Something’s should have been looked into before and changed way before now.

I oppose HB150 Given the rise in serious crime across the country and within the Commonwealth in recent years, Virginia’s justice system should be strengthened—not further constrained. HB150 risks limiting the ability of courts and prosecutors to hold dangerous offenders accountable, even after probable cause has already been lawfully established. In recent cases, including the tragic killing of a civilian in Reston, Virginians have seen firsthand the real-world consequences of offenders being released back into communities without timely and effective justice. Criminals—including repeat offenders and individuals unlawfully present in the country—who avoid prosecution due to procedural or resource-driven delays pose a direct and unacceptable public safety risk. Courts and law enforcement agencies across multiple districts are already under severe strain. Just recently, the Commonwealth’s Attorney in Prince William County publicly stated that her office requires additional resources to process evidence and manage an increasing caseload resulting from a significant uptick in criminal activity. These delays are not the result of negligence or indifference, but of capacity limitations within an already overburdened system. HB150 would penalize prosecutors and victims for delays caused by staffing shortages, forensic backlogs, and administrative constraints—factors largely outside their control. Rather than imposing rigid prosecution cutoffs after probable cause has been found, the General Assembly should focus on providing courts, prosecutors, and law enforcement with the resources necessary to process cases efficiently and uphold public safety.

First felonies should only be for heinous crimes . There are to many crimes under this code if you sell Marijuana or commit murder you can be a felon . That makes it absolutely difficult to find employment when having a felony charge . Every person should be able to have a speedy trial and unless it is a heinous crime you should be able to have bond you can afford . If and when sentenced it should be a certain amount of time and that should apply for everyone . How do people who commit robbery get 30 years yet someone who commits murder gets 7 years there should be a guide line for all charges .

Madam Chairwoman and Delegates, in past legislative sessions, it has often been the position of law enforcement and many Commonwealth Attorneys that the risk of fentanyl exposure should be a reason to oppose this bill. Sadly, due to rampant misinformation, they have been effective at preventing passage of those bills. Below are links to references from the DEA, several emergency medicine and first responder organizations, and research papers showing that the risk of contact with fentanyl is.1.) almost nonexistent; and 2,) highly unlikely to cause any harm in any real life situation if it did happen. DEA https://www.dea.gov/sites/default/files/Publications/Final%20STANDARD%20size%20of%20Fentanyl%20Safety%20Recommendations%20for%20First%20Respond....pdf American Council on Medical Toxicology https://www.acmt.net/wp-content/uploads/2024/11/PS_241101_ACMT-Statement-on-Fentanyl-Exposure-Laws.pdf State of MD Opioid Command Center https://stopoverdose.maryland.gov/wp-content/uploads/sites/34/2023/10/OOCC-Fact-Check-%E2%80%93Accidental-Fentanyl-Exposure.pdf Medical journal articles https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7492952/ https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0955395921002061 Thank you. Thomas A. (“Tom”) Jackson Co-lead organizer Virginia Recovery Advocacy Project

I oppose this bill: reopening sentences—especially in cases involving violent crimes—could undermine the finality of sentencing and weaken deterrence. We should also consider the emotional impact on victims and their families, since hearings would require notification efforts through the Virginia Department of Corrections and could resurface traumatic memories. Another issue: would giving judges discretion to modify sentences lead to inconsistent outcomes across different courts?

HB853 - I do not agree with the reducing of sentences for violent, especially murder, felons. Their victims and the family of the victims did not have the joy of being with their family members. I do not have much trust in a probation system that cannot even safely monitor sexual offenders. Why do you not focus on making punishments MORE harsh in order to deter crimes. Please get the illegals out of our country. Stop making it a picnic for everyone EXCEPT law biding tax payers.

I am totally against this bill and would like to voice my opposition to this bill passing. The law should be upheld and respected not weakened or avoided. This would make criminals more bold and weaken out justice system.

I think this is a dangerous bill and it threatens the safety and justice of the victims of these said criminals. Victims have a hard enough time putting behind the trauma of these crimes and this will reopen those wounds and add new trauma stress. Please vote NO to this bill.

My name is Abigail Romero and I'm a Senior Assistant Commonwealth's Attorney in Fauquier County. I submit this comment in strong opposition to the proposed legislation that would permit individuals convicted of the most serious violent crimes- including murder, rape, and sexual offenses against children- to seek a reduction in their sentence after serving only a portion of that sentence. I have served as a prosecutor for almost seventeen years. During that time, I have handled serious violent felonies, including murder, and I am one of a small number of prosecutors in my office designated to prosecute sex offenses and crimes against children. I have tried these cases. I have sat with victims of sexual violence, with children who have been abused, and with families whose loved ones were murdered. When I read this bill, these were the people I thought of- the father who broke down recounting how he held his son as he died after being shot in his own driveway, the two little girls who felt like they wouldn't be safe anywhere after being repeatedly sexually abused by their mom's boyfriend in their own home, the mom whose beloved son was senselessly murdered simply because he interrupted a burglary at his home, and many other victims who I have worked with over the years. The trial process in these cases is uniquely grueling for victims and their families. Victims of sexual offenses- particularly children- are often required to relive the most traumatic moments of their lives in a public courtroom, while being subjected to cross-examination, scrutiny, and delay. Families of homicide victims endure years of proceedings with no possibility of true closure, only the hope that, at the conclusion of the case, there will be some sense of finality and accountability. This legislation would undermine that finality. For many victims, the sentence imposed at the conclusion of a trial represents the end of a long and painful chapter. It allows them, finally, to begin healing without the constant fear of having to reengage with the system or confront the person who harmed them. Allowing individuals convicted of the most serious violent offenses to seek early release shatters that expectation and replaces it with uncertainty and fear. Victims would have to accept that the individual who victimized them could seek release far earlier than contemplated at sentencing- and that they may be called upon, once again to participate in a process that reopens old wounds. A process that would likely be conducted with a judge who did not hear any of the evidence presented to the trial court. From a public safety perspective, this proposal is deeply concerning. These are not offenses involving a momentary lapse of judgment or low-level harm. They represent the most serious violations of law and trust, often involving profound violence and lasting trauma. Sentences in these cases are imposed only after careful consideration by judges, informed by evidence, victim impact testimony, statutory mandates, and individualized factors. To allow these sentences to be revisited so early erodes confidence in the justice system and diminishes the gravity of the harm caused. Accountability and compassion are not mutually exclusive, but this legislation strikes the wrong balance. It prioritizes the interests of violent convicted offenders over the lasting and often lifelong impact on victims and their families.

