03/26/2014 01:00 PM House JUDICIARY
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB250 | |
| HB362 | |
| HB315 | |
| SB64 | |
| Adjourn |
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| *+ | HB 362 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | SB 64 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | HB 315 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| += | HB 250 | TELECONFERENCED | |
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE JUDICIARY STANDING COMMITTEE
March 26, 2014
1:11 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Wes Keller, Chair
Representative Bob Lynn, Vice Chair
Representative Neal Foster
Representative Gabrielle LeDoux
Representative Charisse Millett (via teleconference)
Representative Max Gruenberg
Representative Lance Pruitt
MEMBERS ABSENT
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
HOUSE BILL NO. 250
"An Act making an expression of apology, responsibility,
liability, sympathy, commiseration, compassion, or benevolence
by a health care provider inadmissible in a medical malpractice
case; requiring a health care provider to advise a patient or
the patient's legal representative to seek legal advice before
making an agreement with the patient to correct an unanticipated
outcome of medical treatment or care; and amending Rules 402,
407, 408, 409, and 801, Alaska Rules of Evidence."
- MOVED CSHB 250(HSS) OUT OF COMMITTEE
HOUSE BILL NO. 362
"An Act relating to a prohibition on the offer, display,
marketing, advertising for sale, or sale of illicit synthetic
drugs."
- HEARD & HELD
HOUSE BILL NO. 315
"An Act relating to juries in criminal cases; and providing for
an effective date."
- HEARD & HELD
COMMITTEE SUBSTITUTE FOR SENATE BILL NO. 64(FIN)
"An Act relating to theft and property offenses; relating to the
definition of 'prior convictions' for certain theft offenses;
establishing the Alaska Criminal Justice Commission and
providing an expiration date; relating to the crime of custodial
interference; relating to the duties of the Alaska Judicial
Council; relating to jail-time credit for offenders in court-
ordered treatment programs; relating to conditions of release,
probation, and parole; relating to duties of the commissioner of
corrections and board of parole; establishing a fund for
reducing recidivism in the Department of Health and Social
Services; requiring the commissioner of health and social
services to establish programs for persons on conditions of
release or probation that require testing for controlled
substances and alcoholic beverages; requiring the board of
parole to establish programs for persons on parole that require
testing for controlled substances and alcoholic beverages;
relating to the duties of the Department of Health and Social
Services; and providing for an effective date."
- HEARD & HELD
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
BILL: HB 250
SHORT TITLE: MEDICAL MALPRACTICE ACTIONS
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) OLSON
01/21/14 (H) PREFILE RELEASED 1/17/14
01/21/14 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
01/21/14 (H) HSS, JUD
02/27/14 (H) HSS AT 3:00 PM CAPITOL 106
02/27/14 (H) Heard & Held
02/27/14 (H) MINUTE(HSS)
03/13/14 (H) HSS AT 3:00 PM CAPITOL 106
03/13/14 (H) Scheduled But Not Heard
03/14/14 (H) HSS AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 106
03/14/14 (H) Moved CSHB 250(HSS) Out of Committee
03/14/14 (H) MINUTE(HSS)
03/17/14 (H) HSS RPT CS(HSS) NT 6DP
03/17/14 (H) DP: REINBOLD, PRUITT, KELLER, NAGEAK,
TARR, HIGGINS
03/24/14 (H) JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120
03/24/14 (H) Heard & Held
03/24/14 (H) MINUTE(JUD)
03/26/14 (H) JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120
BILL: HB 362
SHORT TITLE: SYNTHETIC DRUGS
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) MILLETT
02/26/14 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
02/26/14 (H) JUD
03/26/14 (H) JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120
BILL: HB 315
SHORT TITLE: JURY NULLIFICATION
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) T.WILSON
02/19/14 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
02/19/14 (H) JUD
03/26/14 (H) JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120
BILL: SB 64
SHORT TITLE: OMNIBUS CRIME/CORRECTIONS/RECIDIVISM BILL
SPONSOR(s): JUDICIARY
02/27/13 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
02/27/13 (S) STA, JUD
04/04/13 (S) STA AT 9:00 AM BUTROVICH 205
04/04/13 (S) <Bill Hearing Postponed>
04/09/13 (S) STA RPT CS 1DP 1NR 1AM NEW TITLE
04/09/13 (S) DP: DYSON
04/09/13 (S) NR: GIESSEL
04/09/13 (S) AM: COGHILL
04/09/13 (S) STA AT 9:00 AM BUTROVICH 205
04/09/13 (S) Moved CSSB 64(STA) Out of Committee
04/09/13 (S) MINUTE(STA)
07/25/13 (S) JUD AT 10:00 AM WASILLA
07/25/13 (S) Heard & Held
07/25/13 (S) MINUTE(JUD)
01/29/14 (S) JUD AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
01/29/14 (S) Heard & Held
01/29/14 (S) MINUTE(JUD)
01/31/14 (S) JUD AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
01/31/14 (S) Heard & Held
01/31/14 (S) MINUTE(JUD)
02/03/14 (S) JUD AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
02/03/14 (S) Heard & Held
02/03/14 (S) MINUTE(JUD)
02/05/14 (S) JUD AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
02/05/14 (S) Heard & Held
02/05/14 (S) MINUTE(JUD)
02/07/14 (S) JUD AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
02/07/14 (S) -- MEETING CANCELED --
02/10/14 (S) JUD AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
02/10/14 (S) Heard & Held
02/10/14 (S) MINUTE(JUD)
02/12/14 (S) JUD AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
02/12/14 (S) Moved CSSB 64(JUD) Out of Committee
02/12/14 (S) MINUTE(JUD)
02/14/14 (S) JUD RPT CS 4DP 1NR NEW TITLE
02/14/14 (S) DP: COGHILL, MCGUIRE, WIELECHOWSKI,
DYSON
02/14/14 (S) NR: OLSON
02/14/14 (S) FIN REFERRAL ADDED AFTER JUD
02/25/14 (S) FIN AT 9:00 AM SENATE FINANCE 532
02/25/14 (S) Heard & Held
02/25/14 (S) MINUTE(FIN)
03/06/14 (S) FIN AT 5:00 PM SENATE FINANCE 532
03/06/14 (S) Heard & Held
03/06/14 (S) MINUTE(FIN)
03/11/14 (S) FIN AT 9:00 AM SENATE FINANCE 532
03/11/14 (S) Heard & Held
03/11/14 (S) MINUTE(FIN)
03/11/14 (S) FIN AT 5:00 PM SENATE FINANCE 532
03/11/14 (S) Heard & Held
03/11/14 (S) MINUTE(FIN)
03/13/14 (S) FIN AT 9:00 AM SENATE FINANCE 532
03/13/14 (S) Moved CSSB 64(FIN) Out of Committee
03/13/14 (S) MINUTE(FIN)
03/14/14 (S) FIN RPT CS 3DP 1NR 3AM NEW TITLE
03/14/14 (S) DP: KELLY, MEYER, HOFFMAN
03/14/14 (S) NR: OLSON
03/14/14 (S) AM: FAIRCLOUGH, DUNLEAVY, BISHOP
03/14/14 (S) TRANSMITTED TO (H)
03/14/14 (S) VERSION: CSSB 64(FIN)
03/17/14 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
03/17/14 (H) JUD, FIN
03/24/14 (H) JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120
03/24/14 (H) Heard & Held
03/24/14 (H) MINUTE(JUD)
03/26/14 (H) JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120
WITNESS REGISTER
DOUG WOJCIESZAK, Founder and President
Sorry Works!
