Legislature(1993 - 1994)

03/17/1993 01:00 PM JUD

Audio Topic
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
txt
                                                                               
               HOUSE JUDICIARY STANDING COMMITTEE                              
                         March 17, 1993                                        
                            1:00 p.m.                                          
                                                                               
                                                                               
  MEMBERS PRESENT                                                              
                                                                               
  Representative Brian Porter, Chairman                                        
  Representative Jeannette James, Vice-Chair                                   
  Representative Pete Kott                                                     
  Representative Gail Phillips                                                 
  Representative Joe Green                                                     
  Representative Jim Nordlund                                                  
                                                                               
  MEMBERS ABSENT                                                               
                                                                               
  Representative Cliff Davidson                                                
                                                                               
  COMMITTEE CALENDAR                                                           
                                                                               
  HB 109    "An Act relating to blood tests for persons                        
            charged with sex offenses; and providing for an                    
            effective date."                                                   
                                                                               
            CSHB (109) HES PASSED OUT WITH A DO PASS                           
            RECOMMENDATION                                                     
                                                                               
  *HB 127   "An Act setting presumptive terms of imprisonment                  
            for certain defendants convicted of certain crimes                 
            who possessed a firearm during the commission of                   
            the crime; setting a mandatory term of                             
            imprisonment for a defendant convicted of assault                  
            in the fourth degree who possessed a firearm                       
            during the commission of the offense."                             
                                                                               
            HEARD AND HELD IN COMMITTEE FOR FURTHER                            
            CONSIDERATION                                                      
                                                                               
  HB 86     "An Act relating to sanctions for property-related                 
            offenses, to remedies for property-related                         
            offenses committed by juveniles, and to certain                    
            records of those offenses."                                        
                                                                               
            HEARD AND HELD IN COMMITTEE FOR FURTHER                            
            CONSIDERATION                                                      
                                                                               
  (* first public hearing)                                                     
                                                                               
  WITNESS REGISTER                                                             
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE PETE KOTT                                                     
  Alaska State Legislature                                                     
  State Capitol, Room 409                                                      
  Juneau, Alaska 99801-1182                                                    
  Phone:  465-3777                                                             
  Position Statement: Prime sponsor of HB 109 and HB 127                       
                                                                               
  LEE ANN LUCAS                                                                
  Special Assistant to the Commissioner                                        
  Department of Public Safety                                                  
  P. O. Box 111200                                                             
  Juneau, Alaska 99811                                                         
  Phone:  465-4322                                                             
  Position Statement: Answered questions related to HB 109                     
                                                                               
  ELMER LINDSTROM                                                              
  Special Assistant to the Commissioner                                        
  Department of Health and Social Services                                     
  P. O. Box 110601                                                             
  Juneau, Alaska 99811-0601                                                    
  Phone:  465-3030                                                             
  Position Statement: Answered questions, provided information                 
                      and suggested amendment to HB 109                        
                                                                               
  JERRY LUCKHAUPT                                                              
  Legislative Affairs Agency                                                   
  Division of Legal Services                                                   
  130 Seward Street, Suite 401                                                 
  Juneau, Alaska 99801                                                         
  Phone:  465-2450                                                             
  Position Statement: Provided information related to HB 109                   
                                                                               
  CINDY SMITH                                                                  
  Alaska Network on Domestic Violence and Sexual Assault                       
  419 Sixth Street                                                             
  Juneau, Alaska 99801                                                         
  Phone:  586-3650                                                             
  Position Statement: Suggested amendment to HB 109                            
                                                                               
  MARGOT KNUTH                                                                 
  Assistant Attorney General                                                   
  Department of Law                                                            
  Criminal Division                                                            
  P. O. Box 110300                                                             
  Juneau, Alaska 99811-0300                                                    
  Phone:  465-3428                                                             
  Position Statement: Answered questions related to HB 109 and                 
                      HB 127; suggested amendment to HB 127                    
                                                                               
  JACK PHELPS, Legislative Aide                                                
    to Representative Pete Kott                                                
  Alaska State Legislature                                                     
  State Capitol, Room 409                                                      
  Juneau, Alaska 99801-1182                                                    
  Phone:  465-3777                                                             
  Position Statement: Provided information related to HB 109                   
                                                                               
  GAYLE HORETSKI                                                               
  Committee Counsel                                                            
  House Judiciary Committee                                                    
  Alaska State Legislature                                                     
  State Capitol, Room 120                                                      
  Juneau, Alaska 99801-1182                                                    
  Phone:  465-6841                                                             
  Position Statement: Asked questions related to HB 109                        
                                                                               
  SANDY PEVAN                                                                  
  P. O. Box 871256                                                             
  Wasilla, Alaska 99687                                                        
  Phone:  373-6198                                                             
  Position Statement: Supported HB 86                                          
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE CON BUNDE                                                     
  Alaska State Legislature                                                     
  State Capitol, Room 112                                                      
  Juneau, Alaska 99801-1182                                                    
  Phone:  465-4843                                                             
  Position Statement: Prime sponsor of HB 86                                   
                                                                               
  PREVIOUS ACTION                                                              
                                                                               
  BILL:  HB 109                                                                
  SHORT TITLE:  BLOOD TESTS ON SEX CRIME PERPETRATORS                          
  BILL VERSION: CSHB 109(JUD)                                                  
  SPONSOR(S):   REPRESENTATIVE(S) KOTT                                         
                                                                               
  TITLE: "An Act relating to blood tests for persons charged                   
  with sex offenses; and providing for an effective date."                     
                                                                               
  JRN-DATE     JRN-PG               ACTION                                     
                                                                               
  01/29/93       181    (H)   READ THE FIRST TIME/REFERRAL(S)                  
  01/29/93       181    (H)   HES, JUDICIARY, FINANCE                          
  02/16/93              (H)   HES AT 03:00 PM CAPITOL 106                      
  02/16/93              (H)   MINUTE(HES)                                      
  02/17/93       370    (H)   HES RPT  CS(HES)  8DP                            
  02/17/93       370    (H)   DP: VEZEY, G.DAVIS, BUNDE,                       
                              NICHOLIA                                         
  02/17/93       370    (H)   DP: B.DAVIS, KOTT, TOOHEY,                       
                              BRICE                                            
  02/17/93       370    (H)   -FISCAL NOTE  (DHSS)  2/17/93                    
  02/17/93       370    (H)   -2 ZERO FNS (CORR, LAW)                          
                              2/17/93                                          
  03/17/93              (H)   JUD AT 01:00 PM CAPITOL 120                      
                                                                               
