Legislature(1997 - 1998)
02/21/1997 09:03 AM Senate HES
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
SB 3 MINOR'S CURFEW VIOL. HEARD IN DIST. CT.
CHAIRMAN WILKEN called the Senate Health, Education and Social
Services (HESS) Committee to order at 9:03 a.m. and announced SB 3
to be up for consideration.
SENATOR PEARCE, sponsor of SB 3, said her office became aware this
fall of a problem in Juneau when plans for a youth curfew were set
aside because the Borough had no avenue to prosecute offenders.
This bill seeks to relieve municipalities from the burden of
prosecution and hopefully allow for more effective and expeditious
handling of these offenses. She said there is an interest in
Anchorage in having the same sort of relief.
SENATOR PEARCE said currently, juvenile offenses other than
traffic, tobacco, fish and game, parks and recreational facilities,
or alcohol violations, are handled through municipal courts where
they exist, or are not handled at all because of the Division of
Family and Youth Services caseload.
SB 3 would put a uniform approach in place to handle curfew
violations. It will enable those communities who so wish to put a
curfew ordinance into effect, with the ability to prosecute. It
will mandate that all juvenile curfew violations be handled in
District Court. Alaska Delinquency Rules will not apply and the
minor accused of the offense will be charged, prosecuted, and
sentenced in the district court in the same manner as an adult.
When a minor is charged, prosecuted, and sentenced for an offense
under this subsection, the minor's parent, guardian, or legal
custodian will be present at all proceedings.
She said there are letters of support from the City and Borough of
Juneau Mayor Dennis Eagan, the Mayor's Task Force on Youth in
Juneau, and the Alaska Peace Officers Association. The
Municipality of Anchorage is very interested and have some
suggestions along these lines.
She noted the Troopers have a $0 fiscal note, the Court System has
a $24,000 fiscal note, and the other fiscal notes are all $0.
Anchorage Assemblyman Joe Murdy said he believes they should
authorize community work as one of the penalties for violating the
curfew. He thought the child might learn from that community
service and also because there are some families who will not pay
the fine.
Number 102
SENATOR WARD asked if the courts cannot already give community
service. SENATOR PEARCE thought Juneau found it could not even
prosecute the cases, but SB 3 would allow them to do so.
SENATOR GREEN asked how many cities presently have their own court.
Mat-Su does not have a local court and so this would not apply to
them. SENATOR PEARCE believed that was correct.
SENATOR LEMAN liked the concept, but noted that it requires action
to a minor the same as for an adult. He said the Governor vetoed
his car theft bill that was similar because it would be too tough
on juveniles. Is there any assurance that the Governor would find
a curfew violation so significant that he would want to prosecute
juveniles in an adult court?
SENATOR PEARCE said she had not sought such an assurance. She
thought the Legislature should go forward with the idea, however.
Number 168
CHRIS CHRISTENSEN , Staff Counsel, Alaska Court System, said the
idea of curfew violations for juveniles is a popular one.
Anchorage adopted a municipal ordinance making curfew violations a
civil offense rather than a criminal one a little over a year ago.
During the first 12 months of Anchorage's system about 1,500 curfew
citations to juveniles were issued and a total of 2,000 over the
first full year in operation is expected. Since this is a civil
system Anchorage uses a municipal hearing officer to hear the
cases. The juveniles have the right to appeal the decision, but
thus far there has been only one appeal. Currently the Anchorage
system is not having any impact at all on the court system.
Mr. Christensen anticipated that the major municipalities will
enact curfew ordinances as a way of dealing with an increase in
juvenile crime and gang activity. SB 3 would allow municipalities
to adopt criminal ordinances for which the penalty can be jail
time, mandatory community service, or loss of a valuable license.
Such ordinances would require the state to provide a jury trial.
In addition, SB 3 would allow municipalities to require mandatory
court appearances by juveniles. All citations which are contested
will come before the court system, unless the municipality decides
to pay for its own municipal hearing officer.
Based upon statistics generated during the first year of
Anchorage's civil curfew system, the Court System fiscal note
assumes 3,000 citations per year would be generated statewide.
Noncontested citations may be applied directly to the
municipalities; however, defendants may contest citations or enter
guilty pleas at court. Thus, many persons subject to this section
will come before a district judge and/or pay citations through the
court's accounting system. This note assumes that no municipality
will require a mandatory court appearance(probably an incorrect
assumption), and that one-third of juvenile citations will be run
through the court system; this is the rate at which the courts deal
with other municipal citations. It should be kept in mind that the
rate at which juveniles contest citations will depend on the size
of fines set by the municipalities in their ordinances. The note
assumes that no municipality will criminalize curfew violations and
will not require six-person jury trials. This last assumption is
probably optimistic, in that some municipalities will likely
criminalize repeat offenders or offenses by business owners who
allow minors to remain on-premises after curfew, if only to impose
community service on the offenders.
SENATOR PEARCE said the intent was to give communities tools to
deal with juvenile crime. She understood that there are cost
implications, but hoped SB 3 would save money in the long run.
