Committee reviews statutory recidivism definition as Judiciary weighs broader measure
February 06, 2026 | Corrections & Institutions, HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, Committees, Legislative , Vermont
This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »
The House Corrections & Institutions Committee received a legal briefing on the statutory definition of recidivism and possible changes now under consideration in House Judiciary.
Michelle Childs, legal counsel to Judiciary, told the committee the current Title 28 definition was adopted in 2013 to standardize measurement for program evaluation. "Under the current definition... return to prison within 3 years for a conviction for a new offense or a violation of supervision, and then the new incarceration sentence or time served on the violation is at least 90 days," Childs explained.
Childs said the definition in statute instructs the Department of Corrections on how to calculate a recidivism rate for offenders sentenced to more than one year and that, in practice, many researchers and program evaluators use alternative measures depending on program scope. She said House Judiciary is proposing H.410 as a strike-all that would insert a broader, more colloquial definition of recidivism — focusing on reoffending — and create a subchapter to centralize criminogenic data collection.
Committee members raised several concerns: a broader statutory definition would likely raise measured recidivism rates (a measurement effect), could interact with statutes that use prior convictions to trigger enhanced penalties (for example habitual-offender provisions), and might affect administrative tools such as good-time or earned-time calculations unless drafters explicitly exclude those applications.
Childs recommended the committee invite the Crime Research Group and DOC to explain how Title 28’s definition is used in practice and whether a statutory definition should be retained, amended, relabeled, or moved to a non-criminal-data subchapter. "You should hear from DOC and the Crime Research Group about whether they are still using this" definition, she said.
The committee agreed to seek those technical testimonies as a next step and paused formal agenda business to allow a smaller group to work on budget matters.
Michelle Childs, legal counsel to Judiciary, told the committee the current Title 28 definition was adopted in 2013 to standardize measurement for program evaluation. "Under the current definition... return to prison within 3 years for a conviction for a new offense or a violation of supervision, and then the new incarceration sentence or time served on the violation is at least 90 days," Childs explained.
Childs said the definition in statute instructs the Department of Corrections on how to calculate a recidivism rate for offenders sentenced to more than one year and that, in practice, many researchers and program evaluators use alternative measures depending on program scope. She said House Judiciary is proposing H.410 as a strike-all that would insert a broader, more colloquial definition of recidivism — focusing on reoffending — and create a subchapter to centralize criminogenic data collection.
Committee members raised several concerns: a broader statutory definition would likely raise measured recidivism rates (a measurement effect), could interact with statutes that use prior convictions to trigger enhanced penalties (for example habitual-offender provisions), and might affect administrative tools such as good-time or earned-time calculations unless drafters explicitly exclude those applications.
Childs recommended the committee invite the Crime Research Group and DOC to explain how Title 28’s definition is used in practice and whether a statutory definition should be retained, amended, relabeled, or moved to a non-criminal-data subchapter. "You should hear from DOC and the Crime Research Group about whether they are still using this" definition, she said.
The committee agreed to seek those technical testimonies as a next step and paused formal agenda business to allow a smaller group to work on budget matters.
View the Full Meeting & All Its Details
This article offers just a summary. Unlock complete video, transcripts, and insights as a Founder Member.
✓
Watch full, unedited meeting videos
✓
Search every word spoken in unlimited transcripts
✓
AI summaries & real-time alerts (all government levels)
✓
Permanent access to expanding government content
30-day money-back guarantee
