Legislature(2019 - 2020)GRUENBERG 120

04/24/2019 01:00 PM JUDICIARY

Note: the audio and video recordings are distinct records and are obtained from different sources. As such there may be key differences between the two. The audio recordings are captured by our records offices as the official record of the meeting and will have more accurate timestamps. Use the icons to switch between them.

Download Mp3. <- Right click and save file as
Download Video part 1. <- Right click and save file as

Audio Topic
01:27:34 PM Start
01:28:15 PM HB145
02:32:17 PM Adjourn
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
-- Delayed to 45 Minutes Following Session --
*+ HB 145 PROPERTY CRIME; MOTOR VEHICLE THEFT TOOLS TELECONFERENCED
Heard & Held
Uniform Rule 23 Waived
+ Bills Previously Heard/Scheduled TELECONFERENCED
        HB 145-PROPERTY CRIME; MOTOR VEHICLE THEFT TOOLS                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
1:28:15 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR CLAMAN announced  that the only order of  business would be                                                               
HOUSE  BILL NO.  145,  "An  Act relating  to  crime and  criminal                                                               
procedure; establishing the crime  of possession of motor vehicle                                                               
theft  tools;  relating  to controlled  substances;  relating  to                                                               
credit   toward  a   sentence   of   imprisonment;  relating   to                                                               
sentencing; relating  to registration of sex  offenders; relating                                                               
to the definition of 'sex  offender or child kidnapper'; relating                                                               
to operating under  the influence; relating to  refusal to submit                                                               
to a  chemical test; relating  to the duties of  the commissioner                                                               
of  corrections;   relating  to   the  Alaska   Criminal  Justice                                                               
Commission; relating  to the duties  of the attorney  general and                                                               
the  Department of  Law; requiring  law  enforcement agencies  to                                                               
test sexual  assault examination kits; requiring  notification of                                                               
completion  of testing;  relating to  reports on  untested sexual                                                               
assault examination  kits; and relating  to public  disclosure of                                                               
information relating to certain minors."                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
1:29:17 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
LIZZIE KUBITZ,  Staff, Representative  Matt Claman,  Alaska State                                                               
Legislature,  conducted a  sectional  analysis of  HB  145.   She                                                               
paraphrased  from a  prepared statement,  which  read as  follows                                                               
[original punctuation provided]:                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
              HB 145 version U - Sectional Summary                                                                          
     Section 1                                                                                                              
     AS 11.41.110(a)  Murder in the second degree.                                                                              
     Conforming   amendment.  Amends   AS  11.41.110(a)   to                                                                    
     reflect the changes made in Section 28.                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
     Section 2                                                                                                              
     AS 11.41.150(a)  Murder of an unborn child.                                                                                
     Conforming   amendment.  Amends   AS  11.41.150(a)   to                                                                    
     reflect the changes made in Section 28.                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
     Section 3                                                                                                              
     AS 11.41.432(a)  Defenses.                                                                                                 
     Removes marriage as a defense  if the person engages in                                                                    
     sexual activity with their spouse  when they know their                                                                    
     spouse is incapacitated or unaware  that the sexual act                                                                    
     is being committed.                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
     Because of  the complex  legal and factual  issues that                                                                    
     may  arise, the  defense of  marriage still  applies in                                                                    
     situations  where a  spouse is  the caretaker  of their                                                                    
     partner who is "mentally  incompetent" with dementia or                                                                    
     Alzheimer's, or is mentally ill,  but still consents to                                                                    
     the contact.                                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
     A person who is incapacitated  or unaware that a sexual                                                                    
     act is being committed  is legally and factually unable                                                                    
     to   consent  to   sexual  activity.   In  most   other                                                                    
     circumstances, unless specifically  excluded by statute                                                                    
     or  case  law,  consent  remains a  defense  to  sexual                                                                    
     assault.                                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
     Section 4                                                                                                              
     AS 11.46.130(a)  Theft in the second degree.                                                                               
     Conforming   amendment.  Amends   AS  11.46.130(a)   to                                                                    
     reflect a change made in Section 11.                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
     Section 4  also removes inflation adjustment  for theft                                                                    
     in the second degree.                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
     Sections 5 -10                                                                                                         
     AS  11.46.140(a),   -.150(a),  -.220(c),   -.260(b),  -                                                                    
     .270(b), -.280(d)                                                                                                          
     Removes  inflation   adjustment  from   property  crime                                                                    
     statutes.                                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
     Section 11                                                                                                             
     AS 11.46.285    Fraudulent use  of an access  device or                                                                    
     identification document.                                                                                                   
     Amends AS 11.46.285, the  statute related to fraudulent                                                                    
     use  of  an  access  device, to  include  theft  of  an                                                                    
     identification  document. This  clarification addresses                                                                    
     a gap in the statute  identified in Kankanton v. State,                                                                    
     342 P.3d  (Alaska Ct. App.  2015). With  the amendment,                                                                    
     the  offense will  include fraudulent  use  of both  an                                                                    
     access device and an identification document.                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
     The amendment  also restructures the offense  levels to                                                                    
     a class  B felony if  the theft using an  access device                                                                    
     or identification document is  $25,000 or more, a class                                                                    
     C felony  if the  theft is  $75 or  more and  less than                                                                    
     $25,000,  and a  class A  misdemeanor if  the theft  is                                                                    
     less than  $75. These  financial levels  for Fraudulent                                                                    
     Use of an Access  Device or Identification Document are                                                                    
     different from  the financial levels  for Theft  in the                                                                    
     Second Degree  (AS 11.46.130:  $750 to  $25,000), Theft                                                                    
     in the Third  Degree (AS 11.46.140: $250  to $750), and                                                                    
     Theft  in the  Fourth Degree  (AS 11.46.150:  less than                                                                    
     $250)  because the  impact on  the  victim of  identity                                                                    
     theft is  more serious than  the effect on a  victim of                                                                    
     theft. In addition, the requirement  of proof of intent                                                                    
     to  defraud   in  AS  11.46.285   is  a   more  serious                                                                    
     culpability than intent to  deprive another of property                                                                    
     in AS 11.46.100.                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
     The crime  of fraudulent  use of  an access  device was                                                                    
     first enacted  in 1978, however,  there were  no dollar                                                                    
     amounts  included  in  this   initial  version  of  the                                                                    
     offense.  The statute  was amended  in  2000, at  which                                                                    
     time  the legislature  specified that  if the  value of                                                                    
     property  or  services taken  was  less  than $50,  the                                                                    
     offense would  be a class  B misdemeanor; if  the value                                                                    
     of property or services taken  was $50 or more but less                                                                    
     than $500, it  was a class A misdemeanor;  if the value                                                                    
     of  property or  services taken  was $500  or more  but                                                                    
     less  than  $25,000,  it  was a  class  C  felony;  and                                                                    
     anything over $25,000 would be a class B felony.                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
     In  2005, the  legislature made  additional changes  to                                                                    
     crimes  involving the  theft of  access  devices in  HB                                                                    
