Legislature(1999 - 2000)

02/23/2000 01:17 PM JUD

Audio Topic
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
txt
         HOUSE JUDICIARY STANDING COMMITTEE                                                                                     
                 February 23, 2000                                                                                              
                     1:17 p.m.                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
MEMBERS PRESENT                                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
Representative Pete Kott, Chairman                                                                                              
Representative Joe Green                                                                                                        
Representative Norman Rokeberg                                                                                                  
Representative Jeannette James                                                                                                  
Representative Lisa Murkowski                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
MEMBERS ABSENT                                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
Representative Eric Croft                                                                                                       
Representative Beth Kerttula                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
COMMITTEE CALENDAR                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
HOUSE BILL NO. 163                                                                                                              
"An Act relating to qualifications of voters; relating to the                                                                   
registration of voters; relating to election districts and                                                                      
officials; relating to election procedures and ballots; relating to                                                             
special procedures for elections; relating to nomination of                                                                     
candidates; relating to national elections; relating to special                                                                 
elections and appointments; relating to constitutional amendments;                                                              
relating to election offenses and corrupt practices; relating to                                                                
election pamphlets; relating to the deferral of jury service for                                                                
certain election officials; relating to an exemption from the State                                                             
Procurement Code regarding election ballots; relating to the                                                                    
provision and use of mailing addresses on permanent fund dividend                                                               
applications for election purposes; relating to the inclusion of                                                                
voter registration forms with permanent fund dividend applications;                                                             
making conforming amendments in references to 'election district'                                                               
and 'chairman'; and providing for an effective date."                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
     - HEARD AND HELD                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
HOUSE BILL NO. 354                                                                                                              
"An Act relating to criminal sexual inducement of a minor, to                                                                   
distribution of pornography to minors, and to sex offenses."                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
     - HEARD AND HELD                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
HOUSE BILL NO. 338                                                                                                              
"An Act relating to crimes involving computers, access devices,                                                                 
other technology, and identification documents; relating to the                                                                 
crime of criminal impersonation; relating to crimes committed by                                                                
the unauthorized access to or use of communications in electronic                                                               
storage; and providing for an effective date."                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
     - HEARD AND HELD                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
HOUSE BILL NO. 366                                                                                                              
"An Act relating to the rights of crime victims, the crime of                                                                   
violating a protective order or injunction, mitigating factors in                                                               
sentencing for an offense, and the return of certain seized                                                                     
property to victims; expanding the scope of the prohibition of                                                                  
compromise based on civil remedy of misdemeanor crimes involving                                                                
domestic violence; amending Rules 10, 11, 13, 16, and 17, Alaska                                                                
District Court Rules of Civil Procedure and Rule 9, Alaska Rules of                                                             
Administration."                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
     - MOVED HB 366 OUT OF COMMITTEE                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
PREVIOUS ACTION                                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
BILL: HB 163                                                                                                                    
SHORT TITLE: DIVISION OF ELECTIONS                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
Jrn-Date    Jrn-Page           Action                                                                                           
 3/26/99       583     (H)  READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRAL(S)                                                                   
 3/26/99       584     (H)  STA, JUD, FIN                                                                                       
 2/03/00               (H)  STA AT  8:00 AM CAPITOL 102                                                                         
 2/03/00               (H)  <Bill Postponed to 2/8>                                                                             
 2/08/00               (H)  STA AT  8:00 AM CAPITOL 102                                                                         
 2/08/00               (H)  Moved CSHB 163(STA) Out of Committee                                                                
 2/08/00               (H)  MINUTE(STA)                                                                                         
 2/09/00      2138     (H)  STA RPT  CS(STA) NT  4DP 1NR                                                                        
 2/09/00      2139     (H)  DP: JAMES, SMALLEY, KERTTULA,                                                                       
                            WHITAKER;                                                                                           
 2/09/00      2139     (H)  NR: HUDSON                                                                                          
 2/09/00      2139     (H)  FISCAL NOTE (GOV)                                                                                   
 2/16/00               (H)  JUD AT  1:00 PM CAPITOL 120                                                                         
 2/16/00               (H)  Scheduled But Not Heard                                                                             
 2/23/00               (H)  JUD AT  1:00 PM CAPITOL 120                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
BILL: HB 354                                                                                                                    
SHORT TITLE: SEXUAL INDUCEMENT OF A MINOR/PORNOGRAPHY                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
Jrn-Date    Jrn-Page           Action                                                                                           
 2/09/00      2146     (H)  READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS                                                                     
 2/09/00      2147     (H)  JUD, FIN                                                                                            
 2/09/00      2147     (H)  REFERRED TO JUDICIARY                                                                               
 2/21/00               (H)  JUD AT  1:00 PM CAPITOL 120                                                                         