Glen Carbon, IL
POSITION STATEMENT: Spoke in support of HB 250.
ANNIE HOLT, Executive Director
Alaska Physicians and Surgeons
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 250.
EDRA MORLEDGE, Staff
Senator Kevin Meyer
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented HB 362 on behalf of Senator Meyer.
KATHLEEN STRASBOUGH, Attorney
Legislative Legal Counsel
Legislative Legal and Research Services
Legislative Affairs Agency
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions regarding HB 362.
VASILIOS GIALOPSOS, Staff
Representative Charisse Millett
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions regarding HB 362.
GUS SANDAHL
Kenai, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in favor of HB 362.
REPRESENTATIVE TAMMI WILSON
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented HB 315 as sponsor.
ANNE CARPENETI, Assistant Attorney General
Legal Services Section
Criminal Division
Department of Law (DOL)
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified that the DOL has serious concerns
with HB 315.
JORDAN SHILLING, Staff
Senator John Coghill
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions regarding SB 64.
SERGEANT CHRIS GIFFORD, President
Juneau Police Department Employees Association
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of raising the felony
threshold as found in SB 64.
JEFF JESSE, Chief Executive Officer
Alaska Mental Health Trust Authority
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of SB 64.
PEGGY BROWN, Executive Director
Alaska Network on Domestic Violence and Sexual Assault (ANDVSA)
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented two concerns regarding SB 64.
JOE BAIR
Wasilla, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of SB 64 and on the
complexities of sexual assault laws.
ANDY PEVEHOUSE
Kenai, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of SB 64.
JAYCE ROBERTSON
Soldotna, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of SB 64.
RONALD TAYLOR, Deputy Commissioner
Department of Corrections (DOC)
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Discussed rehabilitative services in
Alaska's correctional system.
CARMEN GUTIERREZ
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of SB 64.
AL TAMAGNI, Member
National Federation of Independent Business
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified against SB 64 with regards to
raising the felony theft threshold above $750.
RICK ALLEN, Director
Office of Public Advocacy
Alaska Department of Administration
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Made comments on the felony/misdemeanor
monetary threshold.
ACTION NARRATIVE
1:11:54 PM
CHAIR WES KELLER called the House Judiciary Standing Committee
meeting to order at 1:11 p.m. Representatives Foster, LeDoux,
Lynn, Millett, Gruenberg and Keller were present at the call to
order. Representative Pruitt arrived as the meeting was in
progress.
HB 250-MEDICAL MALPRACTICE ACTIONS
1: 12:35 PM
CHAIR KELLER announced that the first order of business would be
HOUSE BILL NO. 250 "An Act making an expression of apology,
responsibility, liability, sympathy, commiseration, compassion,
or benevolence by a health care provider inadmissible in a
medical malpractice case; requiring a health care provider to
advise a patient or the patient's legal representative to seek
legal advice before making an agreement with the patient to
correct an unanticipated outcome of medical treatment or care;
and amending Rules 402, 407, 408, 409, and 801, Alaska Rules of
Evidence."
1:13:47 PM
DOUG WOJCIESZAK, Founder and President, Sorry Works!, said he
works around the country with doctors, nurses, health care
insurers, and legal professionals, teaching them how to disclose
and, if necessary, apologize after something goes wrong in a
medical setting. He noted that he has been doing this for over
seven years. In 1998, he lost his brother to medical errors,
and his family did not get disclosure or any communication, he
explained. The family had to file a lawsuit to get any answers,
and even after getting money and when the liability was clear,
the doctors and the hospital still did not communicate with the
family. He said he has taken that experience and now travels
around telling the medical community that "if you don't want
someone like me to sue you, here's what you need to do." He
added that he takes people step-by-step through the process, and
he works with defense and plaintiff counsel, hospital risk
managers, hospital leadership, and others.
1:15:21 PM
MR. WOJCIESZAK noted that he has reviewed HB 250 and has been in
contact with the sponsor's staff. He said about 36 states have
similar laws, and he has seen that the laws help doctors and
nurses be more comfortable communicating with patients and
families if something goes wrong. He said that, according to
defense and plaintiff lawyers, the primary reason doctors get
sued when something goes wrong is the total lack of
communication. Families feel abandoned and left in the lurch
because they want to hear from the doctor. Doctors will say
that they are afraid to talk because it will be used against
them in court, he stated. Bills, like HB 250, help people feel
a little more comfortable and allow people like him to go out
and have "the conversation with hospitals." The laws help the
defense counsel get a little more comfortable allowing doctors
to communicate. The big goal, he stated, is to make medicine
safer. "When doctors talk more, systems get better, patients
and families are safer, and society is better served," he
opined.
1:17:37 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG noted that he has cosponsored the bill,
and he asked Mr. Wojcieszak if lawyers are afraid of getting
sued for their own malpractice.
MR. WOJCIESZAK said he has not heard that question, but his book
was written with two defense attorneys. He said his message to
defense counsel and doctors is that when something goes wrong,
simply say, "Gosh Max, I'm sorry this happened to your mom;
we're going to review to figure out what happened and then we'll
get back to you in due process."
