiau while the individual is ■■ip.-, 
prison or until bis or her- a e l n m  j sentence or parole has expired. The 
present law is sliest with respect j to persona upon whom no sentence has ; 
been imposed where their sentence has been suspended. t

as to whether or not * 
the right Co voce. In

Sow 'shmieipslitie* have noted problems
convicted felon tinder suspended sesterce has

7'
order to clarify this saetter, 
pc rail ted to register or vote 
their suspension is lifted.

FISCAL TH? LX CAT TOM Cf BIIL:

Hoae. ,
.gFFECTIVZ DATS OF 3ILL:

This act shall taie effect ineseoiataiy,

it is proposed that such felons he 
until they era either sentenced or

I
'4' '

0 0 0 0 0 2 3

M

m m

JA 00077



*8
May 2, 1973

P I V B I O H P F  C R IM IN A L  J U S T IC E  S E S V IC S S  '

TO: . Michaal Ihltaraan 
FRCS4i ' Eric Seiff . i f f ^  
RE* S. Intro. 2111-A

A

.Purpose
T o vs»end'-'the,;Eis«;tion Law sc as to rasters voting rights to 
cartrin; tonvlctpd f«lona. • V">i'

Discussion
2» -3*;M ■ and 5 o f -Election

ŷ .p̂ zt

■ ti»» »axlMtf*it«xw of hl« santonc* or upwifti* 
isV" This bill furthar lifc«rallx*s 

.... _...- . . ) fitss.th* voting<il squall float lori'^C^
C'onVi^dd'^.fsldn^whdsa ssntanc* comiats of » fins ox probation 
■ or: schiarg*,; i
T^o'tlwjws'^dsxlyin^ this props*#! is. a good on*. Jf th* 

fontoirti^jstrafetujr'^ is corrsoiion snd.s"

nsc***w7,tr®* 
osti# ;Yi»sr'W-!ih:*:-»xt*nt::ts whl̂ K':

 ̂ '̂dowsili'tsa vcTiSin*i$.X''y'
^T-ch* iyahcfilW ovan from thosS 

ssa^ita: s - S«nt«nc« df ifflprl sonaBent.
•:j'if" -•-■■■■' v v

’:7l.\feac owaoaaaitldn

1 * O• J. v-w

; .0 0 0 0 G.^i

JA 00078



'NC!C '■

m  =
•v*r« **■» To*"lucvnvi0» V lS J O K O *  C R IM IN A L  J U S T IC E  S E f lV J C E S

TGs hichael Whiteman
FRQhj Eric A. Saiff A *

R£i S. Intro. 2111-S

J  ^s i i - G

June 8, 1973

Purpose
To abend the Election Law bo as to reatcx® voting rights to 
certain convicted' felons.
Discussion
A prior version of this bill - S.2111-A—  was enacted but re­
called fro® the Governor* abended sms repassed in its present 
fora. This hill is clearer than its predecessor in establishing 
that loss of the franchise upon a felony conviction attaches, 
for all practical purposes, only when a sentence of imprisonment 
it iapoaed. Thus, other possible felony sentences, such ss 
fines, probation or conditional discharge, axe not subject to 
disenfranchisement.
An additional salutary result flows frea this re-drifti A.2111-A 
suggested that, even without statutory authority, a sentencing 
court could impose loss of suffrage as a specific condition of 
probation or conditional discharge. Besides being of questionable 
validity, this sight well havjr put the idea to do so into the 
heads of judges who would never otherwise have thought of it. 
Deprivation of suffrage is purely punitive in a particularly 
degrading fashion, and certainly serves no rehabilitative 
purpose. The excision of this language is probably this re- 
draft's most useful result. !
In our tseaorandua to you of Mby 2 , 1973, consenting on this bill's 
•A* version, we questioned whether society's best interests 
require the withholding of the franchise even from those felons 
who are serving a sentence of1 imprisonment. Considering the scope 
of this bill, we again pose the question.
Reco— endation

Approval.

0000027

JA 00079



April 20, 1975
Hon. Michael WhitemanThe Executive Chambers Re: 2111-A Support
Albany, New York
We support this bill by Senator Dunne which will allow those convicted felones who are hot in prison and who have not specifically, been deprived of the right to vote by the sentencing "judge to retain the right of suffrage. .
Citizens -Union believes that no valid public purpose is served -by. depriving convicted criminals'.of any of their civil ..-rights'*, fcther 'than -ijhose which-are essential f or the functioning of.the pneal institutions to which they are confined. We are totally opposed to the concept of "civil-death" in which those-convicted for "life" under the Governor's modified dfug ’ ’.11 will Save their marriages . automatically annulled and lose their rights aa parents, etc.;.
If prison is to be a rehabiliatory .experience, and if our- penal and. judicial systemd are to attain the- goal of curtailing recidivism and getting the forcer convict back into the .-mainstream of society aa a productive full-fledged member, - then .anything such as deprivation of the right to vote is ; ■ 'counter-productive because it only serves to move that person further away from the mainstream of society and' from being' i a-responsible, productive|member of. society. -v--

: the Gover.nor to sj.gn this bill, and the dozens of -!. .
other bills (most of which are still stuck in committee) which will-grant .similar rights j to current and former and future, j, 
convicts..

Albert IC Podell 
Associate.Director

JA 00080



i i»3 i:
Atony.«nr. t

■ ; 'R^aaiga^^x^CSftfeiiiSrSf%''.. V
■<*»* ft ■
Eifoîii-JDireetor-- * ;

Albert N.iFcd*JJ •;
Legiihirn Rgp/ẑ uirrr.

Hon. Sichaal Whiteman 
Executive Chamber 
State'Capitolv 
Albany» Kev *Vtork 1222H

June 19, 1S73

In Support of:.' S-2111 E

JfV
Dear Hr. Whiteman: ...

•*■''•' \ . i
Since v* sae no social ■ benefit to depriving any criminal of 

his right to vote, and since •—  quite the opposite —  we feel.that. ." 
the goal of our criminal justice system should be to rehabilitate the 
convict by allowing hia to Remain as much a* part of society an is 
practical, we strongly support this bill. -.

Sincerely,

Albert K. Podeli 
Associate Director

0000029 3 6

JA 00081



•- A id. Society

« T } .4 3 3 A

PRISONER’S RIGHTS PROJECT 

119 Fifth A venue. N fsp Yotx 10003

W l l L U S  E.. H U - k s a s T a iK .  A  r^euMx » sg

June 1, 1973

. . CW<«us/W1 -__
iso* Sa.vnM4N':* ■ -"rO'iJ I

Kaicib H. Rjui5. -jk.'. s T 0 - - 
Sajass- W. >4uv*nv)3U-''

&DWA&D Q. CAUL'liL' •

Mr- Michael Whiteman 
Counsel to the Governor 
Executive Chamber 
State' Capitol 
Albany, New York 12224

Dear Mr. Whitemans
Re: S-2111-B

The effect of this amendment is to restore the right 
to vote to persons who are convicted of felonies but who 
are not sentenced to imprisonment ox to death./

•As it presently, stands,' the law generally deni**”/ 
suffrage;, to any ̂ nyictad'.felon-until .the ■ espirsil^'.-ef", 
his maximum sente&ee .or- discharge from parole.- fhus /per-'"/ 
sons "convicted of felonies who have received', sentences of 
probation or conditional discharge (N.Y. Penal'‘̂ Wu/j /'$565. 00-65.15) , ok-'Who ..have received suspendedr-''â êâ ei;-.;'Y 
in' pther jurisdictions or under former: * 4S \ ': 
denied the right to vote during the /.periods -ofT^^i'/^rb-J/ , 
bationary. *ehten£j»«* . tJnder "'this ' bill • sdeh: 
retain" the franchise. •. A coBv|'cted felon aenkahddd'J^ 
imprisonment' (br :j&8ath)/ vouldcontinue to be dasied!</' '• 
suffrage until the/completion of his sentence, inclhding 
any period of parols. . / v- f. .

The bill woiilld repeal that portion of the?;|»ra.aftait--h,- t . Election Law 'whitei.-'refers, to the granting 
of good conduct hy the Board of Parole, becau8'e''.Ali;iperA/.:'
' seair to whom" suchf:cartifidatea’-'can be granted',‘un^*k r
Cbrrac.tioh haw SS'B {al and E ialv will already'/en^y/t^e -right' 
fctY'Vbte'/if this'--blii ' is/-appro ve'd. The b'i’l i.: w'Gbi‘a/:'jv i t / " 
affect the Board''|of/Parbie*-S -'power, pursuant td':':GerrActibh; 
Law $$700-705, td restore the/franchise t O a : first/-.:f*‘lohy,/: 
offender by granting him a •certificate tf reliAf 'frfd!fc'.vt/ 
disabilities’ at .any time after hi* release from 
sonaent. 1

0000030 iuto

7?u M A* Joriarj It m mitr-Mgel- -rii tn Om Orj si t i t * Vara so pe*mw

JA 00082



P a g e  2

June 7, 1973Hr. Michael Whiteman 
Counsel to the Governor

This bill is a modest but worthwhile step towards 
the goal of fully reintegrating convicted persona into 
'society as soon as this may be done consistent with 
the public interest. Where a judge has determined that 
imprisonment is pot necessary, it is difficult to per­
ceive any useful! purpose to be served by denying a con­
victed person this right to vote during the period of 
probation or conditional release. This bill would 
promote the objebtives of p probationary sentence both 
by sparing t>h© offender tlie possible hunili&’tioti and 
frustration of having his name struck from the voting 
rolls, and by allowing him to be an active participant 
in the political life of the conmunity.