This bill is terrifying. When sentences are imposed, jurors and judges should know that their expectations are being honored. This bill virtually erases the role of the judge who heard the original case and imposed, often with jurors' recommendations, the sentence. More importantly this bill drags families and friends of crime victimd through unnecessary pain and fear.

I am opposed to this bill as it undermines the past decisions of judges and juries and unnecessarily creates a burden on the victims of crime, the Department of Corrections and the entire judicial system. Passage of this bill is a slap in the face to every person and entity just named. There is NO justice in the passage of this bill for anyone, including those convicted.

Dear Chairwoman Watts and other distinguished Delegates, HB853 re-victimizes men, women and children who have already suffered physical, emotional and psychological pain at the hands of criminals. The family members of murder victims, women who have been raped, children who were sexually abused, and other victims who endured trials, sentencing hearing and appeals and heard a judge impose a sentence of X number of years will be betrayed. They will be informed that despite what they heard a judge say in court, the criminal who inflicted such cruelty upon them will be given a "second chance." A "second chance" that the victims do not have the privilege of seeking. The victim will have to go back to that same courtroom where they thought they secured whatever justice our imperfect system deemed appropriate at the time to oppose the criminal's release, probably before a judge who was not the trial judge, who did not hear the evidence, who did not listen to the victim impact statement. Would it not be natural for a woman who was raped or the daughter of a murder victim to feel deceived and betrayed? Why would the victims (or the public) have any trust in such a system? The cost of public trust in the criminal justice system would be sacrificed for what? Because the criminal deserves mercy more than the victim deserves justice? When I read HB 853 I immediately thought of many victims I have had the sad honor to know. For me they are not stories on the news or characters in a true crime podcast. They are human beings who I have spoken to, listened to, and cried with. It breaks my heart to think of the pain this bill will cause them. In my view, an important part of the criminal justice system is a social contract between victims and the rest of society. Victims have a moral, not just a legal, right to justice. Rather than take matters into their own hands, victims delegate that moral right to the community as represented in court by the Commonwealth's Attorney. The victim’s delegation of this natural right to justice imposes the responsibility or duty upon the Commonwealth to treat victims with fairness and compassion. HB853 fails to treat victims with the respect, dignity and fairness the Constitution of Virginia requires. Please treat victims with the fairness and compassion they are entitled to and vote "no" to HB 853. Thank you for your kind consideration. Brian Holohan Roanoke County Commonwealth’s Attorney

Enclosed are comments from Mothers Against Drunk Driving in opposition to HB 853 by Del. Cousins. MADD urges your opposition to this legislation. Thank you, Frank

I strongly oppose this bill as does the far majority of my constitutes.

30 years ago, I received the worst call of my life. One that changed the entire trajectory of my life, who I am as a person, and everything about me 1/18/96, I received a phone call that Roger Vassar II, my boyfriend, my best friend, and the love of my life had been murdered. The devastation and grief that we all suffered through in the days, weeks, months, and even years after his death have been unbearable. Now, his murderer feels like he has “paid his dues” and wants to become a free man. But what does this mean? Have we all suffered enough? Will this bring back the things that Mize took away from Roger in his lifetime? Of course not! Nothing will undo the senseless crime and horrific cold blooded murder that Mize committed that night. So, he does not deserve to be given his life back when Roger will never be given his back! I will never be given back the man I was going to marry. Roger will never be given the chance to have a family. Roger will never be given the chance to finish the degree he was working on or buy the land he was looking at for our home. Mize took that all away from him with a PRE-MEDITATED plan for MURDER. He went as far as to fabricate a homemade silencer for the gun that he used. He cruelly shot Roger at point blank range and Roger had zero chance to even defend himself. Mize has proven that he is a danger to society. I just can’t imagine a world where an evil, dangerous individual would be walking the streets freely Today Roger would be 49 years old, a college graduate, close to retirement age, a husband, a father, a uncle, a brother, a son, a grandson, a cousin, a nephew, a friend, and as of couple weeks ago, even a great uncle. All these things were taken away from him in an instant. The loss is indescribable I can’t describe the emotional and physical torment it would bring knowing we are all going to have to face the possibility of our dear Rogers murderer getting freedom and walking the streets with us. I’m pleading with you to OPPOSE “Second Look” bill – HB 853. We deserve some peace knowing the murderer that took Roger is serving the time that was sentenced to him. Also, it should be noted the following facts from the VA OAG: In the first full year of EESC (fiscal year 2023), 9,638 inmates were released early,~49.8% of those were rearrested within one year of release. The early data from the EESC program signals that offspring of those early releases were rearrested at much higher rates (~35%–50%) for any new crime within about a year, including some very serious offenses. There’s a high chance that Mize is going to be arrested again once he is out of prison. He will also be at reproductive age, making it likely and possible to have a child that will also commit a crime that will also end up in the system. It is safer our family and for the community as a whole for this cold blooded murderer to stay behind bars where he was sentenced and where he belongs for the entirety of his sentence! If individuals choose to commit these heinous crimes, they should not be given the chance to “rehabilitate” and get out of prison. The lives they took, and the families they changed are FOREVER affected. The criminals were given fair trials and a punishment they deserved. They should have to serve it. The death many of them caused is a lifetime, irrevocable sentence a murderer chose for their victim Please OPPOSE “Second Look” bill–HB 853–before the Virginia General Assembly!

Greetings to the House legislators, delegates, and all who are present at this session. I write in strong support of Delegate Cousins’ House Bill 853. I believe this bill is both just and necessary. Rehabilitation should remain a cornerstone of our justice system, and countless incarcerated individuals have demonstrated genuine rehabilitation through consistent effort earning their GEDs, completing state board certified programs, and participating in graduation and reentry focused initiatives. HB 853 offers the Commonwealth an opportunity to take a meaningful second look at individuals serving long sentences who have clearly shown growth, accountability, and readiness to return to society. This bill is not about disregarding accountability; it is about recognizing transformation. It also presents a practical solution to Virginia’s ongoing prison overcrowding and staffing shortages by allowing judicial discretion for those who have proven they are no longer a risk to public safety. As an advocate for prison reform and for the laws of the Commonwealth of Virginia, I support legislation that promotes fairness, rehabilitation, and public safety. I have remained a law-abiding citizen and a committed advocate for reform since my youth, and I firmly believe HB 853 reflects the values of justice, balance, and second chances. I respectfully ask that you reconsider and overturn the prior decision regarding this bill and allow it the thoughtful consideration it deserves. Thank you for the opportunity to make my voice heard and for your time and service.