                                                                               
  BILL:  HB 127                                                                
  SHORT TITLE:  PRESUMPTIVE TERMS FOR FIREARMS POSSESSION                      
  BILL VERSION:                                                                
  SPONSOR(S):   REPRESENTATIVE(S) KOTT,Bunde,Green                             
                                                                               
  TITLE: "An Act setting presumptive terms of imprisonment for                 
  certain defendant convicted of certain crimes who possessed                  
  a firearm during the commission of the crime; setting a                      
  mandatory term of imprisonment for a defendant convicted of                  
  assault in the fourth degree who possessed a firearm during                  
  the commission of the offense."                                              
                                                                               
  JRN-DATE     JRN-PG               ACTION                                     
                                                                               
  02/05/93       235    (H)   READ THE FIRST TIME/REFERRAL(S)                  
  02/05/93       235    (H)   JUDICIARY, FINANCE                               
  02/08/93       264    (H)   COSPONSOR(S): BUNDE                              
  02/22/93       421    (H)   COSPONSOR(S): GREEN                              
  03/17/93              (H)   JUD AT 01:00 PM CAPITOL 120                      
                                                                               
                                                                               
  BILL:  HB 86                                                                 
  SHORT TITLE:  SANCTIONS FOR PROPERTY-RELATED OFFENSES                        
  BILL VERSION: 2D SSHB 86                                                     
  SPONSOR(S):   REPRESENTATIVE(S) BUNDE,Green                                  
                                                                               
  TITLE: "An Act relating to sanctions for property-related                    
  offenses, to remedies for property-related offenses                          
  committed by juveniles, and to certain records of those                      
  offenses."                                                                   
                                                                               
  JRN-DATE     JRN-PG               ACTION                                     
                                                                               
  01/22/93       141    (H)   READ THE FIRST TIME/REFERRAL(S)                  
  01/22/93       141    (H)   JUDICIARY, FINANCE                               
  01/29/93       177    (H)   SPONSOR SUBSTITUTE INTRODUCED-                   
                              NEW TITLE                                        
  01/29/93       177    (H)   REFERRED TO JUDICIARY, FINANCE                   
  02/03/93       223    (H)   COSPONSOR(S): GREEN                              
  02/25/93       455    (H)   2D SPONSOR SUBSTITUTE                            
                              INTRODUCED                                       
  02/25/93       455    (H)   JUDICIARY, FINANCE                               
  03/12/93              (H)   JUD AT 01:00 PM CAPITOL 120                      
  03/17/93              (H)   JUD AT 01:00 PM CAPITOL 120                      
                                                                               
                                                                               
  ACTION NARRATIVE                                                             
                                                                               
  TAPE 93-35, SIDE A                                                           
  Number 000                                                                   
                                                                               
  The House Judiciary Standing Committee meeting was called to                 
  order at 1:07 p.m., on March 17, 1993.  A quorum was                         
  present.  Chairman Porter announced that the committee would                 
  address HB 109 first.                                                        
                                                                               
  HB 109:  BLOOD TESTS ON SEX CRIME PERPETRATORS                               
                                                                               
  Number 025                                                                   
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE PETE KOTT, PRIME SPONSOR of HB 109, called                    
  his legislation a "victims' rights bill."  He said that                      
  sexual assault victims were faced with many difficulties,                    
  including the fear of having been infected with HIV and                      
  other sexually-transmitted diseases (STDs).  He expressed an                 
  opinion that the state had a responsibility to provide some                  
  measure of relief to victims.  He said that a sexual assault                 
  victim had the right to know whether or not the offender was                 
  infected with HIV or another STD.                                            
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE KOTT commented that if an offender tested                     
  positive for HIV, a victim could begin taking precautions to                 
  protect himself or herself and others.  He noted that a                      
  victim could elect to be treated with the drug AZT.  He said                 
  that HB 109 would require the Department of Health and                       
  Social Services (DHSS) to provide information, counseling,                   
  and referral to sexual assault victims so that they could                    
  make informed decisions concerning the health of themselves                  
  and others.                                                                  
                                                                               
  Number 075                                                                   
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE KOTT commented that, because of the delay                     
  between HIV infection and the time when the virus could be                   
  detected, an offender's initial negative HIV test would not                  
  necessarily mean that the virus had not been transmitted to                  
  the victim.  However, he said that a negative test would be                  
  beneficial in sustaining a victim's natural hope that she or                 
  he had not been infected with the HIV virus.  He mentioned                   
  the positive psychological effects of such hope.  He cited                   
  the currently accepted medical practice of testing a sexual                  
  assault victim for the presence of the HIV virus several                     
  times over the months following an assault.                                  
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE KOTT stated that since 1987, 24 states had                    
  enacted laws similar to HB 109.  He said that the bill would                 
  require the court to order that an offender be tested, at                    
  the request of a victim, when the court found probable cause                 
  that the defendant committed specified sexual acts during                    
  which bodily fluids were likely transmitted to the victim.                   
                                                                               
  Number 125                                                                   
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE KOTT said that five other states allowed for                  
  a person to be tested upon a court order at the time of                      
  arrest or when charges were filed.  Other states, he noted,                  
  had made testing mandatory upon arrest.  He said that in                     
  light of Alaska's constitutional right to privacy, mandatory                 
  testing upon arrest might be struck down by the court.  He                   
  added that some victims' advocacy groups had indicated their                 
  preference for a testing process initiated by the victim.                    
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE KOTT commented that in 1990, Congress passed                  
  a law tying action on the issue of testing sex offenders for                 
  the HIV virus with certain federal funding.  He said that                    
  unless the legislature passed HB 109 or a similar law, the                   
  Department of Public Safety (DPS) stood to lose $185,000 in                  
  federal funds.                                                               
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE KOTT noted that although federal guidelines                   
  only required that states test convicted offenders, many                     
  advocacy groups insisted that the delay between the assault                  
  and conviction was too long to provide the desired                           
  reassurance to victims.  That approach was, therefore, not                   
  adopted in HB 109.  He called members' attention to                          
  materials in their bill packets.  He noted that HB 109 had                   
  received unanimous "do pass" votes when it was passed out of                 
  the House Health, Education, and Social Services (HESS)                      
  Committee.                                                                   
                                                                               
  Number 157                                                                   
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE JOE GREEN asked if every state implementing a                 
  testing program would receive the same amount of federal                     
  funding, or if funding depended upon a state's population.                   
                                                                               
