Legislature(2005 - 2006)HOUSE FINANCE 519
05/07/2006 12:00 PM House FINANCE
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| D 48 | |
| SB206 | |
| HB316 | |
| SB231 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| = | HB 316 | ||
| SB 48 | |||
| = | SB 206 | ||
| = | SB 160 | ||
| = | SB 231 | ||
CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 206(FIN)
An Act relating to contempt of court and to temporary
detention and identification of persons.
Representative Stoltze MOVED to ADOPT Work Draft #24-
LS1197\N, Luckhaupt, 5/6/06. NO OBJECTIONS, the Committee
Substitute was ADOPTED. NO OBJECTIONS.
SENATOR CON BUNDE, SPONSOR, testified regarding the bill. He
noted that the bill was an attempt to address a growing
inner city problem regarding material witnesses. He gave a
recent example of a circumstance when a group engaged in
violent criminal behaviors refused to provide identification
in Anchorage. He proposed that it was a balance to protect
the freedoms of regular citizens, while giving the police
the ability to prosecute criminals. He noted attempts to
maintain constitutionality, and stated that the chief of
police in Anchorage supported the bill.
12:54:09 PM
Senator Bunde gave an example of the importance of being
able to identify individuals even if they are not an active
participant in a crime. He referred to a group shooting,
which occurred in the Anchorage area. An individual who was
in the area at the time, but was not involved in the crime,
lead to the identification and location of the murderer. He
stated that the bill protected people from unnecessary
questioning, but would aid police by requiring individuals
to identify themselves. These witnesses would be given
protection.
12:57:29 PM
Representative Hawker asked if the Sponsor supported the CS.
The Sponsor does support this version.
12:57:55 PM
Representative Kerttula asked regarding the ability of an
individual to quash a subpoena was removed in the committee
substitute.
LAUREN RICE, STAFF, SENATOR BUNDE explained that the section
was removed since it implied that if a person provided their
identification, the police could not ask for further
testimony. She explained that if identification was offered,
and the police decided that more information was needed, a
subpoena could be issued.
Representative Kerttula noted that normally the courts
would decide.
DEAN GUANELI, CHIEF ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL, DEPARTMENT
OF LAW explained that it is the obligation of every citizen
to provide testimony in court if they are required to,
unless they would incriminate themselves; there is a
statutory scheme that covers fifth amendment claims. The
legislation attempts to provide a mechanism to identify
persons that witness crime. Persons without of
identification could be given a subpoena.
12:59:28 PM
Mr. Guaneli added that they may be other reasons that a
prosecutor would need their testimony before a grand jury
beyond the need to identify themselves. This provision
allows that if a prosecutor had a need for testimony, the
individual could no longer quash a subpoena. He maintained
that a person should not be allowed to avoid their
obligation to appear before a grand jury by simply showing
identification. They can still move to quash a subpoena for
other reasons.
Representative Kerttula maintained her concern that this
could be used more broadly and committed to speaking with
the department of Law.
Representative Kerttula also referred to the language "in
the vicinity" of a crime. She asked how broad the language
was intended to be. Mr. Guaneli suggested that this
provision must be read in context with other requirements,
such as the officer must suspect that the person has
material evidence that applies to the situation, as well as
having witnessed the situation. He concluded that police
often must make a quick determination of who might be
involved for the sake of public safety. He noted that they
would be unlikely to go far from the scene of the crime, and
contended that the language limited that location.
1:05:03 PM
Senator Bunde noted that a similar discussion had occurred
in the House Judiciary Committee, and a suggestion had been
made to change the language to "immediate vicinity". He
pointed out however, as in the earlier example he gave, the
information had been obtained in an area removed from the
crime scene. He noted that this should be left to the
discretion of the police officer.
1:06:09 PM
Representative Stoltze referred to section 2, pertaining to
the protection of potential crime victims, and asked if a
person that might have been involved in a group, such as a
gang, might by extension become a victim in a gang activity.
He asked if a witness in a gang activity might be protected
under the bill.
1:07:25 PM
Senator Bunde confirmed that by requiring identification, a
person may appear to have been required to cooperate with
police, which may protect them from ramifications.
1:07:57 PM
Representative Stoltze asked for clarification on temporary
detention for the protection of a witness. Mr. Guaneli noted
that there is a general a definition of victim of a crime in
Title 12. the officer did not have to know that a person was
a victim, for this statute to apply, but only have
reasonable suspicion. He gave an example of report of a
beating, not witnessed by police, and a subsequent belief
that a woman and man driving away might be involved in this
incident. He added that the statute proposed a scheme in
which police officers could then request identification.
1:10:31 PM
Representative Holm asked if there was a difference provided
between adults and juveniles. Senator Bunde did not recall
the difference in how this identification would be obtained.
1:11:17 PM
Representative Foster MOVED to REPORT HCS CSSB 206 (JUD)
out of Committee with attached fiscal notes and individual
recommendations. There being NO OBJECTIONS, it was so
ordered.
HCS CSSB 206 (FIN) was REPORTED OUT of Committee with three
Previously Published Zero Fiscal Notes: #5 (ADM); #6 (COR);
#7 (LAW); #8 (ADM) and a Do Pass Recommendation.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|