Greetings to the House legislators, delegates, and all who are present at this session. I write in strong support of Delegate Cousins’ House Bill 853. I believe this bill is both just and necessary. Rehabilitation should remain a cornerstone of our justice system, and countless incarcerated individuals have demonstrated genuine rehabilitation through consistent effort earning their GEDs, completing state board certified programs, and participating in graduation and reentry-focused initiatives. HB 853 offers the Commonwealth an opportunity to take a meaningful second look at individuals serving long sentences who have clearly shown growth, accountability, and readiness to return to society. This bill is not about disregarding accountability; it is about recognizing transformation. It also presents a practical solution to Virginia’s ongoing prison overcrowding and staffing shortages by allowing judicial discretion for those who have proven they are no longer a risk to public safety. As an advocate for prison reform and for the laws of the Commonwealth of Virginia, I support legislation that promotes fairness, rehabilitation, and public safety. I have remained a law-abiding citizen and a committed advocate for reform since my youth, and I firmly believe HB 853 reflects the values of justice, balance, and second chances. I respectfully ask that you reconsider and overturn the prior decision regarding this bill and allow it the thoughtful consideration it deserves. Thank you for the opportunity to make my voice heard and for your time and service.

A felon who has committed a capital crime such as murder can never repay their debt to society. The victim is dead and can never again participate in society why should that felon be allowed to ? On what basis should a felon who has committed a crime serious enough to be convicted of a felony which represents a failure to respect the rules of civil society be allowed to shape that civil society ? This bill is an insult to everyone who respects the law. You should be ashamed of yourself !

I am writing to voice my strong opposition to HB 853. This "Second Look" resentencing legislation represents a fundamental shift in Virginia’s justice system that prioritizes the interests of violent offenders over the safety of our communities and the peace of mind of crime victims. HB 853 would allow individuals convicted of serious felonies to petition a court to reduce or change their sentences after 15, 20, or 25 years. This effectively grants a "second bite at the apple" that overturns long-standing Virginia law regarding the finality of criminal sentences. When a judge or jury hands down a sentence, it is based on the gravity of the crime and the need for public safety. Allowing these cases to be reopened decades later undermines the authority of our courts and the stability of our legal system. Perhaps the most concerning aspect of HB 853 is the toll it takes on victims. For many, the conclusion of a trial is the only way they can begin the long process of healing. By allowing offenders to seek resentencing, this bill forces victims back into the courtroom to testify again and relive the most traumatic moments of their lives. No victim should be forced to look over their shoulder every five years wondering if their attacker will be granted a "second look" hearing. While the bill mentions a work group to study victim-notification systems, this is a hollow promise. A "study" provides no immediate or guaranteed protections. It is irresponsible to create a pathway for the early release of violent offenders before robust, meaningful protections for victims are already established and proven. Our legal system is already overburdened. HB 853 would trigger a wave of petitions and hearings, placing an immense strain on our courts, prosecutors, and probation systems. Diverting these limited resources toward re-litigating decades-old crimes is a disservice to taxpayers and a distraction from the pursuit of justice in current, pending cases. Sentencing should be clear, final, and focused on accountability. HB 853 creates a dangerous precedent that suggests sentences are merely "suggestions" rather than firm consequences for violent actions. This bill shifts the focus away from the victims of crime and toward the comfort of those who have committed serious felonies. For the sake of community safety and the rights of victims, I urge you to oppose HB 853. Virginia must maintain a justice system that honors the finality of its sentences and ensures that "life" or "long-term incarceration" remains a meaningful standard for the most serious crimes.

Vote against. Would release criminals early, likely returning them to a life of crime. Reduce the negative perceived consequences to committing a crime. Would double work on each case if it runs through the courts twice.

My name is Scott Duffy. On May 19, 2017, my daughter Kaitlyn Duffy was killed by a drunk, coked-up, and high truck driver — a man driving on his sixth suspended license. Kaitlyn was murdered one week before her senior prom and three weeks before graduating from Great Bridge High School. She graduated with a 4.4 GPA, in the top five percent of her class, and had just been accepted to Virginia Tech, where she planned to study pre-med and become an OB-GYN. That driver received a sentence. My family received a life sentence — one that can never be reduced. It has been nine years, and not a single day has passed without the weight of her death. We lost our daughter. We lost our marriage. We live with permanent physical and mental health consequences. There is no parole, no appeal, no second look for us. The man who killed my daughter was convicted on all five counts. He appealed — and he lost on every single one. Despite that, he has already had 15 years removed from his sentence, including reductions for so-called good behavior. So let’s be clear — we already have a system in place that reduces sentences. This proposed bill goes further. It reopens wounds for families like mine. It forces victims’ families to relive their trauma so offenders can ask for mercy — while our loss remains permanent. This bill tells parents who have buried their children that the suffering of the criminal deserves reconsideration, while the suffering of victims is simply expected to be endured. I respectfully urge you to vote no on this bill. Please allow families like mine to have at least one thing that cannot be taken away — the certainty that justice, once imposed, will not be undone. I pray that none of you ever have to stand where I am today.

Leniency is not rehabilitation. That being said a criminal convicted of a violent felony, murder, rape , kidnapping, 1st degree assault after being found guilty and sentenced is incarcerated in the Penal system to protect society. This proposed legislation seeks to remove the protection afforded citizens by the judicial system. I do not support this.

Do not pass this bill. This is a way for criminals to scheme and try to invent a path to freedom. There may be witnesses or evidence that is long gone if convicted felon has been incarcerated for a long period. Even if shorter time has been served it’s not fair to witnesses to opened their life again to let a felon out. This is another way that politicians are going soft on crime. Do the crime, do the time.

Individuals convicted of violent offenses, particularly if they are repeat offenders, should not be able to effect early release for any reasons. They knew their actions were a violation of law, or should have known at the time of offense. The frequency of recidivism of these individuals is egregiously high and I have no empathy for their situation. This Bill is a travesty and should never be enacted for any reason.

This bill would weaken public safety, and render original sentencing meaningless, not to mention the fact that the poor victims would have to go back to court and revisit all the trauma of the violence done against them. I strongly oppose this bill.

The Sexual Violence Prevention Association (SVPA), a national nonprofit dedicated to preventing sexual violence systemically, endorses HB 853. This bill will provide a second look at sentencing for incarcerating individuals who have served 15+ years, including incarcerated survivors. Please see our full endorsement letter attached.

