Legislature(1995 - 1996)
03/22/1995 09:20 AM Senate FIN
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
SENATE BILL NO. 46
An Act revising the provision of law under which a
minor may be charged, prosecuted, and sentenced as an
adult in the district court, and adding to the list of
offenses for which a minor may be prosecuted as an
adult in the district court.
Co-chairman Halford directed that SB 46 be brought on for
discussion. SENATOR TAYLOR, sponsor, came before committee
and referenced a draft committee substitute. Senator
Phillips MOVED for adoption of draft CSSB 46 (9-LS0155\K,
Chenoweth, 3/22/95) for discussion purposes. No objection
having been raised, CSSB 46 was ADOPTED. The sponsor
explained that the proposed bill was introduced at the
urging of parents concerned by the lack of consequences
within the juvenile justice system when a minor is arrested
for an alcohol-related offense. In many instances, the
minor is not arrested.
The new draft incorporates many changes adopted by Senate
Judiciary as well as provisions allowing a law enforcement
officer to arrest a minor on minor consuming charges without
a warrant. The latter is necessary because of a court
ruling that says an officer must witness the actual
consumption to make such an arrest.
Sec. 1 makes "minor consuming" an infraction rather than a
misdemeanor of felony. Upon conviction in district court,
it imposes a fine of not less than $100 and a maximum of
$300.
Sec. 2 includes a technical change that adds minor consuming
alcohol to the list of offenses that constitute violations
under Title 4.
Sec. 3 adds minor consuming alcohol to the list of offenses
for which an officer can arrest without a warrant. The only
change to existing law appears on line 27.
Sec. 4 moves the jurisdiction for minor consuming and
tobacco violations to the district court.
Sec. 5 adds liquor-related offenses committed by minors to
the list of offenses for which minors are already treated as
adults in district court. This section requires that a
parent or guardian appear at all proceedings. The only
change here is addition of alcohol-related offenses. The
drafter took the opportunity to rearrange this section and
make it more clear in statutes.
The intent behind moving alcohol-related offenses to
district court is to remove these cases from the over-
burdened juvenile justice system. Provisions will allow a
district court judge to intervene in cases where alcohol
abuse is a serious problem and not just a youthful
experiment.
Under the current system, minors often must commit a serious
crime in conjunction with drinking before they are diverted
to treatment and counseling. Changing minor consuming from
a misdemeanor to an infraction removes the onus of a
criminal record and provides an opportunity for early
intervention.
Fiscal impact on the court system should be offset by
reductions at the division of family and youth services
within the Dept. of Health and Social Services.
In response to a question from Senator Donley, JOE AMBROSE,
aide to Senator Taylor, explained that minor consuming is
the only misdemeanor that becomes an infraction under the
proposed bill. Other elements involving minors and alcohol
remain misdemeanors.
Senator Zharoff inquired concerning the definition of "a
minor." Senator Taylor noted a variety of definitions
depending upon the activity to be undertaken. In this
instance, "a minor" is a person under twenty-one in terms of
alcohol consumption, and nineteen for tobacco.
In response to a question from Senator Zharoff, Senator
Taylor advised that a class A misdemeanor involves up to one
year in jail and up to a $5,000 fine.
Senator Zharoff asked how the pending legislation would
impact the previously passed CSHB 21 (Fin). Joe Ambrose
explained that the minor consuming offense addressed in the
House bill would move from its current status as a
misdemeanor to an infraction. It would not show up on a
criminal record. It would continue to allow for early
intervention in cases where that is warranted.
In response to a question from Co-chairman Frank, Senator
Taylor reiterated the purpose of the proposed bill. He
explained that in order to pick up intoxicated minors, hold
them until their parents come and get them, and subsequently
compel parents and the juvenile to appear before a district
court judge, it was necessary to change the classification
of offenses for which the minor would be considered an
adult. As sponsor of the legislation, Senator Taylor said
he did not want to impact either the juvenile or the system
with a high fine or high criminal offense. He explained
that, instead of a misdemeanor, he elected to "go with a
violation so that there would be a monetary penalty that
would be exacted by the court." The intent is to
immediately address the problem and involve the parents. At
the present time, nothing happens to these young people or
they merely "get written up." After being written up for
minor consuming several times, the matter is turned over to
a probation officer or the Dept. of Health and Social
Services. Most often, until the juvenile does "something
major," he or she is not brought to court.
Co-chairman Frank referenced past "drunk in public" laws and
asked why they ceased to be applied. Senator Taylor
explained that society determined that alcohol is not always
a matter of choice but is, in some instances, a disease. It
did not seem appropriate to incarcerate individuals because
of an illness.
Discussion of application of laws relating to minors
consuming in various districts of the state followed between
Senator Taylor and Co-chairman Frank. Senator Taylor
explained that the rewrite of drunk in public law under
Title 47 anticipated a network of dry-out centers. Officers
would pick up intoxicated individuals based on the civil
justification that they were a danger to themselves or
others because of their condition. The individual would be
taken to a dry-out center, allowed to sober up, and then go
home. Senator Taylor voiced his belief that there is
adequate jurisdiction for law enforcement officers to do the
same with an intoxicated minor. Questions often arise
regarding whether or not they are truly so intoxicated that
they are a danger to themselves or others.
Other districts handle the problem differently than the
first judicial district because the superior court ruling
that impacted the Ketchikan case was not appealed to the
supreme court. The ruling has thus not been applied
statewide. Rather than await a supreme court ruling, the
proposed bill was introduced.
Senator Sharp noted title references to alcohol and tobacco
and also noted statutory citations relating to fish and game
regulations and park and recreational facilities. Senator
Taylor explained that each area reflects existing law. They
were included within the proposed bill when the whole
section was rewritten by the drafter. In further
discussion, the sponsor advised that questioned areas are
not subject to the minimum fine. It only applies to minor
consuming provisions.
In response to a question from Senator Donley, Mr. Ambrose
advised that under existing statutes for offenses where
juveniles are automatically tried as adults (traffic and
fish and game violations) provisions require an appearance
by a parent, guardian, or legal custodian. The proposed
bill would bring alcohol offenses within that requirement.
Discussion followed between Senator Zharoff and Senator
Taylor regarding parental responsibility for actions of
minors. The sponsor said that the proposed bill seeks to
interfere in the parent and child relationship at an early
stage and provide court system support to the parent.
Referencing fiscal notes accompanying the bill, Co-chairman
Halford asked if warrentless arrest provisions would have
fiscal impact. Mr. Ambrose responded negatively, adding
that similar provisions were passed by the Senate, last
year, with zero notes.
In the discussion of fiscal notes, Co-chairman Frank
inquired concerning the threshold whereafter an individual
is entitled to the services of the public defender. Senator
Taylor responded, "When it's a misdemeanor." The agency
does not have jurisdiction to handle cases covered by the
proposed bill.
Senator Phillips MOVED for passage of CSSB 46 (Fin). No
objection having been raised, CSSB 46 (Fin) was REPORTED OUT
of committee with a $66.9 fiscal note from the Court System
and zero notes from the Dept. of Law and Dept. of
Administration (Public Defender Agency).
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at approximately 10:40 a.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|