  Number 175                                                                   
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE KOTT did not know the answer to                               
  Representative Green's question.                                             
                                                                               
  Number 177                                                                   
                                                                               
  LEE ANN LUCAS, SPECIAL ASSISTANT TO THE COMMISSIONER OF THE                  
  DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY, said that the funds were based                  
  upon a state's population.                                                   
                                                                               
  Number 182                                                                   
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE GREEN asked if there was any possibility of                   
  Alaska getting a substantially smaller amount of federal                     
  funding, due to states with large populations implementing                   
  testing programs.  Specifically, he wanted to know if it was                 
  possible that the testing program might cost the state more                  
  money than it would receive from the federal government.                     
                                                                               
  MS. LUCAS understood that states had until October to comply                 
  with the federal law, and stated that thus far, only one                     
  additional state had implemented a testing program.                          
                                                                               
  CHAIRMAN BRIAN PORTER asked if it would be fair to say that                  
  Alaska's $185,000 was predicated on all states coming into                   
  compliance with the federal law.                                             
                                                                               
  Number 205                                                                   
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE KOTT believed that Alaska would receive                       
  $185,000 at a minimum.  If all states did not comply with                    
  the law, he added, Alaska could receive even more federal                    
  funds.                                                                       
                                                                               
  ELMER LINDSTROM, SPECIAL ASSISTANT TO THE COMMISSIONER OF                    
  THE DHSS, said that HB 109 had been extensively discussed by                 
  the Department of Law (DOL), the Department of Corrections                   
  (DOC), the DPS, and the DHSS.  He commented that the DHSS                    
  had submitted two fiscal notes for HB 109, one of which was                  
  for the DHSS' laboratory component, and amounted to $27,900.                 
  He said that the DHSS' laboratories would be responsible for                 
  performing tests on all blood samples required by HB 109.                    
  He mentioned that this fiscal note was the same as one which                 
  had been adopted by the HESS Committee.                                      
                                                                               
  Number 230                                                                   
                                                                               
  MR. LINDSTROM said that the DHSS' second fiscal note was for                 
  the nursing component, and amounted to $45,500.  He stated                   
  that this fiscal note had not been reviewed by the HESS                      
  Committee.  The funds represented the cost of counseling for                 
  sexual assault victims and perpetrators who were not in the                  
  custody of the DOC or the Division of Family and Youth                       
  Services (DFYS).  He said that he had tried without success                  
  to find another agency that would provide the counseling                     
  services.                                                                    
                                                                               
  Number 270                                                                   
                                                                               
  MR. LINDSTROM commented that the provisions of HB 109 had                    
  been placed in Title 18 of the Alaska Statutes.  He noted                    
  that Title 18 pertained to health matters.  He mentioned                     
  that it might be more appropriate to place several of                        
  HB 109's sections into other Titles.  Specifically, he felt                  
  that section 1 of the bill would more appropriately appear                   
  within Title 12.                                                             
                                                                               
  Number 300                                                                   
                                                                               
  MR. LINDSTROM noted that nowhere in HB 109 was it stated                     
  that the DOC and the DFYS had any responsibilities.                          
  However, he said that all parties had agreed that those                      
  agencies ought to be responsible for conducting testing of                   
  and counseling for perpetrators within their custody.  He                    
  noted that the DHSS' Division of Public Health (DPH), would                  
  provide testing of and counseling for all other                              
  perpetrators.                                                                
                                                                               
  Number 336                                                                   
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE GAIL PHILLIPS asked Mr. Lindstrom if he had                   
  suggested that the HESS Committee move sections of HB 109 to                 
  other areas of the Alaska Statutes.                                          
                                                                               
  Number 340                                                                   
                                                                               
  MR. LINDSTROM replied in the negative.  He believed the                      
  nature of the amendment was such that it would be most                       
  appropriately addressed by the House Judiciary Committee.                    
                                                                               
  Number 352                                                                   
                                                                               
  CHAIRMAN PORTER asked Mr. Lindstrom if he felt that not                      
  moving sections of HB 109 to other areas of the Alaska                       
  Statutes would result in certain agencies not fulfilling                     
  their responsibilities toward the testing program.                           
                                                                               
  Number 356                                                                   
                                                                               
  MR. LINDSTROM noted that all parties involved currently                      
  understood what their responsibilities toward the program                    
  were.  However, he commented that over time, personnel would                 
  change and the current understanding might not carry                         
  forward.                                                                     
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE PHILLIPS asked Representative Kott if he had                  
  reviewed Mr. Lindstrom's proposed amendments.                                
                                                                               
  Number 373                                                                   
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE KOTT responded in the negative.                               
                                                                               
  Number 376                                                                   
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE GREEN asked Mr. Lindstrom if the desired                      
  change could be accomplished merely by changing the                          
  referenced Alaska Statute.                                                   
                                                                               
  Number 384                                                                   
                                                                               
  MR. LINDSTROM replied that as he was not a drafting                          
  attorney, he could not speak to Representative Green's                       
  question.                                                                    
                                                                               
  Number 388                                                                   
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE PHILLIPS expressed concern that bills coming                  
  to the House Judiciary Committee should be in somewhat final                 
  form.  She said that this was the second time in less than                   
  two weeks that an agency had come to the committee with an                   
  amendment which the sponsor had not yet reviewed.                            
                                                                               
  Number 402                                                                   
                                                                               
  CHAIRMAN PORTER asked Mr. Lindstrom to clarify how he wished                 
  HB 109 to be amended.                                                        
                                                                               
  MR. LINDSTROM said that his amendment would provide that the                 
  DOC and the DFYS take samples from perpetrators within their                 
  custody; the samples would then go to the DPH for analysis.                  
  Additionally, the DOC and the DFYS would counsel offenders                   
  within their custody.                                                        
                                                                               
  Number 431                                                                   
                                                                               
  JERRY LUCKHAUPT, ATTORNEY, LEGISLATIVE AFFAIRS AGENCY,                       
  DIVISION OF LEGAL SERVICES, said that the provisions of                      
  HB 109 were placed in Title 18 because that section of the                   
  statutes dealt with a number of health and safety issues.                    
  He noted that not everything within Title 18 pertained to                    
  the DHSS.  He commented that HB 109 dealt with many things:                  
  Children, adults, criminal procedure, sex crimes, and blood                  
  testing, subjects which were usually found within many                       
  different sections of the statutes.                                          
                                                                               