My name is Seychell Williams, and I am the CEO and Founder of the newly formed The Ruby Grant Project, a re-entry reform initiative dedicated to empowering individuals returning home from incarceration. Through advocacy, mentorship, and strategic partnerships, I work to build pathways that support dignity, opportunity, and long-term success for justice‑impacted people. I am a formerly incarcerated woman who served 5.5 years, and I used that time with intention and purpose. During my incarceration, I committed myself to personal growth, education, and leadership that ultimately shaped the foundation for The Ruby Grant Project and my dedication to re-entry reform. My hope is that lawmakers understand the human impact behind this reform. Families are waiting. Communities are waiting. And people inside who have worked tirelessly to change are waiting. Passing this bill would show that Virginia believes in redemption, accountability, and second chances. Virginia is facing a re-entry crisis. Right now, countless men and women across the state are depending on parole as their only hope of returning home. For many, parole isn’t just a legal process, it’s the single pathway to reunite with their families, rebuild their lives, and contribute back to their communities. When parole becomes inconsistent, delayed, or inaccessible, people are left in limbo. Families suffer, communities lose potential, and individuals who have worked hard to rehabilitate themselves are denied the opportunity to move forward. This crisis isn’t abstract. It’s affecting real people every day, and it demands urgent attention, accountability, and reform. The biggest positive is the bill will bring hope to many that don’t have any hope. I’m hoping the Virginia General Assembly truly recognizes how important it is to pass this bill. For thousands of men and women across the Commonwealth, Second Look legislation isn’t just policy—it’s a lifeline. It offers a fair, evidence‑based opportunity for people who have demonstrated real growth to return home and rebuild their lives. I FULLY SUPPORT THE SECOND LOOK BILL

My name is Seychell Williams, and I am the CEO and Founder of the newly formed The Ruby Grant Project, a re-entry reform initiative dedicated to empowering individuals returning home from incarceration. Through advocacy, mentorship, and strategic partnerships, I work to build pathways that support dignity, opportunity, and long-term success for justice‑impacted people. I am a formerly incarcerated woman who served 5.5 years, and I used that time with intention and purpose. During my incarceration, I committed myself to personal growth, education, and leadership that ultimately shaped the foundation for The Ruby Grant Project and my dedication to re-entry reform. Please read attached document on why I fully support the HB853/SB634.

I ask this honorable committee to not allow this bill to pass because it’s not going to be effective in assisting the men and women incarcerated for release

Hello, writing in support of HB853. My LO was sentenced to Life as a 19yr old. He is now 51. The chance has never been given to demonstrate the intended rehabilitation. Studies show that you can “age out” of crime and chances of recidivism is minimal. However the DOC is holding on to so many of our brothers and sisters. Costing taxpayers literally millions. This month makes 30 years. For a one time felon with an offense at 19. Not even old enough to drink?! Just sharing a brief testimony to put a face/story behind what’s a stake. Someone who never had a chance to even have a family of his own. But doing a bad thing as a teen does not make you a bad person, incapable of change/growth. And he’s demonstrated both.

In support of the bill with no exclusions

Good Morning. My name is Marki Gaines. I am writing today in support of HB853. Not only am I a reform advocate with the Virginia Justice Alliance, I am the victim of a.crime that left me with a part of my finger amputated. As an advocate and victim, I support this bill because there is a necessity for people to have a second chance when they have earned that chance. When an individual is convicted of a crime, what we as a society need to see is genuine growth, remorse, and a willingness to to come home and contribute not only to our society, but to their families. They do this by making the necessary changes that promotes that growth. Once they have done that, and served a specific amount of time, they should be granted the opportunity to have their sentence re-evaluated. In addition, this bill could be an incentive and help establish safer prisons, not only for incarcerated individuals, but for the staff that works there. I urge you as an advocate, a victim, and a Virginia resident to please support HB853.

HB 863 recognizes a fundamental truth: long-term incarceration should include meaningful incentives for rehabilitation and lawful behavior. This bill strengthens public safety by aligning sentencing outcomes with demonstrated growth, accountability, and reduced risk. Rather than relying on blanket rules, HB 863 supports individualized assessment—ensuring that those who have taken responsibility, completed programming, and maintained sustained good conduct can be appropriately reviewed under the law. This approach benefits everyone. It promotes safer institutions, encourages rehabilitation, and allows Virginia to focus resources where they are most needed—while maintaining safeguards and oversight. HB 863 is not about leniency; it is about smart justice. It reinforces responsibility, respects victims, and advances outcomes that are proven to reduce recidivism. I urge the committee to move HB 863 forward.”

To the Members of the Virginia General Assembly, I write in support of House Bill 853, the Second Look sentencing legislation. In 2015, my loved one was sentenced in Virginia to what is effectively a life sentence for a nonviolent offense. He has now spent more than ten and a half years incarcerated and has been a model prisoner, with no disciplinary charges, no threats to staff or others, and full compliance with all institutional rules. Had he accepted a plea agreement, he would have been released more than five years ago, yet he remains incarcerated with little to no meaningful opportunity for review despite clear evidence of rehabilitation. He is now 56 years old and suffers from a serious heart condition, and his health has declined in custody. Our mother has recently been diagnosed with dementia and will soon no longer remember her son. HB 853 does not guarantee release or remove accountability; it simply allows courts to reassess sentences after years of demonstrated growth and change. It restores judicial discretion and recognizes that people are not static and that long sentences may no longer serve justice or public safety. I respectfully urge you to support HB 853. Bonnie Coyne

I strongly support HB 853, which establishes a fair, thoughtful process for sentence modification for individuals who have been incarcerated long term and have demonstrated meaningful rehabilitation. This legislation acknowledges that people are capable of change and that lengthy incarceration, particularly over decades, can significantly alter an individual’s risk profile and readiness to reintegrate into society. HB 853 allows courts to consider critical factors such as demonstrated rehabilitation, age, time served, and an individual’s propensity to reoffend. Extensive research shows that people who have aged while incarcerated present a substantially lower risk to public safety. This bill does not guarantee release; rather, it provides a carefully structured opportunity for judicial review, ensuring that public safety and accountability remain central to the decision-making process. For individuals serving sentences without parole eligibility, HB 853 offers a meaningful path to review where none currently exists. It recognizes rehabilitation, incentivizes positive behavior, and affirms that justice should be both firm and fair. By permitting individualized consideration after a significant period of incarceration, this bill promotes proportionality, strengthens families and communities, and reflects an evidence-based approach to sentencing reform. I urge the General Assembly to support and pass HB 853.