 2/21/00               (H)  Heard & Held                                                                                        
 2/21/00               (H)  MINUTE(JUD)                                                                                         
 2/23/00               (H)  JUD AT  1:00 PM CAPITOL 120                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
BILL: HB 338                                                                                                                    
SHORT TITLE: CRIMES INVOLVING TECHNOLOGY OR I.D.                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
Jrn-Date    Jrn-Page           Action                                                                                           
 2/04/00      2095     (H)  READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS                                                                     
 2/04/00      2095     (H)  JUD, FIN                                                                                            
 2/04/00      2096     (H)  3 FISCAL NOTES (ADM, LAW, DPS)                                                                      
 2/04/00      2096     (H)  GOVERNOR'S TRANSMITTAL LETTER                                                                       
 2/04/00      2096     (H)  REFERRED TO JUDICIARY                                                                               
 2/23/00               (H)  JUD AT  1:00 PM CAPITOL 120                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
BILL: HB 366                                                                                                                    
SHORT TITLE: CRIME VICTIMS RIGHTS & DOMESTIC VIOLENCE                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
Jrn-Date    Jrn-Page           Action                                                                                           
 2/11/00      2177     (H)  READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS                                                                     
 2/11/00      2178     (H)  JUD, FIN                                                                                            
 2/11/00      2178     (H)  2 INDETERMINATE FISCAL NOTES                                                                        
                            (ADM, COR)                                                                                          
 2/11/00      2178     (H)  2 ZERO FISCAL NOTES (LAW, DPS)                                                                      
 2/11/00      2178     (H)  GOVERNOR'S TRANSMITTAL LETTER                                                                       
 2/23/00               (H)  JUD AT  1:00 PM CAPITOL 120                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
WITNESS REGISTER                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
GAIL FENUMIAI, Election Program Specialist                                                                                      
Division of Elections                                                                                                           
Office of the Lieutenant Governor                                                                                               
P.O. Box 11007                                                                                                                  
Juneau, Alaska 99811-0017                                                                                                       
POSITION STATEMENT: Explained Amendment 1 to HB 163.                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
GAYLE GARRIGUES, Staff                                                                                                          
   to Representative Tom Brice                                                                                                  
Alaska State Legislature                                                                                                        
Capitol Building, Room 426                                                                                                      
Juneau, Alaska  99801                                                                                                           
POSITION STATEMENT:  Explained Version G of HB 354 on behalf of                                                                 
sponsor.                                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
ANNE CARPENETI, Assistant Attorney General                                                                                      
Legal Services Section-Juneau                                                                                                   
Criminal Division                                                                                                               
Department of Law                                                                                                               
P.O. Box 110300                                                                                                                 
Juneau, Alaska  99811-0300                                                                                                      
POSITION STATEMENT:  Testified on Version G of HB 354 that the bill                                                             
has come a long way but the department still has problems with                                                                  
Section 1, and offered draft amendment for Sections 1 and 2;                                                                    
presented HB 338 and HB 366.                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
LESIL McGUIRE, Legislative Assistant                                                                                            
   to Representative Pete Kott and                                                                                              
   Committee Aide, House Judiciary Standing Committee                                                                           
Alaska State Legislature                                                                                                        
Capitol Building, Room 118                                                                                                      
Juneau, Alaska  99801                                                                                                           
POSITION STATEMENT:  As committee aide, offered information                                                                     
pertaining to the use of gender-neutral terms in legislation.                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
BLAIR McCUNE, Deputy Director                                                                                                   
Public Defender Agency                                                                                                          
Department of Administration                                                                                                    
900 West 5th Avenue, Suite 200                                                                                                  
Anchorage, Alaska  99501-2090                                                                                                   
POSITION STATEMENT:  Testified on HB 338; expressed concerns.                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
DAVID HUDSON, Lieutenant                                                                                                        
Division of Alaska State Troopers                                                                                               
Department of Public Safety                                                                                                     
5700 East Tudor Road                                                                                                            
Anchorage, Alaska 99507-1225                                                                                                    
POSITION STATEMENT:  Testified that the Department of Public Safety                                                             
is looking forward to HB 338 moving forward.                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
ROBERT BUTTCANE, Juvenile Probation Officer                                                                                     
Youth Corrections                                                                                                               
Division of Family and Youth Services                                                                                           
Department of Health and Social Services                                                                                        
P.O. Box 110630                                                                                                                 
Juneau, Alaska  99811                                                                                                           
POSITION STATEMENT:  Testified in support of HB 338, especially the                                                             
use of the term "access device," but said the bill may need more                                                                
work.                                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
ACTION NARRATIVE                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