  MR. LUCKHAUPT said that rather than put the elements of                      
  HB 109 into many different sections of the statutes, it was                  
  better to put a coordinated system of law within one section                 
  of the statutes.  He commented that the revisor of statutes                  
  had the authority to place statutes wherever he saw fit, in                  
  order to make it easier for people to understand the law.                    
  He was of the opinion that the revisor would be reluctant to                 
  place the provisions of HB 109 into more than one section of                 
  the statutes.                                                                
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE JIM NORDLUND, reviewing Title 18 of the                       
  Alaska Statutes, said that it pertained to many different                    
  departments within state government.  He was of the opinion                  
  that placing the provisions of HB 109 into Title 18 did not                  
  mean that the DHSS would have to implement all of those                      
  provisions.                                                                  
                                                                               
  Number 515                                                                   
                                                                               
  MR. LUCKHAUPT commented that AS 18.15, where the provisions                  
  of HB 109 had been placed, dealt with the DHSS; however, he                  
  noted that that did not mean the DHSS was responsible for                    
  implementing all of the provisions.                                          
                                                                               
  Number 522                                                                   
                                                                               
  CHAIRMAN PORTER understood that HB 109 would require the                     
  court to make a determination as to which agency would draw                  
  samples and provide counseling.                                              
                                                                               
  Number 523                                                                   
                                                                               
  MR. LUCKHAUPT indicated that he had the same understanding.                  
                                                                               
  Number 537                                                                   
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE KOTT said that the intent of HB 109 was to                    
  not place the responsibility of testing and counseling on                    
  any one agency.                                                              
                                                                               
  Number 541                                                                   
                                                                               
  CINDY SMITH, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, ALASKA NETWORK ON DOMESTIC                  
  VIOLENCE AND SEXUAL ASSAULT (ANDVSA), commented that                         
  transmission of STDs such as syphilis and gonorrhea during                   
  sexual assault was not uncommon.  She said that it was                       
  currently standard practice at most hospitals to give a rape                 
  victim an automatic course of antibiotics, without waiting                   
  to hear about whether or not an offender had an STD.  She                    
  noted that the chances of a sexual assault victim                            
  contracting HIV were thought to be very low, about .2%, but                  
  could be higher in some cases.                                               
                                                                               
  Number 561                                                                   
                                                                               
  MS. SMITH said that in 1990, the first documented case of                    
  HIV transmission as a result of a rape was recorded at a                     
  London hospital.  She stated that unfortunately, an                          
  offender's negative test did not ensure a victim that she or                 
  he had not contracted the HIV virus.  Conversely, an                         
  offender's positive test did not mean that a victim had                      
  contracted the disease.  She noted that a victim would still                 
  need to be tested approximately every three months for a                     
  year after an assault.                                                       
                                                                               
  MS. SMITH commented that there would be two purposes,                        
  medical and legal, served by testing offenders.  The first                   
  was that a victim could undergo AZT treatment if there was                   
  known exposure to the HIV virus.  She stated that in the                     
  absence of a testing requirement, perpetrators were known to                 
  use their willingness to be tested as a chip in charge                       
  bargaining.  She said that the ANDVSA believed that testing                  
  of offenders could be beneficial to victims, and should be                   
  available to them as an option.                                              
                                                                               
  MS. SMITH requested that two changes be made to HB 109.  She                 
  asked that the committee delete the specific citation of                     
  sexual assault statutes referenced in section 1, line 8.                     
  The deletion would allow for testing for offenders of any                    
  crime of sexual penetration, she said.                                       
                                                                               
  Number 600                                                                   
                                                                               
  MS. SMITH also asked that HB 109 be amended so as to broaden                 
  who a victim could tell about contracting an STD as the                      
  result of a sexual assault.  She said that it was her                        
  understanding that the sponsor was proposing to add language                 
  addressing her concern that a victim be able to tell a                       
  person with whom she or he was in a dating or engagement                     
  relationship.  She expressed her concern that many rape                      
  victims were young and single, and would most likely confide                 
  in a best friend.  That, however, would be a violation of                    
  HB 109, as currently drafted, she said.                                      
                                                                               
  MS. SMITH commented that the penalty for telling someone not                 
  authorized by law was currently contempt of court.  She                      
  noted that raising the penalty to a misdemeanor would be                     
  very unfortunate.  She expressed her organization's concern                  
  that confidentiality provisions for STD testing in HB 109                    
  not affect current use of STD tests by prosecutors.  In                      
  summary, she said that HB 109 was no panacea, but would be                   
  of some help to sexual assault victims.                                      
                                                                               
  Number 652                                                                   
                                                                               
  CHAIRMAN PORTER indicated that Joanne Lopez, from the                        
  Council on Domestic Violence and Sexual Assault was present,                 
  as were Lee Ann Lucas and Alaska State Trooper, Colonel John                 
  Murphy from the DPS.                                                         
                                                                               
  Number 657                                                                   
                                                                               
  CHAIRMAN PORTER asked Margot Knuth, from the DOL's Criminal                  
  Division, to address a question regarding penalties for                      
  disclosure of information to unauthorized persons.                           
                                                                               
  Number 661                                                                   
                                                                               
  MARGOT KNUTH, ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL, CRIMINAL DIVISION,                 
  DOL, said that there was concern about involuntarily                         
  identifying persons with the HIV virus.  She said that the                   
  question centered around how the state would balance a                       
  perpetrator's right to privacy with the public's and the                     
  victim's right to know and to share that information.                        
                                                                               
  Number 689                                                                   
                                                                               
  CHAIRMAN PORTER asked Ms. Knuth if any problem would result                  
  from removing the section pertaining to disclosure.                          
                                                                               
  Number 694                                                                   
                                                                               
  MS. KNUTH was of the opinion that omitting the section would                 
  not result in any problems.  She believed that if a person                   
  was charged with a felony sexual assault, that person's                      
  right to privacy was greatly reduced.  She commented that                    
  her opinion was not universally shared, however.  She stated                 
  that part of the problem with HB 109 was that it required                    
  testing for persons charged with an offense, not just those                  
  convicted of an offense.                                                     
                                                                               
  Number 715                                                                   
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE PHILLIPS asked if the sponsor would object to                 
  removing the disclosure section.  She found the notion of                    
  finding a victim guilty of an offense for telling a friend                   
  that his or her attacker was HIV-positive very distasteful.                  
                                                                               