This critical legislation fundamentally acknowledges the enduring human capacity for growth, evolution, and transformation. It operates on the premise that an individual's life trajectory should not be perpetually defined by past transgressions, but rather, that demonstrated rehabilitation and personal development warrant a fair and considered reassessment. HB853 provides a structured and equitable mechanism for individuals who have served extensive periods of incarceration to present evidence of their profound personal growth and readiness for reintegration. It offers a crucial opportunity for comprehensive judicial review, enabling a fair modification of their sentence based on their current character, contributions, and commitment to society, rather than solely on the circumstances of their original conviction. The far reaching benefits of this bill extend directly to the resilience and safety of our communities. By actively encouraging rehabilitation and supporting successful reintegration, HB853 enhances public safety by reducing recidivism and fostering an environment where individuals are empowered to become productive members of society. Moreover, it addresses the silent suffering of families, offering a pathway for healing, rebuilding, and reunification, thereby strengthening the foundational units of our communities. Supporting House Bill 853 represents a commitment to cultivating a justice system that is both robust and humane one that values accountability alongside the profound belief in redemption. It envisions a Virginia where true public safety is achieved not merely through punishment, but through thoughtful judicial review that prioritizes restoration, fairness, and the potential for every individual to contribute positively to our shared future. With over crowding plaguing our prison systems and parole being nonexistent, we need a new approach, that fosters accountability and rewards people for years of growth I support HB853.

I am in full support of both HB 853 and HB 863. HB 853 is incredibly impactful for incarcerated individuals and their loved ones, as it offers hope that demonstrated rehabilitation and good behavior while incarcerated can lead to a meaningful opportunity for sentence review. HB 853 does not guarantee release—it simply restores judicial discretion and ensures that rehabilitation and personal growth are given appropriate weight. HB 863 further promotes fairness by allowing judges to tailor sentences based on individual circumstances, ensuring that justice is balanced, thoughtful, and proportional. Together, these bills reflect a more humane, evidence-based approach to public safety and sentencing.

I am in full support of both HB 853 and HB 863. HB 853 is incredibly impactful for incarcerated individuals and their loved ones, as it offers hope that demonstrated rehabilitation and good behavior while incarcerated can lead to a meaningful opportunity for sentence review. The bill recognizes that people can grow, change, and take responsibility over time, and it allows courts to consider whether a sentence should be modified or run concurrently based on that progress. Long-serving incarcerated individuals who have consistently shown positive behavior, participated in educational or vocational programs, and demonstrated genuine rehabilitation deserve the opportunity for judicial review. HB 853 does not guarantee release—it simply restores judicial discretion and ensures that rehabilitation and personal growth are given appropriate weight. HB 863 further promotes fairness by allowing judges to tailor sentences based on individual circumstances, ensuring that justice is balanced, thoughtful, and proportional. Together, these bills reflect a more humane, evidence-based approach to public safety and sentencing. These are meaningful steps forward for Virginia and represent progress toward a system that values accountability, rehabilitation, and fairness. I strongly support both bills and urge their passage.

I strongly support SB634, HB361, HB26, and HB853. These bills are critically important because they provide retroactive relief, offering meaningful opportunities for those who are newly convicted or recently incarcerated. By allowing past sentences to be reconsidered under updated, fairer standards, these bills promote justice, rehabilitation, and hope for individuals striving to rebuild their lives. Passing these measures will not only benefit those directly affected but also strengthen our communities by encouraging positive reintegration and reducing unnecessary long-term incarceration. I urge the General Assembly to pass these bills promptly. Thank you for considering this crucial step toward fairness and justice.

This bill has been fought for for 5 years. It is a great bill that would allow incarcerated people to have a chance to show they have changed. A judge makes the final decision not an arbitrary board of people who have no idea what a second chance after incarceration looks like. I realize that the VA Commonwealth often has a tainted view of individuals who are incarcerated but you law makers talk and work with formerly incarcerated all of the time. You see the amazing work that people who were incarcerated can do and are doing. It is time to allow others who have served 15 plus years and paid their debt to have the opportunity to come home. You cannot keep saying you believe in second chances while continuing to warehouse people. This is an intelligent bill. it needs to pass

Im the mother of Steven..#1607364: of Staunton Va. and grandma of Ezra 6 yr.old gson that died 2/3/16, my son was charged & sentenced to 20+3 yrs. of 2nd degree murder & child felony neglect. He was 23yrs.old, not in his right mind, immature; brain not fully developed, love struck for a young lady whom he protected from the accidental death of his son. He has suffered for 10yrs. w/o his only child. He went for full custody after knowing he was the father when his boy was 3, gave him his paternal name. Steven has suffered & should be given a sentence modification, let him grieve his lose w/ him mom, siblings & great grandmothers, nieces, nephews & great nephews that love and adore their uncle Steven & want to get to know him, beyond those prison walls. Ty Kathleen Decker..Heartbroken Mom& Grammy

Good Afternoon, the House Of Delegate member of the 79th District, Rae C. Cousin on behalf of the Valley Justice Coalition and other Virginia organizations and statewide organizations, can you support two Bills? The Petition of Modification of Sentences "Second Look Act" (HB853) and Offenses Elimination of Manatory Minimums (HB863). These Bills will provide positive opportunities for re-entry for individuals involved in the Criminal Justice System for them and their families. Please, implement, thank you, Ms Stover

I am a member of the Valley Justice Coalition and we stand strongly in support of this bill. People change, times change. They deserve a second chance, a second look. Please vote YES for HB853 Petition for Modification of Sentence. Thank you.

I am a resident of Arlington, VA (22203), and I am writing to you today to share my support of criminal justice reforms for the Commonwealth of Virginia I know that the Virginia General Assembly has been working on these issues and made substantial progress in recent years, only to see the legislation vetoed by our previous conservative governor. However, November’s elections brought a hopeful change to the Commonwealth. It is my hope that beginning this year that progressive change can become a reality in the Commonwealth. Mass incarceration is a particularly significant problem in Virginia. According to data compiled by the Vera Institute of Justice, in 2015 Virginia had locked up almost 60,000 people, an increase of nearly 300% since 1983.  Virginia ranked first among Southeast states in jail population per capita and third in prison population per capita. I support HB 853 (Remedy for Extreme Sentencing: Second Look) as it will give pathways for the release of offenders serving extreme sentences who are no longer a risk to society or themselves. This is another step towards decreasing the mass incarceration that exists today in the Commonwealth. In addition, I believe the should address the dangerous proliferation of mass surveillance, the way our criminal justice system addresses mental health, access to mental health services for incarcerated individuals, pay parity for public defenders, and reducing burdensome fines and fees. Now, I understand that is a lot of work — but the citizens of this Commonwealth deserve a criminal justice system that serves them, not corporations. In addition, our criminal justice system should focus on corrections over punishments, allowing offenders to make amends for their offenses and return to be productive members of society whenever possible. I urge you to support and promptly pass HB 853 and the other criminal justice reforms listed above during this legislative session.

