Legislature(2009 - 2010)BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)

03/08/2010 01:30 PM Senate JUDICIARY


Download Mp3. <- Right click and save file as

* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+= SB 209 STATE COUNCIL ON THE ARTS; REGULATIONS TELECONFERENCED
Moved SB 209 Out of Committee
+= SB 260 ELECTRIC & TELEPHONE COOPERATIVES' VOTING TELECONFERENCED
Moved CSSB 260(JUD) Out of Committee
*+ SB 202 HATE CRIMES TELECONFERENCED
Heard & Held
+ SB 284 CAMPAIGN EXPENDITURES TELECONFERENCED
Heard & Held
+ Bills Previously Heard/Scheduled TELECONFERENCED
= SB 214 CRUELTY TO ANIMALS
Heard & Held
= HB 6 CRUELTY TO ANIMALS
Moved SCS CSHB 6(JUD) Out of Committee
                       SB 202-HATE CRIMES                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
2:21:11 PM                                                                                                                    
CHAIR FRENCH announced the consideration of SB 202.                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR BETTYE DAVIS, sponsor of SB 202, said she's not the                                                                     
first to introduce a bill about hate crimes, but she hopes to be                                                                
the last.                                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
2:22:45 PM                                                                                                                    
THOMAS OBERMEYER, Staff to Senator Davis, read the following                                                                    
sponsor statement into the record:                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
     SB 202 makes any crime  against a person a more serious                                                                    
     or aggravated  crime if it  is motivated by  race, sex,                                                                    
     color,  creed, physical  or  mental disability,  sexual                                                                    
     orientation, ancestry, or  national origin. Such crimes                                                                    
     are  referred  to as  "Hate  Crimes."  Hate crimes  are                                                                    
     inchoate offenses which are crimes  of preparing for or                                                                  
     seeking  to commit  another  crime.  Absent a  specific                                                                    
     law, an  inchoate offense  requires that  the defendant                                                                    
     have  the  specific  intent to  commit  the  underlying                                                                    
     crime. For  example, for  a defendant  to be  guilty of                                                                    
     the  crime   of  assault  in  the   third  degree,  the                                                                    
     defendant  must   place  another  person  in   fear  of                                                                    
     imminent  serious physical  injury or  intentionally or                                                                    
     recklessly cause  serious injury  to another  person by                                                                    
     means  of a  dangerous  instrument. If  this crime  was                                                                    
     motivated by  hatred, bias, or prejudice,  under SB 202                                                                    
     it  merges  into  a  more serious  hate  crime  and  is                                                                    
     punished  at  a higher  level  than  normally would  be                                                                    
     afforded the underlying offense.                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
     Without creating a  new list of "hate  crimes" under AS                                                                    
     11.76,  new  Sec.  11.76.150  simply  reclassifies  the                                                                    
     level  of  any  crime  up one  notch  if  motivated  by                                                                    
     prejudice,  bias, or  hatred.  For example,  a class  B                                                                    
     misdemeanor becomes  a class  A misdemeanor; a  class A                                                                    
     misdemeanor  becomes  a  C felony;  a  class  C  felony                                                                    
     becomes  a B  felony,  etc.  Such reclassification,  of                                                                    
     course,  increases  the  penalties appropriate  to  the                                                                    
     classification in sentencing under AS 12.55.                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
     The  need  for SB  202  is  apparent as  incidences  of                                                                    
     prejudice   and   crimes  against   persons   regularly                                                                    
     continue to occur  in Alaska and across  the country in                                                                    
     our increasingly  diverse society.  While SB  202 alone                                                                    
     cannot eliminate  prejudice, bias,  or hatred,  it will                                                                    
     send  a message  that Alaskans  will not  tolerate hate                                                                    
     crimes in any form, the  consequences of which are very                                                                    
     severe.  When  crimes  are  committed  because  of  our                                                                    
     differences,  the effects  reverberate beyond  a single                                                                    
     person or group into  an entire community, city, state,                                                                    
     and society as a whole.                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
2:25:10 PM                                                                                                                    
MR.  OBERMEYER  pointed   out  that  the  bill   is  targeted  at                                                               
increasing  the  punishments.  He  noted  that  the  drafter  was                                                               
available to  explain his position  as to the concerns  raised by                                                               
the ACLU  regarding rights of  association, gender  identity, and                                                               