     131. First,  the crime  of theft  in the  second degree                                                                    
     was amended to  include the theft of  an access device.                                                                    
     At  that   time,  the  taking  of   an  access  device,                                                                    
     regardless of whether  it was used, was made  a class C                                                                    
     felony.   Second,  the   felony  level   threshold  for                                                                    
     fraudulent use of  an access device was  reduced to $50                                                                    
     or more.                                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
     According  to testimony  provided  in  committee on  HB                                                                    
     131, these types of offenses  had increased 100 percent                                                                    
     nationwide. Some  states had lowered or  eliminated the                                                                    
     value  level needed  for a  felony level  threshold for                                                                    
     these  types of  offenses.  When  comparing the  fifty-                                                                    
     dollar  threshold to  other crimes  in  Alaska, it  was                                                                    
     noted that the crime of  forgery is a felony regardless                                                                    
     of the amount that is  forged. Thus, if a person forges                                                                    
     a check for five dollars, that conduct is a felony.                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
     In  2014,  the  legislature again  amended  the  felony                                                                    
     threshold for  fraudulent use of  an access  device and                                                                    
     brought it up  to $750. This change  brought the felony                                                                    
     level threshold  in line  with other  property offenses                                                                    
     that were  amended at  the same  time. Since  2014, the                                                                    
     felony  level  threshold   for  property  offenses  has                                                                    
     changed a couple of                                                                                                        
     times and is currently $750.                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
     Section 4 also removes inflation adjustment.                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
     Section 12                                                                                                             
     AS 11.46.295  Prior convictions.                                                                                           
     Amends the application of  "prior convictions" under AS                                                                    
     11.46.295  to apply  to theft  in the  third degree  in                                                                    
     determining the  existence of prior convictions  in the                                                                    
     recidivist theft statutes.                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
     Section 13                                                                                                             
     AS 11.46.360(a)                                                                                                            
     Removes inflation  adjustment for vehicle theft  in the                                                                    
     first degree.                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
     Section 14                                                                                                             
     AS  11.46.370     Possession  of  motor  vehicle  theft                                                                    
     tools.                                                                                                                     
     Amends AS  11.46 by adding  a new  section establishing                                                                    
     the crime  of possession  of motor vehicle  theft tools                                                                    
     as a class  A misdemeanor. The new crime  is similar to                                                                    
     AS 11.46.315,  Possession of  burglary tools,  which is                                                                    
     also a class A misdemeanor.                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
     In addition to mechanical tools  used to unlock a motor                                                                    
     vehicle,  the amendment  also  includes an    lectronic                                                                    
     unlocking  device"  as  a  motor  vehicle  theft  tool.                                                                    
     "Electronic  unlocking  devices"  are devices  used  to                                                                    
     capture the electronic signals from  key fobs and other                                                                    
     electronic locking  systems to  unlock a  motor vehicle                                                                    
     without permission.  The amendment  does not  include a                                                                    
     screwdriver as  a motor vehicle  theft tool, just  as a                                                                    
     screwdriver is not a burglary tool in AS 11.46.315.                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
     Sections 15-20                                                                                                         
     AS  11.46.482(a),   -.484(a),  -.486(a),   -.530(b),  -                                                                    
     .620(d), -.730(c)                                                                                                          
     Remove   inflation  adjustment   from  property   crime                                                                    
     statutes.                                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
     Section 21                                                                                                             
     AS 11.46.980    Determination of value;  aggregation of                                                                    
     amounts.                                                                                                                   
     Adds a new  subsection (e) to AS  11.46.980 that allows                                                                    
     prosecutors  to aggregate  crimes  under  theft in  the                                                                    
     second  degree  if  they occur  within  180  days,  the                                                                    
     amount is  more than  $750 and  less than  $25,000, and                                                                    
     the property  or services  are taken  from one  or more                                                                    
     persons or commercial establishments.                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
     Under  current  law,  the  prosecution  aggregates  the                                                                    
     theft amounts when  it can prove that  the defendant or                                                                    
     defendants  committed  the  criminal  acts  "under  one                                                                    
     course of conduct." AS  11.46.980(c), see Buckwalter v.                                                                    
     State,  23  P.3d  81  (Alaska   Ct.  App.  2001).  This                                                                    
     amendment to the  statutes does not require  proof of a                                                                    
     single course  of conduct and, instead,  requires proof                                                                    
     that the crimes occurred within  180 days and were from                                                                    
     one or more persons or commercial establishments.                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
     Section 22                                                                                                             
     AS  11.56.810(a)      Terroristic  threatening  in  the                                                                    
     second degree.                                                                                                             
     Amends  the   second  degree   terroristic  threatening                                                                    
     statute  AS 11.56.810(a)  to  cover  an individual  who                                                                    
     knowingly threatens to commit  a crime against a person                                                                    
     or  property and  recklessly disregards  the risk  that                                                                    
     the threats  will cause the  evacuation of  a building,                                                                    
     will cause serious public  inconvenience, or will place                                                                    
     the  public or  a substantial  group of  the public  in                                                                    
     fear of  serious physical  injury. The  amended statute                                                                    
     covers  real  threats  of violence  as  well  as  false                                                                    
     threats.                                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
     Terroristic  threatening   in  the  second   degree  is                                                                    
     directed at  threats that, if  carried out,  are likely                                                                    
     to affect  a substantial  number of people.  Threats to                                                                    
     schools,  trains,  buses,  airplanes,  businesses,  and                                                                    
     offices are  examples reflected  in tragic  events over                                                                    
     the  past 25-30  years. The  amended statute  addresses                                                                    
     conduct that  is usually different from  assault in the                                                                    
     third degree, AS  11.41.220(a)(1)(A), which addresses a                                                                    
     person  placing another  person  "in  fear of  imminent                                                                    
     serious  physical  injury  by   means  of  a  dangerous                                                                    
     instrument,"  and AS  11.41.220(a)(2), which  addresses                                                                    
     "repeated threats  to cause  death or  serious physical                                                                    
     injury   to    another   person."    Both   terroristic                                                                    
     threatening  in the  second degree  and assault  in the                                                                    
     third degree are class C felonies.                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
     Section 23                                                                                                             
     AS 11.61.123(a)  Indecent viewing or photography.                                                                          
     Separates "production"  from "viewing" in the  crime of                                                                    