TAPE 00-18, SIDE A                                                                                                              
Number 0001                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
CHAIRMAN PETE KOTT called the House Judiciary Standing Committee                                                                
meeting to order at 1:17 p.m.  Members present at the call to order                                                             
were Representatives Kott, Green and James.  Representative                                                                     
Murkowski arrived just after the call to order.                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
HB 163 - DIVISION OF ELECTIONS                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
CHAIRMAN KOTT announced that the first item of business would be                                                                
HOUSE BILL NO. 163, "An Act relating to qualifications of voters;                                                               
relating to the registration of voters; relating to election                                                                    
districts and officials; relating to election procedures and                                                                    
ballots; relating to special procedures for elections; relating to                                                              
nomination of candidates; relating to national elections; relating                                                              
to special elections and appointments; relating to constitutional                                                               
amendments; relating to election offenses and corrupt practices;                                                                
relating to election pamphlets; relating to the deferral of jury                                                                
service for certain election officials; relating to an exemption                                                                
from the State Procurement Code regarding election ballots;                                                                     
relating to the provision and use of mailing addresses on permanent                                                             
fund dividend applications for election purposes; relating to the                                                               
inclusion of voter registration forms with permanent fund dividend                                                              
applications; making conforming amendments in references to                                                                     
'election district' and 'chairman'; and providing for an effective                                                              
date." [Before the committee was CSHB 163(STA).]                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
Number 0064                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE JAMES, speaking as the sponsor, made a motion to                                                                 
adopt Amendment 1 [1-0769\A.1, Kurtz, 1/25/00], which read:                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
     Page 1, line 12, following "'chairman';":                                                                                  
          Insert "relating to initiative, referendum, and recall                                                                
     petitions;"                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
     Page 27, following line 11:                                                                                                
          Insert new bill sections to read:                                                                                     
       "* Sec. 67.  AS 15.45.110(a) is amended to read:                                                                         
               (a)  The petitions may be circulated throughout the                                                              
          state [ONLY BY A SPONSOR AND] only in person.                                                                         
       * Sec. 68.  AS 15.45.110(c) is amended to read:                                                                          
               (c)  A circulator [SPONSOR] may not receive payment                                                              
          or agree to receive payment that is greater than $1 a                                                                 
          signature, and a person or an organization may not pay or                                                             
          agree to pay an amount that is greater than $1 a                                                                      
          signature, for the collection of signatures on a                                                                      
          petition.                                                                                                             
       * Sec. 69.  AS 15.45.110(e) is amended to read:                                                                          
               (e)  A person or organization that violates (c) or                                                               
          (d) [(b) - (d)] of this section is guilty of a class B                                                                
          misdemeanor.                                                                                                          
       * Sec. 70.  AS 15.45.130 is amended to read:                                                                             
               Sec. 15.45.130.  Certification of circulator                                                                     
          [SPONSOR].  Before being filed, each petition shall be                                                                
          certified by an affidavit by the person [SPONSOR] who                                                                 
          personally circulated the petition.  The affidavit must                                                               
          state in substance that (1) the person signing the                                                                    
          affidavit meets the residency, age, and citizenship                                                                   
          qualifications of AS 15.05.010 [IS A SPONSOR], (2) the                                                                
          person is the only circulator of that petition, (3) the                                                               
          signatures were made in the circulator's [SPONSOR'S]                                                                  
          actual presence, (4) to the best of the circulator's                                                                  
          [SPONSOR'S] knowledge, the signatures are those of the                                                                
          persons whose names they purport to be, (5) the                                                                       
          signatures are of persons who were qualified voters on                                                                
          the date of signature, (6) the person has not entered                                                                 
          into an agreement with a person or organization in                                                                    
          violation of AS 15.45.110(c), (7) the person has not                                                                  
          violated AS 15.45.110(d) with respect to that petition,                                                               
          and (8) the circulator [SPONSOR] prominently placed, in                                                               
          the space provided under AS 15.45.090(5) before                                                                       
          circulation of the petition, in bold capital letters, the                                                             
          circulator's [SPONSOR'S] name and, if the circulator                                                                  
          [SPONSOR] has received payment or agreed to receive                                                                   
          payment for the collection of signatures on the petition,                                                             
          the name of each person or organization that has paid or                                                              
          agreed to pay the circulator [SPONSOR] for collection of                                                              
          signatures on the petition.  In determining the                                                                       
          sufficiency of the petition, the lieutenant governor may                                                              
          not count subscriptions on petitions not properly                                                                     
          certified.                                                                                                            
       * Sec. 71.  AS 15.45.340 is amended to read:                                                                             