mandatory minimum sentencing.                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR FRENCH asked if the bill  is modeled after other hate crime                                                               
legislation.                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MR. OBERMEYER replied  the bill uses different  language than the                                                               
federal Mathew Shepherd legislation.  It doesn't include the term                                                               
"gender identity," which may be part  of the impetus for the ACLU                                                               
giving  the language  in this  bill particular  scrutiny. Current                                                               
Alaska statutes and  the Alaska Constitution use  the words "sex,                                                               
color, and creed" and there  was concern that using language that                                                               
is different than that might have unintended consequences.                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked if a  person could be prosecuted under                                                               
both state and federal law if this bill were to pass.                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
MR. OBERMEYER  replied his  experience is that  state law  can do                                                               
more but not less than federal law.                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  FRENCH  added that  it's  not  double jeopardy  if  you're                                                               
prosecuted by the  federal government or the state,  even for the                                                               
same act.                                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
2:28:15 PM                                                                                                                    
J. KATE BURKHART, Executive Director,  Alaska Mental Health Board                                                               
(AMHB), explained that  AMHB was established in  statute to serve                                                               
in  an advisory  role for  Alaskans  who are  affected by  mental                                                               
illness. She said she is speaking  only for the board members and                                                               
in  favor of  SB 202,  particularly the  provisions that  protect                                                               
people with physical and  mental disabilities. Available research                                                               
indicates that  people with serious  mental illness are  at great                                                               
risk  of  victimization whether  it's  violent  crime upon  their                                                               
person  or  their  property.  A   2005  study  from  Northwestern                                                               
University found they were 11 times  more likely to be the victim                                                               
of violent crime.                                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
While  SB  202 targets  those  crimes  committed because  of  the                                                               
victim's disability and  not all crimes inflicted  on people with                                                               
disabilities,  it  goes a  long  way  to  help protect  the  most                                                               
vulnerable  members of  the community.  It sends  a message  that                                                               
crimes committed  against people because of  their disability are                                                               
unacceptable  and it  changes policy  by heightening  the penalty                                                               
for these crimes.                                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
2:31:31 PM                                                                                                                    
MARSHA BUCK, Board of Directors,  Alaskans Together for Equality,                                                               
Inc., said  this is  a statewide  advocacy organization  that was                                                               
formed  to  advance civil  equality  for  Alaska's gay,  lesbian,                                                               
bisexual,  and  transgendered  citizens.  She  related  that  she                                                               
serves  on the  board  as  a proud  mother  and grandmother.  Her                                                               
oldest daughter is in a  lifelong relationship with another woman                                                               
and that  relationship has  given her  two grandchildren.  She is                                                               
testifying because she cares deeply  about the personal safety of                                                               
her daughter, her daughter-in-law, and her grandchildren.                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
MS. BUCK said Alaskans Together  for Equality supports SB 202 and                                                               
its coverage of  crimes motivated by prejudice,  bias, and hatred                                                               
based  on inherent  characteristics with  which people  are born,                                                               
like  sexual  orientation.  She said  they  recognize  that  hate                                                               
crimes aren't limited to the  gay and lesbian population. Rather,                                                               
they   occur  throughout   the  minority   community.  The   bill                                                               
emphasizes that Alaska has no tolerance for these acts.                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
MS. BUCK stated  that Alaskans Together for  Equality supports SB
202 conditioned on  an amendment to include  "gender identity and                                                               
expression" in Sec.  11.76.150(a). Some people may  see others as                                                               
"too masculine" or  "too feminine" and that  perception may evoke                                                               
a violent response  that results in harm. It  doesn't matter that                                                               
the person who  is perceived as different is  heterosexual or gay                                                               
to  be a  recipient  of such  a response.  We  contend that  many                                                               
Alaskans are  in jeopardy of  gender expression hate  crimes, she                                                               