MR. CHRISTENSEN said statistics show that keeping kids off the
streets effectively cuts down on crime.
Number 335
MS. MARGOT KNUTH, Assistant Attorney General, said this year one of
her principle functions is representing the Governor's Children's
Cabinet on legislation that relates to youth and justice. This
last year she worked with the Governor's Conference on Youth and
Justice, acknowledging Senator Green's participation, and said she
ended up being the reporter for the Conference which produced two
reports. The Conference was a bi-partisan effort to address
juvenile crime. There is a sense in Alaska that there is a problem
that needs to be addressed. The Conference focused on three
courses of action: prevention, intervention, and prosecution.
One item they heard most from communities was that Alaska is
responding only to the serious juvenile offenders and there have
been no swift appropriate consequences for low-level offenders. It
makes sense that limited resources would be applied to only the
most serious cases. However, there is a whole population receiving
no punishment which creates a sense that nobody is watching, that
it does not matter, and that leads to the possibility of the
escalation of offenses. The major message from the Conference was
that it is appropriate for the state to delegate to communities the
ability to respond, in particular, to the low-level offenses.
SB 3 attempts to address "at risk" kids, not serious offenders.
Ms. Knuth offered a conceptual amendment to the effect that DHSS be
able to delegate to communities the ability to respond to low-level
offenses. She said this concept is embodied in SB 69.
Ms. Knuth said it makes a great deal of sense to let communities
take action that seems appropriate and to not necessarily specify
what the community should do because they favor different
approaches.
Number 392
SENATOR GREEN commented that Ms. Knuth said just the opposite of
what the bill does which is sending the issue to the state. MS.
KNUTH responded that this bill does send it to the court system and
that is part of the problem rather than the solution. Mr.
Christensen testified and DHSS will testify that they are over-
burdened in most areas already. There are children who are already
being sent to detention for tobacco violations and other minor
offenses which creates a problem in terms of very limited space and
the need for that space to be used by the more serious offenders.
Ms. Knuth said the conceptual amendment would be a diversionary
system from court intervention. She thought the court system
needed to be used and reserved for prosecuting criminals. At-risk
youth need to have a tool in the state system allowing communities
to address the youth in an intervention setting.
Number 410
SENATOR WARD asked what would be the biggest deterrent,
intervention or treating it as a crime. MS. KNUTH said there is a
deterrent effect to criminalizing behavior, but in terms of
effectively responding to a child's particular circumstances,
intervention is a lot more effective in the long-run.
Nation-wide criminal laws are effective only when the perpetrator
believes they will be caught and there will be sanctions. Simply
having a law on the books does not do anything. That is what the
idea of community empowerment is getting to. When the state is in
control there has not been enforcement nor consequences. If
communities are allowed to respond, a level of commitment will
result in a much higher percentage of responses. This is what the
communities want.
Number 437
SENATOR PEARCE said she could see empowering local communities for
intervention, if they need statutory authority to do that.
However, that might not get to the whole problem and perhaps, a two
tier system might work. A community would have the authority to
intervene with maybe a first curfew offense. If there is a second
offense, the community would have the ability to go to a
prosecution at the state level. Taken together this might be an
even greater deterrent.
SENATOR WARD asked how many juveniles had been incarcerated for th
possession of tobacco. MS. KNUTH deferred to someone from HESS to
answer that.
SENATOR PEARCE said she had spoken with Judge Froehlich in Juneau
who estimated that in Juneau District Court about 75% of the youth
who are curfew violators are also violators of the alcohol and
tobacco subsection. Judge Froehlich did not think there would be
the pyramid effect because many of the children are the same.
Number 479
MR. ELMER LINDSTROM , Department of Health and Social Services, said
that SB 3 would add curfew violations to those offenses placed
under the authority of the District Court. This creates a possible
concern that violators who fail to appear in court under a citation
may be subject to detention for failure to appear, or contempt of
court, or non-compliance with a sentence order.
Mr. Lindstrom said in the calendar year of 1996 there were 68
instances where youth were detained in a youth facility for minor
consuming or a tobacco offense. The most significant impact has
occurred here in Juneau at the Johnson Youth Center where
approximately 14% of its total admissions were related to minor
consuming and tobacco cases. The detention staff in each facility
assumes the responsibility of transporting the youth to court,
maintaining supervision during the court proceedings, and
processing discharges if the youth is released. Although the
statute places authority for these cases outside the department, by
default, the department's detention resources are used to
facilitate the judicial process for these youth.
In calendar year 1996, Anchorage police issued over 1,000 curfew
citations under municipal ordinance which took effect in January
1996. At present these cases are processed as a civil matter
through an administrative hearing officer. Transferring these
cases to the district court could have a significant impact on the
department's detention resources.
Mr. Lindstrom explained that an undetermined fiscal note was
submitted because it is difficult to estimate what will happen
within different municipalities. The department does not know
which ones will put in place a new curfew ordinance, to what extent
local police departments will enforce the curfew and the behavior
of individual district court judges. As a cautionary note, there
may well be an impact on our already over-crowded detention
facilities. He supported Ms. Knuth's testimony and her comments on
the Governor's Conference on Youth and Justice.