     viewing or production of an  indecent picture, making a                                                                    
     distinction  between in-person  viewing and  viewing of                                                                    
     an  indecent  picture. Increases  the  age  at which  a                                                                    
     person can  consent to having  these pictures  taken of                                                                    
     themselves from 13 years of age to 16 years of age.                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
     Section 24                                                                                                             
     AS 11.61.123(c)  Indecent viewing or photography.                                                                          
     Conforming  amendment. Changes  the word  "photography"                                                                    
     to "production of pictures."                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
     Section 25                                                                                                             
     AS 11.61.123(d)  Indecent viewing or photography.                                                                          
     Conforming  amendment. Changes  the word  "photography"                                                                    
     to "production of pictures.                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
     Section 26                                                                                                             
     AS 11.61.123(f)  Indecent viewing or photography.                                                                          
     Classification   section.   Makes  production   of   an                                                                    
     indecent  picture of  a person  under the  age of  16 a                                                                    
     class B  felony (which  will be  sentenced as  a sexual                                                                    
     felony  in  Section  38);  makes  viewing  an  indecent                                                                    
     picture  of a  person under  the age  of 16  a class  C                                                                    
     felony; makes  production of an indecent  picture of an                                                                    
     adult  a  class  C  felony; and  makes  viewing  of  an                                                                    
     indecent picture of an adult a class A misdemeanor.                                                                        
                             Child                Adult                                                                       
     Viewing                 Class    C           Class    A                                                                    
     AS                      Felony               Misdemean                                                                     
     11.61.123(a)Registeraor                                                                                                  
     (1)                     ble    Sex                                                                                         
                            Offense                                                                                             
     Production              Class    B           Class    C                                                                    
     AS                      Sexual               Felony                                                                        
     11.61.123(a)Felony                           Registera                                                                     
     (2)                     Registerable                Sex                                                                    
                             ble    Sex           Offense                                                                     
                            Offense                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
     Section 27                                                                                                             
     AS 11.61.123  Indecent viewing or photography.                                                                             
     Adds a new subsection (g)  to AS 11.61.123 to provide a                                                                    
     defense to the crime  of Indecent Viewing or Production                                                                    
     of a Picture.                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
     A defense requires some evidence  to put the defense in                                                                    
     issue,  and then  the prosecution  "has  the burden  of                                                                    
     disproving  the  existence  of  the  defense  beyond  a                                                                    
     reasonable doubt." AS 11.81.900(b)(19).                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
     Section 28                                                                                                             
     AS  11.71.025      Misconduct  involving  a  controlled                                                                    
     substance in the second degree.                                                                                            
     Creates an additional  tier of drug offense  (a class A                                                                    
     felony) for  possession with  intent to  manufacture or                                                                    
     deliver  large  quantities  of schedule  IA  controlled                                                                    
     substances,  which  include  opiates  and  heroin,  and                                                                    
     schedule  IIA  controlled   substances,  which  include                                                                    
     methamphetamines.                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
     The higher  felony level for this  controlled substance                                                                    
     offense is  directed at  dealers and  distributors, and                                                                    
     not  at the  possession level.  In Alaska,  the federal                                                                    
     government  prosecutes the  majority of  large quantity                                                                    
     drug  dealers.  The  penalties  in  federal  court  for                                                                    
     similar quantities  are greater  than the  penalties in                                                                    
     this amendment. This class A  felony offense would give                                                                    
     state  prosecutors  an  option for  prosecuting  large-                                                                    
     quantity  drug  dealers  when federal  prosecutors  may                                                                    
     decline the case.                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
     Section 29                                                                                                             
     AS  11.71.030(a)    Misconduct  involving a  controlled                                                                    
     substance in the second degree.                                                                                            
     Conforming   amendment.  Amends   AS  11.71.030(a)   to                                                                    
     reflect the changes made in Section 28.                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
     Section 30                                                                                                             
     AS  11.71.030(d)    Misconduct  involving a  controlled                                                                    
     substance in the second degree.                                                                                            
     Conforming   amendment.  Amends   AS  11.71.030(d)   to                                                                    
     reflect the changes made in Section 28.                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
     Section 31                                                                                                             
     AS  11.71.040(a)    Misconduct  involving a  controlled                                                                    
     substance in the third degree.                                                                                             
     Conforming   amendment.  Amends   AS  11.71.040(a)   to                                                                    
     reflect the changes made in Section 28.                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
     The bill further amends  subsection (a) by establishing                                                                    
     a basis to prosecute  repeat offenders of possession of                                                                    
     any amount of schedule  IA or IIA controlled substances                                                                    
     (such as  opiates, heroin, and methamphetamine)  at the                                                                    
     class C felony level.  Specifically, a person commits a                                                                    
     felony if they  possess any amount of a  schedule IA or                                                                    
     IIA drug  and they  have been previously  convicted two                                                                    
     or more  times of drug  possession of a schedule  IA or                                                                    
     IIA controlled  substance, either as  a felony or  as a                                                                    
     misdemeanor as described in the statute.                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
     This  amendment also  confirms that  certain possession                                                                    
     felonies  are  not  affected  by  this  new  provision:                                                                    
     felony possession  of heroin/opiates near a  school (AS                                                                    
     11.71.030(a)(3))  and felony  possession  of date  rape                                                                    
     drugs (AS 11.71.040(a)(3)).                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
     Section 32                                                                                                             
     AS  11.71.040(d)    Misconduct  involving a  controlled                                                                    
     substance in the fourth degree.                                                                                            
     Conforming   amendment.  Amends   AS  11.71.040(d)   to                                                                    
     reflect the changes made in Section 28.                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
     Section 33                                                                                                             
     AS  11.71.050      Misconduct  involving  a  controlled                                                                    
     substance in the fifth degree.                                                                                             
     Two conforming  amendments. First,  the bill  amends AS                                                                    
     11.71.050 to  reflect the changes  made in  Section 28.                                                                    
     Second, the  bill amends  AS 11.71.050(a)(4)  by adding                                                                    
     the   new   paragraph   of   Section   31   above   (AS                                                                    
     11.71.040(a)(12)) into  the list of exemptions  of what                                                                    
     constitutes misdemeanor drug possession.                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
