Section 1. Short Title 

This Act shall be known and may be cited as the “Survivor Justice Act.” 

Section 2. Purpose and Findings 

(a) Findings. The legislature finds that: 

(1) In many criminal prosecutions, survivors of human trafficking, domestic violence, dating violence, or child abuse may be accused by their abusers in plea bargaining or sentencing as having “provoked” or “aggressive” behavior. 

(2) Some survivors may have acted under the influence of trauma, fear, coercion, or self-defense, which may not be adequately considered under existing law. 

(3) To promote fairness and justice, survivors of abuse should be allowed, under defined circumstances, to present evidence of abuse by the alleged victim (hereafter “Abusive Party”) as part of a justification, mitigation, or defense theory. 

(4) In addition, structured victim-centered programs (e.g., restorative dialogues, facilitated victim-offender dialogue) may provide additional healing and may be especially appropriate when the abuse history is relevant and procedures are safeguarded. 

(5) The State has a compelling interest in ensuring that criminal proceedings fairly and comprehensively consider the circumstances of abuse survivors and the costs to society and their families of incarceration while also seeking to protect public safety, due process, the rights of the accused, and the integrity of criminal adjudication. 

(b) Purpose. The purpose of this Act is to: 

(1) Allow survivors of human trafficking, domestic violence, dating violence, or child abuse committed by the Abusive Party (the other party) to introduce evidence of that abuse in criminal proceedings under a defined “survivor justification” doctrine; 

(2) Provide a qualified privilege for participation in certain victim-centered programs or dialogues, and offer civil immunity for facilitators in limited circumstances; 

(3) Establish procedural safeguards, limitations, and definitions to balance fairness and protection of rights; 

(4) Promote more just outcomes in prosecution, sentencing, or plea negotiations where abuse history is relevant. 

Section 3. Definitions 

In this Act: 

1. “Abusive Party” means the person alleged to be the victim in the criminal case, who is alleged to have committed family violence, dating violence, or child abuse against the defendant. 

2.“Survivor” means a defendant in a criminal prosecution who alleges that he or she was subjected to family violence, dating violence, or child abuse by the Abusive Party. 

3.“Family violence” means conduct that is a criminal offense under state law, or would be if prosecuted, committed by a current or former spouse, cohabitant, household member, or person with whom the survivor has or had a familial or intimate relationship, including injurious or threatening behavior. 

4. “Dating violence” means violence (or threat thereof) between individuals in a romantic or intimate relationship, as defined in state law. 

5. “Child abuse” means conduct against a minor (under age of majority) that constitutes physical, emotional, or sexual harm or threat under state law. 

6. “Victim-centered program” means a program in which a trained facilitator coordinates a structured process (e.g., restorative dialogue, victim impact sessions, safe victim-offender mediation) in which participants may engage, subject to safeguards. 

7. “Facilitator” means a person who administers or oversees a victim-centered program or dialogue under this Act. 

8. “Participating party” means a survivor (defendant) or Abusive Party (victim) who consents to participate in a victim-centered program or dialogue. 

9. “Clear and convincing evidence” means evidence indicating that the proposition is highly probable, or more likely true than not, a standard intermediate between “preponderance” and “beyond a reasonable doubt.” 

10. “Justification evidence” means evidence offered to support a justification, mitigation, or defense theory based on abusive conduct by the Abusive Party. 

11. “Proportionality” means that a sentence or legal consequence should correspond in severity and nature to the seriousness of the crime committed and the culpability of the defendant.

Section 4. Survivor Justification Doctrine; Permissible Evidence 

(a) Introduction of Evidence. 