I recommend approval of S-2111-B.
Very truly yours

WILLIAM E. HELXERSTEIN 
Attorney-in-Charge

WEH/yl

o o o o c n i

i .
JA 00083



r w *  a c » o c i .a t w 3 w o r  r w *  * a «  

or  T*C CJT̂  ®r **W TO*K 
4a W I9 T  *dTw •TU C ffT  

miw rroit* (cos«
C O M M i T T i t  O H  C B i M I N A l C O U t f r i .  L A W  A H O  S - f l t O C C C U P E

a j C H A I L  « .  J U V U . Y B  CK4HMAW
I S S  L l © * A * 0  * T * I t T  

n i w  r o n e
U ia l  7J 1.7SM

Hay 7, 1973

Honorable Michael Whiteman 
Counsel to the Governor 
Executive Chamber Albany, New York 12224

Ra:
WM 10 RtCfl

Senate Bill 2111-A
Dear Sir:

The Committee recossaenda that the bill be approved.
The bill take* a significant step forward to alle­

viate the collateral consequence* of a conviction for a eriae . 
AM this Committee and the Committee on Civil Rights have noted 
in peat year* {See 1972 Labial Bull., 17j 1971 Legia. Bull. 19] 
we are in favor of Uniting th* consequence* that attach to a 
felony conviction. When the lsgislatsups amended Section 152 of the Election Lav in 1971, to proviAa that a convicted felon . 
should be eligible to vote1 upon the expiration of the maxima 
term of the sentence or the discharge free parole, it left the 
anomaly that where a peraoii has been convicted of a felony , but 
the sentencing court has not deemed the circusutapaea of the 1 
crime or criminal serious enough to impose a prison term; the 
right to vote is apparently forfeited until the expiration gjf

•iSr

the tics when the sentence 
probation, three years for 
Law fS65 .00 <31. S4.05U).

could be re voted —  five year* for 
conditional discharge. Sea ftimali 'This bill raaovas the anomaly, while 

allowing the sentencing court to impose the loss of suffrage as 
a condition of the non-prison sentence. The discretion on the 
part of the court is highly desirable. I

The Committee has noted reservation about the mom- 
stitutionality, under the state constitution. Art. II, Section 
3 of bills restoring the right to vot* of all convicted felon*, 
11971 Legis. Bull. 19] This bill has the aane difficulty a*1 
did the 1971 legislation: in light of th* prior act, the lasrj 
should be clarified and the constitutional problem, already in 
tha law, laft for a court's dataraination,

Th* bill is adequately drafted to accomplish its 
purpose. J

A. - '■- • 'Jj
....m

JA 00084



T « «  * * * 0 € J l A T j O *  c r  T M «  ? A *

o r  t h *  e r r ?  o ?  w rw  t o b j

*2 *ftk? <M!T* 8TS5ST
n i w  r o e s  t e o a

CO««imt O* atATS L . X a t B L A ' r f O H

■OKamat L- oAArr CWAmMAWIII THtHO AVXMUC 
W * w  Y O K  1 0 0 * 2  

212 «ca-MCO

m

June 22, 1973

M I C H A t k  U .  0 J A A S 0 * f O  ..micmt**#*, -
•  » •  TN I *  0  A l ^ f N U * ' • ;• 

N I W  T 0 « *  4 *lt« J?U

Re: S. 2111-B - Disapprovedi ■«
Dear Hr. Whiteman:

In reply to your inquiry, we disapprove the refer­
enced bill.

We disapprove the ibill because it would create arbi­
trary distinctions in determining the persons to be deprived 
of a fundamental civil right.

The bill, to take.effect immediately, would amend 
t h e  Election Law to permit persons convicted of a felony to' 
register and vote, unless they have been sentenced to death 
or imprisonment. : !

Under present law, all felons are deprived of their 
right to register, and vote ijirtil the maximum sentence has \
expired.: This applies regardless of whether or not any prison/
sentence is actually imposed and continues in effect while the,' 
person is free on parole approbation. This bill would limit:-j 
that civil disability to those persons who have actually been 
sentenced to a term in prison. However, it continues the 
deprivation of rights for tiiose who, having served a prison 
term, are. free on parole. j" i '. IThe effect of thaibill would create the anomalous 
situation Whereby an individual having'received a suspended 
sentence would never be deprived of his right to vote even if 
he subsequently violates the terms of his probation and is ■ 
imprisoned..' Oh the other hind, a :person imprisoned for even 
a brief period'and subsequently released on parole would still 
be deprived; of that right, despite exemplary behavior. The •

0000033 l a

; .; r. *-y

. . - I

- ■ -.Hr 
• • ■

..:sm

m
. m

* j•J

xm

JA 00085



v June 22, 1973

distinction created by the bill appears -to be arbitrary

be disapproved!^ rSaSOnS StatCd' ^  recaBJaend the bill ‘' Vi-;..

; Very truly yours,

v.--.• » «. ;

Boa , J4ich*ai : Wfci taman 
Sxftcuti.ve Chamber 
■ StateCapitol;'
Mbaiiy >' _'Hew‘;'Vork 12224
GLG:JML

•vVi 
' r-z-i

< . :
' rVS*!3

0 0 0 0 0 3 4

20
i

:

■ ̂ 3
! ... i-yPZ

o p
i • 'A-sAj
‘AJtl

*•• ,J r.

: i~f

.■ Ai
■”»v--K\

,TA 00086



N e w  Y o r k  C i v i l  L i b e r t i e s  U n i o n . 8 4  F i l t h  A v e n u e . N e w Y o r k ,  N . Y J 0 0 1 1 . T e ] e p h o n e ' 9 2 4 - 7 8 0 G

LEGISLATIVE MEMORANtiOH
20 JTOO

Gov. Nelson RockefellerTO:
FROM:

S 2111-B

Ira Glasser, E x e c u t iv e  D i r e c t o r  
K en n e th  P. N orw ich ,1 L e g i s l a t i v e  D i r e c t o r

AN ACT to emend the election law, in relation tci 
the right of a convicted felon to register for 
or vote at any election

THIS BILL IS APPROVED

This hill would extend the right to vote to persons 
who have been convicted of a felony in any federal or state pjr©»*-v; . - .  

... cution. but whose sentence ha® been suspended. Under the•
. law. such persons are prohibited from voting until the iwoiaua »»^F, 
tence has expired or they have been discharged from parole.

This bill does not go far enough. It would not. 'for 
example, permit a convicted fulen sentenced to one to three ya*roT 

._i_£n prison who served one year and was then paroled- to vote whil  
oh parole. There does [ not appear to be any reasonable distin 

r between such a person on parole and a similar poreon^dx»*a sst 
• thrse-yeax aentenca ha* been suspended: during those last two 
"they are in a virtually identical position.

•::.£e*pite such an dbviou# logical ^consistency ■
__—. fL .  ; 1 • 'is L. smlssAVkeVtl A.  ̂̂  4 AW* 1;;. i.J \iv"'y"r *

j l f
: ':S i

i^KXDnsistency that might well W  vulnerable: to constitutional 
-J-:'clialJenge.-;“ -thisi bill! .should be approved because it dcjws-:
;-th«t right tc vote, if only partially, to a-class now deprived of 
. that right. . ; ■' ' ' l

Th* Ebited States Supreme- Court has repeatedly■.:ralj8d :W- 
that:-.state statutes which have the effect of »el» : t i v e l y - d i ^ t r ^ ^ : ! ^ ; ^  

the trasseiiise;,among discrete- classes of otherwise: g u a l i f }&•*& 
voters must advance a . csespelling ttata interest by. the - least-;Ydru»a»

l ' t td  "acaais-- id  o rd er  t o  p a ss-r scrutiny,* u a d er ; th e E q u a l  t e p t o c f c i ^ | | |
V -  ^ l n a s t s o h r :» G S : 0 . 5 ,  3 3 0  - U 9 7 2 V  ;  C a t T r i r i g t o ^  7; v?

W m m M ■ j.ijL'J?-yxT.a nn 7J-̂4i±.ar.a k*r«V f LKrAaq̂ jCHift ■i«ti

JA 00087



'-LEGISLATIVE

;y.; Rash,- 33.0.'-tJl'5. 89 -'{1965} ,\- Mo such‘•conipe 1.ling state interest-.- 
•^©-,«vetiiiefhhsuggest-ed ..to-- justify, the present statute. In fa'ctv; 
/•iior;Conipe4J.'in9 -B.tate interest I could -b<* ''suggested to justify-those v 
(B^ciusionaryhicii/even this hill still maintains, /.