     Section 34                                                                                                             
     AS  11.71.060      Misconduct  involving  a  controlled                                                                    
     substance in the sixth degree.                                                                                             
     Conforming  amendment. Amends  AS 11.71.060  to reflect                                                                    
     the changes made in Section 28.                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
     Section 35                                                                                                             
     AS  11.71.311(a)      Restriction  on  prosecution  for                                                                    
     certain persons in connection with a drug overdose.                                                                        
     Two conforming  amendments. First,  the bill  amends AS                                                                    
     11.71.311(a)  to reflect  the changes  made in  Section                                                                    
     28. Second,  the bill amends AS  11.71.311(a) by adding                                                                    
     the  new paragraphs  of Section  28 (AS  11.71.025) and                                                                    
     Section  34  (AS  11.71.040(a)(12)) into  the  list  of                                                                    
     crimes  that  may  not be  prosecuted  if  that  person                                                                    
     sought in good faith  either medical or law enforcement                                                                    
     aide for  another person they  believed to be  having a                                                                    
     drug overdose.                                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
     Section 36                                                                                                             
     AS 12.55.027   Credit for  time spent toward service of                                                                    
     a sentence of imprisonment.                                                                                                
     Adds a new subsection (a) to read:                                                                                         
      "A court may  only grant credit for  time spent toward                                                                    
     service  of  a  sentence  of  imprisonment  under  this                                                                    
     section  if   the  court   finds  that   the  sentence,                                                                    
     including   any   credit   toward   the   sentence   of                                                                    
     imprisonment, meets the requirements of AS 12.55.005."                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
     In  State  v. Justin  Schneider,  it  appears that  the                                                                    
     prosecution and  the court may not  have understood the                                                                    
     legislature intent when it passed HB 15 in 2015.                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
     During the  House Judiciary Hearing  on HB 15  on March                                                                    
     23, 2015,  from approximately  1:46 p.m. to  1:53 p.m.,                                                                    
     Representative Wilson confirmed  that the courts should                                                                    
     not  be  required to  grant  jail  credit for  time  in                                                                    
     treatment  or on  electronic  monitoring credit  simply                                                                    
     because the  defendant had  completed treatment  or had                                                                    
     not   committed   any   crimes  while   on   electronic                                                                    
     monitoring. Rep.  Wilson confirmed that her  intent, as                                                                    
     the  bill  sponsor,  was  that  judges  should  not  be                                                                    
     required  to grant  credit  for electronic  monitoring.                                                                    
     Rep. Claman  then discussed  a proposed  amendment that                                                                    
     would  change the  word "shall"  in AS  12.55.027(d) to                                                                    
     "may." As Rep. Claman  explained, a judge could decline                                                                    
     to  grant  credit  for electronic  monitoring  or  drug                                                                    
     treatment in some cases based  on the specifics of that                                                                    
     case  and grant  jail  credit in  many other  casesall                                                                     
     depending  on the  specific circumstances.  Rep. Claman                                                                    
     then moved an amendment  that changed "shall" to "may."                                                                    
     The amendment  passed without objection, and  the "may"                                                                    
     language is now incorporated in AS 12.55.027(d).                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
     The  reason  to  add  the  new  subsection  (a)  to  AS                                                                    
     12.55.027 is  to make sure that  all parties understand                                                                    
     that   the   sentencing   court   has   discretion   in                                                                    
     determining  whether to  grant  credit  for time  spent                                                                    
     toward  service  of  a sentence.  Specifically,  before                                                                    
     granting any credit, the court  must consider and apply                                                                    
     the sentencing  criteria set forth in  AS 12.55.005 and                                                                    
     announced  by  the Alaska  Supreme  Court  in State  v.                                                                    
     Chaney, 477 P.2d  441 (Alaska 1970) to  the question of                                                                    
     whether to  grant credit for  time spent  on electronic                                                                    
     monitoring or a treatment program.                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
     Section 37                                                                                                             
     AS  12.55.125(d)      Sentences  of   imprisonment  for                                                                    
     felonies.                                                                                                                  
     Amends  AS 12.55.125(d)  by increasing  the presumptive                                                                    
     sentencing   range  for   first-time  class   B  felony                                                                    
     offenders from  0 to  2 years  to 90  days to  2 years.                                                                    
     This section  also adds  enhanced felony  sentences for                                                                    
     making  or   possessing  with  intent   to  manufacture                                                                    
     methamphetamine  in a  home or  lodging where  children                                                                    
     live  or  engaging  children   in  the  manufacture  of                                                                    
     methamphetamine.                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
     Section 38                                                                                                             
     AS  12.55.125(i)      Sentences  of   imprisonment  for                                                                    
     felonies.                                                                                                                  
     Amends  AS  12.55.125(i), which  establishes  sentences                                                                    
     for  sexual felonies,  to  add  conforming language  to                                                                    
     reflect the changes made in Sections 23-26.                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
     Section 39                                                                                                             
     AS  12.55.135(a)      Sentences  of   imprisonment  for                                                                    
     misdemeanors.                                                                                                              
     Amends  AS 12.55.135(a)(2)  by  increasing the  maximum                                                                    
     sentence for  some class A  misdemeanors from 30  to 90                                                                    
     days.                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
     The  amendment  is  intended  to  give  judges  greater                                                                    
     discretion  in  sentencing   individuals  convicted  of                                                                    
     misdemeanor charges.                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
     Section 40                                                                                                             
     AS  12.55.135(b)      Sentences  of   imprisonment  for                                                                    
     misdemeanors.                                                                                                              
     Amends  AS 12.55.135(b)(1)  by  increasing the  maximum                                                                    
     sentence for  some class B  misdemeanors from 10  to 30                                                                    
     days.                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
     The  amendment  is  intended  to  give  judges  greater                                                                    
     discretion  in  sentencing   individuals  convicted  of                                                                    
     misdemeanor charges.                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
     Section 41                                                                                                             
     AS  12.55.135(n)      Sentences  of   imprisonment  for                                                                    
     misdemeanors.                                                                                                              
     Conforming   amendment.  Amends   AS  12.55.135(n)   to                                                                    
     reflect the changes made in Section 28.                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
     Section 42                                                                                                             
     AS 12.55.185(16)  Definitions.                                                                                             
     Conforming  amendment. Amends  AS 12.55.185(16)  to add                                                                    
     viewing or  production of an indecent  picture under AS                                                                    
     11.61.123(f)(1)  or (2)  to the  definition of  "sexual                                                                    
     felony                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
     Section 43                                                                                                             
     AS  12.63.010(d)    Registration of  sex offenders  and                                                                    
