Legislature(2007 - 2008)HOUSE FINANCE 519
03/27/2008 01:30 PM House FINANCE
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB367 | |
| HB419 | |
| HB400 | |
| HB50 | |
| HJR37 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | HB 50 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | HB 314 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | HJR 37 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| += | HB 419 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 367 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 400 | TELECONFERENCED | |
2:07:13 PM HOUSE BILL NO. 400 An Act relating to a person who seeks medical assistance for a person experiencing a drug overdose. REPRESENTATIVE BETH KERTTULA, SPONSOR, introduced the bill because a constituent's daughter died from a drug overdose, and out of that, she has put her grief to work to determine a way to encourage reporting of someone having a drug overdose. There have been nationwide studies undertaken that address mitigating factors. 2:08:54 PM AURORA HAUKE, STAFF, REPRESENTATIVE BETH KERTTULA, stated that HB 400 is an attempt to save lives; approximately 85 Alaskans die each year from drug overdoses and that number exceeds the national average. Many times, deaths from drug overdoses may be preventable by a single 911 call. Often those calls are not made because the people who are witnessing the overdose are afraid of being arrested themselves. HB 400 identifies the problem by allowing a mitigating factor in sentencing for crimes involving controlled substances, if the defendant sought medical assistance for another person, who was experiencing a drug overdoes. 2:09:56 PM Representative Hawker asked the specific definition of a drug overdose. Representative Kerttula viewed it as anything threatening a person's health from the use of a drug. Representative Hawker questioned if a single trip on heroine could be considered a drug overdose. Representative Kerttula offered to check into that, advising that what she had seen had been more serious and life threatening. 2:10:59 PM Vice-Chair Stoltze mentioned a case that happened in Spenard. He thought that the definition was too ambiguous. Representative Kerttula countered that the judge could make the decision regarding whether it was appropriate or not and that factual information is never taken lightly. Vice-Chair Stoltze did not have the same confidence in the judicial branch. 2:12:25 PM Representative Gara took offense to comments regarding judges, made by Vice-Chair Stoltze. Representative Gara suggested that those type of comments are not in the Committee's greatest use of time. Representative Gara noted that these are not people who have committed a crime and are going to get off sentencing. Instead, it will be a person that has committed a crime and convicted of committing that crime. It is a mitigater indicating that in the circumstances where there is a crime committed, during the commission of that crime, you place the call for help for another person, that action would be considered in the sentencing. If a crime is committed and other awful things have been done also, there would be an aggravator and the judge determines the sentence for those people. There are more aggravators than there are mitigaters in the sentencing statutes. Sentencing should be determined by everything the person did. He summed up, a person calling law enforcement to help another person, should receive some favorable consideration. Co-Chair Meyer agreed that if someone does a good deed, there should be mitigating factors considered. He did not know if people committing the crimes would know that by calling 911, there would be a possibility of a lesser sentence. Representative Kerttula replied that this kind of information does get around and is known and could make a difference. She noted she had looked into the statute and could not determine if there was a criminal law definition for overdose. She thought it might be a medical term. 2:15:33 PM Representative Hawker commented that the legislation proposes a "good Samaritan refuge". He wondered if there was another way to look at the language to be more inclusive. Representative Kerttula advised that the information in HB 400 is specific about the actual problem related to the overdose itself. Ms. Hauke added, last year, the State of New Mexico, which also has a high rate of deaths related to drug overdoses, passed similar legislation. 2:17:48 PM Representative Hawker advised that the bill proposes to create a mitigater and asked if that could create a conflict with presumptive sentencing already in Statute. Representative Kerttula did not think so. She said that the Department of Law had looked closely at it. It would only happen after the person is convicted and the judge then makes certain findings; it would be left to the judge's discretion. Ms. Hauke added that the mitigating factor is based on the presumptive sentences. The low-end of the presumptive range is zero to four years; it could be reduced to removing the sentence all together. 2:19:04 PM Representative Gara believed that a court could interpret a drug overdose. He pointed out that sentence hearings are not long like trials can be. He pointed out #18, the need to prove that mitigating factors, asking what "suffering" from mental disease means. He thought that some terms just do not need to be defined. Representative Gara referenced the comment made by Representative Hawker regarding the "Good Samaritan" provision of the bill. To resolve the drug overdose situation, it is a good thing for someone to call for medical help during a crime and recommended that alternative language be included. Representative Kerttula thought those changes would reduce the title, making is substantially broader. She did not object to that if it were the will of the Committee. She pointed out that New Mexico added immunity to their statute. She had not offered the bill that way. HB 400 specifically offers a mitigater. Co-Chair Meyer commented that those changes should have been made in the House Judiciary Committee. 2:22:30 PM Vice-Chair Stoltze asked if references had been made to legal or criminal immunity. Representative Kerttula responded, it would be immunity from criminal prosecution. The Committee chose not to do that. Vice-Chair Stoltze disagreed with the term "Good Samaritan" suggesting rather a "criminal accomplice with a lapse of conscience". He asked if the legislation could include alcohol abuse. Ms. Hauke stated it deals with AS 11.71, the controlled substances statute. She did not believe that drug overdose would also be considered alcohol overdose. Representative Kerttula said arguably it could be, however, wanted to check it with the Department of Law. 2:24:45 PM Representative Joule thought that Representative Stoltze was correct. He noted that he had served on the Alcohol Drug and Advisory Board, referencing alcohol and other drugs. He worried the bill would place a continued stress on the bed space at the Department of Corrections. He wanted to see responsibility in addressing people's choices. Co-Chair Meyer agreed and thought that the bill could actually save the State money. He did not know about sentencing and mitigating factors. Representative Kerttula explained that mitigating factors must be specifically requested, with findings made and after the trial, during the sentencing. Then there is a range of mitigating options and in the higher sentencing, the judge can only reduce ½ of the sentence. She added that these kind of defendants do know the law and she thought it would have a beneficial result. Representative Gara advised that the legislation would not cover alcohol abuse; it is only for a conviction under AS 11.71, which he thought was only controlled substances, not alcohol. He stated that part of the criminal system is determining the right level of punishment. Representative Kerttula clarified that the offense that the person is convicted under is under AS 11.71; however, it is the other person that is actually experiencing the drug overdose and consequently, alcohol would be included under the definition. 2:29:25 PM PUBLIC TESTIMONY CLOSED 2:30:09 PM Representative Gara thought that inclusion of the mitigater could reduce jail time, which could zero out the fiscal note. Co-Chair Meyer advised that the note is already zero. Vice-Chair Stoltze MOVED to REPORT HB 400 out of Committee with individual recommendations and with the accompanying fiscal note. There being NO OBJECTION, it was so ordered. HB 400 was reported out of Committee with a "do pass" recommendation and with zero note #1 by the Department of Law.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|