1:19:37 PM
MR. WOJCIESZAK suggested there might be a case for legal
malpractice if an attorney tells a doctor not to talk to a
patient and then the doctor gets sued. He opined that many
doctors have been poorly advised not to talk after something
goes wrong, "and that's what leads to so many lawsuits." The
general movement in the medical world is that it is better to
talk. If the doctor goes too far and speculates or prematurely
admits fault, "then we'll clean that up" with documentation and
expert reviews. He said he has heard of doctors who say,
"Sorry, I've killed your mom," and then a follow-up review shows
no error. Some courts will consider the comments as hear-say,
he stated.
1:21:38 PM
ANNIE HOLT, Executive Director, Alaska Physicians and Surgeons,
said her organization has 150 members and supports HB 250. Over
30 states have introduced such a law with the goal of empowering
the patient/physician relationship and encouraging dialogue
between the two, especially when there is an unanticipated
outcome. Such outcomes may or may not be directly attributable
to the physician's care. She noted that a genuine expression of
sorrow by the physician can be misinterpreted, and physicians
are concerned that it can increase their liability. In the best
interest of physicians and their patients, this legislation
would support open conversations and understanding of what
happened without the specter of liability, she stated.
1:22:56 PM
CHAIR KELLER closed public testimony.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG said, "We had an amendment that would
have put language about the civil rules; you raised a point in a
conversation with [Representative Kurt Olson] and me on the
floor. Your point was very well taken, and had I offered it, I
would have offered it in a little different form, as a result of
your conversation."
1:23:59 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG moved to pass HB 250 out of committee
with individual recommendations and accompanying fiscal notes.
There being no objection, CSHB 250(HSS) was reported out of the
House Judiciary Standing Committee.
1:24:21 PM
The committee took an at-ease from 1:24 p.m. to 1:26 p.m.
HB 362-SYNTHETIC DRUGS
1:26:17 PM
CHAIR KELLER announced that the next order of business would be
HOUSE BILL NO. 362, "An Act relating to a prohibition on the
offer, display, marketing, advertising for sale, or sale of
illicit synthetic drugs."
1:27:52 PM
REPRESENTATIVE MAX GRUENBERG moved to adopt HB 362, labeled
28LS1538\U, Strasbaugh, 3/18/14, as a working document.
CHAIR KELLER objected for discussion purposes.
1:28:44 PM
EDRA MORLEDGE, Staff, Senator Kevin Meyer, Alaska State
Legislature, said that Senator Meyer is carrying the Senate
Version (SB 173). She noted that he has previously sponsored
legislation to outlaw synthetic cannabinoids, and the bills have
passed. The cannabinoids go by various names, such as spice and
bath salt, and they are commonly used as alternatives to cocaine
and marijuana. The substance is sold by the gram in small
packets in convenience stores and smoke shops, and it is easily
accessible, she explained. Unfortunately, many people think
these drugs are safe, including parents, because they are so
readily available. "They're actually not safe; they cause many
psychotropic effects on users," she stated. The bill is an
attempt to stop the sale of these drugs by targeting the way
they are packaged, rather than the chemical compounds they are
made of. "What happens is, the manufacturers of these drugs,
who are often overseas, simply change the compounds that we
previously outlawed by a molecule or two, and all of a sudden,
they're not illegal anymore," she explained.
MS. MORLEDGE said that the Anchorage Assembly passed an
ordinance to ban the packaging of synthetic cannabinoids, and
the House and Senate bills are modeled after that ordinance, as
it has been very successful. "They virtually wiped it out of
all of the smokes shops and convenience stores," she stated.
She surmised that Alaska is the only state attempting this
approach-to target the packaging rather than the compound-and
"it hasn't really been challenged as ... a state law." She
noted that a similar ordinance was passed in Maine and there
have been no challenges.
1:31:45 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GABRIELLE LEDOUX asked if [the label] has to
include some or all of the following criteria: false and
misleading; does not specify the name of the synthetic drug;
does not specify the name and place of the manufacturer, packer,
or distributer; and all of [the criteria listed under paragraph
(2)].
1:32:11 PM
MS. MORLEDGE noted that her understanding is that the substance
would have to meet one criterion from [paragraph] (b)(1) and one
from [paragraph] (b)(2).
1:32:31 PM
KATHLEEN STRASBOUGH, Attorney, Legislative Legal Counsel,
Legislative Legal and Research Services, Legislative Affairs
Agency, said, yes, [the package] would have to have one from
(b)(1) and one from (b)(2).
1:32:45 PM
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX suggested that the manufacturer could
simply put the ingredients on the label in order to be legal.
MS. STRASBOUGH she said does not have all of the facts
associated with the bill, but those who trade in these products
do not like the scrutiny and do not want to provide that
information.
1:33:45 PM
MS. MORLEDGE said the items are being marketed as things that
they are not, like incense. The packaging often states, "Not
for human consumption," but that is exactly what it is intended
for, she explained. She suggested that the Anchorage city
prosecutor answer the question.
CHAIR KELLER asked if instant coffee, a stimulant, could fall
under this prohibition.
1:35:34 PM
MS. STRASBOUGH said this bill depends upon mislabeling; a person
selling coffee would likely not want to disguise it. There is
another law, Imitation Controlled Substance, where something
like that might occur, but the element of falsity is necessary
for a violation to be committed under HB 362, she explained.
CHAIR KELLER assumed [instant coffee could fall under the
statute].
1:36:47 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG said he agrees with Chair Keller and
also with Representative LeDoux. He turned to page 1, line 11,
where the intent is correctly drafted because the item must have
(A), (B), or (C), and "or" is the key word [under (b)(1)].
However, "and" appears on page 1, line 13, but there only needs
to be one of (A) through (G) under [(b)(2)]. The word "or" does
not appear at the end of line 18, like it appears at the end of
line 11. He said he will offer an amendment at the appropriate
time to ensure that it requires only one criterion from [(b)(2)]
by inserting the word "or".
1:38:12 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG asked if his suggestion is correct.
CHAIR KELLER stated that that can be worked out with the
sponsor.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG said it is not clear to him whether
each sale would be a separate violation. "If you sold 10 of
these packages to one person and three to another, you would
have committed 13 separate offenses?"
1:39:21 PM
MS. MORLEDGE answered that the intent is a $500 violation per
package.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG said he will offer an amendment that
specifies that intent. He then said he is concerned about the
question that Chair Keller raised. "We have things that are
depending upon having street names," and those names vary, so
how can it withstand a test for vagueness? "I see this thing
not being challenged as a whole bill but in an individual case
where they have something from category A and something from
category B, and I see one thing is legal, and somebody will say
'well, I bought a legal drug.'"