  Number 724                                                                   
                                                                               
  CHAIRMAN PORTER asked whether, if the committee removed the                  
  disclosure section, a person who disclosed certain                           
  information could or could not be found to have violated                     
  someone's right to privacy.  He further asked if including                   
  the disclosure section established that a victim would                       
  definitely be guilty of violating someone's right to                         
  privacy, if she or he disclosed the offender's HIV-positive                  
  status to a friend.                                                          
                                                                               
  Number 729                                                                   
                                                                               
  MS. KNUTH felt that the Chairman was correct.  She added                     
  that a judge could enter an order requiring non-disclosure                   
  in any case.  That, she noted, would invoke all of the                       
  contempt sanctions.                                                          
                                                                               
  Number 737                                                                   
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE KOTT commented that the section prohibiting                   
  the disclosure of HIV test results was put into HB 109                       
  because of Alaska's constitutional right to privacy.  He                     
  noted that the disclosure section in the HESS committee                      
  substitute was somewhat watered down, as compared to the                     
  same section in the original HB 109.  He said that in the                    
  original HB 109, disclosure was considered a misdemeanor,                    
  not contempt of court, as it was in the committee                            
  substitute.                                                                  
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE KOTT stated that most states which had                        
  implemented laws similar to HB 109 punished disclosure                       
  violations as misdemeanors.  He noted that HB 109 would                      
  require testing for those charged with sex offenses, not                     
  just those who were convicted.  He commented that he was                     
  trying to maintain a balance between a defendant's right to                  
  privacy and a victim's rights.                                               
                                                                               
  Number 752                                                                   
                                                                               
  CHAIRMAN PORTER wondered aloud whether the balance to which                  
  Representative Kott had referred already existed, as any                     
  person could sue any other person for violating their right                  
  to privacy.  He expressed concern that the disclosure                        
  section in HB 109 gave offenders a tool with which to "go                    
  after" victims.                                                              
                                                                               
  Number 761                                                                   
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE PHILLIPS supported removing the section                       
  prohibiting disclosure of HIV test results from HB 109.                      
                                                                               
  Number 765                                                                   
                                                                               
  CHAIRMAN PORTER relayed a comment from the committee's                       
  counsel that if a court order prohibited a victim from                       
  disclosing a defendant's HIV status, then violation of that                  
  court order would be contempt of court.                                      
                                                                               
  Number 772                                                                   
                                                                               
  MS. KNUTH commented that the committee substitute for                        
  HB 109, on page 3, lines 26-27, required that the court                      
  order confidentiality.  She suggested that if the committee                  
  chose to delete the disclosure section of the bill, they                     
  should also make the order of confidentiality discretionary,                 
  by changing the word "shall" to "may" on line 26.                            
                                                                               
  CHAIRMAN PORTER said that he would entertain a motion to                     
  strike proposed section 18.15.330 and change, on page 3,                     
  line 26, the word "shall" to "may."                                          
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE JEANNETTE JAMES made the MOTION.                              
                                                                               
  TAPE 93-35, SIDE B                                                           
  Number 000                                                                   
                                                                               
  JACK PHELPS, LEGISLATIVE AIDE TO REPRESENTATIVE PETE KOTT,                   
  asked that the committee get assurance from the DOL that                     
  making the amendment would not compromise the                                
  constitutionality of HB 109.                                                 
                                                                               
  Number 015                                                                   
                                                                               
  MS. KNUTH commented that the amendment did not present                       
  constitutionality problems.  She noted that at some point,                   
  an HIV-positive defendant, whose HIV status was disclosed,                   
  and who was acquitted, might sue.  The result of that, she                   
  said, would be that courts would be required to order                        
  confidentiality.  The result, in her opinion, would not be                   
  to cease testing.                                                            
                                                                               
  CHAIRMAN PORTER, hearing no objection to the amendment,                      
  stated that the AMENDMENT had been ADOPTED.                                  
                                                                               
  Number 039                                                                   
                                                                               
  MS. KNUTH noted that Representative Kott had proposed                        
  several amendments to HB 109, one of which was important to                  
  the DOL.  She suggested that the committee add the word                      
  "exclusively" to language regarding letting the court rely                   
  on evidence presented to a grand jury or at a preliminary                    
  hearing.                                                                     
                                                                               
  Number 060                                                                   
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE JAMES made a MOTION to ADOPT the HESS                         
  Committee substitute for HB 109.  There being no objection,                  
  IT WAS SO ORDERED.                                                           
                                                                               
  Number 084                                                                   
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE KOTT had four amendments to offer.  His FIRST                 
  AMENDMENT would ADD the word "presentment" AFTER the word                    
  "indictment" to page 1, lines 7, 12 and 14.  He commented                    
  that this amendment would tighten up the constitutionality                   
  of the bill.                                                                 
                                                                               
  Number 100                                                                   
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE GREEN MOVED the AMENDMENT.                                    
                                                                               
  Number 124                                                                   
                                                                               
  MR. PHELPS explained that presentment occurred when a charge                 
  was brought by a grand jury, on its own information and                      
  knowledge.  He added that it happened very rarely in Alaska.                 
  He said that in contrast, an indictment was an action taken                  
  by a grand jury upon information laid before it by the                       
  government.                                                                  
                                                                               
  There being no objection, the AMENDMENT WAS ADOPTED.                         
                                                                               
  Number 154                                                                   
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE KOTT OFFERED his SECOND AMENDMENT, DELETING                   
  the comma on page 2, line 1, and ADDING "of an alleged                       
  victim who is a minor or incompetent".  He said that the                     
  amendment would clear up a technical oversight in the HESS                   
  Committee version of HB 109.                                                 
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE JAMES MOVED the AMENDMENT.  There being no                    
  objection, the AMENDMENT WAS ADOPTED.                                        
                                                                               
  Number 171                                                                   
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE KOTT said that his NEXT AMENDMENT was the one                 
  which Ms. Knuth had discussed earlier.  It would ADD the                     
  word "exclusively" AFTER the phrase "may rely" on page 2,                    
  line 8, and was being offered at the request of the DOL, he                  
  said.  He said also that the amendment would tighten up                      
  HB 109's language.                                                           
                                                                               
  CHAIRMAN PORTER commented that the amendment would give the                  
  court an indication of the legislature's intent that the                     
  court should not hold another hearing, but instead rely on                   
  the record of previous hearings.  There being no objection                   
  to adoption of the amendment, IT WAS ADOPTED.                                
                                                                               