But as far as it goes, this bill- should be approved.-! „

■ ;:x

■ m
i

.Wb
!

p o o o o a j s

,V

JA 00088



:g. if'":-

»££ fig
:.--■!:-'- 'Vv;̂ 5̂ 2s*K

■ .*;•:*’1* •: ■ :. ’• ‘.J ;• ; • ,.' -*‘;.;■ ̂:: 1 '̂i-3.izX y

l3>r̂ stVzg?‘:

F̂-V;
.. .... /V-> -<y-~':r;

f  V-’C p M M IT T a *  ON YOUTH|̂-';̂ :̂icspM»'fi*c,noN' |̂ :?)apfxL wvt'sins|.
‘.‘ri  ■ >OWC>tB a A E » , J*.
*■ -'■ : E C e**« rO .« . B M N H E IM . J« .a:- anowN ■J4'i»tHCorf'OAi.t*sr

5Tt> *}t+ 4 'J-CM IM LUN O  
JOHN-M .-COW K 

. /.:.: V A B tC C S * * * * * -  « .0 ' • 3VT'j<af»-Vi PSMNtY 
-jvJ- U -H tSflSW .'f. D O * .  JR - 
t;::-: ' iS d 8 E W .F .  O S * * ,m  

-.':W VJD '>i: .OINKINS . ■.&  MA*t;f>3TC*V .
^  -v W lfc« G tK » V T I C H O W A N  :vi;«4y??lK:<»co>i*N. J« 
S & -.* « S S 2 K S X M « * < M . 
S S 3 * * & a a f ® f i» t  M AU -IN CS r

Jr : ;'T«»5«X-S>E. H E W O C O>;:-.>Mn.'?.-:.»aMi»Err'p- . ; . ^ « E D t D H 6 b H. .-MBS! C »»■« JR
r,* t .* M ^ O » '5 lB B .-M C C A L L

7-y;..W F^ £*SA T i.S«  -£:!i*Wai*wi*.sEiic ■JiSa?.taivio w. smith 
#J'CH*8’rQ V*NT»AGENEN 

WHITE
;-?■ •:  ̂E C L K S  J t  M *«D

I; f'-pJWCiDsre- OR.TMK o o c i r r r
S A » j lt S .A N D 1 » r*  H E IS K JZ t V. . -n ■ ■ mm ■ «4 *A« Immm

‘? .1 0 5  East' N ^ :kcn,■ hfrl&w'-  (2121 2 5 'i l^ 6 b

• ,K , , v

\ **>■«* .;-*::. . ‘ 1:- ’•*?-.: * - :<.:v:,£’>-3't* - fuawci:? *. *ri»*toR*>«''-/
M  A jw rw t *sr *«•** * ^ - O u » W . : K;

*»ar 3 , 1973;

Its

V..-..-J -: i

MAY ?

;-i ;V -* 0 * C T T '<*. SWETT

f  - ' i i i s ,  W lfcU A M  A. *1. 9U R 0EN  ;-SrXC|»G*f»̂ tViR
»# A* * - • *

f  - ^S4k3*M3»T P. »AT7I*SOH

"mmo L. Horxma. J»,; -'Iim-IT— '•«!»• »•— ’ 

jS tV lH  L. IC H O R *

Hon, lelBon A. Rockefeller 
Gkrrerndr of I n  York 
JtocrtiT* Quafcer 
State G*pltal •■.
Albany, Berw Tcrk 12224.

Bear Governor Rockefeller:

Be: s. au - i : t f ^  
the • el«rt|ioir^&ir^ 
latten

i

■;y . &

r'T'rVr'>-'-T,‘:

In respenae to your r»^»8t fear our coHMsts on this 
ten-day bill, the'Cdiaaittee. on Ycath and Correction 
has taken no position on S. 2111-A,

Sincerely,

lot B. Sxsrkina
Xm/ aja 
IffA 1034-1

;;• .J' 'v-.t.:.\

1*5

0 0 0 0 0 3 7

J f ...... JA 00089



'X* t
'l:

$acrw+9rf . 
,k@mm W„ Sorsdaoe* 

Sexrmtar*

June 8, 1973

Hon. Michael T. Whiteman 
Counsel to the Governor 
Executive Chamber 
State Capitol 
AlbanyHnN. Y. 12224

Re; S. 2111-B Dunne
Right of a Convicted 
Felon to Vote

Dear Mr. Whiteman;
The a bove-t numbered bill is now pending 

before the Governor | for executive action and you 
have very kindly asked for our analysis, --cements 
and. recommendations jwith respect to it.

?This billjamends the election law, to 
clarify the right to vote for those persons con­
victed of a felony,;but not sent to prison.

Under the!present law, a conviction for 
a felony causes a person to lose his right to vote. 
In many cases, the judge will give a person a 
suspended sentence,! This person would lose his or 
her right to vote until the maximum sentence he or 
she -should have received expires.

It BeemH only appropriate that a person 
who is not sent to prison for a felony should not 
lose his right to vote. By permitting the person 
to vote, you are carrying out one step of the 
ladder toward rehabilitation.

■' j -
i

0000038 • i

\i

JA  00090



Hon. Michael T. 
6/8/73
2 ■ -

Whiteman'I

Our Committee urges that executive approval 
be given to this measure which clarifies the right 
to vote of convicted., hut not sentenced, felona,

0 0 0 0 0 3 9

•* A?.V. JA 00091



aiZ.••;r '•' r' • • . - "j_ •’;. 'i■>“?;]• ■’£S->!:?S";24’-5f-: -■• ••' "ivTi-'-— '-• '_■•■**•

150 stats • na5triJ'«#S^; war . t o** iaaoR:'' 'r". Wiai 455-3473 ::;. .-•:':
UESJE HAISS, TE, #WA«n 
'Xl*Ti. BA. ef >

heebot H..sicm

i^^^;©/wewiN0
_ J £ v  W E 7 .K -  1  HSKSENBUTm

. .  ■■■ ■ ' .  ’ 
£•*: ■ Wl'UiAM J. SIXVEHS

'• •■ • • IftM rof

&7< DMUa
i|>::; h asou* t  colltks

Hay 4,. 1973

g'ji' f(af>
P ?Y ; C a iM S O  !■ JASILE 
5fe'iy?; V, ■OmiWwtX' ■ 

A issW S li SAMOT
r-:;\;.y ' '^(:ijQHN CGHDLET: Oiww il«< -

-A*- -;■

h-BEKNAKP I. t-ELUHZS 
7r.A~c<rf»«»fcMi ■
’a miiAM saxes
SGBSTC M. ATWEJ.

tefcV
i f f ' Ckainma

^ r: CHARLES A CLASS 
wV'a (raJux/*™1

lOKN C. MTEAS

1
Mr. Michael Whiteman 
■ Counsel to Governor 
Executive Chamber ■
State Capitol i 
Albany, New York 12224
Dear- Mr. Whiteman:

Net Senate 2111A by M r . Dunne 
and Mr. Garcia

This bill is to!amend the election law, in 
relation to the; right of a convicted felon to 
register for or vote at any election.
The County Officers Association has no objection 
to the approval of this bill.

Your* very truly,

ieO

Herbert H. Smith 
Executive Director

0000040

x-ric;*/.- • !
v.*h-T -r; - ■- '* ̂ vii v- •><•. > JA 00092



s t a t c  o r  n i w  YOfiK

D E P A R T M E N T  0 F  AUDIT AND CO N TRO L
ALBANY

A*T*»U9 L ffY lT Tarr*T« coBUPT&ouL&a
*® »*a-#"5a ^

June 5i 1973

HE POST TO THE GOVERNOR OK LEGISLATION

TO: The Honorable Michael Whitenan; Counsel to the G overnor

The following bille are of no interest to this D epartm ent. 

Assembly **

1 6 7 7 -A
,2 1 9 1
4 9 0 4
6 3 2 7
6633

?!i!

Senate
2111-B 
3 2 6 4  
326S-C 
3445-A 
3969-A 
4758-A  
5208  
5950-A  
6231 
6349 
6 5 2 9  '
8 0 2 0

J .L .C ./g J

ARTHUR LEVITT 
S ta te  C om ptroller

By

Alfred W. H aight ^  
F ir s t  Deputy C om ptroller

a?

0000041

JA 00093



Pr*-* • .■*- :: . wasuwwr •

Cajnfy 
226 lake -S«vs*

Its ■timlm..'.«. T. 1-490̂
?̂:' '̂i40>j 737.3U*

life' v

Siii,-.jP& f«m*m
** -CMi A-' VSiGMs

.i~_; i. i ^■* v-' -i /£ .i- ' i J Vi - ' i  4>- -v̂ ĵ ^ 5 ^ L 4 4C_/*4
STATE , OF NZW YGJIX

'V?
: •■'•' ) • ••45rgg.^« r̂r:»5f e 1. 