1:40:57 PM
MS. MORLEDGE said the sponsor will be happy to work with
Representative Gruenberg on refining the bill's language.
REPRESENTATIVE BOB LYNN noted page 2, line 19, where the
esoteric names [of the product] are listed. "What happens if
somebody comes up with a new name that is not included in this
list?"
1:41:34 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG answered that the law would have to be
amended.
MS. MORLEDGE said the names are included now because they are
known; perhaps when the names change, the list can be deleted.
These are drugs that we would like off of the street
immediately, she stated.
REPRESENTATIVE LYNN asked if there was language that would
include future street names.
MS. MORLEDGE said, "We would be happy to work on that."
1:42:34 PM
REPRESENTATIVE CHARISSE MILLETT said she is willing to work with
both Representatives Gruenberg and Lynn. "It is an ever-
changing group of names, and that's what we struggle with. And
it's an ever-changing group of drugs that are mixed in with
these," she noted. It is difficult to capture everything, but
she wants to make sure kids do not have access to the drugs and
people do not sell them. She reiterated that she will work with
anyone to make the bill better.
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX asked about a definition of "false and
misleading."
1:43:39 PM
MS. STRASBOUGH said those terms are in frequent use in the
statutes. "I'm sure that a definition can be put together if
someone wanted one," she added.
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX asked if it is defined.
MS. STRASBOUGH said she has not researched it, but it is her
impression that the statute uses the term without definition.
1:44:46 PM
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX said she is looking forward to an answer
on why a person [selling the substance] would not just specify
what is in the package and who manufactured it in order to make
it legal.
VASILIOS GIALOPSOS, Staff, Representative Charisse Millett,
Alaska State Legislature, said that the overwhelming majority of
these synthetic substances comes from China. In order for them
to enter the United States under those pretenses, the substances
would have to comply with the federal Food and Drug
Administration (FDA), and they would not be able to do so.
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX asked why the substances would not be able
to meet the FDA requirements. If it cannot meet those
requirements, why is it not illegal?
MR. GIALOPSOS said that was an excellent question that he would
not be answering at this point.
1:46:44 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG noted that page 3, line 17, states that
the commissioner of the Department of Public Safety may delegate
its authority as appropriate. He asked if that phrase is
normally used, because it does not specify any outer limits of
what may be delegated. It could be unconstitutional, he added.
He then noted that the language does not specify who the
authority can be delegated to; it could be to a non-governmental
agency, and he sees potential problems.
1:48:17 PM
GUS SANDAHL, Kenai, Alaska, said he works in law enforcement,
and he is very supportive of legislation that prohibits the sale
and possession of these substances across all of Alaska. He
appreciates the time taken to eliminate loopholes and for
considering the bill.
CHAIR KELLER said he agreed and complimented the sponsor.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG said he had two more questions.
Regarding the section with the penalties, page 3, lines 21-22, a
person who violates the law is guilty of a violation. "Are you
intending to punish the person who makes the drugs, who
wholesales them, who retails it, or all three?" He then
referred to page 3, line 30, [defining a synthetic drug] as a
chemical intended to.... He asked who would have to have the
intent, "and how are you going to prove it?" He said he
supports the concept [of the bill], but he is trying to save it
from potential serious challenges.
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX surmised that a violation is a civil
matter, rather than a criminal matter. "If it's civil, you're
not entitled to a public defender; you're not entitled to a
trial by jury; is that the reason for making it a violation as
opposed to a misdemeanor?"
CHAIR KELLER said that question will be answered later, and HB
362 was held over.
HB 315-JURY NULLIFICATION
1:51:47 PM
CHAIR KELLER announced that the final order of business was
HOUSE BILL NO. 315, "An Act relating to juries in criminal
cases; and providing for an effective date." He said he will
not rush this bill, but there is no time for questions. The
discussion will continue at a future date.
1:52:26 PM
REPRESENTATIVE TAMMI WILSON, Alaska State Legislature, said HB
315 relates to jury nullification. She made the following
statement:
Before one is able to understand why jury
nullification is a good idea, one must understand the
importance of a trial by jury. Our Founding Fathers
considered them to be a powerful weapon in the war
against tyranny. Thomas Jefferson wrote, "I consider
trial by jury as the only anchor yet imagined by man,
by which a government can be held to the principles of
its constitution." In the Federalist Papers, Alexander
Hamilton wrote that trial by jury was the "very
palladium of free government" and a "valuable check
upon corruption."
As for the concept that juries have not only the power
but the obligation to nullify unjust rulings of a
judge, John Adams wrote, "It is not only the juror's
right, but his duty to find the verdict according to
his own best understanding, judgment, and conscience,
though in direct opposition to the direction of the
court."
Our Founding Fathers zealously defended this right and
recognized that only an informed and empowered jury
could effectively protect a defendant from the
potentially harmful effects of judges. Jury
nullification allows citizens to have the final say on
what is fair in a court of law.
Therefore, jury nullification is a good idea and one
supported by Constitutional principles and freedoms.
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON noted that there are 27 states that have
some form of jury nullification, and most of them are within
their state constitutions. "New Hampshire just finished passing
a jury nullification," she said. If one were to truly believe
that when people join a jury, they leave all of their past
experiences, all of their biases, and "everything" behind, and
make their determinations only based on the judge's instructions
and the testimony, then juries would be selected in the order
the people arrive. But, people do take their experiences and
biases into the courtroom, so "a lot of this is already going
on," Representative Wilson explained. "What this bill basically
says is we want the judge to give us permission to do it."
1:56:00 PM
ANNE CARPENETI, Assistant Attorney General, Legal Services
Section, Criminal Division, Department of Law (DOL), said the
DOL has two serious concerns with HB 315. The language allows
the defendant to instruct the members of a jury that they may
disregard the laws as given to the judge "and to all of us by
the people who make the law; that is, you. You're the people who
make the law that we try and enforce to the best of our ability
when we charge people with crimes."
MS. CARPENETI stated that the second concern is the fact that
the law will allow the defendant in a criminal case to ask the
judge to disregard Alaska's rules of evidence, which have been
written with a view of making a trial as fair as possible. The
bill requires the evidence to be relevant, and that is already
true under Alaska law, but there are various rules that try and
dictate evidence that is just too prejudicial to be fair or is
hearsay and not reliable enough to be introduced for
consideration by the jury. However, [HB 315] allows [evidence]
if it is relevant in any way-even though it might be
specifically disallowed in statute or in the evidence code.