I oppose this bill. It would let even very dangerous inmates petition for release, such as those guilty of "aggravated murder" or the most serious murders of all, "a Class 1 felony," like killers who tortured and murdered a child. When the death penalty was abolished in Virginia, Virginians were assured that the death penalty wasn't needed, because the worst killers could be given life without parole. But this bill would eliminate life without parole, in all but name. The factors it lays down for releasing an inmate are more favorable to release than those used by most parole boards, and are biased in favor of release. That's unfair. This bill could set dangerous killers free to kill again, and menace the families of their victims.

I strongly support SB634, HB361, HB26, and HB853. These bills are critically important because they provide retroactive relief, offering meaningful opportunities for those who are newly convicted or recently incarcerated. By allowing past sentences to be reconsidered under updated, fairer standards, these bills promote justice, rehabilitation, and hope for individuals striving to rebuild their lives. Passing these measures will not only benefit those directly affected but also strengthen our communities by encouraging positive reintegration and reducing unnecessary long-term incarceration. I urge the General Assembly to pass these bills promptly. Thank you for considering this crucial step toward fairness and justice.

I am writing to oppose the current slate of firearm restriction bills before the General Assembly. While these proposals are framed as public safety measures, in practice they disproportionately harm marginalized Virginians — including racial minorities, LGBTQ+ individuals (especially trans people), immigrants, and low-income residents — who often face higher risks of targeted violence and slower or unequal police response. These bills add costs, delays, and bureaucratic hurdles to exercising a fundamental right. Increased fees, mandatory waiting periods, feature bans, and expanded disqualifications fall hardest on people with limited financial resources, unstable work schedules, or justified concerns about their personal safety. For many vulnerable individuals, the ability to lawfully and promptly acquire a firearm is not about ideology, but about self-defense. History shows that restrictive gun laws are most aggressively enforced in minority communities, amplifying disparities in arrests, prosecution, and legal exposure — even when no harm has occurred. Expanding civil liability, criminal penalties, and subjective risk standards increases that risk. Public safety should not come at the expense of civil rights or equal access to self-protection. Policies that price people out of their rights or delay lawful self-defense do not address the root causes of violence and instead leave the most vulnerable less safe. I respectfully urge you to oppose these bills and support approaches that protect both public safety and the rights of all Virginians, regardless of income, identity, or background. Thank you for your time and consideration.

I oppose this bill. This is who you want to eliminate mandatory minimum sentencing for? "🔹 Violent and sexual offenses Rape and related sexual assault statutes (including forcible sodomy and object sexual penetration) Certain violent felony offenses such as manslaughter Assaulting law-enforcement officers in some cases Repeat violent felonies (where current law adds additional mandatory minimum terms) 🔹 Sex-related offenses involving children Production, distribution, and some possession of child pornography offenses 🔹 Firearms and other weapon-related mandatory minimums Mandatory minimum terms tied to using a firearm in the commission of a felony and similar weapon provisions 🔹 DUI and traffic-related provisions Mandatory minimum jail terms for certain DUI offenses (including some repeat DUI provisions)" Mandatory minimum sentencing was put in place for a reason. Leaving sentencing completely open to the whims of a judge are dangerous as it destroys uniformity in sentencing, opens up the potential for implicit bias, it removes a guarantee of serious consequences, and it removes a safeguard against overly lenient sentencing.

HB 863 recognizes a fundamental truth: long-term incarceration should include meaningful incentives for rehabilitation and lawful behavior. This bill strengthens public safety by aligning sentencing outcomes with demonstrated growth, accountability, and reduced risk. Rather than relying on blanket rules, HB 863 supports individualized assessment—ensuring that those who have taken responsibility, completed programming, and maintained sustained good conduct can be appropriately reviewed under the law. This approach benefits everyone. It promotes safer institutions, encourages rehabilitation, and allows Virginia to focus resources where they are most needed—while maintaining safeguards and oversight. HB 863 is not about leniency; it is about smart justice. It reinforces responsibility, respects victims, and advances outcomes that are proven to reduce recidivism. I urge the committee to move HB 863 forward.”

I'm writing on behalf of my brother Jimmy Baggett who is serving an 83 year NEW law sentence in Virginia for bank robberies he committed in 2003 (with only a note), while high on crack cocaine. During his over two decades of incarceration my brother has continually shown remorse for the crimes he committed and the impact his decisions had on the people he robbed ,his family, and his self. He has worked tirelessly to address the underlying issues of his addiction, has remained infraction free,written 2 books,a program that helps others, has worked 16 plus years for Virginia Correctional Enterprises, and is now at Beaumont Correctional Center where he has earned the privilege of an outside job in the Silk Screen shop for VCE. Jimmy has a very large loving family and support network who will be there to support him upon his release. He has a home with my husband and I in the house we own in Hampton, VA My brother like so many others like him deserve a chance at redemption... one which he has proven over his 20 plus years of incarceration . He did not want it given to him, but instead has proven he wanted to earn it by his hard work and relentless effort to change. I am asking you to help my family bring my brother home. I am asking for a Second Look for my brother Jimmy Baggett. Thank you for your time and consideration on The Second Look Bill. Sincerely, Marcia Goode l

This proposed legislation critically addresses the inherent limitations of rigid, one-size-fits-all mandatory minimum sentencing guidelines, which frequently impede the judiciary’s capacity to render judgments that account for the unique intricacies, personal histories, and precise levels of culpability present in individual cases. By advocating for the judicious elimination of these inflexible minimum prison terms, House Bill 863 seeks to re-empower our seasoned judicial officers. This reform would enable them to meticulously craft sentencing outcomes that are not only proportionate to the gravity of the offense but also sensitively reflective of the specific circumstances surrounding each individual appearing before the court, all while operating firmly within established legal sentencing parameters. This progressive initiative should not be misconstrued as an attempt to diminish accountability. On the contrary, it represents a strategic advancement towards ensuring truly individualized justice, alleviating the pervasive issue of prison overcrowding, and intelligently redirecting invaluable resources toward programs and interventions that demonstrably yield the greatest impact on both public safety and successful rehabilitation. House Bill 863 is poised to fortify our Commonwealth by placing greater trust in the invaluable expertise of our judiciary, thereby cultivating a smarter, more equitable, and ultimately more effective sentencing system for all Virginians. I strongly support house bill 863.

