Legislature(2001 - 2002)
05/04/2001 09:00 AM House FIN
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 105(FIN)
"An Act relating to victims' rights; relating to
establishing an office of victims' rights; relating to
the authority of litigants and the court to comment on
the crime victim's choice to appear or testify in a
criminal case; relating to compensation of victims of
violent crimes; relating to eligibility for a permanent
fund dividend for persons convicted of and incarcerated
for certain offenses; relating to notice of
appropriations concerning victims' rights; amending
Rules 16 and 30, Alaska Rules of Criminal Procedure,
Rule 9, Alaska Delinquency Rules, and Rule 501, Alaska
Rules of Evidence; and providing for an effective
date."
JULI LUCKY, STAFF, SENATOR HALFORD testified in support of
the legislation. She explained that a similar bill was
passed in the previous Legislature and was vetoed by the
Governor. The bill establishes an Office of Victim's Rights.
The main task of the Office of Victim's Rights would be to
advocate on behalf of crime victims in the court system (if
necessary) and investigate any violations of constitutional
rights (similar to an ombudsman). The Office would be
located in the legislative branch, which is where the Office
of the Ombudsman is located. Studies by the National
Institute for Justice have shown that, even if the victim's
have guaranteed constitutional rights and strong statutory
protection, more needs to be done to assure that victims are
aware of their rights.
Ms. Lucky discussed changes from the legislation adopted [in
the Twenty-First Legislature]. She observed that HB 133 was
included, which is the Governor's legislation dealing with
restitution for crime victims. There are studies that show
that restitution is a fairly high priority of victims. The
legislation would set up a mechanism in the court, which
already makes collections for other things, to collect
restitution on behalf of victims. The Senate Finance
Committee raised the compensation cap because they felt that
the compensation was not keeping up with inflation in
relation to medical costs.
Representative John Davies questioned if the victim would
give permission for the state to go after restitution. Ms.
Lucky affirmed that the court would send a notification,
stating that the victim has the right not to have the state
collect on their behalf. The victim has three days to notify
the state that they would prefer to collect the restitution
on their own behalf.
Representative Davies observed that reasonable attorney
costs would be charged against what is owed. Ms. Lucky
thought that the reasonable attorney costs would be added to
the restitution judgment.
Representative Hudson noted that there would be six members
with travel and a new office in Anchorage. The office would
be in the legislative branch of government.
Ms. Lucky explained that discussions with other states
determined that an ombudsman type office would be most
beneficial. She stressed that it would be beneficial for
victims to contact a third, neutral party and argued in
support of the provision.
Representative Hudson and Representative Davies questioned
why the office would not be placed in the ombudsman's
office.
Ms. Lucky pointed out that the ombudsman's office does not
become involved until rights have been violated. The intent
is to have a more collaborative effort and to be involved
during the process.
Representative John Davies stressed that there would be no
reason why the office couldn't operate in the same way under
the ombudsman's office. Ms. Lucky responded that the intent
is to have an office that has experience with the justice
system.
DEAN GUANELI, CHIEF ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL, CRIMINAL
DIVISION, DEPARTMENT OF LAW spoke in support of the
legislation. The office would review the activities of the
agency. He noted that a lack of cooperation by victims is
one of the primary reason cases are lost. Treating victims
well helps the department to do its job well. He observed
that it is difficult for the prosecution to reach some
victims and thought that a separate entity for legal advice
would be an advantage for the department. The Department of
Law represents the state of Alaska. He thought it was
appropriate for victims to have their own legal
representation. The Department of Law could provide better
restitution collection on behalf of the victims if it had
statutory authority. The Civil Division of the Department of
Law has a collection unit that works efficiency and has a
good working relationship with the state. The bill would
provide the authority for state collections. He argued that
the office is modeled after the ombudsman and the Office of
the Ombudsman is in the legislative branch. The Office of
the Ombudsman accepts complaints about state agencies.
People who complain about a state agency need to know that
the investigation is not guided by the agency being
investigated and that they are neutral. He did not have a
recommendation in regards to whether the office should be
part included under the Office the Ombudsman or kept
separate.
Representative John Davies expressed concern that the cost
of restitution collection would be added to the fine.
Mr. Guaneli pointed out that if a defendant pays their fine
on schedule there would be no action by the department. He
maintained that it would not be inappropriate to add costs
if the defender forces the department to go to collection.
The Court can adjust the payment schedule if the offender is
having difficulty with payments. Representative Davies
reiterated concerns that the addition of collect costs could
exceed the fine. If the victim were forced to collect the
money on their own there would still be costs, which the
offender would have to pay. The state would not collect
anything more than what the state of Alaska would collect.
The collection unit uses reasonable efforts. He did not
think the state would spend $10,000 dollars to go after $100
dollars.
Representative Lancaster observed that the legislation
includes juveniles and questioned if it costs more to
include juveniles. Mr. Guaneli responded that juveniles do
victimize people and maintained that it would be appropriate
to include them.
Representative Hudson questioned if concerns with the
placement of the office under the Legislative Council have
been addressed.
Ms. Lucky provided members with Amendments 1 and 2 (copy on
file).
Amendment 1
Delete page 4, lines 5 - 11, and insert:
Sec. 12.30.075. Forfeited cash and other securities.
(a) Cash or other security posted by a defendant under
AS 12.30.020 that would otherwise be forfeited shall be
held by the court in trust for the benefit of the
victim if, within 30 days after an order of the court
establishing a failure to appear or a violation of
conditions of release, the prosecuting authority gives
notice that restitution may be requested as part of the
sentence if the defendant is convicted.
(b) If a restitution order is not entered, the court
shall order the cash or other security being held in
trust to be forfeited to the state.
(c) If a restitution order is entered, the court shall
apply the cash or other security to the satisfaction of
the order. If the cash or other security held in trust
is applied to an order of restitution, the court shall
issue a separate judgment against the defendant in
favor of the state in the amount that would have
otherwise been forfeited, and any cash or other
security remaining after payment of the restitution
shall be applied against that judgment. Any cash or
other security remaining shall be forfeited to the
state.
Amendment 2
Page 6, line 15
Delete "is
Insert "may be"
Delete Page 6, lines 20 - 21; and Insert:
A defendant who is convicted of (1) a felony shall
submit the form to the probation office within 30 days
after conviction, and the probation officer shall
attach the form to the presentence report, or (2) a
misdemeanor shall file the form with the defendant's
response or opposition to the restitution amount. The
defendant shall provide a copy of the completed form to
the prosecuting authority.
Ms. Lucky explained that they are technical amendments from
the Department of Law. Amendment 1 clarifies how bail works.
Amendment 2 deals with how reports are filed and
consolidates the reports.
Vice-Chair Bunde MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 1.
Mr. Guaneli explained that legislative attorneys suggested
Amendment 1. If a defender has posted bail and forfeits
bail, instead of the bail first going to the state, under
the amendment, victims restitution would be paid first and
the remaining funds would go to the state.
There being NO OBJECTION, Amendment 1 was adopted.
Co-Chair Williams MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 2. Co-Chair
Mulder OBJECTED for the purpose of discussion. Mr. Guaneli
explained that the Alaska Court System requested the
amendment. The amendment clarifies where financial
information about the offender would be sent. Forms would go
directly to the probation officer who would write a report
to the court.
There being NO OBJECTION, Amendment 2 was adopted.
CSSB 105 (FIN) was heard and HELD in Committee for further
consideration.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|