               Sec. 15.45.340.  Circulation [BY SPONSOR].  The                                                                  
          petitions may be circulated throughout the state [ONLY BY                                                             
          A SPONSOR AND] only in person.                                                                                        
       * Sec. 72.  AS 15.45.360 is amended to read:                                                                             
               Sec. 15.45.360.  Certification of circulator                                                                     
          [SPONSOR].  Before being filed, each petition shall be                                                                
          certified by an affidavit by the person [SPONSOR] who                                                                 
          circulated the petition.  The affidavit shall state in                                                                
          substance that (1) the person signing the affidavit meets                                                             
          the residency, age, and citizenship qualifications of                                                                 
          AS 15.05.010 [IS A SPONSOR], (2) the person is the only                                                               
          circulator of the petition, (3) the signatures were made                                                              
          in the circulator's [SPONSOR'S] actual presence, and (4)                                                              
          to the best of the circulator's [SPONSOR'S] knowledge,                                                                
          the signatures are the signatures of persons whose names                                                              
          they purport to be.  In determining the sufficiency of                                                                
          the petition, the lieutenant governor may not count                                                                   
          subscriptions on petitions not properly certified.                                                                    
       * Sec. 73.  AS 15.45.580 is amended to read:                                                                             
               Sec. 15.45.580.  Circulation [BY SPONSOR].  The                                                                  
          petitions may be circulated [ONLY BY A SPONSOR AND] only                                                              
          in person throughout the state or senate or house                                                                     
          [ELECTION] district represented by the official sought to                                                             
          be recalled.                                                                                                          
       * Sec. 74.  AS 15.45.600 is amended to read:                                                                             
               Sec. 15.45.600.  Certification of circulator                                                                     
          [SPONSOR].  Before being filed, each petition shall be                                                                
          certified by an affidavit by the person [SPONSOR] who                                                                 
          personally circulated the petition.  The affidavit shall                                                              
          state in substance that (1) the person signing the                                                                    
          affidavit meets the residency, age, and citizenship                                                                   
          qualifications of AS 15.05.010 [IS A SPONSOR], (2) the                                                                
          person is the only circulator of that petition or copy,                                                               
          (3) the signatures were made in the circulator's                                                                      
          [SPONSOR'S] actual presence, and (4) to the best of the                                                               
          circulator's [SPONSOR'S] knowledge, the signatures are                                                                
          those of the persons whose names they purport to be.  In                                                              
          determining the sufficiency of the petition, the director                                                             
          may not count subscriptions on petitions not properly                                                                 
          certified."                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
     Renumber the following bill sections accordingly.                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
     Page 31, line 20, following "AS 15.20.740;":                                                                               
          Insert "AS 15.45.110(b);"                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
     Page 31, line 21:                                                                                                          
          Delete "sec. 88"                                                                                                      
          Insert "sec. 96"                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
     Page 32, line 1:                                                                                                           
          Delete "15.45.580,"                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
     Page 32, line 9:                                                                                                           
          Delete "Section 85"                                                                                                   
          Insert "Section 93"                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
     Page 32, line 10:                                                                                                          
          Delete "sec. 87"                                                                                                      
          Insert "sec. 95"                                                                                                      
          Delete "1999"                                                                                                         
          Insert "2000"                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
[END OF AMENDMENT 1]                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
Number 0095                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
GAIL FENUMIAI, Election Program Specialist, Division of Elections,                                                              
Office of the Lieutenant Governor, came forward at the request of                                                               
Representative James.  She explained that Amendment 1 was                                                                       
introduced to make changes to the initiative petition and the                                                                   
referendum and recall petition statutes, which are in conflict with                                                             
a recent United States Supreme Court ruling in Buckley v. American                                                              
Constitutional Law Fund.  That court ruled that circulators of                                                                  
initiative petitions don't have to be registered voters in Alaska,                                                              
whereas Alaska's current law is contrary to that.  That court case                                                              
also stated that petition circulators don't have to identify                                                                    
themselves by wearing a badge, whereas in 1998 the Alaska State                                                                 
Legislature passed legislation requiring that.  Therefore, the                                                                  
changes in Amendment 1 bring Alaska's statutes into compliance with                                                             
the U.S. Supreme Court case.                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
Number 0217                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
CHAIRMAN KOTT asked whether there was any objection to Amendment 1.                                                             
He indicated it had originally been suggested by Representative                                                                 
Croft.  Noting that there was no objection, he announced that                                                                   
Amendment 1 was adopted.                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
Number 0240                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE MURKOWSKI asked whether, with this change, petition                                                              
