Legislature(1995 - 1996)
02/14/1996 09:10 AM Senate FIN
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HOUSE BILL NO. 38
"An Act relating to criminal sentencing; relating to
the availability for good time credit for offenders
convicted of certain first degree murders; relating to
mandatory life imprisonment, parole, good time credit,
pardon, commutation of sentence, modification or
reduction of sentence, reprieve, furlough, and service of
sentence at a correctional restitution center for
offenders with at least three s e r i o u s f e l o n y
convictions; and amending Alaska Rule of
CriminalProcedure 35."
Representative Con Bunde was invited to join the committee.
Co-chairman Halford advised that amendment #1 was previously
adopted and that amendments #2, 3 and 4 would be reviewed.
Senator Zharoff called attention to a letter from the
Department of Law correcting their position on the bill
that they neither support nor oppose HB 38. Senator
Phillips appreciated letter from Anne Carpeneti.
Senator Donley referred to amendment #4 and the existing law
requiring mandatory ninety-nine year sentences for very
serious classes of homicide. This amendment would extend
the prohibition on good time to those crimes currently
subject to the mandatory ninety-nine year term of
imprisonment. An ascending level of punishment must be kept
for more serious crimes and homicide ought to have the most
serious level of punishment in the statutes.
Senator Rieger commented on release under furlough and what
types exist. Senator Donley stated there is furlough for
personal family matters, the early furlough program, death
in the family; furlough also refers to when the prisons are
overcrowded and they decide to let someone loose early.
This is a special classification not relevant to parole,
probation, mandatory or discretionary parole. This is a
creative way to free up room in the prisons.
Representative Bunde advised furlough only applies to
medical, family visitation or funeral and furloughed person
would be accompanied by a corrections officer. In cases of
murder there is no furlough. Discussed "good time".
Senator Rieger referenced the medical furlough and when the
measure was pushed through so federal funds could be picked
up for medical care and doesn't want to catch something here
that will cost the State a lot of money.
Senator Donley stated that his amendment #4 just conforms
this to the prohibition on any type of furlough for the
third strike bill. Someone who falls in this category is
banned from any type of furlough.
Representative Bunde commented that there is furlough
allowed but they must be accompanied by a corrections
office.
Senator Frank asked for further clarification on this
amendment. Senator Donley stated that any third time
offender who falls under this bill would not be eligible for
furloughs or good time. This would include anyone under the
ninety-nine year mandatory homicide statute also. Senator
Sharp also commented on the amendment regarding good time.
Co-chairman Halford concurred and stated there would be no
fiscal impact on this amendment. He also voiced his concern
that no administration would try to furlough people
convicted of the worst aggravated murder.
Representative Bunde also concurred and felt amendment #4
did not fall out of the scope of the bill.
Co-chairman and Senator Phillips discussed Senator Rieger's
comments on medical furlough and the costs. Co-chairman
Frank also voiced concern over release of a long term
prisoner with terminal illness and then they could pay for
their own medical.
Co-chairman Halford advised that WITHOUT OBJECTION amendment
CS.
Senator Donley introduced amendment #3 and his concern over
"good time" for multiple offenders. A reoffender can be put
back in for the term of their probation or any discretionary
parole period but they don't lose their good time. This
bill will take away good time between the second and third
offense.
Representative Bunde commented that "good time" only applies
after you are the third time loser. A second time felony
offender could still get out on good time. Senator Donley
advised that the amendment #3 provided that a second time
felony offender would lose good time earned for first
offense. Senator Phillips agreed.
Senator Frank asked if second offense would generally be a
presumptive sentence and Senator Donley advised that a
second felony offense would be. The judge would have no
discretion in the sentence other than with aggravators. He
would have flexibility in dealing with how much of the
former mandatory and discretionary parole that could be
reinstated. An offender under this amendment would have to
go back and serve any good time earned in addition to the
sentence. Senators Donley and Phillips discussed a
hypothetical armed robbery and how under this amendment the
"good time" earned for the second stretch would be lost and
the offender would have to go back and serve any good time
earned on the first offense. A judge would be prevented
from running this concurrent with the sentence imposed.