■ 1 .... . r<_

j < 9 iP ^
' m§ri&£'l

' 770 J
n»* r«..K;4;_s««^r2

oiai Auntie - "

3 May 1973

MAY ? R£rO
po:«»£*T m . »ose«kArj
Sgi.J’ '®u'itUi»

maobi-
ĴtidN: OtOtASlS |*iv *"'♦••1**'

-Aiion couxxJ .~Munk»4>
•' .^nxAtfrK H. T. 1IJ0I

m m t* :  mwns.*■ Ow**"*-**

santr
MOKSCO

*»•«#>*.-K V. I0M1
lirin ,co«wwnaa el’«iJIFO»i'*. ioum■ <S>Mw«bh. '.~;-i UWNO

ifWWN '-.
pj*.' DAWSON' oc*Mtnr,
KfA- OtttON

a&nsif k  buscn ‘ •HHmsrr 
v&XD '‘-»W. 

r̂ -iaoG»n f»\.UWpVM5 
t̂' t̂OSNAH' irwBON 
t&OSiNiilAH ‘ i faUlVAN

Hon. M ichael Whitaaan 
E xecutive C haster ' 
State' C ap ito l 
Albany* Ha  ̂ York 1222b

Re: 10 Pay B i l l  a

Dear Mr. Whiteaaa:

The Hew York S ta ts  D i s t r i c t  A tto rn ey s  A ea o o la tio c i takes, 
no p o s it io n  on th e  fo llo w in g  b i l l s :

S e n a te
S en ate
Senate
A ssssib ly
Aaaasfbly

2111-A
1014
570-A
A959-A
2739-A

-r.SCW

J-A.; YSie A s s o c ia t io n  recownends

On Senate 4613-A.  ̂ The A s s o c ia t io n  does n o t oppose ap­
proval a t  th e  o l l ' l .  ' I t  has r e so lv e d  t o  ta k e  no s p e c i f i c  
p o s it io n  w ith  r e s p e c t  t o  th e  ix r o lc a e o ta t io n  o f  '
s t i i u t i o p s l  e s endroent p ers& ttih g  A -year term s fo*'®i%$fricfc I 
A ttorneys as i t  v iew s th is' t o  .he; a  lo c a l  a ifi^ tc i^ 'iw -:  
g en era l, i t  approvers 4 -y ea r  te n s*  t o  th e  e x te n t ' i  
l o c a l i t y  d es irea  th*

On A See____________
o f  t h i s  t i l l ,  ' I t  wp5dld appear th a t  th e  I n c lu s io n  
shbtgchs and: sachihh: .gims i ir t te e r p r o T ia lo n s ’:a |ir§ £  
burglary and rtfcber^ tp p *  ititen d ed  by th e   ̂p re^ d i& ijid i
*§at- Mita» & m € * M  * * - ^ * ^ ^ --------- —
ever A w h ile  prepay l y  

■ a r t iC is s  should be I- 
to  th e d e f in i t io n  of- , ,

' th A t;^ # S r te i» : ■firearm*'
Lav d e f in it io n  i s
« y

._ „. . . ._ _«a: apparent fllN »a^»SL
[f ̂ t# r« y ^ ^ ire a J a l’, - a t  •4m — -rl--,' '

-•I

» g e n e r ic  saeaning tuv
i h  A r t i c l e  2 6 5 ,  

U n it e d  t o  th e  
b y  t h i s  b i l l  -which

0 0 0 0 0 4 2 n%



£V\'-'.?tf£X>SW7 • ;
i: &hawa

’.‘J- Q̂*«>urtg'. Cov«»y 
t*jk* S>e«*i

Tflmire, N-“:Y. .'14951 
v..' 16071 737-2944

p£j-r ;;■
gt*?G| *t£uo©TOA  VWGAti yuVeerdwref 
gS*, 8T M. «OS£NEiAn 

:-Ek*rdh«M
*£./ 2HOMAS J. MACICEU .
S>;- .EONCHOL4XI5
K̂lv'*s-» - '"  ̂nr*ar ". ;
;f̂ Morr. GOLDW • liVi.- Building■Jfroôyn, f*. T. 1 i 20)_E£te> .■ .«•.,• <

&§*fes|W >, OEViNf §*5,;"->̂fiir’ CeurfNmA.
A iiulw iaid . n . r .  i j soi .

huativi uc«n*.ir
\ ANrWONV MO»OSCO
- v W i« *  N a im , N. Y. Ifr60;

nvt coMMirm
sa rf® 8 p » t i  lOIEIiSiQwimiori
iVCaplBGt J: ASfUKO 
c'ieftN '^M; 8BAISTE5, JSL 

.& $ © * »  ••MOWN . ifMifiHtoyi-.'CAHN ■; 
$®Egfl»D.-»{. DAWSON

‘ITJON OOHIITY
3pt:fc oiuow 

SMaTN. iu is o n  
rW4Nf*TY

a**iM*m. •
; V hO G A N  .' 

jt'?*.-.U2A«U5 -

. F8G9CIN feSSBEINAUEH 
-J-.-WUlVAN

JŜ Ti j. ;“•■■ . ;*:■ -
^S^-.:cp*»Mrn* • 
l^V G O W IN G  ' 

OTROIK5 f»!0«(0 • ' i'-K. ( m i . 
Si»CC-wieftu ■ 
g*;-JONES
■ w tm

;xocwrofcXiJMCiOTfr ^ j $ 6KSUtvi
itaAXUW

rJTT .

4, June 1973

Hon. Michael Whiteman 
Executive Chamber 
State Capitol •
Albany, New York 12224

■ ■■ ■ - ■
The N e w  York State District Attorneys* Association 
takes the following positions on the bills listed 
below: • .i .■

1. The Association approves of a -7849.

_ ., ^ e  Association takes no position o n  the : 
following b i l l s : ;

S en a te  -  20 ,044  
Assembly- 7 9 % - A  

M 6 '9 2 - A  

78lk 
6938 
6551-B  

Senate - _ g n i ^
^ 3288- C -----

II

If

If
n

JKR/cr

cc: Eon. John P.: O'Mars

Very truly yours,

B. ANTHONY MQBOSCO 
L e g is la t iv e  S ecre ta ry

By Ja«a^ M. Rose
A ss is ta n t  D i s t r i c t  At*

r>o 0 0043 m
—V.

. :  ivy
■ .1-

v

•- .'1 ’: ‘W .
‘ m

yir.

; ■ /Y '.‘- S V V j<-T - Ja-TS
4 : ; H f* y y g f y P

- •.
. * '<* «

“  >* •* ■iW jS>  *.*;•
. rm m

JA 00095



k\

* « 4  * •

NEW: YORX STATE 

OFFICE OF PLANNING SERVICES

M E M O R A N D U M

TO: Nichae,! Whiteman, Counsel to the Governor

FROi-t: Richard A. Wiebe
SUBJECT: Senate Bill h'o. 2111-A (Dunne, Garcia)

DATE: May 2, 1973

You requested our comments and recommendations concerning 
the above-numbered bill. ;

This measure does not affect tne functions of this Office 
end we have no comment to make with respect to it.

JA  00096



NEW:TORI STATE 

OFFICE OF PLANNING SERVICES

M E 0 R A N D U .1

TO: Michael Whiteman, Counsel to the Governor
FROM: Richard A. Wiebe
SUBJECT: Senate Bill No. 2111-B (Dunne, Garcia)
DATE:. June 5, . 1973

You requested our comments and recommendations con 
the above-numbered bill.

i
This measure does not jaffect the functions of this 

and we have no comment to make with respect to it.

ea rn in g  

o ffice  :

JA 00097 ,~*njarft*££,



EXHIBIT C



IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

JOSEPH HAYDEN; LUMUMBA 
AKINWOLE-BANDELE: WILSON ANDINO; 
GINA ARIAS; WANPA BESI-DEVEAUX: 
CARLOS BRISTOL; AUGUSTINE 
CARMONA; DAVID GALARZA; KIMALEE 
GARNER; MARK GRAHAM; RERAN 
HOLMES, HI; CHAUJUANTHEYIA

Case No.: 00 Civ. 8586 (LMM)

LOCHARD; STEVEN MANGUAL; JAMEL 
MASSEY; STEPHEN RAMON; LILLIAN M. FIRST AMENDED
RIVERA; NILDA RIVERA; MARIO 
ROMERO; JESSICA SANCLEMENTE; 
PAUL SATTERFIELD; and BARBARA 
SCOTT, on behalf of themselves and all 
individuals similarly situated,

COMPLAINT

Plaintiffs,

V.

GEORGE PATAKI, Governor of the State of 
New York and CAROL BERMAN, 
Chairperson, New York State Board of 
Elections,

Defendants.

PRELIMINARY STATEMENT

I. Plaintiffs bring this matter before the court to challenge New York State’s 

unconstitutional and discriminatory practice of denying suffrage to persons who are incarcerated 

or on parole for a felony conviction and the resulting discriminatory impact that such denial of 

suffrage has on Blacks and Latinos in the State. Plaintiffs contend that this practice of 

disfranchisement and the resulting discriminatory impact violate the First, Fourteenth, and 

Fifteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution; Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act of 

1965. codified at 42 U.S.C. §§ 1973, et sen.; the Civil Rights Acts of 1957 and 1960, codified at

JA 00098



42 U.S.C. §§ 1971(a)(1), 1971(a)(2)(A), and 1971(a)(2)(B); 42 U.S.C. § 1983, and customary 

international law.

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

2. This Court has jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1343; 42 U.S.C.

§ 19 /jj(f) and § 198o; and under the First, Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments to the 

United States Constitution.

3. Declaratory and injunctive relief is authorized by 28 U.S.C. §§ 2201 and 2202, 

and by Rules 57 and 65 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

4. Venue is proper pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b).

PARTIES

Plaintiffs

5. JOSEPH HAYDEN is an African American of lawful voting age, a citizen o f the 

United States, and a legal resident of the State of New York. He is currently on parole for a 

felony conviction and is therefore barred from registering to vote under New York State Election 

Law § 5-106(2).

6 . LUMUMBA AKINWOLE-BANDELE is an African American o f lawful voting 

age, a citizen of the United States, and a legal resident of the State of New York. He currently 

resides in the Bedford-Stuyvesant neighborhood of New York City and is denied an equal 

opportunity to participate in the political process in New York State because o f the 

disproportionate disfranchisement of Blacks and Latinos under New York State Election Law

§ 5-106(2).

7. WILSON ANDINO is a Latino of lawful voting age, a citizen o f the United 

States, and a legal resident of the State of New York. He is currently serving a sentence in 

Woodboume Correctional Facility for a felony conviction and is therefore barred from 

registering to vote under New York State Election Law § 5-106(2).