circulators are required to do anything in terms of identifying                                                                 
themselves.                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
MS. FENUMIAI answered no.  A person's name is printed on the                                                                    
petition booklet in front of him or her while gathering signatures,                                                             
but the person is no longer required to state his or her name while                                                             
circulating a petition.  In response to a further question about                                                                
"checks" to ensure that persons are who they claim to be, Ms.                                                                   
Fenumiai explained that the petition circulator signs an affidavit                                                              
on the back of the booklet saying the signatures were gathered in                                                               
that person's presence and that he or she was the only circulator                                                               
of the petition booklet.  That is in current statute.                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
Number 0350                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GREEN pointed out that the bill before the committee                                                             
is CSHB 163(STA).  However, Amendment 1 amends the original version                                                             
of the bill.  He asked Representative James what the intent is.                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE JAMES said she didn't know the reason, as the same                                                               
drafter had written the original version, then CSHB 163(STA), then                                                              
Amendment 1, in that order, and would draft the new committee                                                                   
substitute (CS).  It was a drafting error.  She suggested the                                                                   
committee look at the new CS before moving it from committee.  She                                                              
informed members that Amendment 1 adds a whole new issue to the                                                                 
bill.                                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
Number 0536                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GREEN and CHAIRMAN KOTT pointed out that there are                                                               
a couple of other minor details, as well.                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
[Informal discussion followed as the committee went through the two                                                             
versions of the bill and the amendment.]                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
Number 0986                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG noted that the bill contains the word                                                                   
"chairperson" instead of "chairman."                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
CHAIRMAN KOTT, REPRESENTATIVE GREEN AND REPRESENTATIVE MURKOWSKI                                                                
pointed out that Amendment 1 says "chairman," however.                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
MS. FENUMIAI reported that Legislative Legal Services had suggested                                                             
changing all the references from "chairman" to "chairperson."                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
CHAIRMAN KOTT concluded that the title should read "chairperson" as                                                             
well, then.                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GREEN AND REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG said they didn't                                                               
like it.                                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE JAMES indicated she didn't want to go through this                                                               
issue on the floor again.                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
Number 1075                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
CHAIRMAN KOTT agreed, saying he would rather not go through the                                                                 
exercise of addressing "chairman" versus "chairperson" on the floor                                                             
again, but would encourage doing it there rather than in committee.                                                             
                                                                                                                                
Number 1086                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG nonetheless made a motion to adopt a                                                                    
conceptual amendment to change the language throughout the bill to                                                              
"chairman" rather than "chairperson."                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE MURKOWSKI objected for purposes of discussion.  She                                                              
suggested that if those changes are made in the bill, perhaps they                                                              
should go back into the election statutes and revise the whole                                                                  
chapter.  She said she isn't interested in completely revising all                                                              
statutes to make them "gender-neutral."  She proposed the                                                                       
possibility of sending a letter to Legislative Council, however,                                                                
requesting that they look into this to see whether there is a                                                                   
policy.  Although not strongly on either side of the issue,                                                                     
Representative Murkowski said she is a proponent of consistency.                                                                
If they are going to use it one way, they should use it throughout.                                                             
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG remarked that he would advocate for a                                                                   
policy that "chairman" can be used in the statutes but that "the                                                                
reference to the chairman could be at the discretion of that                                                                    
chairperson, and any other words interchangeably meaning the same                                                               
would be acceptable as a matter of law."  He suggested some                                                                     
flexibility, saying it is a matter of personal preference now.                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GREEN agreed that if it is done, it should be done                                                               
throughout the statutes.  For example, the statute before them                                                                  
refers to another statute that still has "chairman" in it.                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
Number 1354                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
CHAIRMAN KOTT announced that if it is the will of this committee,                                                               
they can address it now and submit a letter - on whatever is                                                                    
decided upon - as a recommendation to Legislative Council to review                                                             
the statutes to either use "chairman" throughout the statutes or to                                                             
go to the politically correct term, whatever that may be.                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG suggested instructing the Legislative                                                                   
Council that the Revisor of Statutes would take it up after the                                                                 
legislature has made a decision, to avoid these debates.                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
Number 1405                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE MURKOWSKI expressed concern about what else is in                                                                
Alaska's statutes currently that isn't "politically correct."  She                                                              
said she didn't even want to suggest what those items might be.                                                                 
