H.B. Rowe Company v. Tippet Brief of Amicus Curiae
Public Court Documents
August 20, 2009
Cite this item
-
Brief Collection, LDF Court Filings. Hayden v. Pataki Joint Appendix, 2003. 220608d5-b79a-ee11-be36-6045bdeb8873. LDF Archives, Thurgood Marshall Institute. https://ldfrecollection.org/archives/archives-search/archives-item/5425032d-6fa2-4d43-ae73-29dd911b3309/hayden-v-pataki-joint-appendix. Accessed April 28, 2025.
Copied!
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-