     related requirements.                                                                                                      
     Conforming   amendment.  Amends   AS  12.63.010(d)   to                                                                    
     reflect the changes made in Section 45.                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
     Section 44                                                                                                             
     AS  12.63.010     Registration  of  sex  offenders  and                                                                    
     related requirements.                                                                                                      
     Clarifies that a person may  petition the Department of                                                                    
     Public  Safety for  removal from  the  registry if  the                                                                    
     petitioner submits  proof acceptable to  the department                                                                    
     that  the facts  underlying the  conviction in  another                                                                    
     jurisdiction do  not constitute a sex  offense or child                                                                    
     kidnapping in Alaska.                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
     Currently, in at least 13  states, an indecent exposure                                                                    
     conviction  for   public  urination  can   trigger  sex                                                                    
     offender  registration requirements.  Of those  states,                                                                    
     two limit  registration to those who  committed the act                                                                    
     in  view of  a  minor. This  amendment  is intended  to                                                                    
     provide an  option to petition the  department to "opt-                                                                    
     out" of registering  if the conduct would not  be a sex                                                                    
     crime in Alaska.                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
     Section 45                                                                                                             
     AS  12.63.020     Duration of  sex  offender  or  child                                                                    
     kidnapper duty to register.                                                                                                
     Amends AS  12.63.020 to  clarify that  a person  who is                                                                    
     convicted of  an offense  as an  adult and  required to                                                                    
     register  as  a  sex  offender or  child  kidnapper  in                                                                    
     another jurisdiction is also  required to register as a                                                                    
     sex offender in Alaska.                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
     Section 46                                                                                                             
     AS 12.63.100(6)  Definitions.                                                                                              
     Amends  AS   12.63.100(6)  to  add  a   person  who  is                                                                    
     convicted of  an offense  as an  adult and  required to                                                                    
     register  as  a  sex  offender or  child  kidnapper  in                                                                    
     another   jurisdiction  to   the  definition   of  "sex                                                                    
     offender or child kidnapper."                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
     Section 47                                                                                                             
     AS 18.65.087(d)  Central registry of sex offenders.                                                                        
     Amends  AS 18.65.087(d)  to require  the Department  of                                                                    
     Public   Safety   to   review  procedures   and   adopt                                                                    
     regulations  to  allow  individuals  with  sex  offense                                                                    
     convictions in  another state  to petition  for removal                                                                    
     from  the registry  because  the  facts underlying  the                                                                    
     out-of-state  conviction   do  not  constitute   a  sex                                                                    
     offense or child kidnapping in Alaska.                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
     Section 48                                                                                                             
     AS 18.65.087(j)  Central registry of sex offenders.                                                                        
     Conforming  amendment. Amends  AS 18.65.087  to reflect                                                                    
     change made in Section 46.                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
     Section 49                                                                                                             
     AS  28.35.030(o)    Operating a  vehicle, aircraft,  or                                                                    
     watercraft while  under the  influence of  an alcoholic                                                                    
     beverage, inhalant, or controlled substance.                                                                               
     Amends AS  28.35.030(o) to allow the  Division of Motor                                                                    
     Vehicles to restore a driver's  license if a person has                                                                    
     had no  driving-related offenses in the  10-year period                                                                    
     before applying  for the restoration of  their license.                                                                    
     A license  may not  be restored  if the  revocation was                                                                    
     ordered  in  a  case  in  which  the  person  was  also                                                                    
     convicted  of a  crime where  homicide, assault  in the                                                                    
     first and second degree, or  assault of an unborn child                                                                    
     was involved.                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
     Section 50                                                                                                             
     AS 28.35.032(q)   Refusal to submit to chemical test.                                                                      
     Amends AS  28.35.032(q) to allow the  Division of Motor                                                                    
     Vehicles to restore a driver's  license if a person has                                                                    
     had no  driving-related offenses in the  10-year period                                                                    
     before applying  for the restoration of  their license.                                                                    
     A license  may not  be restored  if the  revocation was                                                                    
     ordered  in  a  case  in  which  the  person  was  also                                                                    
     convicted  of a  crime where  homicide, assault  in the                                                                    
     first and second degree, or  assault of an unborn child                                                                    
     was involved.                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
     Section 51                                                                                                             
     AS 33.30.011(a)  Duties of commissioner.                                                                                   
     Amends AS 33.30.011(a) by changing  the minimum term of                                                                    
     imprisonment  in which  the  Department of  Corrections                                                                    
     must conduct  a risk  assessment and prepare  a written                                                                    
     case plan to 90 days.                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
     Further, it  amends AS  33.30.011(a)(9) to  require the                                                                    
     Department of Corrections  to coordinate with community                                                                    
     reentry  coalitions  or   other  providers  of  reentry                                                                    
     services  when developing  a written  reentry plan  for                                                                    
     prisoners.                                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
     Finally,    it   creates    a    new   subsection    AS                                                                    
     33.30.011(a)(12),  that  requires  regular  reports  on                                                                    
     offender management  plan implementation  that includes                                                                    
     the number  of prisoners  provided written  case plans,                                                                    
     the number  of written case plans  initiated within the                                                                    
     preceding year,  and the number  of written  case plans                                                                    
     that were updated in the preceding year.                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
     Section 52                                                                                                             
     AS 34.03.360(7)  Definitions.                                                                                              
     Conforming   amendment.  Amends   AS  34.03.360(7)   to                                                                    
     reflect the changes made in Section 28.                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
     Section 53                                                                                                             
     AS 44.19.647(a)  Annual report and recommendations.                                                                        
     Amends  AS 44.19.647(a)  by adding  a requirement  that                                                                    
     the Alaska Judicial Council  include the data collected                                                                    
     by the Department of Law  as described in Section 58 in                                                                    
     their annual report.                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
     Section 54                                                                                                             
     AS  44.23.020(k)     Duties;   and  powers;  waiver  of                                                                    
     immunity.                                                                                                                  
     Amends  AS 44.23.020  by adding  a  new subsection  (k)                                                                    
     that  requires  the  Department of  Law  to  develop  a                                                                    
     method  to  track  certain information  and  to  report                                                                    
     about sex  offense complaints and disposition  of those                                                                    
     cases.                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