- 2 -
JA 00099



8. GINA ARIAS is a Latina o f lawful voting age., a citizen of the United States, and

a legal resident of the State of New York. She currently resides in the Washington Heights 

neighborhood o f New York City and is denied an equal opportunity to participate in the political 

process in New York-State because of the disproportionate disfranchisement of Blacks and 

Latinos under New York State Election Law § 5-106(2).

9. WANDA BEST-DEVEAUX is an African American of lawful voting age, a 

citizen of the United States, and a legal resident o f the State of New York. She currently resides 

in the Queens Village neighborhood o f New York City and is denied an equal opportunity to 

participate in the political process in New York State because o f the disproportionate 

disfranchisement of Blacjcs and Latinos under New York State Election Law § 5-106(2).

10. CARLOS BRISTOL is an African American of lawful voting age, a citizen of the 

United States, and a legal resident of the State of New York. He currently resides in the East 

New York neighborhood of New York City and is denied an equal opportunity to participate in 

the political process in New York State because of the disproportionate disfranchisement of 

Blacks and Latinos under New York State Election Law § 5-106(2).

1 1 . AUGUSTINE CARMONA is an African American and Latino of lawful voting 

age, a citizen of the United States, and a legal resident of the State of New York. He is currently 

on parole for a felony conviction and is therefore barred from registering to vote under New 

York State Election Law § 5-106(2).

12. DAVID GALARZA is a Latino of lawful voting age, a citizen of the United 

States, and a legal resident of the State of New York. He currently resides in the Sunset Park 

neighborhood of New York City and is denied an equal opportunity to participate in the political 

process in New York State because of the disproportionate disfranchisement of Blacks and 

Latinos under New York State Election Law § 5-106(2).

JA 00100



13. KJMALEE GARNER is an African American o f lawful voting age. a citizen of 

the United States, and a legal resident of the State of New \  ork. She is currentlv on parole for a 

felony conviction and is therefore barred from registering to vote under New York State Election 

Law § 5-106(2).

14. MARK GRAHAM is an African American of lawful voting age, a citizen o f the 

United States, and a legal resident of the State of New York. He is currently on parole for a 

felony conviction and is therefore barred from registering to vote under New York State Election 

Law § 5-106(2).

15. RERAN HOLMES, 133 is an African American o f lawful voting age, a citizen of 

the United States, and a legal resident of the State of New York. He is currently serving a 

sentence in Woodboume Correctional Facility for a felony conviction and is therefore barred 

from registering to vote under New York State Election Law § 5-106(2).

16. CHAUJUANTHEYIA LOCHARD is an African American of lawful voting age, 

a citizen of the United S tates, and a legal resident of the State o f New York. She currently 

resides in the Bedford-Stuyvesant neighborhood of New York City and is denied an equal 

opportunity to participate in the political process in New York State because of the 

disproportionate disfranchisement of Blacks and Latinos under New York State Election Law 

§5-106(2).

17. STEVEN MANGUAL is a Latino of lawful voting age, a citizen of the United 

States, and a legal resident of the State of New York. He is currently serving a sentence in 

Otisville Correctional Facility for a felony conviction and is therefore barred from registering to 

vote under New York State Election Law § 5-106(2).

18. JAMEL MASSEY is an African American of lawful voting age, a citizen o f the 

United States, and a legal resident of the State of New York. He is currently serving a sentence

-4- JA 00101



in Otisville Correctional Facility for a felony conviction and is therefore barred from resisterino 

to vote under New York State Election Law § 5-106(2).

19. STEPHEN RAMON is a Latino of lawful voting age, a citizen of the United 

States, and a legal resident of the State of New York. He currently resides in the Harlem 

neighborhood of New York City and is denied an equal opportunity to participate in the political 

process in New York State because of the disproportionate disfranchisement of Blacks and 

Latinos under New York State Election Law § 5-106(2).

20. LILLIAN M. RIVERA is a Latina of lawful voting age, a citizen of the United 

States, and a legal resident of the State of New York. She currently resides in the Lower East 

Side neighborhood o f NeyvYork City and is denied an equal opportunity to participate in the 

political process in New York State because of the disproportionate disfranchisement ofBlacks 

and Latinos under New York State Election Law § 5-106(2),

21. NILDA RIVERA is a Latina o f lawful voting age, a citizen o f the United States, 

and a legal resident of the State o f New York. She currently resides in the Lower East Side 

neighborhood of New York City and is denied an equal opportunity to participate in the political 

process in New York State because of the disproportionate disfranchisement ofBlacks and 

Latinos under New York State Election Law § 5-106(2).

22. MARIO ROMERO is a Latino of lawful voting age, a citizen of the United States, 

and a legal resident of the State of New York. He is currently sen'ing a sentence in Woodboume 

Correctional Facility for a felony conviction and is therefore barred from registering to vote 

under New York State Election Law § 5-106(2).

23. JESSICA SANCLEMENTE is a Latina of lawful voting age, a citizen of the 

United States, and a legal resident of the State of New York. She currently resides in the Harlem 

neighborhood of New' York City and is denied an equal opportunity to participate in the political

-  o  -

JA 00102



process in New York State because of the disproportionate disfranchisement of Blacks and 

Latinos under New York State Election Law § 5-106(2).

24. PAUL SATTERFIELD is an African American of lawful voting age, a citizen of 

the United States, and a legal resident of the State of New York. He is currently serving a 

sentence in Otisville Correctional Facility for a felony conviction and is therefore barred from 

registering to vote under New York State Election Law § 5-106(2).

25. B ARBARA SCOTT is an African American of lawful voting age, a citizen of the 

United States, and a legal resident of the State of New York. She currently resides in the 

Cambria Heights neighborhood of New York City and is denied an equal opportunity to 

participate in the political process in New York State because of the disproportionate 

disfranchisement of Blacks and Latinos under New York State Election Law

§5-106(2).

Defendants

26. GEORGE PATAKI is the Governor of the State of New York. He is sued in his 

official capacity in connection with actions taken under color of state law. As Governor, he is 

charged with upholding the Constitution and laws of the State of New York, including those 

provisions disfranchising persons who are incarcerated or on parole for a felony conviction.

27. CAROL BERMAN is the Chairperson of the New York State Board o f Elections, 

and, as such, is vested with the authority for the execution and enforcement of the state laws 

related to the elective franchise and for the preservation of public confidence in the democratic 

process and engagement of voter participation in elections. She is sued in her official capacity in 

connection with actions taken under color of state law.

-6-
JA 00103



CLASS ACTION .ALLEGATIONS

28. Plaintiffs bring this action on their own behalf and on behalf o f all others similarly 

situated against the Defendants pursuant to Rule 23(a) and (b)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil 

Procedure.

29. The Plaintiff class includes three subclasses: (a) Black and Latino prisoners who 

are of lawful voting age, citizens of the United States, currently incarcerated in New York State 

as a result of a felony conviction, and otherwise qualified to vote but for their incarceration 

resulting from a felony conviction; (b) Black and Latino parolees who are of lawful voting age, 

citizens of the United States, currently on parole in New York State as a result of a felony 

conviction, and otherwise qualified to vote but for their parole resulting from a felony 

conviction; and (c) Black and Latino persons who are of lawful voting age, citizens of the United 

States, qualified to vote, and denied an equal opportunity to participate in the political process in 

New York State because of the disproportionate disfranchisement under New York State 

Election Law § 5-106(2) of Black and Latino persons who are incarcerated or on parole for a 

felony conviction.

30. The named Plaintiffs representing subclass (a) are as follows: WILSON 

ANDINO; RERAN HOLMES, HI; STEVEN MANGUAL; JAMEL MASSEY; MARIO 

ROMERO; and PAUL SATTERFIELD.

31. The named Plaintiffs representing subclass (b) are as follows: JOSEPH 

HAYDEN; AUGUSTINE CARMONA; KJMALEE GARNER; and MARK GRAHAM.

32. The named Plaintiffs representing subclass (c) are as follows: LUMUMBA 

AKINWOLE-BANDELE; GINA ARLAS; WANDA BEST-DEVEAUX; CARLOS BRISTOL; 

DAVID GALARZA; CHAUJUANTHEYIA LOCHARD; STEPHEN RAMON; LILLIAN M. 

RIVERA; NILDA RIVERA; JESSICA SANCLEMENTE; and BARBARA SCOTT.

-7- JA 00104



33. The members of the Plaintiff class are so numerous as to make it impractical to 

bring them all before this Court.

3 4 . There are questions of law and fact regarding the rights of citizens to register to 

vote and the dilution q f minority voting strength that are common to the class as a whole.

35. The claims of the Plaintiffs are typical of the claims of the class as a whole.

36. The Plaintiffs can adequately and fairly represent the interests of the Plaintiff 

class. The Plaintiffs are not seeking monetary or other relief that would require consideration of 

individual circumstances.

37. The Plaintiffs are represented by counsel who are familiar with the applicable 

laws, including attorneys of the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc., the 

Community Service Society of New York, and the Center for Law and Social Justice at Medgar 

Evers College. Counsel for Plaintiffs have the resources necessary to pursue this litigation and 

are experienced in class action litigation and litigation regarding civil rights, including voting 

.rights.