  Number 199                                                                   
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE KOTT offered his LAST AMENDMENT, which would                  
  DELETE, on page 3, line 31, AFTER the phrase "immediate                      
  family" the word "or."  On page 4, line 1, he said, the                      
  period would be DELETED, a comma INSERTED, and the phrase                    
  "or a person in a dating, courtship, or engagement                           
  relationship with the victim" ADDED.                                         
                                                                               
  Number 227                                                                   
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE GREEN asked what effect the amendment would                   
  have on the occurrence of a spousal rape.                                    
                                                                               
  Number 243                                                                   
                                                                               
  CHAIRMAN PORTER commented that the amendment gave the court                  
  the ability to require confidentiality regarding HIV test                    
  results, but would broaden the group of people whom a victim                 
  could tell to include persons with whom the victim was                       
  involved in a dating, courtship, or engagement relationship.                 
  There being no objection to adoption of the amendment, IT                    
  WAS ADOPTED.  The Chairman announced that the committee now                  
  had the HESS Committee substitute, as amended, before it.                    
                                                                               
  Number 259                                                                   
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE NORDLUND asked what would happen if a                         
  defendant refused to be tested for sexually-transmitted                      
  diseases.  He asked if that person would be held in contempt                 
  of court.                                                                    
                                                                               
  Number 261                                                                   
                                                                               
  CHAIRMAN PORTER commented that court-ordered blood drawing                   
  in other circumstances was simply performed, regardless of                   
  any objections from the defendant.                                           
                                                                               
  Number 263                                                                   
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE KOTT concurred.                                               
                                                                               
  Number 277                                                                   
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE JAMES made a MOTION to MOVE the amended bill                  
  out of committee with individual recommendations.                            
                                                                               
  Number 280                                                                   
                                                                               
  GAYLE HORETSKI, COMMITTEE COUNSEL, HOUSE JUDICIARY                           
  COMMITTEE, asked the Chairman if he wished to address Ms.                    
  Smith's suggestion regarding broadening the class of crimes                  
  on page 1, line 8.  She noted that the crimes included in                    
  HB 109 were both felonies and misdemeanor offenses, and                      
  required that sexual penetration be an element of the                        
  offense.  She said that the list of crimes did not include                   
  assault, because sexual penetration was not an element of                    
  that offense, although penetration in fact may have                          
  occurred.                                                                    
                                                                               
  CHAIRMAN PORTER noted that the state would obviously not                     
  want to order HIV testing in every non-sexual assault case.                  
                                                                               
  Number 309                                                                   
                                                                               
  MS. KNUTH indicated that the committee could probably leave                  
  a reference to sexual penetration, that was not an element                   
  of the offense, in HB 109.  She commented that the issue was                 
  complex.                                                                     
                                                                               
  Number 329                                                                   
                                                                               
  MS. HORETSKI asked if the committee wanted to leave the                      
  language as it was, but also add another section which                       
  referred to "any crime during which penetration occurred"?                   
                                                                               
  Discussion ensued between Ms. Knuth and Ms. Horetski.                        
                                                                               
  Number 347                                                                   
                                                                               
  CHAIRMAN PORTER said that it might be advisable to pass                      
  HB 109 out of committee in its present form, rather than to                  
  insert potentially inappropriate language that would address                 
  one recent case which hopefully would never happen again.                    
  Hearing no objection to moving the bill out of committee, IT                 
  WAS SO ORDERED.  The Chairman announced that HB 127 was the                  
  next item of business before the committee.                                  
                                                                               
  HB 127:  PRESUMPTIVE TERMS FOR FIREARMS POSSESSION                           
                                                                               
  Number 366                                                                   
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE PETE KOTT, PRIME SPONSOR of HB 127, said the                  
  bill was intended to send a clear message that the state                     
  would deal harshly with people who carried firearms while                    
  committing serious crimes.  He noted that HB 127 would                       
  impose presumptive terms of imprisonment on first-time                       
  felony offenders who possessed a firearm while committing a                  
  class B or C felony.  He added that the bill would also                      
  impose a mandatory minimum sentence of 30 days for those who                 
  possessed a firearm during the commission of a fourth-degree                 
  assault.                                                                     
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE KOTT noted that the Alaska Peace Officers'                    
  Association supported HB 127, as did Crimestrike, a national                 
  organization devoted to reducing crime.  He stated that the                  
  DPS supported the concept of the bill, and had indicated                     
  there was no expected fiscal impact associated with HB 127.                  
  He mentioned that the DOC had submitted a very large fiscal                  
  note, but expressed his opinion that it was based on a great                 
  deal of speculation.                                                         
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE KOTT commented that while working on HB 127,                  
  he had discovered that the state had a very poor information                 
  management system for reporting and tracking crimes, in his                  
  opinion.                                                                     
                                                                               
  Number 430                                                                   
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE JAMES stated that if the DOC fiscal note was                  
  correct, then the state was in serious trouble and should                    
  have implemented HB 127's provisions long ago.                               
                                                                               
  Number 438                                                                   
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE KOTT noted that if the fiscal note was even                   
  close to being correct, he would have serious problems in                    
  working to advance HB 127.                                                   
                                                                               
  CHAIRMAN PORTER believed the fiscal note did not reflect                     
  people who were "slipping through the cracks" of the state's                 
  judicial system.  Rather, he said that the fiscal note                       
  simply reflected longer sentences for people who had already                 
  been convicted.                                                              
                                                                               
  Number 454                                                                   
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE KOTT confirmed that the Chairman's comments                   
  were correct, to a large degree.  He questioned the                          
  methodology used in calculating the DOC fiscal note.                         
                                                                               
  Number 474                                                                   
                                                                               
  MS. KNUTH stated that Alaska had one of the best information                 
  tracking systems on crimes in the nation.  However, she said                 
  that what Alaska tracked was very different from the                         
  information that was needed for a fiscal note like the one                   
  prepared by the DOC.  She noted that Alaska was extremely                    
  good at tracking prosecutions and convictions, but said that                 
  offenses were tracked, not conduct, including whether or not                 
  a weapon was used in an offense.                                             
                                                                               
  MS. KNUTH expressed the DOL's concerns with HB 127.  She                     
  said that the bill would create a presumptive sentence of                    
  one year for class C felonies and two years for class B                      
  felonies, if a person possessed a firearm and that                           
  possession was not an element of the offense.  She said that                 
  anytime possession of a firearm was an element of the                        
  offense, there was a rule of law that said a person would                    
  not be doubly penalized.  Therefore, she noted that HB 127                   
  would not affect the offender's sentence in any present                      
  misconduct with weapons' offenses.                                           
                                                                               
