2808

VETOES

or part of the time the person has been on probation) in
the event the probation is subsequently revoked.

There is, initially, some question as to whether, as
worded, the bill is adequate to achieve this objective.
It would have been clearer if Section 641 had been
amended.

Assuming, however, that the bill would be
interpreted to accomplish its objective, I am advised
that it would likely have the effect of Constitutionality
requiring the assistance of counsel at all revocation
hearings, thereby placing a heavy fiscal and
administrative burden on the Public Defender's Office.
At present, counsel is not constitutionally required at
such hearings, because once the court finds from the
facts that a violation has occurred and decides to revoke
the probation, it merely reinstitutes the suspended
sentence without change. If the Court has discretion to
reduce the effective sentence by granting a credit
against it, there is serious concern that the proceeding
may become a "critical" one in a Constitutional sense,
thereby requiring counsel, since the assistance of
counsel may be effective in persuading the Court to
impose something less than the full sentence earlier
suspended.

I agree with the intent of House Bill 450. However,
I do not believe that the General Assembly considered its
effects fully. The sponsor of House Bill 450 has advised
me that, in light of the problems brought to my attention
and to his attention, he has no objection to a veto of
House Bill 450.

For these reasons, I have decided to veto House
Bill 450.

Sincerely,
Marvin Mandel
Governor

House Bill No. 526 — State Athletic Commission
Revenues

AN ACT concerning

State Athletic Commission — License Fees

FOR the purpose of providing that revenues received by