38. Class certification pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(a) and (b)(2) is warranted 

because Defendants have acted or failed to act on grounds generally applicable to the class, 

thereby making appropriate final injunctive relief with respect to the class as a whole.

FACTS

History of Race Discrimination in New York State's Disfranchisement Laws

3 9 . New York State and governmental jurisdictions within the state have historically 

used a wide variety of mechanisms to discriminate against minority voters in violation of the 

Constitution and laws of the United States, including, inter aha, literacy tests, English-only 

election procedures, and racially discriminatory rules for purging voters from registration lists.

40. New York’s history of discrimination in contravention of minority voting rights 

has triaeered coverage of three of its counties under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act. 42

-8 - JA 00105



U.S.C. § 1973c. Congress passed Section 5 to require states or portions of states with a history 

of voting discrimination to submit any law that affects voting to the federal government for 

review. Since the passage of the Act, Congress has extended New York’s Section 5 status twice: 

first in 1975 for a seven-year period, Voting Rights Act of 1965-Extension, Pub. L. No. 94-73,

89 Stat. 400 (1975), and then a second time in 1982, when Congress extended coverage until the 

year 2007. Voting Rights Act Amendments of 1982, Pub. L. No. 97-205, 96 Stat. 131 (1982).

41. New York State’s extensive history of racial discrimination in voting dates as far 

back as the State’s provisions in its constitution regarding suffrage. Throughout the New York 

Constitutional Conventions addressing the right of suffrage, the framers made explicit statements 

of intent to discriminate against minority voters.

42. Delegates created certain voting requirements that expressly applied only to racial 

minorities and crafted other provisions with seemingly neutral language that they knew would 

have a discriminatory effect on racial minorities. The.disfranchisement o f felons was one aspect 

.of this effort to deprive minorities of the right to vote.

43. In 1777 the framers of the first New York State Constitution excluded minorities 

from the polls by limiting suffrage to property holders and free men. See N.Y. Const, art. VII 

(repealed 1826). These voting requirements disproportionately disfranchised Blacks.

44. As more Blacks became property holders and free men, the New York 

Constitution further limited their access to the ballot.

45. In 1801 the legislature removed all property restrictions from the suffrage 

requirements for the election of delegates to New York’s first Constitutional Convention; 

however, to ensure that this act would not extend the vote to Blacks, the legislature expressly 

excluded Blacks from participating in this election.

46. At the second New York Constitutional Convention in 1821, the delegates met to 

address the issue of suffrage generally and Black suffrage in particular. The question of Black

- 9 - JA 00106



suffrage sparked heated discussions, during which many delegates expressed the view that racial 

minorities were essentially unequipped to participate in civil society. Some delegates made 

explicit statements regarding Blacks’ natural inferiority and unfitness for suffrage.

47. Basefron their beiiet in Blacks unfitness for democratic participation, the 

delegates designed new voting requirements aimed at stripping Black citizens of their previously 

held right to vote.

48. Article II o f the Constitution of 1821 incorporated the new discriminatory 

restrictions and contained new and unusually high property requirements that expressly applied 

only to men o f color. N.Y. Const, art. D, § I (repealed 1870). Only 298 Blacks out of 29,701, or 

.0075 % of the Black population, met these new requirements. Article II also provided new 

citizenship requirements that applied only to men of color. Id.

49. Article II further restricted the suffrage of minorities by permitting the state 

legislature to disfranchise persons “who have been, or may be, convicted o f infamous crimes.” 

N.Y. Const, art. II, § 2. Through common law and legislative interpretation, “infamous crimes” 

came to mean traditional felonies.

50. In an 1826 amendment to the Constitution, New York State formally abolished all 

property qualifications for white male suffrage, but the unduly onerous property requirements for 

Black males were left intact.

51. At the third Constitutional Convention of New York in 1846, heated debates over 

suffrage again focused on Blacks. Advocating for the denial of equal suffrage, delegates 

continued to make explicit statements regarding Blacks’ unfitness for suffrage, including a 

declaration that the proportion of “infamous crime” in the minority population was more than 

thirteen times that in the white population.

52. Felon disfranchisement was further solidified in the Convention of 1846. As 

amended, the relevant constitutional provision stated: “Laws may be passed excluding from the

- 10-
JA 00107



right of suffrage all persons who have been or may be convicted of bribery, o f larceny, or of any 

infamous crime; and for depriving every person who shall make, or become directly or indirectly 

interested in any bet or wager depending upon the result of any election, mom the right to vote at 

such election.” N.Y. Const, art. II, § 2 (amended 1894) (emphasis added).

53. When re-enacting the felon disfranchisement provision and specifically including 

“any infamous crime” in the category of convictions that would disqualify voters, the delegates 

were acutely aware that these restrictions would have a discriminatory impact on Blacks.

54. At the fourth Constitutional Convention of New York in 1866-67, after engaging 

in heated debates, the legislators ultimately rejected various proposals to expand suffrage and 

instead chose to maintain racially discriminatory property qualifications.
V

55. New York’s explicitly racially discriminatory suffrage requirements were in place

until voided in 1870 by the adoption of the Fifteenth Amendment to the United States 

Constitution. U.S. Const, amend. XV. ~

56. However, two years after the passage of the Fifteenth Amendment, an 

unprecedented committee convened and amended the disfranchisement provision of the New 

York Constitution to require the state legislature, at its following session, to enact laws excluding 

persons convicted of infamous crimes from the right to vote. N.Y. Const, art. II, § 2 (amended 

1894). Theretofore, the enactment of such laws was permissive.

5 7 . In 1894, at the Constitutional Convention following this amendment, the 

delegates permanently abandoned the permissive language and adopted a constitutional 

requirement that the legislature enact disfranchisement laws. As amended, the provision stated 

that “[tjhe legislature shall enact iaws excluding from the right o f suffrage all persons convicted 

of briber}' or of any infamous crime.” N.Y. Const, art. II, § 2 (emphasis added). This is the 

provision in the Constitution pursuant to which § 5-106 of the New York State Election Law was

- 12 -
JA 00108



enacted and tinder which persons incarcerated and on parole for felony convictions are presently 

disfranchised in New L ork State.

Disparate Application of New York State Election Law § 5-106

58. The New York State Constitution mandates that the Legislature “enact laws 

excluding from the right of suffrage all persons convicted of bribery or of any infamous crime.” 

N.Y. Const, art. II, § 3 .s

59. Pursuant to Article II, Section 3 of the New York State Constitution, New York 

State Election Law prohibits persons convicted of a felony under the laws o f New York State 

from voting, unless said persons have been pardoned, received a suspended or commuted 

sentence been sentenced to probation or conditional or unconditional discharge, or served their 

maximum sentence of imprisonment, including parole.

60. As a result of the disparate application ofNew York State Election Law § 5- 

106(2), persons who are convicted of “bribery or of any infamous crime” and are sentenced to 

incarceration and/or parole are not permitted to vote, whereas their counterparts who have been 

pardoned, received a suspended or commuted sentence, or been sentenced to probation or 

conditional or unconditional discharge are permitted to vote.

Racial Disparities in Disfranchisement Rates of Blacks and Latinos

61. In New York State, Blacks and Latinos are prosecuted, convicted, and sentenced 

to incarceration at rates substantially disproportionate to whites.

62. Although Blacks make up approximately 15.9% ofNew York State’s overall 

population (as reported in the 2000 Census), they make up 54.3% of the current prison 

population and 50% o f the current parolee population in New York State.

In New York’s Set'enth Constirational Convention in 1938, Article II, Section 2 of the New \ ork Constitution 
of 1894 became Article II, Section 3. See N.Y. Const, an. II, §3.

-  1 2  -
JA 00109



63 . Although Latinos make up approximately 15.1 % of New York State’s overall 

population (as reported in the 2000 Census), they make up 26.7% of the current prison 

population and 32% of the current parolee population in New York State.

64. Collectively, Blacks and Latinos make up 8 6% of the total current prison 

population and S2% of the total current parolee population in New York State, while they 

approximate only 31% of New York State’s overall population.

65. By contrast, whites make up approximately 62% of New York State’s overall 

population (as reported in the 2000 Census) and only 16% of New York State’s current prisoners 

and parolees, respectively.

66 . Blacks and Latinos are sentenced to incarceration at substantially higher rates 

than whites, and whites are sentenced to probation at substantially higher rates than Blacks and 

Latinos. For example, in 2001 whites made up approximately 32% of total felony convictions, 

yet comprised 44% of those who received probation and only 21.4% of those incarcerated for_ 

felony convictions. By contrast, Blacks made up 44% of those convicted o f  a felony, yet' 

approximately only 35% of those sentenced to probation and over 51% o f those sentenced to 

incarceration. Latinos comprised 23% of those convicted o f a felony, yet only 19% of those 

sentenced to probation and over 26.5% of those sentenced to incarceration.

67. In addition, Blacks make up 30% and Latinos make up 14% o f the total current 

population of persons sentenced to probation in New York State, while whites make up 51% of 

such persons.

68 . Nearly 52% of those currently denied the right to vote pursuant to New York 

State Election Law § 5-106(2), are Black and nearly 35% are Latino. Collectively, Blacks and 

Latinos comprise nearly 87% of those currently denied the right to vote pursuant to New York 

State Election Law § 5-106(2).

-  13 - J A  00110



M inority Vote Dilution

69. The disproportionate rates o f prosecution, conviction, and incarceration o f Blacks 

and Latinos and the resulting disproportionate rates of disfranchisement among these groups has
i

a disparate impact on the ability of Blacks and Latinos in New York State to participate in the 

political process.