     Section 55                                                                                                             
     AS    44.23.040(b)          Records,    reports,    and                                                                    
     recommendations on uniform laws.                                                                                           
     Amends  AS 44.23.040  by adding  a  new subsection  (b)                                                                    
     that  requires  the Department  of  Law  to gather  and                                                                    
     report data  to the  Alaska Judicial Council  on felony                                                                    
     sex  offenses including  the  number  reported but  not                                                                    
     referred  for  prosecution,  the  number  referred  for                                                                    
     prosecution that  were not  prosecuted, and  the number                                                                    
     prosecuted  that resulted  in a  conviction of  a crime                                                                    
     other than a sex offense.                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
     Section 56                                                                                                             
     AS 44.41.065  Sexual assault examination kits.                                                                             
     Adds a  new section AS  44.41.065 to: (1)  require that                                                                    
     within  30 days  after collection  of a  sexual assault                                                                    
     kit, it is  sent to an accredited lab  or Department of                                                                    
     Public Safety operated  laboratory facility; (2) ensure                                                                    
     that the  sexual assault  kit undergoes  testing within                                                                    
     one year of  the laboratory receiving the  kit; and (3)                                                                    
     within  two  weeks  following  completion  of  testing,                                                                    
     reasonable  effort will  be made  to notify  the victim                                                                    
     that testing  occurred. Failure  to meet  this timeline                                                                    
     will not cause a case to  be dismissed and if a case is                                                                    
     resolved prior to testing, it is no longer required.                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
     Section 57                                                                                                             
     AS  44.41.070(a)    Report on  untested sexual  assault                                                                    
     examination kits.                                                                                                          
     Requires  the Department  of Public  Safety to  include                                                                    
     additional data  about which  kits were  ineligible for                                                                    
     testing and why.                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
     Section 58                                                                                                             
     AS  44.41.070(b)    Report on  untested sexual  assault                                                                    
     examination kits.                                                                                                          
     Conforming   amendment.  Amends   AS  44.41.070(b)   to                                                                    
     reflect change made in Section 57.                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
     Section 59                                                                                                             
     AS  44.41.070      Report on  untested  sexual  assault                                                                    
     examination kits.                                                                                                          
     Adds   a  new   subsection   (e)   that  includes   the                                                                    
     definitions  of  why  a  sexual   assault  kit  may  be                                                                    
     ineligible for testing:  it is scientifically unviable,                                                                    
     is ineligible  for CODIS (Combined DNA  Index System, a                                                                    
     national program  that links  crimes to  DNA) or  is an                                                                    
     anonymous kit.                                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
     Section 60                                                                                                             
     AS 47.12.315(a)    Public disclosure of  information in                                                                    
     department records relating to certain minors.                                                                             
     Conforming   amendment.  Amends   AS  47.12.315(a)   to                                                                    
     reflect the changes made in Section 28.                                                                                    
                                                                                                                              
     Section 61                                                                                                             
     Repealer Section: Removes the inflation adjustments.                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
     Section 62                                                                                                             
     Applicability Provisions: This  Act applies to offenses                                                                    
     committed on or after the effective date.                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
     Section 63                                                                                                             
     Uncodified Law                                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
2:01:26 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE WOOL asked whether public urination is a sex                                                                     
crime in Alaska.                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
MS. KUBITZ  said it  is not,  though it  is a  sex crime  in some                                                               
other states.  She explained that  if HB 145 becomes law, an out-                                                               
of-state  sex offender  who was  convicted of  crimes related  to                                                               
public urination  would have  to register in  Alaska.   She noted                                                               
that HB  145 would  provide an opt-out  should the  Department of                                                               
Public Safety (DPS)  verify that the sex offense   does not apply                                                               
to the laws in Alaska.                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
2:02:45 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN  noted that amendments  to HB 145  are due                                                               
in less than 48 hours.  He asked why.                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR CLAMAN  answered,  Thats  the  schedule were  on so  we can                                                               
move crime bills.                                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
2:03:09 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  KOPP referenced  section 28,  which would  create                                                               
the crime of  misconduct involving a controlled  substance in the                                                               
second  degree.   He  said  he  likes  the idea  of  establishing                                                               
prosecutable  levels  for  trafficking   and  noted  that  it  is                                                               
something law  enforcement has  requested.   He asked  a question                                                               
about  state and  federal prosecutors  and whether  HB 145  would                                                               
change how they operate with each other.                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR CLAMAN  noted that representatives  from the  Department of                                                               
Law (DOL),  who were not  able to  attend this meeting,  would be                                                               
able  to provide  a more  detailed  answer.   He said  it is  his                                                               
understanding  that the  federal  government  tends to  prosecute                                                               
large possession  offenses, though DOL  would like the  option to                                                               
do  it themselves  should  the federal  government  elect not  to                                                               
prosecute.                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE KOPP said  he is glad that  misconduct involving a                                                               
controlled  substance in  the second  degree would  be a  class A                                                               
felony.  He  said he is also pleased that  repeat drug possession                                                               
offenders would be guilty of a felony.                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  CLAMAN noted  that it  was Representative  Kopp's idea  to                                                               
make it so.                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE KOPP  said it  would introduce  a higher  level of                                                               
accountability  and deal  with the  gray area  of possession  and                                                               
trafficking.  He  remarked that prosecutors would have  a tool to                                                               
address the behavior associated with repeat possession offenses.                                                                
                                                                                                                                
2:05:42 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN asked if  indecent exposure is currently a                                                               
sex crime [in Alaska].                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
MS. KUBITZ said she would have  to research the answer.  She said                                                               
she believes  there are criminal penalties  for indecent exposure                                                               
but noted that she is unsure where it falls.                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE KOPP  said indecent exposure in  the first degree,                                                               
which is  covered in AS  11.41.458, is when the  offender exposes                                                               
his/her genitals in the presence  of another person with reckless                                                               
disregard that  the act is  offensive, insulting,  or frightening                                                               
to  the  victim.    He  noted   that  the  crime  is  a  class  B                                                               
misdemeanor.    He  added  that   the  conduct  becomes  indecent                                                               
exposure in the  second degree when the victim is  under 16 years                                                               