She indicated it might open a Pandora's box of issues that they                                                                 
wouldn't want to resolve right now.                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG agreed but stated that the earlier "flap"                                                               
about same-sex marriage had been caused by the revisors' changing                                                               
of the statute on their own, resulting in a substantive revision                                                                
because of trying to make the statute gender-neutral by changing                                                                
"men and women" into "persons," or whatever the exact wording was.                                                              
He offered to withdraw the amendment to move the process along if                                                               
there is to be a letter to the Legislative Council.                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
Number 1495                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
CHAIRMAN KOTT suggested that would be more acceptable to the                                                                    
committee than debating this.  He announced that a letter would be                                                              
submitted to Legislative Council asking them to come up with some                                                               
consistent term throughout, so that Legislative Council, after                                                                  
their own debate of the issue, can direct the Revisor of Statutes                                                               
about the drafting manual from here on out.                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
Number 1511                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG withdrew his amendment.                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
CHAIRMAN KOTT indicated the intention of bringing a new CS before                                                               
the committee that includes Amendment 1, to ensure that all the                                                                 
sections are placed appropriately throughout the bill.  He thanked                                                              
Ms. Fenumiai, stating his belief that no other testifiers wished to                                                             
speak at the moment.  He announced that HB 163 would be held over                                                               
until the coming Friday, at which time there would be a letter for                                                              
everyone's review that would accompany the bill.                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG restated the need to ask Legislative                                                                    
Council about the issue and mentioned getting further guidance from                                                             
Legislative Legal Services.  [HB 163 was held over.]                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
HB 354 - SEXUAL INDUCEMENT OF A MINOR/PORNOGRAPHY                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
CHAIRMAN KOTT announced that the next item of business would be                                                                 
HOUSE BILL NO. 354, "An Act relating to criminal sexual inducement                                                              
of a minor, to distribution of pornography to minors, and to sex                                                                
offenses."  He pointed out that there was a new proposed committee                                                              
substitute (CS).  [The bill had been introduced at the previous                                                                 
meeting, but no testimony was heard other than from Ms. Garrigues,                                                              
staff to Representative Brice, sponsor.]                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
Number 1620                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG made a motion to adopt as a work draft                                                                  
Version G [1-LS1339\G, Luckhaupt, 2/23/00].  There being no                                                                     
objection, it was so ordered and Version G was before the                                                                       
committee.                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
Number 1650                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
GAYLE GARRIGUES, Staff to Representative Tom Brice, Alaska State                                                                
Legislature, came forward on behalf of the sponsor.  She explained                                                              
that Version G basically makes three changes.  The first is                                                                     
relatively minor, in Section 1, changing some of the ages of                                                                    
various participants; although the original version was consistent                                                              
with the child abuse statutes, in this particular application it                                                                
didn't make a lot of sense.  The change in Section 2 is                                                                         
significant.  The original bill had made a new offense called                                                                   
"distribution of pornography to minors"; as she and Representative                                                              
Brice had heard from more and more people, however, it looked like                                                              
a potential First Amendment problem.                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
MS. GARRIGUES told members the goal was to try to stop people when                                                              
they are "grooming" minors by providing pornographic materials.                                                                 
However, she was persuaded that it wasn't worth getting into a                                                                  
fight in terms of defining those and dealing with all the possible                                                              
exceptions in terms of potentially pornographic but otherwise                                                                   
legitimate activities.  Therefore, that is dealt with at the end of                                                             
a case, as an aggravating factor.  If a person commits one of these                                                             
sex offenses and, in the process, uses these materials to "groom"                                                               
the child, the court can consider that as an aggravator to use at                                                               
sentencing.  Ms. Garrigues pointed out that because Version G                                                                   
eliminates the new crime of distribution of pornography, there is                                                               
no need to further amend the statutes regarding sex offenders.                                                                  
Therefore, Section 3 was dropped.                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
Number 1777                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG said he understands the Internet                                                                        
connection, but this establishes what he takes to be a new crime of                                                             
inducement.  He stated his understanding that sexual assault in the                                                             
fourth degree is the lowest level now.  He asked whether other                                                                  
states have an inducement statute criminalizing this type of                                                                    
activity.                                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
MS. GARRIGUES responded that as she understands it, other states                                                                
are in various stages in terms of working on this area.  The                                                                    
Internet is relatively recent, and the concern here is people                                                                   
essentially inducing and soliciting children over the Internet.                                                                 
She mentioned that there are a couple cases in the Fairbanks area                                                               
where that has happened.                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG said there is no reference to that.  He                                                                 