"And then, it allows the state to come back and rebut that. I
think that what we would find is that allowing the jury to
disregard the courts [and] disregard our rules of evidence,
would result in trials that are not very orderly or not very
fair to either side."
CHAIR KELLER set aside HB 315.
SB 64-OMNIBUS CRIME/CORRECTIONS/RECIDIVISM BILL
1:58:08 PM
CHAIR KELLER announced that the next order of business would be
CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 64(FIN), "An Act relating to theft and
property offenses; relating to the definition of 'prior
convictions' for certain theft offenses; establishing the Alaska
Criminal Justice Commission and providing an expiration date;
relating to the crime of custodial interference; relating to the
duties of the Alaska Judicial Council; relating to jail-time
credit for offenders in court-ordered treatment programs;
relating to conditions of release, probation, and parole;
relating to duties of the commissioner of corrections and board
of parole; establishing a fund for reducing recidivism in the
Department of Health and Social Services; requiring the
commissioner of health and social services to establish programs
for persons on conditions of release or probation that require
testing for controlled substances and alcoholic beverages;
requiring the board of parole to establish programs for persons
on parole that require testing for controlled substances and
alcoholic beverages; relating to the duties of the Department of
Health and Social Services; and providing for an effective
date."
1:58:27 PM
JORDAN SHILLING, Staff, Senator John Coghill, Alaska State
Legislature, said he will address the questions the committee
had regarding custodial interference. He noted that there was
some debate during the last meeting about whether those sections
would be more appropriate in the attempted kidnapping or
kidnapping statutes. He said he provided the committee with a
memo on this topic. He reminded the committee that the sections
were added through an amendment in the Senate Judiciary Standing
Committee. The issue was brought to its attention by a
constituent in Anchorage who relayed the scenario of a man
walking into a school representing himself as the lawful parent
of a child, probably with the intent of kidnapping the child,
and only getting charged with criminal mischief in the fourth
degree. The reason the man could not be charged with attempted
kidnapping was because of the difficulty in proving the attempt.
"Attempt would require a substantial step towards restraining
another person with the intent to hold that person," he
explained.
MR. SHILLING explained that the provision was placed in the
custodial interference statutes because the offender would be
attempting to portray himself as a relative-as a lawful
custodian. The offenders are saying that they have a right to
custody, so that is why the decision was made to put it into the
custodial interference statutes, he stated.
2:01:03 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG said he hopes that Mr. Shilling will
convey to the sponsor that his previous comments were made to
help the legislation, not to "torpedo" it. He said he spoke
with Senator Wielechowski, the bill's author. This is a big
bill and it warrants some careful consideration, and
Representative Gruenberg would like to review it.
2:02:11 PM
SERGEANT CHRIS GIFFORD, President, Juneau Police Department
Employees Association, said he has been a police officer for 15
years, and he has handled a lot of theft cases and would like to
talk about the felony threshold in SB 64. He has dealt with
minor to very serious property crimes, he noted. Police
officers and state troopers who investigate property crimes in
Alaska take all cases seriously, but he can only speak to his
experience in Juneau. In Juneau, if a person steals a corndog
or a DVD player, a uniformed officer will respond. He stated
that there is seldom a situation that is called in that receives
no personal attention or action by law enforcement; however,
police prioritize their level of calls for service. Crimes
against persons are a priority over property crimes, he
explained, and persons reporting a theft can feel like they are
being ignored if an officer is called to a scene of domestic
violence at the same time, for example. The officer is not
ignoring the theft but just prioritizing the incidents, he said.
"In Juneau, an officer will respond to a theft regardless of the
monetary amount," he stated, and "raising the threshold for
property crimes will not change the police response to them-we
respond to all crimes as we can and when we are able, in
relation to other pending calls." Delays in response times can
be alleviated by adding officers, he noted.
SERGEANT GIFFORD said that raising the felony threshold from
$500 to $1200 is reflective of inflation. "I think it's fair,"
he stated. Many times, a person who is accused of a theft of
$500 is convicted of a misdemeanor crime anyway; they are
charged with a felony but end up with a misdemeanor conviction.
Raising that level puts serious pressure on prosecutors to keep
those felony cases as felony cases. Someone who steals $2,000
deserves a felony conviction, incarceration, and supervised
probation and/or parole, he opined. "I think all property
crimes should be prosecuted vigorously, but the statute should
be fair and reflective of current monetary values," he
concluded.
CHAIR KELLER asked Sergeant Gifford if the property threshold
makes no difference as far as the [Juneau Police Department is
concerned].
SERGEANT GIFFORD said that the department investigates
violations, which are not even crimes, if possible. If there is
something more serious pending, the department takes that first,
he added.
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX said many merchants are concerned that if
the property crime is raised to $1,200, then a $750 theft, for
example, would only be a misdemeanor and not taken as seriously.
SERGEANT GIFFORD said police are fact finders, and that is not
based on the monetary amount. A felony level case may involve
different legal aspects, but that would be a question for an
attorney.
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX asked if the department would prioritize a
higher theft amount over another during an investigation.
SERGEANT GIFFORD said a very typical case is the theft of bottle
from a liquor store, and the surveillance footage is reviewed
and an investigation is done, whether the theft is a $500 case
[of liquor] or a $22 bottle. "We do the best we can...."
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG spoke to the effect of SB 64.
"Currently if the value of the merchandise is $500 or more it is
a class C felony; under the bill, if the value was $1,200 or
more it would be a felony." He asked if there is now a
difference in the level of attention in investigating a felony
over a misdemeanor.
SERGEANT GIFFORD said the department gets all the facts that it
can in a theft case and follows all leads, like tracking down a
witness. "We are not doing our job 100 percent if we are not
trying to get all of the evidence we possibly can," he stated.
There is usually not a whole lot of difference in investigating
a felony or a misdemeanor. Many times an arrest is not made for
a felony because prosecutors need to schedule a grand jury "and
things like that." He said, "A lot of times we will gather
information and file the charges with the prosecutor's office,
and the person may walk away at that point but later go in front
of a grand jury and be indicted and arrested on an arrest
warrant."