of age.  He noted that  indecent exposure in the second degree is                                                               
a  class  A misdemeanor.    He  stated  that, as  a  misdemeanor,                                                               
indecent exposure is not a registerable offense.                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  EASTMAN asked  which  sections of  the bill  deal                                                               
with the Criminal Justice Commission.                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
MS.  KUBITZ asked  if he  was  referring to  the Alaska  Criminal                                                               
Justice Commission or the Alaska Judicial Council (AJC).                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  EASTMAN  clarified  that   he  meant  the  Alaska                                                               
Criminal Justice Commission.                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MS. KUBITZ said she is only  aware of sections that relate to the                                                               
AJC.   She noted that  the Alaska Criminal Justice  Commission is                                                               
under AJC.   She said she would have to  review those sections to                                                               
determine  whether  the  Alaska Criminal  Justice  Commission  is                                                               
specifically mentioned.                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
2:08:21 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE WOOL  noted that HB  145 would impose  a mandatory                                                               
minimum  sentence  of  30  days for  first-time  class  B  felony                                                               
offenses.  He asked for examples of class B felonies.                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR CLAMAN clarified that the  presumptive sentence for class B                                                               
felonies would be 90 days.                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE WOOL acknowledged the  clarification.  He said the                                                               
bill  would change  the presumptive  sentence range  from 0  to 2                                                               
years to 90 days to 2 years.                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR CLAMAN  said theft in the  first degree and assault  in the                                                               
second  degree are  class B  felonies.   He added  that some  sex                                                               
offenses  are also  of that  category but  are sentenced  under a                                                               
different framework.                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE KOPP  mentioned that  sexual abuse  of a  minor in                                                               
the  second degree  is  a  class B  felony.    He clarified  that                                                               
assault in  the second  degree relates to  situations in  which a                                                               
serious physical injury is caused or is attempted.                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  CLAMAN  noted  that  HB   145  would  make  the  crime  of                                                               
misconduct involving  a controlled substance in  the third degree                                                               
a  class B  felony.   He said  misconduct involving  a controlled                                                               
substance in  the second  degree is currently  a class  B felony,                                                               
but HB 145 would change it to a class A felony.                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
2:10:44 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE WOOL addressed  section 31.  He noted  that HB 145                                                               
would make three  instances of  simple possession  a  felony.  He                                                               
asked whether  a violation committed  by someone at age  20 would                                                               
be held  against him/her should  he/she violate again at  the age                                                               
of 45.                                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE KOPP  stated,  Those are  just policy calls.    He                                                               
said Representative Wools  point is  valid and that the committee                                                               
could discuss what the time bars should look like.                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR CLAMAN mentioned  that, presently, HB 145  contains no time                                                               
bars.                                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE WOOL  noted that  the crime  of driving  under the                                                               
influence (DUI) has a time bar.                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE KOPP confirmed that.                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
2:12:23 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  WOOL  addressed  section  26  and  the  [indecent                                                               
viewing] of  a picture of an  adult, which the bill  would make a                                                               
class A misdemeanor.  He asked for an explanation.                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE KOPP said  indecent viewing   is defined.  He said                                                               
he would look it up.                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE WOOL asked  about the same offense  but as relates                                                               
to  children.   He noted  that  HB 145  would change  the age  of                                                               
consent from 13 years of age to  16 years of age.  He asked about                                                               
innocuous  situations  in  which  parents take  photos  of  their                                                               
children when the children are not fully clothed.                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  KOPP   said  there  is  a   defense  for   normal                                                               
caretaking or  parenting activities.    He said  those activities                                                               
are exempted.                                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR CLAMAN pointed  to section 27.  He said  the exact language                                                               
is   the   acts  occurred  as   part  of  the   normal  caretaker                                                               
responsibilities  for  a child,  interactions  with  a child,  or                                                               
affection for a  child.   He referenced  a discussed hypothetical                                                               
situation involving  three 15-year-old  high schoolers  who, with                                                               
parental  permission,  go  skinny  dipping in  a  lake  and  take                                                               
pictures  of each  other.   He  said  as long  as  the kids  have                                                               
permission,  then  that is   generally  okay.    But,  he  noted,                                                               
somebody at  edge of the  lake hiding behind  a tree with  a long                                                               
telephoto  lens  would not  have  that  permission and  would  be                                                               
treated differently.                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
2:14:53 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  KOPP,  in  response  to an  earlier  question  by                                                               
Representative Eastman,  noted that an  offense must be  a felony                                                               
for  it  to be  a  registerable  sex  crime.   He  remarked  that                                                               
indecent  exposure,  when combined  with  a  sexual act  such  as                                                               
masturbation, could qualify as a  felony.  He clarified that this                                                               
would be treated differently from simple indecent exposure.                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
2:15:34 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN addressed section 31.   He asked as to the                                                               
rationale  for  specifically ensuring  date  rape  drugs are  not                                                               
affected by changes to the law.                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE KOPP said possession of  date rape drugs is always                                                               
a felony  under any circumstance,  which explains why there  is a                                                               
carve-out for them in the bill.                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
2:16:25 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX addressed  the previously-mentioned example                                                               
of  teenage skinny  dippers.    She asked  what  would happen  if                                                               
pictures of the event were posted on Facebook.                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  CLAMAN said  that raises  complicated  issues relating  to                                                               
modern society and the question of permission.                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX  said that is  the question she  is asking.                                                               
She noted  that, at some  point, the  court might look  into that                                                               
question  and will  look back  on  the bill  and the  committees                                                                
discussion.                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  CLAMAN  said  it  is  a good  question.    He  noted  that                                                               
 internet  viewing of  an indecent  picture  is  already a  crime                                                               
under current statute.   He observed that  the same prosecutorial                                                               
challenges faced  today would  be faced in  the future  should HB                                                               
145 become law.                                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX said,   Lets  say its  illegal  ... to post                                                               
something on  the internet.   What about  all the people  who see                                                               
it?    She  asked if  SOA  would prosecute  every individual  who                                                               
views the picture via the Facebook news feed.                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  KOPP   noted  that   the  key  element   for  the                                                               
prosecution   is  the   wording   knowingly   view.      He  said                                                               
 knowingly  means  the viewer must   have some type  of knowledge                                                               
that the image was done without  the consent of the person who is                                                               
being depicted and probably was  never authorized to begin with.                                                                
He  said the  example  of  a mutual  friend  viewing  a photo  on                                                               
Facebook would be  difficult to prosecute unless it  can be shown                                                               
