Legislature(1999 - 2000)
04/30/2000 10:39 AM Senate FIN
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
COMMITTEE SUBSTITUTE FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 368(JUD) am "An Act relating to release of persons before trial and before sentencing or service of sentence; relating to when service of sentence shall begin; relating to custodians of persons released, to security posted on behalf of persons released, and to the offense of violation of conditions of release; and amending Rule 41(f), Alaska Rules of Criminal Procedure." This was the first hearing for this bill in the Senate Finance Committee. ANNE CARPENITTI, Assistant Attorney General, Legal Services Section, Criminal Division, Department of Law testified that the bill was introduced to give the trial courts in the state more tools to release a person after that person has been charged with a crime, pending sentencing or pending appeal. These tools, she stated, are the ability to enforce whatever conditions of release the court might impose on the defendant. In granting this authority, she explained, the legislation adopts a new crime for violating conditions of release. She said these offences are already crimes in the Municipality of Anchorage and the City and Borough of Juneau and the prosecutors have told her that it is an effective tool for encouraging defendants to abide by the conditions of release. Ms. Carpenitti described the elements of the newly defined crime telling that a person who violates the release conditions imposed could be charged with a Class A misdemeanor if the underlying charge is a felony. She noted that a Class B misdemeanor could be charged if the underlying charge is a misdemeanor offense. Ms. Carpenitti emphasized that this legislation is a way to encourage the people who abide by the conditions of a release. She said this is because current statutes allow that a person re-imprisoned, due to violations of a release, receives credit as time served against the original charge. She said there are currently no additional consequences for violating the conditions of release. Ms. Carpenitti continued that the bill allows a court to impose a performance bond on a person who is released. She defined a performance bond as the defendant's money that must be posted and would be lost to that person if a violation of release is committed. She shared that some judges are reluctant to release a defendant on a $5000 appearance bond, but would be more willing to release a person on a $250 performance bond. This, she said is because bail bondsmen will not write performance bonds and therefore, the financial incentive is placed on the defendant. Ms. Carpenitti shared that a decision issued in January 2000 by the Court of Appeals determined that trial courts do not have sufficient authority to issue performance bonds. This bill provides that statutory authority, she attested. Ms. Carpenitti pointed out this bill clarifies that a third party custodian for a person released is subject to prosecution for contempt of court if the custodian fails to report violations. She stressed that the court is responsible for informing the custodian both verbally and in writing, the consequences for not reporting violations immediately. Ms. Carpenitti concluded that the bill also gives statutory authority for judges to impose delayed sentences. She explained that under current law, judges often sentence a defendant to a term in prison but delay the starting date of that term due to employment obligations or prison overcrowding. Senator Leman asked what types of felony crimes the conditional release would apply to and if it would include violent crimes against others. Ms. Carpenitti replied that the US Constitution gives people the right to be released before trial because they have not been found guilty. Therefore, she said there are many felony offenses that a defendant could be charged with and yet still be released. She noted that performance bonds usually are imposed for less serious offenses. She said this method is often used in smaller communities but that the bonds could be required as part of a release package for people charged with committing violent crimes. Senator Phillips asked if any opposition has been voiced on the bill. Ms. Carpenitti answered that testimony given in prior committees by the defense bar in Anchorage relayed concerns. Co-Chair Parnell wanted to know what were the concerns. Ms. Carpenitti replied that the Senate Judiciary Committee removed a provision requiring mandatory forfeiture of a performance bond if the defendant contacted the victim in violation of an order of release. She said the concerns were with the forfeiture proceedings related to this provision. She added that there was some opposition to the performance bonds generally. Senator Donley spoke to the Senate Judiciary Committee hearings on the bill and how some of the public defender's concerns were addressed. He stated that the committee amended the bill to require that the performance bonds be part of the appearance bonds, which took care of the conflict. Co-Chair Torgerson stated that he had attended the same committee meeting and had come to the same conclusion that most concerns were addressed although not all parties were completely satisfied. Co-Chair Parnell offered a motion to report from Committee CS HB 368 (JUD) am, 1-GH2027\I. There being no objection, the bill MOVED from Committee.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|