1. A survivor may introduce justification evidence of prior abuse by the Abusive Party (family violence, dating violence, or child abuse) to support a defense, mitigation, or sentencing theory (including self-defense, duress, provocation, or diminished moral culpability). 
2. Relevant evidence includes, but is not limited to: 
   • (i) Evidence indicating the defendant sought law enforcement assistance;
   • (ii) Evidence indicating the defendant sought services from a counselor, social worker, domestic violence program, or other relevant agency or service provider;
   • (iii) (Evidence indicating the defendant sought medical attention;
   • (iv) Evidence of the effects of battering and post-traumatic stress disorder on the defendant;
   • (v) Temporary protective order petitions, ex parte orders, and final orders in which the alleged victim is the respondent;
   • (vi) Expert testimony, including, but not limited to, testimony as to relevant facts and circumstances relating to the family violence, dating violence, or child abuse that are the bases of such expert’s opinion; and
   • (vii) Any other evidence the court determines is of sufficient credibility or probative value. 
3. The survival justification evidence is admissible only if the survivor meets the burden (by clear and convincing evidence) that:
   • (i) the survivor was a victim of abuse by the Abusive Party;
   • (ii) the particular abusive conduct is relevant and sufficiently proximate in time and type to have potentially influenced the behavior of the survivor in the charged offense;
   • (iii) the probative value of admitting the evidence substantially outweighs the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion, or delay. 
4. The survivor must establish by clear and convincing evidence that the particular abusive conduct was sufficiently proximate in time, such that the effects of the abuse had a direct and material influence on the survivor’s conduct in the underlying offense. Proximity shall be determined by the court based on the totality of the circumstances, including the nature, severity, and ongoing impact of the abuse, rather than an arbitrary time limit. The abuse must have existed at or near the time of the offense, or such that its residual effects demonstrably contributed to the survivor’s actions;
5. The court shall conduct a preliminary in-camera hearing (outside the jury’s view) to determine whether the proffered survival justification evidence satisfies the standards in (2).
6. If the court admits the evidence, the jury (or factfinder) may consider it along with all other competent evidence in determining guilt, sentencing, or plea disposition. 

(b) Limitation on Certain Evidence. 

1. Evidence of abuse is not admissible merely to show that the Abusive Party was a generally violent or bad person; rather, admissibility must depend on its direct relevance to the relationship between the parties or the charged incident. 
2. Evidence that is too remote in time to be relevant, purely speculative, or unduly prejudicial may be excluded. 
3. The court may set parameters on cross-examination and rebuttal and issue limiting instructions to prevent unfair prejudice or confusion. 

(c) Jury Instruction and Standard of Proof.
If survival justification evidence is admitted, the court shall provide a jury instruction (or equivalent) explaining the use and limits of that evidence, emphasizing that it is one factor among many, and that the burden of proof remains with the State. The standard for the ultimate verdict does not change (beyond reasonable doubt for guilt). 

Section 5. Victim-Centered Programs; Privilege; Immunity 

(a) Voluntary Participation. 

1. Upon motion by either party or the court’s own initiative, the court may permit, or the parties may jointly request, that the survivor and Abusive Party participate in a victim-centered program or facilitated dialogue before trial, in accordance with this Act and procedural rules. 
2. Participation is entirely voluntary. Either party may withdraw at any time prior to substantive exchange, without prejudice to their position in the criminal case. 
3. A party’s participation, or refusal to participate, shall not be used by the prosecution or defense to argue guilt, credibility, or sentencing disadvantage, except as expressly permitted by this Act. 

(b) Privilege and Confidentiality. 

1. All oral statements, documents, evaluations, or communications made solely for the purpose of participation in a victim-centered program or dialogue under this Act are privileged and may not be admitted as evidence in the criminal case, except as set forth in paragraph (2). 
2. The privilege does not extend to:
   • (i) statements that are independently discoverable, admissible, or otherwise within the scope of discovery (e.g. prior statements, admissions outside the program);
   • (ii) statements indicating imminent risk of serious bodily harm to self or others, or ongoing abuse of minors, subject to mandatory reporting laws;
   • (iii) agreements in writing executed as part of plea negotiations or sentencing schemes (if agreed by both parties). 

(3) A party may waive the privilege in writing, in whole or in part, but only after consultation with counsel. 