Representative Bunde voiced concern in protection of the
public and what can be afforded. This amendment would have
significant fiscal impact. The idea is laudable but would
prefer that it be drawn as a separate bill. He agreed with
Senator Phillips that the concept of his bill is to lock up
the offender but doesn't feel that locking up a second time
felony offender for an additional three years, earned "good
time", would serve as a detriment. Would rather achieve a
bill for the worst predators that is still affordable.
Senator Donley called to the attention of his colleagues
that we are faced with a federal mandate that states are
complying with for truth in sentencing, which requires that
an 85% standard be adopted. States not adopting this
standard will lose federal funds. Our liberal "good time"
provision would not comply with this standard.
Representative Bunde agreed that this was a good amendment
and would support a new bill.
Senator Phillips commented on the fiscal impact and would
this kill the bill. Representative Bunde advised that he
made a number of compromises that he would not have made if
not concerned about the fiscal impact. Co-chairman Halford
will defer to the sponsor.
Senator Zharoff voiced concern in keeping the criminals off
the street and that by imposing service of "good time" on
second felony offense this would keep the offender off the
street long enough so they would not commit the same crime
again. Representative Bunde concurs with the premise.
Department of Corrections is constitutionally required to
rehabilitate people and "good time" is used as a reward for
rehabilitation. "Good time" keeps convicts reasonably
happy and something to work towards. The fiscal drag of
including this amendment will keep the three strikes bill
from passing. However, Senator Zharoff felt that keeping an
offender in for a longer period of time would mean that upon
release they would be in an older age group and therefore a
lessor potential of committing a third offense.
Representative Bunde agreed but would rather see the good
pass now than wait for the perfect which may not be
possible.
Upon a vote taken amendment #3 FAILED ADOPTION.
Senator Donley introduced amendment #2. The maximum monetary
penalty for murder is $500,000. Under Alaska State law the
maximum is only $75,000. Under the amendment class A felony
should be $250,000 and $500,000 for homicide. We are
severely under the Federal standards and courts should
have the discretion to issue these kinds of fines if
appropriate in these serious cases. Representative Bunde
agreed with the goal but not the vehicle. It goes outside
the scope of the basic three strikes bill. The gain is not
worth the challenge to the bill. Would support a second
bill on this matter.
Senator Halford inquired as to if a fine proposal was ever
received from the Court System. Senator Rieger stated he
would be happy to work with Senator Donley on a day fines
bill that he has in subcommittee to see if some penalties
can be drafted that make some sense.
Senator Donley WITHDRAWS amendment #2 pending consultation
with the prosecutors. The bill is discretionary and only
gives judges more options.
Senator Sharp MOVES SCSCSHB 38 (FIN) as amended with
accompanying fiscal notes with individual recommendations.
Senator Donley commented on discrepancy between public
defender and prosecutor fiscal notes. He had no objection
to moving the bill and Co-chairman Halford agreed. Senator
Donley felt it would be important to talk to the criminal
justice folks; specifically in Bethel there is a full time
public defender but the prosecutor just flies in
occasionally. A serious need for additional prosecutors was
indicated. This also included Kotzebue. Appropriate fiscal
notes would help deal with this imbalance between the
prosecutors and the defense. Co-chairman Halford stated he
was willing to changing the recommendation on the fiscal
notes. Senator Frank commented on how this money could be
allocated between OPA and the Public Defender. Some
discussion was held regarding possible allocations. Senator
Rieger inquired would there be a slow down on the
calendaring of trials because of the budget. Senator Donley
again referred to the collateral attacks as discussed at the
last hearing. Senator Frank commented on the possibility of
limiting the use of funds to look at prior convictions.
Senator Donley said that he was still looking into this
matter.
Co-chairman Halford stated that there was a proposal to
amend the fiscal notes splitting an equal amount between the
public defenders and the public advocates. NO OBJECTION
being heard SCSCSHB 38 (FIN) with individual recommendations
and modifications to the fiscal notes was MOVED out of
committee.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|