2:13:58 PM
JEFF JESSE, Chief Executive Officer, Alaska Mental Health Trust
Authority, stated that he is testifying in favor of SB 64. It
is rare to find a bill that is both timely and strategic, he
opined. The House Finance Standing Committee recently attached
intent language to the budget, saying that the court system, the
Alaska Housing Finance Corporation, the Mental Health Trust, and
the departments of Corrections, Labor and Workforce Development,
and Health and Social Services need to continue to work together
toward a plan to reduce recidivism and avoid building another
prison in 2016, which is the path the state is currently on
unless it does something different. The agencies have been
working toward this effort, and he noted that the Criminal
Justice Working Group has a reentry task force and has been
working on how to enhance the process of reentry to deter
recidivism. However, it will require a broader set of actions
in order to avoid building a $300 million prison within the next
four or five years, he stated.
MR. JESSE surmised that the finance committee was responding to
the need for a sustainable budget, and building new prisons
every four to eight years is unlikely to support a sustainable
budget. This bill is an important first step because it
contains a number of keystones to reducing recidivism, including
raising the property crime threshold for a felony. It is time,
he said. Representative Craig Johnson recently reminded him
that the state incarcerates for two reasons: "We're either mad
at them or we're afraid of them." For theft crimes, mostly
people are mad at the offenders, and the fact that inflation has
raised the price of items does not necessarily mean that people
are madder than at the time when original thresholds were set.
Clearly, there needs to be a change in the threshold, he
reiterated. The Criminal Justice Commission created by SB 64 is
also very important. He continued:
If you want to control the prison population, you need
to start reviewing the sentencing guidelines that we
have in state law and make sure that those sentencing
guidelines and requirements are where you want them to
be, so that we're only incarcerating people for the
particular circumstances that we want them
incarcerated for and that we are incarcerating them
for the period of time that is most appropriate to
achieve the goals, not only for setting public
standards of behavior, but also those sentences that
would be most beneficial in terms of rehabilitation
and preventing recidivism.
MR. JESSE opined that the Recidivism Reduction Fund is also a
key element of SB 64. He reiterated the cost of a new prison
and said that, obviously, recidivism cannot be reduced without
cost. He said [the state] is getting smarter in using the
resources available, but clearly there will be a need for
additional resources. This is no different from the "Bring the
Kids Home" initiative, where dollars needed to be reinvested
that were being spent out of state to serve Alaska children. In
this case, [the state] is looking at long-term budgetary
sustainability and what strategic investments need to be made in
order to reduce the population of people in prison and avoid
building another prison. Mr. Jesse turned to the 24/7 Sobriety
program and said it is an evidence-based practice that has
proven to be very effective in keeping people sober and keeping
them from recidivating. A vast majority of people in
corrections had substance abuse connected with their criminal
behavior. He expressed support for the "good time" provided to
those participating in treatment and said that the basic needs
to avoid someone from recidivating is housing, job, and support
in recovery. He stated that this bill is a huge first step that
will reduce recidivism and the budget.
CHAIR KELLER asked if Mr. Jesse saw any areas that were missed.
MR. JESSE said the bill is a great start and covers a pretty
broad cross section of the things that should be started right
now.
2:20:42 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG noted that a district court judge in
Montana declared the 24/7 program to be unconstitutional and it
is getting appealed to their supreme court.
MR. JESSE said there are many conditions placed on release, and
he would be surprised if there was a compelling constitutional
argument against requiring sobriety as a condition for release.
2:22:17 PM
PEGGY BROWN, Executive Director, Alaska Network on Domestic
Violence and Sexual Assault (ANDVSA), noted that she will speak
to two items today. When ANDVSA first saw the bill, members
were OK with [the 24/7 sobriety program] being in the Department
of Corrections (DOC), but as the bill changed and became a part
of the Department of Health and Social Services (HSS), they
developed concerns about victim safety, but some of the concerns
may not be real in the long run, she stated. She said she
understands the need to do something about Alaska's prison
population and that $2 a day for sobriety tests compares well
with $138 for imprisonment. One concern is whether HSS can
actually deal with violent offenders who have been drinking,
including sexual predators or offenders of domestic violence.
She understood that DOC would be a consultant, and the point of
view of ANDVSA is that there may be quite a bit of consulting
and contracting. States with 24/7 programs, like Montana and
South Dakota, have a very strong and immediate law enforcement
response. She cautioned that the program may be evidence-based
in practice but not in its structure. Ms. Brown said ANDVSA is
definitely supportive of some kind of program that works on
sobriety because it is known that alcohol and substance abuse
does not cause sexual assault, but it is a co-occurring
disorder.
2:25:11 PM
MS. BROWN said the second concern is that "your representative
who you created in terms of the Office of Victims' Rights, that
that person who represents victim rights-constitutional
rights...-be a member of that sentencing commission." The
victim's constitutional rights should be considered equally with
the defendant's constitutional rights, she stated. She noted AS
44.19.645 regarding the powers and duties of the commission,
which includes providing for the protection of the rights of
crime victims. Having a representative from the Office of
Victims' Rights will represent the constitutional rights of
victims, she reiterated. She knows that the commission should
have a manageable number of members, but "we feel very strongly
that at least that ... office should be on that panel."
2:29:06 PM
JOE BAIR, Wasilla, Alaska, said he is supportive of SB 64
redefining what is criminal and to what extent it is criminal.
He said his concern today is in redefining sexual crimes, which
not many people want to talk about. He gave the example of two
men having a heated discussion whereby one man backs the other
against the wall. If the man who is against the wall puts up
his arms into the area of the other man's chest to move him
back, it could be construed as an assault-a misdemeanor. If the
one person was a female in the same situation and if any part of
the man's hand touched any part of her breast, it would be a
felony, and the woman does not even have to [press charges]. It
is a crime against the state, and anyone who saw the interaction
could bring it forward, he stated. If the woman said she was
touched, even if the man said, "yea, I was trying to get her out
of my space," it does not matter-it is a felony. "That's the
problem that we're at today-these felonies are not defined," he
opined. Whether it is an attempted sexual assault or a vicious
rape, the penalty can be the same. That is why he thinks there
should be some distinguishing, he stated.
CHAIR KELLER told Mr. Bair that the committee is there to look
at those tough questions.
MR. BAIR said he had another example. He said he and his wife
had been sexually assaulted in their "younger days."