70. Approximately 80% of New York State’s prison population consists of Blacks 

and Latinos from New York City communities in the following areas; Harlem; Washington 

Heights; the Lower East Side; the South and East Bronx; Central and East Brooklyn; and 

Southeast Queens.

71. A sa  result of the disproportionate disfranchisement o f Blacks and Latinos, the
V . . . . .

voting strength of Blacks and Latinos in certain citywide', statewide, and other jurisdiction-wide 

elections, as separate groups and collectively, is diluted in violation of Section 2 of the Voting

Rights Act of 1965, e t s e i  ,

Customary International Law and Felonv Disfranchisement

72. Customary international law is binding on all States, including the United States.

73. Political participation, which includes the right to vote and to participate in the 

conduct of public affairs, is a fundamental human right recognized under international law.

7 4 . Article 5, Section (c) of the Convention on the Elimination o f All Forms of Racial 

Discrimination (CERD), to which the United States is a signatory member, guarantees all 

citizens equality before the law in the exercise of political rights, including the right to vote, 

resardless of race, color, descent, or national or ethnic origin.

75. Article 25 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), to 

which the United States is also a signatory member, guarantees every citizen the right and the 

opportunity to vote without unreasonable restrictions.

- 14- JA 00111



/ 6 . Article 5, Section (c) of CERD and Article 25 o f the ICCPP, reflect principles of 

customary international law.

77. The disfrancniseinent of persons who are incarcerated or on parole for a felonv 

conviction under New' York State Election Law § 5-106(2) has a disproportionate impact on 

Blacks and Latinos and serves to deny the Plaintiff class of persons who are incarcerated and on 

parole for a felony conviction the right to vote generally and on account o f their race, color, 

descent, or national or ethnic origin in violation of customary international law.

CLAIMS FOR RELIEF 

First Claim for Relief

(Fourteenth Amendment Equal Protection Clause)

78. Plaintiffs hereby reallege and incorporate by reference paragraphs 1 through 76

above.

79. Defendants have maintained and administered non-uniform practices o f 

disfranchising persons convicted of a felony under the laws of the State of New York, whereby 

persons convicted of a felony who receive a suspended or commuted sentence or are sentenced 

to probation or conditional or unconditional discharge are permitted to vote while persons 

convicted of a felony who are sentenced to incarceration are not.

80. These practices violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment 

to the United States Constitution and 42 U.S.C. § 1983 in contravention of the rights o f  persons 

incarcerated and on parole for a felony conviction (Plaintiff subclasses (a) and (b)).

Second Claim for Relief 

(Fourteenth Amendment Due Process Clause)

SI. Plaintiffs hereby reallege and incorporate by reference paragraphs 1 through 76

above.

- 15 - JA 00112



82. Defendants have maintained and administered non-uniform practices of 

disfranchising persons convicted of a felony under the laws of the State o f New York, whereby 

persons convicted of a felony who receive a suspended or commuted sentence or are sentenced 

to probation or conditional or unconditional discharge are permitted to vote while persons 

convicted of a felony who are sentenced to incarceration are not without affording such persons 

due process under the law.

83. These practices violate the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to

the United States Constitution and 42 U.S.C. § 1983 in contravention of the rights of vote o f

persons incarcerated and on parole for a felony conviction (Plaintiff subclasses (a) and (b)).

Third  Claim for Relief - -

(Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment; Fifteenth Amendment; 

Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act o f 1965; the Civil Rights Acts of 1957 and 1960)

84. Plaintiffs hereby reallege and incorporate by reference paragraphs 1 through 76

above.

'85. Section 5-106(2) of New York Election Law was enacted pursuant to Article I, 

Section 2 of the New York State Constitution with the intent to disfranchise Blacks.

86. Section 5-106(2) of New York Election Law and Article 1, Section 2 of the New 

York State Constitution abridge the right to vote o f  persons incarcerated and on parole for a 

felony conviction (Plaintiff subclasses (a) and (b)) on account of their race in violation of the 

Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment; Fifteenth Amendment; Section 2 o f  the 

Votina Rights Act of 1965; the Civil Rights Acts o f 1957 and 3960, and 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

Fourth Claim  for Relief 

(Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act o f 1965)

87. Plaintiffs hereby reallege and incorporate by reference paragraphs 1 through 76

above.

- 16- JA 00113



88 . The disfranchisement of persons under New York State Election Law § 5-106(2) 

has a disproportionate impact on Black and Latino persons incarcerated or on parole for a felony 

conviction.

89. As a result, such persons are denied an equal opportunity to participate in the 

political process in New York State.

90. The discriminatory impact of New York’s disfranchisement law's serves to deny 

the Plaintiff class ofpersons incarcerated or on parole for a felony conviction (Plaintiff 

subclasses (a) and (b)) the right to vote in violation of section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, 42 

U.S.C. § 1973.

Fifth Claim for Relief
-A

(Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965)

91. Plaintiffs hereby reallege and incorporate by reference paragraphs 1 through 

paragraph 76 above.

92. The disfranchisement of persons incarcerated or on parole for a felony conviction 

under New York State’s Election Law' has a disproportionate impact on Blacks and Latinos.

9 3 . Consequently, § 5-106(2) of New York Election Law serves to dilute the voting 

strength of Blacks and Latinos and certain minority communities in New York State (Plaintiff 

subclass (c)) in violation of section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, 42 U.S.C. § 1973.

Sixth Claim for Relief 

(First Amendment)

94. Plaintiffs hereby reallege and incorporate by reference paragraphs 1 through 76

above.

95. New York State Election Law § 5-106(2) imposes severe restrictions on the right 

to vote ofpersons wrho are incarcerated or on parole for a felony conviction (Plaintiff subclasses

(a) and (b)) in violation of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.

- 17- JA 00114



Seventh Claim for Relief

(Customary International Law)

96. Plaintiffs hereby reallege and incorporate by reference paragraphs 1 through 76

above.

97. New York State Election Law § 5-106(2) and Article L Section 2 of the New 

York State Constitution violate customary international law because they were enacted with the 

intent to disfranchise Blacks.

98. New York State Election Law § 5-106(2) further violates customary international 

law because it denies persons who are incarcerated or on parole for a felony conviction the right 

to vote and has a disparate effect on Blacks and Latinos on account of their race, color, descent, 

or national or ethnic origin.

9 9 . As a result of New York State Election Law § 5-106(2), Plaintiffs (Plaintiff 

subclasses (a), (b), and (c)). are denied the enjoyment o f  guaranteed political rights, such as the. 

right to vote and participate in the political process, in violation o f customary international law.

PRAYER FO R RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs respectfully ask this Court:

(1 ) To certify the Plaintiff class, consisting o f  the following subclasses of:

(a) Black and Latino persons who are o f  lawful voting age, citizens o f  the United 

States, currently incarcerated in New York State as a result of a felony conviction, and otherwise 

qualified to vote but for their incarceration resulting from a felony conviction;

(b) Black and Latino persons who are o f  lawful voting age, citizens o f  the United 

States currentlv on parole in New York State as a result of a felony conviction, and otherwise 

qualified to vote but for their parole resulting from a felony conviction; and

(c) Black and Latino persons who are o f  lawful voting age, citizens of the United 

States, qualified to vote, and denied an equal opportunity to participate in the political process in

- 18- JA 00115



New York State because of the disproportionate disfranchisement of Blacks and Latinos under

New7 York State Election Law § 5-106(2).

(2) To enter a judgment declaring and determining that § 5-106(2) o f  New' Y ork’s 

Election Law7 and Article!, Section II of the New York State Constitution violate the First, 

Fourteenth, and Fifteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution; Section 2 of the Voting 

Rights Act o f 1965, codified at 42 U.S.C. §§ 1973, et see.: the Civil Rights Acts of 1957 and 

1960, codified at 42 U.S.C. §§ 1971(a)(1), 1971(a)(2)(A) and 1971(a)(2)(B); 42 U.S.C. § 1983; 

and customary international law;

(3) To grant injunctive relief enjoining Defendants from implementing and enforcing 

§ 5-106(2) of New York Election Law;

(4) To award’plaintiffs their costs and disbursements associated with the filing and 

maintenance o f  this action, including an award of reasonable attorneys’ fees pursuant to 42 

U.S.C. §§ 1973(e) and 1988; and

(5) To award such other equitable and further relief as the Court deems just and

proper.

DATED: January 15, 2003

Respectfully submitted,

dfanai S. Nelson (JN1825)

Elaine R. Jones 
Director-Counsel

Theodore M. Shaw 
Norman J. Chachkin 
Debo P. Adegbile
NAACP Legal Defense

and Educational Fund, Inc.

- 19-
JA 00116



99 Hudson Street. Suite 1600 
New York, NY 10013-2897 
(Tel.) 212-965-2200 
(Fax) 212-226-7592
inelson@naacnldi~.org

Todd A. Cox 
NAACP Legal Defense

and Educational Fund, Inc.
1444 Eye Street, 1Ô 1 Floor 
Washington, D.C. 20005 
(Tel.) 202-682-1300 
(Fax) 202-682-1312

Community Service Society 
of New York 

105 E. 22nd Street 
New York, NY 10010 
(Tel.) 212-614-5462 
(Fax) 212-260-6218 
icartageria@cssnv.org

Esmeralda Simmons 
Center for Law and Social Justice 

at Medgar Evers College 
1150 Carroll Street 
Brooklyn, NY 11225 
(Tel.) 718-270-6296 
(Fax) 718-270-6190 
igibbs3926@aol.com

- 2 0 - JA 00117

mailto:icartageria@cssnv.org
mailto:igibbs3926@aol.com


EXHIBIT D



UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

JOSEPH HAYDEN, et ah, etc., : 00 Civ. 8586 (LMM) (HBP)

Plaintiffs,

-against-

GEORGE PATAKI, Governor of the State
o f New York, and CAROL BERMAN, :
Chairperson, New York State Board of Elections,

, Defendants.