asked what will constitute inducement.   He further asked whether                                                               
it will be defined by Webster's Dictionary or is in Alaska case                                                                 
law.                                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
MS. GARRIGUES said she doesn't believe "induce" is a word that is                                                               
so specific that it needs a definition outside of how it is                                                                     
commonly understood.   There is no legal definition of inducement                                                               
that she is aware of.  For the elements of this particular offense,                                                             
an adult of a certain age engages in a "course of conduct" with a                                                               
person who is under a certain age, with the intent to induce or get                                                             
this person to engage in the various sexual activities that are                                                                 
listed in Alaska's code and defined there already.  It doesn't                                                                  
specifically refer to the Internet, however, because it is expected                                                             
that people may initiate these contacts through the Internet but                                                                
that the course of conduct may extend to using the telephone, the                                                               
mail or paging devices, for example.                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
Number 1887                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG asked whether it is correct that a 19-year-                                                             
old who has been talking to a 16-year-old about some type of sexual                                                             
activity would be guilty of a class C felony.                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
MS. GARRIGUES specified that the victim would have to be under 16                                                               
years of age.  In Alaska's present code, a 19-year-old who engages                                                              
in sexual relations with a 15-year-old would be guilty of sexual                                                                
abuse of a minor in the second degree ("SAM 2").                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG pointed out that that involves contact,                                                                 
whereas this just asks for it.                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
MS. GARRIGUES agreed.                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG asked whether this crime would, then, be                                                                
included under Megan's Law and require registration as a sexual                                                                 
offender in Alaska for 15 years.                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
MS. GARRIGUES affirmed that it would fall within the sex offender                                                               
registration statutes.                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
Number 1924                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GREEN alluded to the fact that the title, the                                                                    
beginning of new section AS 11.41.452, and subsection (c) call this                                                             
"criminal sexual inducement," whereas the text in subsection (a)                                                                
says "commits the crime of criminal sexual solicitation."  He asked                                                             
why that terminology is used.                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
MS. GARRIGUES said that is a question for Legislative Legal                                                                     
Services, whose recommendation she had followed regarding that.                                                                 
She noted that Mr. Luckhaupt, the drafter, was not present.                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GREEN requested a response from Anne Carpeneti.                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
Number 1978                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
ANNE CARPENETI, Assistant Attorney General, Legal Services Section-                                                             
Juneau, Criminal Division, Department of Law (DOL), came forward,                                                               
noting that the department has worked with the sponsor and his                                                                  
staff on this bill.  She reported that Version G has come a long                                                                
way towards addressing problems, but the DOL still has a problem                                                                
with Section 1 for a couple of reasons.  Bringing attention to page                                                             
1, line 7, she pointed out that "course of conduct" is not defined                                                              
in Alaska's statutes, and it has proven to be problematic in other                                                              
areas.  For example, when working on child murder legislation the                                                               
previous year, they had changed murder in the first degree from a                                                               
pattern of practice of abuse to two or more acts, just because the                                                              
department was never able to prove a pattern of practice of                                                                     
mistreating a child.                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
MS. CARPENETI explained that the other problem, mentioned by                                                                    
Representative Rokeberg, is with the ladder of the level of                                                                     
offenses.  She clarified that Alaska does have solicitation to                                                                  
commit sexual abuse of a minor.  For sexual abuse of a minor, the                                                               
underlying offense is an unclassified felony.  Solicitation of that                                                             
offense is a class A felony; this would bring that offense down to                                                              
a class C felony.  On the other hand, Alaska has sexual abuse of a                                                              
minor in the fourth degree, a class A misdemeanor.  Solicitation of                                                             
that conduct would be a class B misdemeanor, which this bill would                                                              
change to a class C felony.  Ms. Carpeneti stated:                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
     So, any way you look at it, the prosecution's going to                                                                     
     lose if it is a different level because if we charge                                                                       
     solicitation of sexual abuse of a minor in the first                                                                       
     degree, the defendant's going to come in and say, "This                                                                    
     is a more specific statute; prosecute me under this one."                                                                  
     And in the same regard, if it's solicitation to commit                                                                     
     the lower offense, ... we're going to have to argue about                                                                  
     where that is in terms of a penalty.                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
Number 2068                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
MS. CARPENETI offered a suggestion on behalf of the DOL which she                                                               
acknowledged the sponsor may not be enthusiastic about.  If the                                                                 
purpose is to discourage "grooming" of victims over the Internet,                                                               
the DOL suggests that solicitation for the offense be the same                                                                  
level as the offense itself.  That would eliminate problems with                                                                
having a different crime called "inducement."  Although the header                                                              