Consequently, they were very careful with their children, and he
was never alone with his nieces. "I bend over backwards to not
be in a situation where anything could be construed as being
irregular," he noted, but he finds that it is detrimental to
him. He spoke of helping a young child get off some play
equipment and asked what would happen if a parent questioned
what he was doing. "These are strange things, but without clear
definitions, I always feel at risk," he told the committee.
2:34:47 PM
ANDY PEVEHOUSE, Kenai, Alaska, said he works for the Alaska
Public Defender Agency, but he is speaking for himself, and he
supports SB 64, particularly with regard to the increased
misdemeanor and felony monetary threshold for property crimes.
On the Kenai Peninsula, police investigate every crime whether
it is a class B misdemeanor or a class A felony, he noted. In
terms of prosecutions, he has seen thefts of $1 prosecuted, and
he has seen a theft of something valued $501 prosecuted as a
class C felony, "so I don't think that there's any risk that
changing the threshold is going to change how crimes are
prosecuted." He noted that the consequences of being branded a
felon are extreme, and it closes many doors for people,
particularly young people. Crimes like theft and criminal
mischief are largely crimes of passion or opportunity, he
explained. He gave the example of a girlfriend and boyfriend
who are angry, and one of them throws a rock and breaks a
windshield. If it costs more than $500 to replace a windshield,
it is a felony, even though the person was not likely thinking
about it, especially not whether it was a felony or a
misdemeanor. The "hothead" is suddenly a felon, he stated.
Raising the threshold will protect people who might do something
foolish but who really should not be branded as felons, he
opined.
MR. PEVEHOUSE noted that the bill does not change the part of
the theft statute that keeps recidivists thieves from becoming
felons. The law, as it stands, is that the third class A
misdemeanor of theft can be charged as a class C felony-it
aggravates and elevates on the third one. He did not think
anyone should be concerned that by changing the threshold, the
message will not go out to repeat offenders. "So if you
continue to be a thief, at some point you certainly deserve that
class C felony," he stated. What was worth $500 30 years ago
would be [worth a lot more] today.
CHAIR KELLER noted that he is surprised at how much interest
there is in SB 64.
2:39:02 PM
JAYCE ROBERTSON, Soldotna, Alaska, noted that he has submitted
written testimony and he has written a letter to Chair Keller.
He said he agrees with much of what Mr. Jesse said, and he
particularly supports the SB 64 language regarding the
conditions of release and "treatment versus punishment." His
strongest support is with the "hopeful addition" of language
from SB 81, which would have an immense positive impact on his
life. He said he once had a substance abuse problem, but he has
been clean and sober for almost three years. He has been
involved with the legal system and with rehabilitation and
punishment. He stated that punishment seems to be the main
focus instead of rehabilitation. Noting that he also supports
the felony threshold change and the recidivism [fund], he mostly
supports treatment for offenders.
MR. ROBERTSON said that treatment, not punishment, is the true
solution to substance abuse, and he knows from personal
experience and from the many people he knows in the recovery
community. Directly or indirectly, every person in Alaska is
impacted by substance abuse, one way or another, he opined. "It
is a rampant problem, statewide, and the true solution is
treatment options." The individual who is abusing drugs or
alcohol will not recover until ready, "so that takes exposure to
treatment and the possibilities; and that takes time and
boundaries; and it forces the individual to be accountable to
their own decisions," he explained. He reiterated that he would
like to see language from SB 81 added to SB 64, granting the
privilege to obtain a limited driver's license for a person who
has completed court-ordered treatment. He explained that he had
his driver's license suspended for a minimum of 10 years, and
that is an extreme hardship on his family. When a person is not
able to drive to work, it creates a hardship on others and
encourages reliance on public assistance. Having a license
would provide access to jobs, treatment, education, and 12-step
recovery community meetings. Personally, he has been able to
overcome the limitation, but he knows of others in the recovery
community where [not being able to drive] is indescribably
difficult. This change would give the state a step forward in
the movement of recognizing treatment versus punishment.
CHAIR KELLER said he appreciated his testimony and called Ronald
Taylor to hear about what is being done by the Department of
Corrections regarding treatment options and reducing recidivism.
2:47:19 PM
RONALD TAYLOR, Deputy Commissioner, Department of Corrections
(DOC), said DOC has placed great emphasis on expanding
rehabilitative services. He noted that only 6 percent of DOC's
total budget is used for those services, but that has been a
substantial increase "of at least a million or two over the last
three or four years." That includes an expansion of educational
opportunities and substance abuse services, he added. The
Recidivism Fund would provide supportive and reentry services
that DOC is now not able to do, he said. Once persons are
released from custody, "they need that added support to
maintain, not only sobriety, but to be able to remain crime-free
and remain in the community and be productive in the community."
This would be of tremendous value, because it is a critical part
of a person being able to stay out of the system, he stated.
CHAIR KELLER asked if those in prison also need more treatment
of substance abuse and more education. He asked if the
recidivism programs are functioning for the inmates.
MR. TAYLOR said that is correct, "We actually have expanded our
institutional substance abuse programing for out-patient
services and residential services, and we continue to look at
ways that we can enhance our assessment capabilities inside the
institution as well as in the community."
2:50:10 PM
CARMEN GUTIERREZ, Anchorage, Alaska, said she is testifying for
herself, but she has worked for the State of Alaska for about 25
years in the criminal justice system, and she was the deputy
commissioner for DOC for 3 years. She commended Chair Keller
and the committee for their hard work to address meaningful
reforms that will reduce recidivism and make Alaska communities
healthier, and she said SB 64 is a great step in that direction.
The bill is intended to promote offender accountability and to
allow the DOC to use its limited hard prison beds in a more
cost-effective fashion, she opined. An organization, called
Right on Crime, is "making the conservative case for criminal
justice reform." Right on Crime is very engaged in looking at
cost-effective, evidence-based practices that reduce crime,
reduce cost, reform offenders, and protect communities, she
stated. She said that Grover Norquist is a leader of the
organization and in July, 2013, sent a letter in support of SB
64. Other members of Right on Crime are noteworthy
conservatives, such as Edwin Meese, Jeb Bush, Newt Gingrich, and
William Bennett. There is a recognition throughout the country
that the practices of the past will only provide failed results,
"and we really have a responsibility to use valuable Alaska
resources in a manner that gives Alaskans the best outcomes
possible," she said.