that  the  viewer  had  specific knowledge  that  the  image  was                                                               
wrongfully posted and  without consent.  He  explained that there                                                               
is a  sum total  of circumstances  necessary for an  act to  be a                                                               
violation.                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
2:20:10 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE WOOL  noted that  a viewer cannot  discern whether                                                               
consent for  a picture was given  simply through viewing it.   He                                                               
said it is  easy to view things of unknown  origin through social                                                               
media,  texts, and  Snapchat.    He spoke  to  the difficulty  of                                                               
proving intent in such a situation.                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  CLAMAN commented  that the  topic contains  a lot  of gray                                                               
areas.  He  noted that the language which would  raise the age of                                                               
consent from 13 to 16 was  lifted from a bill offered by Governor                                                               
Michael J. Dunleavy.  Under the  current law, he explained, a 14-                                                               
year-old could consent  to a person taking a  picture of him/her.                                                               
He  said the  proposed  change  would require  a  parent to  give                                                               
permission to post a picture.                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  LEDOUX  asked if  that  means  there could  be  a                                                               
situation in which a 14-  or 15-year-old and his/her parent could                                                               
consent to posting a nude photo on Facebook.                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR CLAMAN clarified  that the consent relates  to the creation                                                               
of the picture,  not the posting of the picture.   He returned to                                                               
the  skinny-dipping example  and  explained  that, under  current                                                               
law, the three 15-year-olds could  all consent mutually without a                                                               
parents   input to  take pictures  of each  other.   The proposed                                                               
change,  he  said,  would  require  parental  consent  for  those                                                               
pictures to be taken.                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
2:22:49 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE WOOL  questioned how HB 145  would affect sexting.                                                               
He  wondered  whether  a  15-year-old  who  sexts  a  picture  of                                                               
themselves  to somebody  else would  be committing  a crime.   He                                                               
added  that  the  receiver  would also  be  committing  a  crime,                                                               
regardless of  whether he/she  wanted to view  the photo  or not,                                                               
because the  person depicted is  under the age  of 16.   He noted                                                               
that under  current law, this  would all be  legal.  He  noted as                                                               
well that sexting is a common practice.                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
2:23:51 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN  asked for  a definition  of "production,                                                                
as the  term appears  often in the  bill.  He  asked if  it would                                                               
include a  case in which someone  attaches an image to  an e-mail                                                               
or posts an image to a website.                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR CLAMAN  said the language  from this  part of HB  145 comes                                                               
from  the governor's  bill.   He  said he  believes  the term  is                                                               
intended to  cover a broader  range of production,  including the                                                               
production of an image  on a computer.  He deferred  to DOL for a                                                               
more thorough answer to the question.                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
2:24:58 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX said  she is not sure she wants  to make it                                                               
a felony for  a child to transmit a photo  of themselves via text                                                               
message.  She said it is  weird   that it would not be a crime if                                                               
the parents consented  to it.  She commented that  a parent would                                                               
have to be pretty weird to give consent.                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR CLAMAN  said that is  why the question  of 13 years  of age                                                               
versus 16  years of  age is  a significant  policy question.   He                                                               
said  the notion  that parents  have complete  control over  what                                                               
their teenagers do is far from reality.                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  LEDOUX   commented  that  if  a   child  requests                                                               
permission   from   a  parent   to   take   a  naked   photo   of                                                               
himself/herself  and transmit  it via  Instagram, and  the parent                                                               
consents, then there is something wrong there.                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE KOPP remarked that it  is hard to legislate common                                                               
sense.  He  noted that the examples  provided involving teenagers                                                               
would all qualify as juvenile  offenses which would be handled by                                                               
a juvenile  court.  He  said the aim  of juvenile court  is early                                                               
intervention.   He acknowledged that the  conduct described would                                                               
be violative by  the literal definition of the law.   He remarked                                                               
that  a  statute addressing  the  topic  of 14-year-olds  sexting                                                               
could be useful to a  teacher or school administrator who becomes                                                               
aware of  the conduct.   He said  these examples  demonstrate how                                                               
technology  makes  more  sharing  possible.    On  the  topic  of                                                               
Representative  Eastmans   question  about production,  he  noted                                                               
that the  posting of an  image on  the internet would  fall under                                                               
 distribution  of  child  porn,   as  it  would  make  the  image                                                               
accessible  to   millions  as  opposed  to   part  of  one-on-one                                                               
correspondence.  He said distribution is a felony.                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE WOOL  referenced an  incident in another  state in                                                               
which sexted images  were spread across a  high school, resulting                                                               
in hundreds of students being charged.                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
2:28:42 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MS. KUBITZ,  in response  to an  earlier query  by Representative                                                               
Eastman,  noted that  section  53  refers to  the  duties of  the                                                               
Alaska Criminal Justice  Commission.  She said  the section would                                                               
require  that  the commission  include  DOL  data in  its  annual                                                               
report to the legislature.                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE   EASTMAN   said   that  seems    a   little   bit                                                               
duplicative.   He  asked for verification that  the section would                                                               
require DOL  to generate  a report  but not send  it so  that the                                                               
commission can send it instead.                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
MS. KUBITZ  said that is  her understanding.  She  said questions                                                               
related to  section 53  would be better  answered by  DOL because                                                               
the language  was pulled from  a different crime  bill introduced                                                               
by the governor.                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  CLAMAN added  that  these  sections   came from  proposals                                                               
that were  introduced by Senator  Shelley Hughes.  He  noted that                                                               
DOL is not currently required to  provide an annual report to the                                                               
legislature,  but  the  Alaska  Criminal  Justice  Commission  is                                                               
required to submit a report.   He suggested the language reflects                                                               
the  reality  that  it  is  simpler to  ask  DOL  to  submit  its                                                               
information   through   the   commissions    alreadyin-existence                                                                
reporting structure.                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN  said he noticed that  various sections of                                                               
HB 145  come from bills submitted  by the governor.   He asked if                                                               
the governor was consulted during the development of HB 145.                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR CLAMAN said  DOL was consulted about  different features of                                                               
the bill  and that DOLs   input is  reflected in portions  of the                                                               
bill.                                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
2:31:38 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR CLAMAN,  after ascertaining  that there were  no additional                                                               
questions,  announced  that HB  145  would  be held  for  further                                                               
review.                                                                                                                         

Document Name Date/Time Subjects
HB145 ver U 4.24.19.PDF HJUD 4/24/2019 1:00:00 PM
HJUD 4/25/2019 5:15:00 PM
HJUD 4/26/2019 1:00:00 PM
HB 145
HB145 Sponsor Statement ver U 4.24.19.pdf HJUD 4/24/2019 1:00:00 PM
HJUD 4/25/2019 5:15:00 PM
HJUD 4/26/2019 1:00:00 PM
HB 145
HB145 Sectional Analysis ver U 4.24.19.pdf HJUD 4/24/2019 1:00:00 PM
HJUD 4/25/2019 5:15:00 PM
HJUD 4/26/2019 1:00:00 PM
HB 145