I am in full support of both HB 853 and HB 863. HB 853 is incredibly impactful for incarcerated individuals and their loved ones, as it offers hope that demonstrated rehabilitation and good behavior while incarcerated can lead to a meaningful opportunity for sentence review. HB 853 does not guarantee release—it simply restores judicial discretion and ensures that rehabilitation and personal growth are given appropriate weight. HB 863 further promotes fairness by allowing judges to tailor sentences based on individual circumstances, ensuring that justice is balanced, thoughtful, and proportional. Together, these bills reflect a more humane, evidence-based approach to public safety and sentencing.

I am in full support of both HB 853 and HB 863. HB 853 is incredibly impactful for incarcerated individuals and their loved ones, as it offers hope that demonstrated rehabilitation and good behavior while incarcerated can lead to a meaningful opportunity for sentence review. The bill recognizes that people can grow, change, and take responsibility over time, and it allows courts to consider whether a sentence should be modified or run concurrently based on that progress. Long-serving incarcerated individuals who have consistently shown positive behavior, participated in educational or vocational programs, and demonstrated genuine rehabilitation deserve the opportunity for judicial review. HB 853 does not guarantee release—it simply restores judicial discretion and ensures that rehabilitation and personal growth are given appropriate weight. HB 863 further promotes fairness by allowing judges to tailor sentences based on individual circumstances, ensuring that justice is balanced, thoughtful, and proportional. Together, these bills reflect a more humane, evidence-based approach to public safety and sentencing. These are meaningful steps forward for Virginia and represent progress toward a system that values accountability, rehabilitation, and fairness. I strongly support both bills and urge their passage.

I strongly support SB634, HB361, HB26, and HB853. These bills are critically important because they provide retroactive relief, offering meaningful opportunities for those who are newly convicted or recently incarcerated. By allowing past sentences to be reconsidered under updated, fairer standards, these bills promote justice, rehabilitation, and hope for individuals striving to rebuild their lives. Passing these measures will not only benefit those directly affected but also strengthen our communities by encouraging positive reintegration and reducing unnecessary long-term incarceration. I urge the General Assembly to pass these bills promptly. Thank you for considering this crucial step toward fairness and justice.

Good Afternoon, the House Of Delegate member of the 79th District, Rae C. Cousin on behalf of the Valley Justice Coalition and other Virginia organizations and statewide organizations, can you support two Bills? The Petition of Modification of Sentences "Second Look Act" (HB853) and Offenses Elimination of Manatory Minimums (HB863). These Bills will provide positive opportunities for re-entry for individuals involved in the Criminal Justice System for them and their families. Please, implement, thank you, Ms Stover

I am a member of the Valley Justice Coalition and we strongly support this bill. Only the judge, seeing all the evidence is in a position to make a just decision. With the facts and the person before him, a more accurate judgement would be made. The judgement to give a lesser, or even a longer sentence should be in the hands of the judge. There is no equitable standard size sentence, every situation is unique. Please. Vote YES in support of HB863 Offenses, elimination of Mandatory Minimums. Eliminate ALL Mandatory Minimums. Thank you.

Absolutely despicable. Getting rid of mandatory minimum sentencing for rape, assault on LE, and CHILD PORNAGRAPHY. You have to be joking. Vote NO!!!!!

I am a resident of Arlington, VA (22203), and I am writing to you today to share my support of criminal justice reforms for the Commonwealth of Virginia I know that the Virginia General Assembly has been working on these issues and made substantial progress in recent years, only to see the legislation vetoed by our previous conservative governor. However, November’s elections brought a hopeful change to the Commonwealth. It is my hope that beginning this year that progressive change can become a reality in the Commonwealth. Mass incarceration is a particularly significant problem in Virginia. According to data compiled by the Vera Institute of Justice, in 2015 Virginia had locked up almost 60,000 people, an increase of nearly 300% since 1983.  Virginia ranked first among Southeast states in jail population per capita and third in prison population per capita. One of the major drivers of mass incarceration has been the rise of laws requiring mandatory minimum sentences, which became popular beginning in the latter part of the twentieth century.  Originally touted as a tool to deter serious crime and eliminate sentencing disparities, mandatory minimum sentences have had no measurable impact on deterrence and have coincided with the mass incarceration of American citizens. For that reason, many states are doing away with mandatory minimum laws, particularly for non-violent offenses and drug offenses.  The Commonwealth of Virginia should do the same.  HB 863, ending mandatory minimums, is an important first step in addressing the issue of mass incarceration in the Commonwealth of Virginia. It will begin to reduce the number of non-violent offenders behind bars and contend with the inequalities in our criminal justice system. The additional criminal justice reforms I support are HB 637 (Eliminate the Felony Charge for Possession of Drug Residue), SB 23 (Ban Fourth Amendment Plea Waivers); HB426 and SB 335 (Protect People with Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities (and Mental Health Disorders); HB 331 (Deferred Dismissal Should Not Depend on Payment of Costs); HB 1070 (Eliminate the Prejudicial Use of Prior Convictions at Trial), HB 245 (Preserve Access to Diversion), SB 24 and HB 118 (Fix Criminal Discovery) HB 127, SB 112, HB 1084, SB 480, HB 933, and SB 382 (Pretrial Reform); HB 489 (Ensure Confidentiality of Restorative Justice Practices); and HB 853 (Remedy for Extreme Sentencing: Second Look). In addition, I believe the should address the dangerous proliferation of mass surveillance, the way our criminal justice system addresses mental health, access to mental health services for incarcerated individuals, pay parity for public defenders, and reducing burdensome fines and fees. Now, I understand that is a lot of work — but the citizens of this Commonwealth deserve a criminal justice system that serves them, not corporations. In addition, our criminal justice system should focus on corrections over punishments, allowing offenders to make amends for their offenses and return to be productive members of society whenever possible. I urge you to support and promptly pass HB 863 and the other criminal justice reforms listed above during this legislative session.