  MS. KNUTH commented that burglary had already been elevated                  
  one degree, if the target of the burglary was a commercial                   
  establishment, or the perpetrator was in possession of a                     
  weapon.  She commented further that possession of a weapon                   
  during any drug offense was already a separate crime.  She                   
  added that it was already a higher-class felony offense if a                 
  person escaped from incarceration with a gun.  She noted                     
  that there were many weapons' offenses that HB 127 would not                 
  affect.                                                                      
                                                                               
  Number 525                                                                   
                                                                               
  MS. KNUTH stated that HB 127 likely would affect about half                  
  of all assault cases and drug offenses in which a gun was                    
  used on the drug charge sentence, but not on the second                      
  charge that was made for the weapons offense of using a                      
  weapon during a drug offense.  She was concerned that by                     
  setting a presumptive sentence, the state was tying judges'                  
  hands to some degree.  She commented that in cases where a                   
  weapon was an active part of an offense, the state was                       
  already getting much higher sentences than those proposed in                 
  HB 127.  She noted that the bill would create "ceilings"                     
  that currently did not exist.                                                
                                                                               
  MS. KNUTH cited a recent case that she had prosecuted, which                 
  would have been negatively affected if the provisions of                     
  HB 127 had been law.  She commented that generally, the                      
  legislature had tried to respond to the use of weapons by                    
  making it an aggravator in existing presumptive sentences                    
  and by having a long list of separate weapons' crimes.  She                  
  predicted that the approach taken in HB 127 would have some                  
  strange effects, some of which were most likely                              
  unintentional.                                                               
                                                                               
  MS. KNUTH suggested that the committee study the bill                        
  carefully before taking any action on it.  She noted that                    
  the Sentencing Commission, in its thorough analysis of the                   
  criminal justice system, had not recommended the approach                    
  taken in HB 127.  She commented that HB 127 would increase                   
  sentences in cases where a weapon was not a major part of                    
  the offense.  However, in cases where a weapon was a major                   
  part of the offense, sentences would be decreased, she said.                 
                                                                               
  Number 578                                                                   
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE GREEN asked if the legislature could pass                     
  presumptive sentences that took effect only if another                       
  presumptive sentence did not.                                                
                                                                               
  Number 585                                                                   
                                                                               
  MS. KNUTH did not believe that could occur.  She noted that                  
  the point of presumptive sentences was to use them                           
  generally.                                                                   
                                                                               
  Number 603                                                                   
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE NORDLUND asked Ms. Knuth if the possession of                 
  a firearm during the commission of a crime was now an                        
  aggravator.                                                                  
                                                                               
  MS. KNUTH replied in the affirmative.  She said that it gave                 
  flexibility to a judge in handing down a sentence.                           
                                                                               
  Number 628                                                                   
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE NORDLUND commented that Representative Kott's                 
  intentions were probably good, but said that the effect of                   
  HB 127 might be counterproductive to what Representative                     
  Kott had set out to accomplish.  He asked Representative                     
  Kott what had prompted his introduction of HB 127.                           
                                                                               
  Number 636                                                                   
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE KOTT replied that he had sponsored the bill                   
  because of concerns raised by police officers.  He suggested                 
  that the committee lay HB 127 aside, and instead look into                   
  recommendations made by the Sentencing Commission.                           
                                                                               
  CHAIRMAN PORTER stated that he would accept Representative                   
  Kott's comment as a MOTION to lay HB 127 on the table,                       
  pending further discussion of the Sentencing Commission's                    
  recommendations.  There being no objection, IT WAS SO                        
  ORDERED.  The Chairman announced that the committee would                    
  take up HB 86 next.  He called a brief "at ease" while                       
  Representative Bunde was being notified.                                     
                                                                               
  HB 86:  SANCTIONS FOR PROPERTY-RELATED OFFENSES                              
                                                                               
  TAPE 93-36, SIDE A                                                           
  Number 032                                                                   
                                                                               
  CHAIRMAN PORTER called the meeting back to order.  He stated                 
  that HB 86 was now before the committee.                                     
                                                                               
  Number 042                                                                   
                                                                               
  SANDY PEVAN testified in support of HB 86.  She mentioned                    
  that there was a problem in the Matanuska-Susitna Valley                     
  regarding homeless youths and runaways who committed crimes.                 
  She indicated that HB 86 would help to alleviate that                        
  problem.                                                                     
                                                                               
  Number 075                                                                   
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE CON BUNDE, PRIME SPONSOR of HB 86, stated                     
  that the intent behind the bill was to deter juvenile                        
  mischief, which would result from forfeiture of vehicles                     
  used in the commission of a crime, and the publishing of an                  
  offender's name, photograph, and crime.  Additionally,                       
  offenders could be required to pay restitution.  He was open                 
  to suggestions on other types of deterrents.                                 
                                                                               
  Number 129                                                                   
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE NORDLUND asked Representative Bunde to                        
  comment on the current law regarding adults who used a                       
  vehicle in the commission of a crime.                                        
                                                                               
  Number 135                                                                   
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE BUNDE replied that for certain drug offenses,                 
  an offender's vehicle could be confiscated.  With regard to                  
  other types of offenses, he said that HB 86 would be a                       
  stricter law than that currently applied to adults.  He                      
  noted that it was not his intent to restrict juveniles more                  
  than adults.  He commented that his bill focused on                          
  forfeiture of a vehicle because criminal mischief was often                  
  committed with a vehicle, and also because a vehicle was                     
  often a minor's only possession of any value.                                
                                                                               
  Number 182                                                                   
                                                                               
  MS. KNUTH noted that section 2 of HB 86, regarding                           
  forfeiture of vehicles, was not limited to minors.  She said                 
  that section 2 would apply to vehicles used by a person in                   
  aid of criminal mischief in the first degree or criminal                     
  mischief in the second degree.  She commented that criminal                  
  mischief in the first degree occurred very rarely in Alaska.                 
  She commented that the types of crimes which Representative                  
  Bunde had described would be considered criminal mischief in                 
  the third and fourth degrees.                                                
                                                                               
  MS. KNUTH said that the DOL had two concerns with vehicle                    
  forfeiture.  She noted that there was no provision in HB 86                  
  regarding vehicles owned by innocent parties.  She said that                 
  there was no quick fix for this particular problem.                          
  Additionally, she said that the DOL was concerned about the                  
  definition of a vehicle used in aid of criminal mischief                     
  offenses.  She noted that there needed to be a nexus between                 
  a vehicle and damage done during a criminal mischief                         
  offense.  She commented that using a vehicle to get to the                   
  scene of the crime was not a sufficient nexus, whereas using                 
  a vehicle as a battering ram was.                                            
                                                                               