------------------------------------------------------ --------- X

ANSWER TO AMENDED COMPLAINT

Defendant the Governor of the State of New York, by his attorney, ELIOT SPITZER, 

Attorney General of the State of New York, as and for his answer to the amended complaint herein:

1 . States that the allegations set forth in paragraphs 1, 28 and 29 of the amended 

complaint consist in plaintiffs’ characterizations of the action to which no response is required.

2. Denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief in respect to the 

allegations contained in paragraphs 2, 5, 6 , 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18,19,20,21,22, 

23,24,25.30,31,32,33,35,36,37,61,62,63,64, 65,66,67,68, 70, 74, 75 and 76 of the amended 

complaint.

3. Denies the allegations set forth in paragraph 26 of the amended complaint, except 

admits that George E. Pataki is the Governor of the State of New' York, with powers and duties as

JA 00118



prescribed by law, and respectfully refers the Court to the constitution and laws of the State of New 

York for the terms and contents thereof respecting the Governor.

4. Denies the allegations in paragraph 27 of the amended complaint, except admits that 

Carol Berman is Chairperson of the New York State Board o f Elections, with powers and duties as 

prescribed by law, and respectfully refers the Court to the constitution and laws of the State of New 

York for the terms and contents thereof respecting the Chairperson.

5 . Denies the allegations set forth in paragraphs 34, 38, 39, 41,42, 44, 45, 46, 47, 51,

amended complaint. v

6 . Denies the allegations contained in paragraphs 40,43, 48,49, 50, 52, 56, 57 and 60 

of the amended complaint, except respectfully refers the Court to the provisions of law referred to 

in those paragraphs for the terms and contents thereof. '

AS AND FOR A FIRST DEFENSE

7 . The amended complaint and each of the seven claims alleged therein fail to state a 

claim upon which relief can be granted.

AS AND FOR A SECOND DEFENSE

8. Each of plaintiffs Akinwole-Bandele, Arias, Best-Deveaux, Bristol, Galarza, Lochard, 

Ramon, L. M. Rivera, N. Rivera, Sanclemente and Scott lack standing to maintain the fifth and 

seventh claims allesed in the amended complaint, as sucn claims may only be maintained, if  at all, 

by a member of the public duly registered to vote in the State of New York.

-2-

JA 00119



9. By reason of the foregoing, the Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction over the fifth

and seventh claims alleged on behalf of each of plaintiffs Akinwole-Bandele, .Anas, Best-Deveaux, 

Bristol. Galarza, Lochard, Ramon, L. M. Rivera, N. Rivera, Sanclemente and Scott.

AS AND FOR A THIRD DEFENSE

10 . Each of plaintiffs Andino, Holmes, Mangual, Massey, Romero, Satterfield, Hayden 

Carmona, Gamer and Graham lack standing to maintain any claim under § 2 o f the Voting Rights 

Act of 1965, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 1973, as any claim under § 2 may only be maintained, if  at
it,'

all, by a member of the public duly registered to vote in the State of New York.

1 1 . By reason of the foregoing, the Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction over the third 

and fourth claims under § 2 alleged on behalf of each of plaintiffs Andino, Holmes, Mangual, 

Massey, Romero, Satterfield, Hayden, Carmona, Gamer and Graham.

AS AND FOR A FOURTH DEFENSE

12. Each of plaintiffs Akinwole-Bandele, Anas, Best-Deveaux, Bristol, Galarza, Lochard, 

Ramon. L. M. Rivera, N. Rivera, Sanclemente and Scott lacks standing to maintain any claim in 

respect to any district in which he or she does not reside.

13. By reason of the foregoing, the Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction over any such 

claim or claims on behalf of each of plaintiffs Akinwole-Bandele, .Anas, Best-Deveaux, Bnstol, 

Galarza, Lochard, Ramon, L. M. Rivera, N. Rivera, Sanclemente and Scott.

- 3-

J A  0 0 1 2 0



AS AND FO R A FIFTH DEFENSE

14. The mere fact that the governor o f a state is under a general duty to enforce state law 

is not sufficient to make"a governor a proper party' to litigation challenging a state law.

15. Defendant the Governor has no connection with the enforcement o f the provisions 

of law challenged in this action, within the meaning of Ex Parte Young, 209 U.S 123 (1908).

16. By reason of the foregoing, this action as against defendant the Governor is barred

by the Eleventh Amendment and, accordingly, the Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction over this

action as asainst defendant the Governor.W \\

AS AND FO R A SIXTH DEFENSE

17. The actions and conduct o f  defendant the Governor and all agents and employees of 

the State of New York under his direction or control in regard to the matters alleged in the amended 

complaint, at all relevant times have been fully in compliance with all applicable federal and State 

constitutional provisions, statutes and regulations.

-4-

JA 00121



Dated:

WHEREFORE, defendant the Governor respectfully requests that judgment be entered:

(A) dismissing the amended complaint in this action in entirety';

(B) dismissing the amended complaint in this action in entirety as against defendant the 

Governor;

(C) awarding to defendant the Governor, as against plaintiffs and each o f them, 

reasonable attorney’s fees and expenses, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1988, for each of 

those claims against him as are frivolous, unreasonable, or without foundation, and;

(D) granting such other and further relief as the Court may deem just and proper.

New York, New York 
April 14,2003

ELIOT SPITZER 
Attorney General of the 

State of New York
Attorue
By:

for Defendant Governor

h i '
JOEL GRABER (JG-3337) 
Assistant Attorney General 
120 Broadway - 24th Floor
New York, NY 10271-0332 
(212) 416-8645 
FAX (212) 416-6075
ioel.graber@oag.state.nv.us

TO:

CLERK OF THE COURT 
ATTORNEYS-OF-RECORD

mailto:ioel.graber@oag.state.nv.us


EXHIBIT E



UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

JOSEPH HAYDEN; LUMUMBA AKINWOLFE-BANDELE; 
WILSON ANDINO; GINA ARIAS; WANDA BAST- 
DEVEAUX; CARLOS BRISTOL; AUGUSTINE 
CARMONA; DAVID CjALARZA; KIMALEE GARNER; 
M ARK GRAHAM ; KERAN HOLM ES, III; 
CHAUJUANTHEYIA LOCHARD; STEVEN MANJUAL; 
JAMEL MASSEY; STEPHEN RAMON; LILLIAN M. 
RIVERA; NILDA RIVERA; MARIO ROMERO, JESSICA 
SANCLEMENTE; PAUL SATTERFIELD; and BARBARA 
SCOTT; on behalf of themselves and all individuals similarly 
situated,

-Plaintiffs,
-against-

V

GEORGE PATAKI, Governor of the State of New York; and 
CAROL BERMAN, Chairperson, New York State Board of 
Elections,

-Defendants.

ANSWER

Index No. 00 Civ 8586 
(LMM)

CAROL BERMAN, Chairperson of the NEW YORK STATE BOARD OF ELECTIONS, 

by her attorney, Patricia L. Murray, as and for an answer to the amended complaint herein:

]. Makes no response to the allegations contained in paragraphs numbered 1 through 

37, as they delineate the parameters of the proceeding.

2. Deny the allegations contained in paragraphs numbered 38 and 71.

3. Deny knowledge and information sufficient to admit or deny the allegations contained 

in paragraphs numbered 39, 42, 44, 46, 47, 51, 53, 54, and paragraphs numbered 61 through 70, 

inclusive.

4. Admit the allegations contained in paragraph 40 only to the extend that they reflect 

the public record.

JA 00123



5. Admit the allegations contained in paragraphs numbered 58 and 59.

6. Admit the allegations contained in paragraph 60 only insofar as it reflects statutory 

language.

7. Deny the allegations contained in paragraphs numbered 41,43,45,48,49,50,52, 55, 

56, 57, and 72 through 77, inclusive; insofar as they reflect conjecture and opinion of plaintiff 

counsel.

AS AND FOR A FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

8. The amended complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.
f

WHEREFORE, defendant respectfully requests that judgment be entered dismissing the 

amended complaint herein and granting such other and further relief as this Court may deem just and 

proper.

DATED: April 8, 2003
Albany, New York

PATRICIA L. MURRAY, ESQ. (PM 1196) 
Deputy Counsel 
Attorney for Defendant Carol Berman, Chairperson 
New York State Board of Elections 
40 Steuben Street, Albany, NY 12207 
Tel: (518) 474-6367 / Fax: (518) 486-4546

-2-

JA 00124



TO: Janas S. Nelson, Esq.
Counsel for Plaintiffs
NAACP Legal Defense and Education Fund, Inc.
99 Hudson Street, Suite 1600, New York, NY 10013-2897

J o e l  E .  G r a b e r ,A A G .
New York State Attorney General’s Office 
120 Broadway, New York, NY 10271

>*r.*rpe -3-