MS. GUTIERREZ urged the committee to look at the opinion noted
previously by Representative Gruenberg, which she has not seen,
but as Mr. Jesse indicated, courts have been imposing, via
statute, conditions of release and probation, "and it is very
hard for me to imagine how adding a condition of sobriety 24/7
would be found, by our courts, as being unconstitutional." She
said she strongly supports the Alaska Criminal Justice
Commission, and it would be very essential in Alaska moving
forward in developing comprehensive strategies.
2:55:00 PM
AL TAMAGNI, Member, National Federation of Independent Business,
said that he found it interesting to listen to the previous
testifiers, "because none of them are really absorbing the loss;
it's the business people that absorb the loss, and there really
isn't enough consideration given there." He noted that
inflation depends on what is stolen; a computer worth $3,000 in
1982 would be worth $680 today. He said, "We have already
agreed to an increase in the threshold amount from $500 to
$750." He noted that net profits have not increased 200 percent
since 1976 on a percentage-type basis; they are still very, very
low. The small business entities of Alaska are willing to do
its share by allowing the threshold to rise to $750, and the
other entities should make more of an effort to solve the
problem, he opined.
2:58:12 PM
RICK ALLEN, Director, Office of Public Advocacy, Alaska
Department of Administration, said the Office of Public Advocacy
does not generally take positions on proposed legislation, and
it takes no official position on SB 64; however, he will testify
on the felony threshold provision. Mr. Allen was a state
prosecutor for over seven years, and he noted that current law
is strictly prosecuted in many parts of Alaska. He said he
personally indicted at least two people for felony theft for
stealing bicycles worth over $500, and in his last trial, in
2011, he successfully prosecuted a man for walking into a Target
[store] and walking out with a $600 stereo. The man was
sentenced to prison for two years, and the case cost the state
over $100,000 for the prosecution, defense, and incarceration.
The legislature needs to decide "if that math pencils out to
anybody but Target."
CHAIR KELLER closed public testimony, and SB 64 was held over.
3:00:57 PM
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the House
Judiciary Standing Committee meeting was adjourned at 3:00 P.M.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| 2. HB 315 Sponsor Statement.pdf |
HJUD 3/26/2014 1:00:00 PM |
HB 315 |
| 3. HB 315 Ver U.pdf |
HJUD 3/26/2014 1:00:00 PM |
HB 315 |
| HB 315 Fiscal Note~LAW.pdf |
HJUD 3/26/2014 1:00:00 PM |
HB 315 |
| HB 315 Fiscal Note~OPA.pdf |
HJUD 3/26/2014 1:00:00 PM |
HB 315 |
| HB 315 Fiscal Note~PDA.pdf |
HJUD 3/26/2014 1:00:00 PM |
HB 315 |
| 5. HB 315 Legal Opinion re NH 2-26-14.pdf |
HJUD 3/26/2014 1:00:00 PM |
HB 315 |
| 4. HB 315 Legal Opinion 2-18-14.pdf |
HJUD 3/26/2014 1:00:00 PM |
HB 315 |
| 6. HB 315 Supporting Documents State Language on Jury Nullification.pdf |
HJUD 3/26/2014 1:00:00 PM |
HB 315 |
| 7. HB 315 Supporting Document HB 140.pdf |
HJUD 3/26/2014 1:00:00 PM |
HB 315 |
| 8. HB 315 Supporting Document HB 463.pdf |
HJUD 3/26/2014 1:00:00 PM |
HB 315 HB 463 |
| HB 362-Sponsor Statement.pdf |
HJUD 3/26/2014 1:00:00 PM |
HB 362 |
| HB 362-Version U.pdf |
HJUD 3/26/2014 1:00:00 PM |
HB 362 |
| HB 362 Fiscal Note~DHSS.pdf |
HJUD 3/26/2014 1:00:00 PM |
HB 362 |
| HB 362 Fiscal Note~OPA.pdf |
HJUD 3/26/2014 1:00:00 PM |
HB 362 |
| HB 362 Fiscal Note~Public Defender Agency.pdf |
HJUD 3/26/2014 1:00:00 PM |
HB 362 |
| HB 362 Fiscal Note~Public Safety.pdf |
HJUD 3/26/2014 1:00:00 PM |
HB 362 |
| HB362 Fiscal Note~Court System.pdf |
HJUD 3/26/2014 1:00:00 PM |
HB 362 |
| HB 362-Legal Memo.pdf |
HJUD 3/26/2014 1:00:00 PM |
HB 362 |
| HB 362-ADN Article 2-4-14.pdf |
HJUD 3/26/2014 1:00:00 PM |
HB 362 |
| HB 362-ADN Article 12-18-13.pdf |
HJUD 3/26/2014 1:00:00 PM |
HB 362 |
| HB 362-ADN Article-1-22-14.pdf |
HJUD 3/26/2014 1:00:00 PM |
HB 362 |
| HB 362-Alaska Dispatch Article 1-10-14.pdf |
HJUD 3/26/2014 1:00:00 PM |
HB 362 |
| HB 362-Anchorage Ordinance.pdf |
HJUD 3/26/2014 1:00:00 PM |
HB 362 |
| HB362-ADN Article 2-8-14.pdf |
HJUD 3/26/2014 1:00:00 PM |
HB 362 |
| HB 250 ver. P Proposed Amendments.pdf |
HJUD 3/26/2014 1:00:00 PM |
HB 250 |
| SB 64 Letter~Betty Bair.pdf |
HJUD 3/26/2014 1:00:00 PM |
SB 64 |
| SB 64 Support Letter~Jayce Robertson.pdf |
HJUD 3/26/2014 1:00:00 PM |
SB 64 |
| SB 64 Memo Addressing Questions from House Judiciary 3-26-14.pdf |
HJUD 3/26/2014 1:00:00 PM |
SB 64 |
| HB 315 Support Letter~Lance Roberts.pdf |
HJUD 3/26/2014 1:00:00 PM |
HB 315 |
| CSHB 362 Summary of Changes ver. U.pdf |
HJUD 3/26/2014 1:00:00 PM |
HB 362 |
| HB 362 Support Document~ADN Article 3-25-14.pdf |
HJUD 3/26/2014 1:00:00 PM |
HB 362 |
| HB 362 Fiscal Note~Revised OPA.pdf |
HJUD 3/26/2014 1:00:00 PM |
HB 362 |
| HB 362 Fiscal Note~Revised PDA.pdf |
HJUD 3/26/2014 1:00:00 PM |
HB 362 |