SENATOR WARD asked about the youths who were recently fined $50
here in Juneau for smoking; was it a state or local fine. MR.
LINDSTROM said that the youths probably received citations issued
by the local police department and the fine would be paid to the
City and Borough of Juneau. If the fine is not paid, the youth
will have a court appearance; and if the youth fails to appear, the
youth may well be cited for contempt. At that point the youth
would become a resident of our youth facility for a period of time.
SENATOR WARD noted that it had a chilling affect on two kids he
knows. He asked if there were figures for the number of minors who
were charged with possession of tobacco in Alaska. MR. LINDSTROM
did not have the number with him, but repeated that in 1996 there
were 68 detention admissions related to minor consuming or
possession of tobacco.
SENATOR WARD said it appeared to him that Juneau, by far, is
enforcing the $50 fine. He suggested that fines reduced the
numbers of those at risk for smoking and the same theory would
likely work for a curfew on a statewide basis. MR. LINDSTROM
agreed that Juneau has been very aggressive in the last year and
certainly Judge Froehlich has been very aggressive in dealing with
the tobacco use issue. However, the method of dealing with these
issues has some impacts and one is that it now represents 14% of
admissions in the Johnson's Youth Center. The Governor's
Conference suggests there may be other ways to have an impact that
will not have those consequences on our detention facilities.
SENATOR PEARCE asked what acts actually put them in the Johnson
Youth Center. MR. LINDSTROM replied that the youth probably did
not pay the fine or did not appear in court and were found in
contempt of court.
SENATOR PEARCE asked what power the Conference recommended to
delegate to local authorities that would have more impact. If
youth are already ignoring fines or not showing up in courts, being
softer on them would not do much good.
SENATOR GREEN said this was addressed last year in a bill that
pertained to issuing citations to youth for smoking. Then it was
said to be too much trouble and the "kids on the street" were more
of a problem. SENATOR PEARCE asked if citations are not used, how
do 14% of Johnson's admissions come from these youth. SENATOR
GREEN assumed that happened since the hearings last year.
MS. KNUTH explained that Juneau is an anomaly in the State and
Judge Froehlich is on a one person crusade for juvenile tobacco and
alcohol offenders. He is exceptional in the diligence with which
he is pursuing these kids and there is no one else who is throwing
children into detention for tobacco violations. She said there is
the question of whether you can put these children into detention
without offering them a jury trial on the contempt proceedings.
She did not know whether his responsiveness would be able to
continue necessarily.
MS. KNUTH said that when the sanction is available at the court
level, it is very effective. The problem is that it is not being
used for most offenders and therefore there is no impact on the
behavior in the manner desired. So the concept of community
intervention is that a much higher percentage of the violators
would be held accountable in order to impact the behavior.
She agreed with the need for a stair-step approach to be available.
Community work service was raised as an available sanction for
this, but Ms. Carpeneti in the Criminal Division, said that
currently in Alaska, if community work service can be ordered, the
penalty is sufficient to have the right to a jury trial.
Number 538
MS. ANNE CARPENETI, Assistant Attorney General, said that last year
the zero tolerance for children drinking and driving had
alternative penalties. The Booth decision holds that the
possibility of community work service did give rise to the right to
a jury trial and court appointed counsel.
MR. CHRISTENSEN commented that there are two kinds of work service.
One is when you give someone a fine with the option of doing work
service instead of the fine. What is talked about here is an
actual order to do the work. In the eyes of the law ordering
someone to work, essentially involuntary servitude, is considered
the legal equivalent of putting them in jail.
SENATOR LEMAN wondered if that was consistent with the
constitutional change made in 1994 when restitution was put in
place as one of the five conditions for corresponding to victims'
rights. Community work service could be used in the same vein to
pay back society. MS. CARPENETI did not think that issue had been
raised in the Booth case. She assumed that would be different from
restitution, because that is paying back an individual rather than
doing work for the good of the community. SENATOR LEMAN thought
restitution could be in different forms other than money.
CHAIRMAN WILKEN indicated the need to act on the amendment before
the committee. If action on the Health and Social Service
component is desired, that could be considered in Judiciary.
Number 500
CAPTAIN TED BACHMAN , Alaska State Troopers, said he was available
to answer questions.
MR. BLAIR MCCUNE, Deputy Director, Alaska Public Defenders,
identified municipal prosecutions as one of the impacts on the
agency which he expected to be minimal. In most areas,
municipalities contract with private attorneys who represent
children or adults. If the prosecution is in Superior Court for a
juvenile delinquency action, he would represent the child even if
a municipal ordinance is at issue. Currently, the curfew
violations in Anchorage are handled as civil penalties and as Ms.
Knuth and Ms. Carpeneti mentioned, it is difficult to say just what
civil penalties are.
Number 478
SENATOR WARD moved to pass SB 3 from committee. SENATOR LEMAN
objected. Senator Leman wanted to include with a note to the
Judiciary Committee to consider the issues discussed today. He,
then, removed his objection. There were no further objections and
is was so ordered.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|