I would like to express my support for HB 863. I’m a gym minister at the Chesapeake city jail and I’m also a volunteer at Onesimus House Ministries in Chesapeake Virginia. This halfway house is one of the few halfway houses in the state of Virginia that house is sex offenders. I’ve also spent 12 years in prison ministry at Saint Brides Correctional facility and Indian Creek Correctional facility. Through the years I’ve seen so many people who were unjustly sentence because of mandatory minimums for crimes that did not fit the scenario or their situation and do not represent good jurisprudence at all. Eliminating mandatory minimums as outlined in this bill allows a judge to have due discretion and to analyze the situation, which is often very complex, so that the proper sentence may be imposed on somebody found guilty of a specific crime, by trial of law. By supporting this bill, it doesn’t condone crime at all, however, it does promote justice. It allows, smart judges to use smart discretion when they develop sentences based on the role of law that are fitting for the individual and the crime, and not restrained by steer and unnecessary mandatory minimums for many of the crimes imposed. Our prisons are full of people serving mandatory minimums, and the restitution that they’re paying, is punitive for the sake of being punitive, does no good for society, and would not be imposed if a sentencing judge had discretion unrestrained by mandatory minimums. The mandatory minimums that they must endure do not make the world a safer place or our society one that is progressing into a safe society. Eliminate mandatory minimums now as outlined in the proposed bill by Delegate Rae Cousins. Thank you very much

I oppose this dangerous bill because it puts more people in harm’s way. This is one of the numerous examples democrats keep showing that they side with the criminals instead of the victims. Democrats have proven every time they promote reckless policies that do not work and the law abiding citizens suffer from it all. Democrats believe in defunding the police, restored justice practices, bailouts, smash and grab, lower sentencing guidelines, erase crime records, blame others, more excuses for and more. Why are Democrats still endangering society?

I am a sworn law enforcement officer in the Commonwealth of Virginia with nearly eighteen years of experience serving and protecting our communities. I respectfully submit this testimony in opposition to House Bill 863 because its proposed elimination of mandatory minimum sentences for a wide range of violent offenses—including assault on law enforcement officers, rape, manslaughter, and child exploitation crimes—would weaken public safety, undermine the rule of law, and erode the deterrent effect of our criminal justice system. Mandatory minimum sentences have long served a foundational role in Virginia’s criminal code by establishing a guaranteed baseline of punishment for the most serious and predatory crimes. These statutory minimums ensure that individuals who commit violent offenses face predictable, substantial consequences, irrespective of local prosecutorial discretion or sentencing variability. Removing these minimums would allow offenders to receive significantly lighter sentences for violent conduct that devastates victims and families, diminishes community safety, and shows blatant disregard for the vulnerable. Assaulting a law enforcement officer is not a low-level offense; it is an attack on the rule of law itself. Officers perform duties that protect the public, often placing themselves at personal risk. Mandatory minimum sentences provide a clear, unequivocal message that attacks on those who enforce the law will be met with serious consequences. Eliminating these statutory benchmarks will reduce the certainty of punishment, embolden offenders, and weaken incentives for lawful behavior. HB 863 would also remove mandatory minimums for other violent crimes such as rape, manslaughter, and certain repeat violent felonies. These are serious offenses that devastate victims and communities. While every case has unique circumstances, mandatory minimums prevent undue leniency in cases where egregious conduct merits a baseline period of confinement, regardless of mitigating factors. The deterrent effect of mandatory minimums cannot be understated. Predictable consequences shape offender behavior and assist prosecutors and law enforcement in plea negotiations, charging decisions, and long-term case resolution. Eliminating these statutory floors will reduce predictability and incentivize those predisposed to violence to gamble on lesser sentences. This is especially troubling for repeat violent offenders and crimes posing intrinsic danger to life and bodily integrity. Public confidence in the criminal justice system depends on the perception that serious crimes will be met with serious consequences. Removing mandatory minimum sentences for violent offenses will create perceptions of a weakened justice system, erode trust among victims and families, and leave law enforcement officers vulnerable to repeated attacks with less assurance of consistent punishment. For these reasons, I respectfully urge the members of this committee to oppose House Bill 863 and to preserve mandatory minimum sentencing provisions for assault on law enforcement and other violent crimes, which are essential to maintaining public safety, upholding the rule of law, and ensuring that offenders are held appropriately accountable for their actions.

PLEASE VOTE NO. The problem with this bill is that it narrows once more the guardrails under which the police must respect rights of the accused. It is extremely easy to fool a magistrate into allowing for it. One of our members had his house searched many days AFTER no evidence turned up on the flimsy excuse that "a juvenile" had noted that the accused had "showed [said juvenile] pornography' (not even CP), and that became the pretext for police to bust down the door, destroy property, and all to find ZERO evidence of even that vague and specious claim. When the accused demanded an internal review and claimed no such juvenile ever existed, the police command in Fairfax declined to reveal an identity, or to indicate whether or not a now former juvenile existed. But, as all knows, had there been a juvenile, such juvenile would likely have been mentioned at some hearing or trial, even as a potential witness, but that was never mentioned anywhere public at any time. It was a lie. Empowering police to act even more lawlessly protects NO ONE. VOTE NO on this bill.

I am writing to voice my strong opposition to HB 853. This "Second Look" resentencing legislation represents a fundamental shift in Virginia’s justice system that prioritizes the interests of violent offenders over the safety of our communities and the peace of mind of crime victims. HB 853 would allow individuals convicted of serious felonies to petition a court to reduce or change their sentences after 15, 20, or 25 years. This effectively grants a "second bite at the apple" that overturns long-standing Virginia law regarding the finality of criminal sentences. When a judge or jury hands down a sentence, it is based on the gravity of the crime and the need for public safety. Allowing these cases to be reopened decades later undermines the authority of our courts and the stability of our legal system. Perhaps the most concerning aspect of HB 853 is the toll it takes on victims. For many, the conclusion of a trial is the only way they can begin the long process of healing. By allowing offenders to seek resentencing, this bill forces victims back into the courtroom to testify again and relive the most traumatic moments of their lives. No victim should be forced to look over their shoulder every five years wondering if their attacker will be granted a "second look" hearing. While the bill mentions a work group to study victim-notification systems, this is a hollow promise. A "study" provides no immediate or guaranteed protections. It is irresponsible to create a pathway for the early release of violent offenders before robust, meaningful protections for victims are already established and proven. Our legal system is already overburdened. HB 853 would trigger a wave of petitions and hearings, placing an immense strain on our courts, prosecutors, and probation systems. Diverting these limited resources toward re-litigating decades-old crimes is a disservice to taxpayers and a distraction from the pursuit of justice in current, pending cases. Sentencing should be clear, final, and focused on accountability. HB 853 creates a dangerous precedent that suggests sentences are merely "suggestions" rather than firm consequences for violent actions. This bill shifts the focus away from the victims of crime and toward the comfort of those who have committed serious felonies. For the sake of community safety and the rights of victims, I urge you to oppose HB 853. Virginia must maintain a justice system that honors the finality of its sentences and ensures that "life" or "long-term incarceration" remains a meaningful standard for the most serious crimes.

Leniency is not rehabilitation. That being said a criminal convicted of a violent felony, murder, rape , kidnapping, 1st degree assault after being found guilty and sentenced is incarcerated in the Penal system to protect society. This proposed legislation seeks to remove the protection afforded citizens by the judicial system. I do not support this.