(c) Civil Immunity.
A facilitator or sponsoring entity is immune from civil liability for harm arising from acts or omissions during the conduct of a victim-centered program or dialogue, except in cases of willful misconduct or gross negligence. 

(d) Reporting and Oversight.
The State shall maintain minimal reporting requirements (e.g. number of participants, demographics, general outcomes) to track program utilization and effectiveness, subject to confidentiality safeguards and protection of identities. 

Section 6. Plea Negotiations and Sentencing Considerations 

1. In plea discussions, defense counsel may present to prosecutors, with supporting documentation (if admissible under this Act), the survival justification evidence and make arguments for mitigating dispositions (e.g. reduced charges, diversion, downward departure). 
2. At sentencing, the court shall permit the introduction of admissible survival justification evidence when it is relevant to sentencing mitigation (e.g., offense seriousness, defendant culpability, recidivism risk), even if this evidence was not presented during the trial or plea discussions. 
3. The court may grant downward departures from prescribed sentencing ranges if the court finds, by clear and convincing evidence, that the survivor’s abuse history materially reduces moral culpability or increases the need for a rehabilitative approach. 
4. Nothing in this Act requires a prosecuting authority to accept a plea or to reduce a charge; prosecutorial discretion remains intact. 

Section 7. Procedural Safeguards 

1. Notice Requirement. A survivor seeking to introduce survival justification evidence must give timely notice to the prosecuting authority and court (e.g. by pretrial motion) of the intent to rely on such evidence, including a summary of the abusive conduct to be offered, witnesses, and exhibits. 
2. Discovery. The prosecution and defense may conduct discovery (depositions, document requests, expert reports) concerning the abuse allegations, subject to protective orders and privilege limits. 
3. Protective Orders. The court may issue protective orders to limit dissemination of sensitive materials, redaction, sealing, or in-camera review to protect privacy and safety. 
4. Uniform Standards. The State should adopt uniform rules (e.g. as amendments to rules of evidence or criminal procedure) clarifying admissibility standards, timing, and limitations consistent with this Act. 
5. Appeals and Review. A denial of admissibility, or other interlocutory rulings under this Act, shall be immediately appealable (or reviewable) under the State’s interlocutory review provisions. A judgment may likewise be challenged on the basis of erroneous exclusion of survival justification evidence. 

Section 8. Relief for Previously Sentenced Survivors 

(a) Purpose.
To ensure equitable treatment of survivors of abuse regardless of when they were convicted or sentenced, this Section provides a mechanism by which individuals currently serving a sentence, or previously sentenced, may seek resentencing based on evidence of human trafficking, domestic violence, dating violence, or child abuse that would have been admissible as survival justification evidence under this Act. 

(b) Eligibility. 

1. A person is eligible to petition for relief under this Section if:
   • (i) the person was convicted of an offense and is currently incarcerated, on probation, on parole, or serving any portion of a sentence imposed by a court of this State; and
   • (ii) the person can demonstrate, by a preponderance of the evidence, that they were a survivor of human trafficking, domestic violence, dating violence, or child abuse perpetrated by the victim or another person involved in the offense conduct; and
   • (iii) the abusive conduct was relevant to the circumstances surrounding the offense or sentencing, and would have constituted “survival justification evidence” admissible under Section 4 of this Act. 
   • (iv) if the alleged offense for which survivor justification evidence is presented is a violent criminal offense, it must have been committed against the person identified as the abuser or perpetrator of the underlying domestic violence, trafficking, or abuse, or must have occurred during the direct course of defending against such violent abuse at the hands of that person. Violent offenses are defined as those involving the actual, attempted, or threatened use of physical force or resulting in physical injury to the abuser. Relief shall not be available for violent offenses committed against unrelated third parties, except in cases where the survivor was acting under immediate coercion by the abuser.
2. This remedy shall not be limited by the date of conviction or sentencing, provided that the petition is filed within the timeframe specified in subsection (f). 

(c) Petition for Relief. 