said. In particular,  youths are often subject  to bullying based                                                               
on expression  that is different  from the fluctuating  norm. The                                                               
term "gender  identity" also includes those  who are transgender,                                                               
she said.                                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
2:35:20 PM                                                                                                                    
KELLI BURKINSHAW, representing herself  and Alaskans Together for                                                               
Equality,  Inc., stated  support for  SB 202,  which is  designed                                                               
protect the civil  rights of individuals who may  be targeted for                                                               
violence or  harassment based on  who they inherently are  due to                                                               
their race  or sexual orientation  or membership in a  group. She                                                               
said she appreciates that the  bill emphasizes that Alaska has no                                                               
tolerance  for  hate  crimes,  but   it  leaves  out  transgender                                                               
individuals. "It  is essential that  gender identity  be included                                                               
in this bill," she said. She offered to provide definitions.                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
2:36:43 PM                                                                                                                    
SENATOR MCGUIRE said it would be helpful to get the definitions.                                                                
                                                                                                                                
MS.  BURKINSHAW  explained  that   "sexual  orientation"  is  the                                                               
personal  and unique  way a  person perceives  his or  her sexual                                                               
desires and expression  toward others. It ranges from  one of the                                                               
opposite biological sex and runs  along a continuum to someone of                                                               
the same  biological sex. "Gender"  is the concept  of femininity                                                               
and masculinity. "Gender  identity" is the sense of  oneself as a                                                               
male or  a female  or anywhere along  or outside  that continuum.                                                               
"Sex" refers to biological characteristics  a person has at birth                                                               
so  a  transgender person  is  one  who identifies  their  gender                                                               
perhaps  differently than  their  sex at  birth.  This bill  will                                                               
protect me  as a  lesbian and  for that I'm  happy; but  the most                                                               
painful wounds I  carry are based on my  gender perception, which                                                               
is that  I was perceived as  too masculine as a  child, she said.                                                               
Those wounds last a long time.                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
"Gender identity is very important  and I'm very saddened to know                                                               
that close to  40 percent - and  estimates up to 60  percent - of                                                               
my   transgender  brothers   and   sisters   in  community   have                                                               
experienced violent reactions. I know  what that feels like and I                                                               
would  strongly  urge  you  to   include  gender  identity,"  she                                                               
concluded.                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
2:40:08 PM                                                                                                                    
JEFF JESSEE,  CEO, Alaska Mental Health  Trust Authority (AMHTA),                                                               
said  his testimony  is  focused  on the  parts  of  SB 202  that                                                               
address hate  crimes based on  physical or mental  disability. He                                                               
related  that  many  AMHTA  beneficiaries  are  singled  out  for                                                               
physical attacks resulting in harm  and sometimes death. Clearly,                                                               
these crimes are  damaging to people. He told  the committee that                                                               
he  was born  with a  cleft  palate and  because of  that he  was                                                               
bullied  and   mocked  and   physically  abused   throughout  his                                                               
elementary school  years. These bullies  grow up and  commit hate                                                               
crimes and this is a time when  society needs to stand up and say                                                               
hurting  people   based  upon   their  differences  will   be  an                                                               
additional penalty. "Both personally and  on behalf of the Trust,                                                               
I urge you to pass this legislation," he said.                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
DAVID EASTMAN, representing  himself, said that for  the past six                                                               
years he  has served as a  military police officer in  Alaska and                                                               
based  on that  experience he  opposes  SB 202.  The motives  for                                                               
crime are bad, but the  government doesn't need to insert itself;                                                               
it  isn't very  effective when  it tries  to legislate  morality.                                                               
This bill  attempts to  make some people  more equal  than others                                                               
and further politicizes our lives, he said.                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