  MS. KNUTH cited the DOL's concern with section 3 of HB 86,                   
  regarding restitution.  She said that the section pertained                  
  to restitution ordered of adult offenders.  She said the                     
  bill proposed that juveniles waived to adult status be                       
  required to pay restitution for any criminal mischief                        
  offense.  She noted that Alaska already had a requirement                    
  that adults pay restitution for criminal mischief in the                     
  third degree.  She said the DOL was concerned that HB 86                     
  would set up an anomalous situation in which juveniles                       
  waived to the adult system would be required to pay                          
  restitution for all criminal mischief offenses, while adult                  
  offenders would only have to pay restitution for criminal                    
  mischief in the third degree.                                                
                                                                               
  MS. KNUTH commented that the court would question why the                    
  legislature wanted to treat juveniles more harshly than                      
  adults.  She suggested that HB 86 be amended so as to                        
  require only under-18 offenders who had been waived to adult                 
  court to pay restitution upon conviction of criminal                         
  mischief in the third degree.  Alternatively, she said that                  
  the legislature could amend the adult restitution statutes                   
  so that they would be in line with what was being proposed                   
  in HB 86.                                                                    
                                                                               
  MS. KNUTH recommended that the legislature follow her first                  
  suggestion, as following the second suggestion would require                 
  that the court make a finding that an offender was able to                   
  pay restitution of more than $500 and up to $100,000.  She                   
  said that it was easy to require restitution of up to $500,                  
  because anyone could go out and work for a month and come up                 
  with that amount of money.  However, she said, when people                   
  were required to pay restitution of $100,000, the state                      
  would run afoul of constitutional prohibitions against                       
  "imprisonment for debt."                                                     
                                                                               
  MS. KNUTH commented that she had not examined the public                     
  records' provision of HB 86, as the Criminal Division of the                 
  DOL was not involved in juvenile delinquency proceedings.                    
  She had alerted the Civil Division about HB 86, and because                  
  of their absence, she assumed that they had no problem with                  
  HB 86.                                                                       
                                                                               
  Number 354                                                                   
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE GREEN asked if there was any difference in                    
  the use of a vehicle to commit a felony and a misdemeanor.                   
  He used an example of a person driving a getaway car in a                    
  felony.                                                                      
                                                                               
  Number 365                                                                   
                                                                               
  MS. KNUTH replied that if a person drove another person to a                 
  place where the second person committed criminal mischief,                   
  then the driver would be criminally liable.  She said that                   
  the state currently had laws regarding the forfeiture of                     
  vehicles used in committing certain drug offenses.  That                     
  law, she said, applied to juveniles and adults.  She                         
  commented that the state had problems regarding innocent car                 
  owners, when applying that forfeiture law.  She noted that                   
  the federal government now handled most of the state's                       
  forfeiture proceedings, as the federal laws more thoroughly                  
  addressed the issue of innocent parties.                                     
                                                                               
  MS. KNUTH added that the governor had introduced a bill                      
  which addressed the problem of innocent owners more                          
  effectively.                                                                 
                                                                               
  Number 398                                                                   
                                                                               
  CHAIRMAN PORTER believed that releasing information                          
  regarding juveniles who committed two levels of criminal                     
  mischief offenses and not releasing information about                        
  juveniles who committed much more serious crimes was rather                  
  inconsistent.                                                                
                                                                               
  Number 416                                                                   
                                                                               
  MS. KNUTH commented that laws were often made in response to                 
  very narrow, perceived problems.                                             
                                                                               
  Number 446                                                                   
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE KOTT asked Ms. Knuth how many actual offenses                 
  HB 86 would impact.                                                          
                                                                               
  Number 455                                                                   
                                                                               
  MS. KNUTH replied that if HB 86 was enacted as currently                     
  written, applying to criminal mischief in the first and                      
  second degrees, its provisions would never be used.  If the                  
  bill was amended to reflect the level of criminal mischief                   
  that she believed the sponsor intended to address, she                       
  guessed that fewer than 20 cases a year would be impacted.                   
                                                                               
  Number 481                                                                   
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE JAMES asked Ms. Knuth to comment on the use                   
  of a vehicle as a dangerous weapon.                                          
                                                                               
  Number 491                                                                   
                                                                               
  MS. KNUTH responded that cars were treated as dangerous                      
  weapons in certain crimes, including drunk driving.                          
                                                                               
  Number 498                                                                   
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE GREEN asked Ms. Knuth if she had said that,                   
  even if HB 86 were amended, it would only impact 20 or fewer                 
  cases per year.                                                              
                                                                               
  MS. KNUTH stated that was her best estimate.  She said the                   
  original intent behind HB 86 was that taking away a                          
  juvenile's car would serve as a deterrent.  She was of the                   
  opinion that courts should order restitution from juveniles                  
  when they caused damage.  A juvenile's car could then be                     
  subject to seizure and normal civil attachment procedures.                   
                                                                               
  Number 520                                                                   
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE GREEN inquired about the impact of adding                     
  three-wheelers, snow machines, and other types of vehicles                   
  in HB 86.                                                                    
                                                                               
  Number 522                                                                   
                                                                               
  MS. KNUTH did not know the answer to Representative Green's                  
  question.                                                                    
                                                                               
  Number 532                                                                   
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE BUNDE agreed with Ms. Knuth regarding taking                  
  criminal mischief in the first degree out of HB 86.                          
  However, he argued strongly for leaving criminal mischief in                 
  the second degree in the bill, because it would address                      
  joyriding and causing damage in excess of $500.  He wanted                   
  to encourage awareness among juveniles that they needed to                   
  be responsible for their actions.                                            
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE BUNDE believed that if the names and                          
  photographs of juveniles who committed criminal mischief                     
  were to be published, that would serve as a deterrent.                       
                                                                               
  Number 570                                                                   
                                                                               
  CHAIRMAN PORTER had some concerns regarding HB 86.  Due to                   
  the late hour, however, he said he would hold the bill in                    
  committee and reschedule it for another hearing, at a time                   
  uncertain.                                                                   
                                                                               
  ADJOURNMENT                                                                  
                                                                               
  CHAIRMAN PORTER adjourned the meeting at 3:04 p.m.                           

Document Name Date/Time Subjects