1. An eligible person may file a written petition for resentencing based on survival justification in the sentencing court, or, if that court no longer exists, in its successor court. 
2. The petition shall include:
   • (i) a statement of the facts supporting the claim that the petitioner was a survivor of abuse relevant to the offense;
   • (ii) copies of any available records, affidavits, expert reports, or other supporting materials; and
   • (iii) a request for relief, which may include reduction of sentence, modification to a non-custodial term, or other just disposition. 
3. The court shall appoint counsel for indigent petitioners upon a preliminary showing that the petition is not frivolous. 

(d) Hearing and Standard. 

1. Upon filing, the court shall conduct an initial review to determine whether the petition presents a prima facie case for relief. If so, the court shall order an evidentiary hearing. If not, the court shall notify the applicant of the reason(s) for denial. 
2. At the hearing, the petitioner bears the burden of proving by clear and convincing evidence that:
   • (i) the petitioner was a survivor of qualifying abuse;
   • (ii) the abuse was relevant to the petitioner’s conduct or sentencing, and had it been presented, it is reasonably probable that the court would have imposed a lesser sentence; and         
   • (iii) in light of the petitioner’s institutional record, participation in programming such as parenting classes and substance abuse treatment while incarcerated, disciplinary history, plans for reintegration, and other relevant factors, modifying the sentence would not endanger public safety. 
3. The prosecuting authority may present rebuttal evidence. 
4. If the court finds in favor of the petitioner, it may:
   • (i) vacate the sentence and resentence the petitioner under current law;
   • (ii) reduce the sentence to time served and order release; or
   • (iii) otherwise modify the sentence in the interest of justice. 

(e) Victim Notification. 

1. The prosecuting authority shall make reasonable efforts to notify the victim or next of kin of the pending petition and any hearing date. 
2. Victims may submit statements regarding resentencing but shall not have authority to veto relief. 

(f) Timing and Procedure. 

1. Petitions shall be prioritized for review if the petitioner:
   • (i) is serving a life or long-term sentence; or
   • (ii) has served more than ten years of incarceration. 
2. The court may consolidate petitions or appoint special masters for efficiency, subject to appropriations. 

(g) Reporting and Oversight. 

The State shall maintain minimal reporting requirements (e.g. number of participants, demographics, the offense, and general outcomes, such as whether the participant was granted or denied sentencing pursuant to this Act, the sentence imposed, whether the prosecutor consented, opposed, or took no position on the request) to track program utilization and effectiveness, subject to confidentiality safeguards and protection of identities.  

(h) Rulemaking Authority.
The judiciary or relevant sentencing commission may promulgate procedural rules to implement this Section, including standardized petition forms and guidelines for evaluating survival justification evidence in post-conviction settings. 

(i) Non-Exclusivity.
Relief under this Section is in addition to, and does not preclude, other post-conviction remedies available under State law (including habeas corpus, clemency, or sentence review). 

(j) Construction.
Nothing in this Section shall be construed to reopen or disturb valid convictions except as provided for limited resentencing relief based on survivor justification evidence, nor to affect the finality of convictions beyond that necessary to implement this remedial purpose. 

Section 9. Severability; Effective Date
(a) Severability. If any provision of this Act or its application to any person or circumstance is held invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, the remainder of the Act, or the application of its provisions to other persons or circumstances, shall not be affected.

(b) Effective Date. This Act shall take effect on [ ] and shall apply to all criminal cases pending and filed on or after that date, to the extent constitutionally permissible

Commentary / Implementation Notes 

• States should adapt cross-references to their criminal statutes, evidence rules, sentencing codes, and definitions of human trafficking, domestic/dating violence or child abuse. 
• The in-camera threshold hearing is critical to avoid undue prejudice before presenting abusive evidence to a jury. 
• The privilege and immunity provisions balance openness of dialogue and protection of participants. 
• Legislatures may choose to limit applicability (e.g. to specific offenses or classes of survivors) depending on policy and resource constraints.