2:46:41 PM                                                                                                                    
QUINLAN  STEINER,   Public  Defender,  Public   Defender  Agency,                                                               
Department  of Administration,  said his  comments will  focus on                                                               
practical drafting concerns. The first  relates to the use of the                                                               
phrase "knowingly  directed" because use of  the word "knowingly"                                                               
is theoretically inconsistent  with the mens rea  scheme. You can                                                               
knowingly have  a motive and  criminalize that. It's  really more                                                               
along the lines  of specific intent but it's  hard to distinguish                                                               
because the  concepts differ,  he said. The  knowing part  of the                                                               
conduct would  be the  crime itself  and motive  is more  in line                                                               
with  specific  intent. By  using  the  word knowingly  you'd  be                                                               
confusing  the issues  and it  could be  confused as  downgrading                                                               
something you can't theoretically downgrade to a lower mens rea.                                                                
                                                                                                                                
A second  concern relates  to proof. Typically,  motive is  not a                                                               
crime and  by criminalizing  motive, it broadens  the proof  of a                                                               
criminal  case beyond  the  act  to the  person.  That creates  a                                                               
significant problem in conducting  the trial. Essentially it puts                                                               
the person's  comments and speech  and other things  they've done                                                               
throughout their  life on trial  as a  way of proving  a specific                                                               
act. And it could go beyond  the act itself and the comments that                                                               
were  made during  the act.  Together it  creates a  much broader                                                               
trial than it usually is in criminal cases.                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
2:49:41 PM                                                                                                                    
CHAIR  FRENCH asked  Mr. Steiner  to send  his specific  drafting                                                               
suggestions to his office.                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR  COGHILL mentioned  the relatively  new aggravator  in AS                                                               
12.55.155(c)(22)  and  said he'd  be  interested  in knowing  how                                                               
often it's been applied because  it seems that the same questions                                                               
would  apply.  The  language  isn't  exactly  the  same  but  the                                                               
personal  motive  is  more  at  issue than  the  act  under  that                                                               
aggravator.                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR FRENCH asked  Ms. Carpeneti to respond to  that question at                                                               
a future hearing.                                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
2:51:12 PM                                                                                                                    
JEFFERY  MITTMAN, Executive  Director, ACLU  of Alaska,  said the                                                               
ACLU of Alaska  thinks it's important for the State  of Alaska to                                                               
go on  record stating that  all its citizens should  be protected                                                               
from  targeted acts  of hatred  and violence.  He emphasized  the                                                               
importance of  adding the  phrase "gender  identity" to  the bill                                                               
because  there  is  statistical  evidence  that  individuals  are                                                               
targeted  for their  race, gender,  religion, sexual  orientation                                                               
and  gender   identity.  Individuals   are  attacked   for  being                                                               
different and  it's important  for them  to understand  that they                                                               
are protected.                                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
At  the same  time, there  are protected  associational and  free                                                               
speech rights that  must be recognized. A person  can be punished                                                               
for the  act of attacking a  transgender or gay person,  but they                                                               
should  not  be  prosecuted  based on  their  association,  their                                                               
membership, or their  past statements. A person has  the right to                                                               
hold  their beliefs  and  they shouldn't  be  punished for  them.                                                               
Based on that,  the ACLU asks that language be  added to the bill                                                               
that  specifically  states  that  at  trial  evidence  should  be                                                               
introduced that directly relates to  the crime, but not merely as                                                               
associational or First Amendment rights.                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
2:53:32 PM                                                                                                                    
CHAIR FRENCH closed public testimony  and announced he would hold                                                               
SB 202 in committee.                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                

Document Name Date/Time Subjects
SB284 Sponsor Statement.doc SJUD 3/8/2010 1:30:00 PM
SB 284
Sectional Analysis SB 284.PDF SJUD 3/8/2010 1:30:00 PM
SB 284
SB202 Sponsor Statement.pdf SJUD 3/8/2010 1:30:00 PM
SB 202