for the statute is "inducement," she explained, when proving a case                                                             
the department doesn't deal with the header.  The element of that                                                               
would be criminal solicitation.  In response to a question, she                                                                 
said a solicitation is similar to an attempt, but the elements                                                                  
involved are a little different.                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
Number 2100                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE MURKOWSKI inquired about the difference between                                                                  
solicitation and inducement.                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MS. CARPENETI said she doesn't know, because this really is a                                                                   
solicitation statute.  She doesn't know what "inducement" means nor                                                             
what the drafter meant when he decided to name this "criminal                                                                   
sexual inducement" and then define the elements as solicitation.                                                                
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GREEN asked:  If that is the evidence used, why not                                                              
call it that?                                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
MS. CARPENETI agreed but surmised that perhaps the drafter was                                                                  
thinking that because there is solicitation in the statutes                                                                     
already, that would be redundant.  She emphasized that she isn't                                                                
sure and hasn't spoken to the drafter about this in particular.                                                                 
She said she doesn't think Alaska has a definition of inducement,                                                               
but recalled that Ms. Garrigues had said perhaps it isn't needed                                                                
because it isn't in the body of the statute anyway.  "But I do                                                                  
think we ought to think long and hard before we adopt language that                                                             
includes 'course of conduct' without a definition, because we've                                                                
already had problems with it," Ms. Carpeneti cautioned.                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
Number 2162                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GREEN asked whether there is anything in Alaska's                                                                
criminal statutes for enticing over the Internet or using some                                                                  
electronic method.  He suggested perhaps this could be included                                                                 
along with other so-called enticements.                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
MS. CARPENETI answered that she doesn't think there is a specific                                                               
provision, indicating that is, to her belief, the reason for this                                                               
bill.  However, there is a solicitation statute.  Ms. Carpeneti                                                                 
offered a draft amendment, which read as follows [original                                                                      
capitalization and punctuation provided]:                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
     *Sec. 1. AS 11.31.110(c) is amended to read:                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
               (c) Except as provided in (e) of this section,                                                                   
          solicitation [SOLICITATION] IS                                                                                        
                    (1) an unclassified felony if the crime                                                                     
               solicited is murder in the first degree;                                                                         
                    (2) a class A if the crime solicited is an                                                                  
               unclassified  felony other than murder in the first                                                              
               degree;                                                                                                          
                    (3) a class B felony if the crime solicited is                                                              
               a class A felony;                                                                                                
                    (4) a class C felony if the crime solicited is                                                              
               a class B felony:                                                                                                
                    (5) a class A misdemeanor if the crime                                                                      
               solicited is a class C felony;                                                                                   
                    (6) a class B misdemeanor if the crime                                                                      
               solicited is a class A or class B misdemeanor.                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
     *Sec. 2. AS 11.31.110 is amended by adding a new section to                                                                
     read:                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
               (e) If the crime solicited is sexual abuse of a                                                                  
          minor under AS 11.41.434 - 11.41.440, or unlawful                                                                     
          exploitation of a minor under AS 11.41.455, solicitation                                                              
          to commit the crime is the same classification as the                                                                 
          crime solicited if the person uses a computer, computer                                                               
          system, computer program, computer network, or any part                                                               
          of a computer system or network in the commission of the                                                              
          offense.                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
MS. CARPENETI explained that the proposed amendment provides that                                                               
if a person solicits over the Internet and uses a computer, the                                                                 
level of offense is the same as for the completed offense.                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GREEN said that makes sense.                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
Number 2233                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
CHAIRMAN KOTT asked whether Ms. Carpeneti had provided this to the                                                              
sponsor and whether the sponsor and his staff had had an                                                                        
opportunity to comment.                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
MS. CARPENETI said they had talked a little bit, but had missed                                                                 
each other that morning.                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
CHAIRMAN KOTT commented that it seems to work quite a bit better,                                                               
if that is the intent of the sponsor.                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
Number 2245                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE MURKOWSKI asked what exactly "unlawful exploitation                                                              
of a minor" is.                                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
MS. CARPENETI answered that unlawful exploitation is inducing a                                                                 
child to participate in sexual acts that are filmed or                                                                          
photographed, for example.                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE MURKOWSKI voiced her understanding that it wouldn't                                                              
go to the concern here that one would have solicited someone over                                                               
the Internet.  [After Ms. Carpeneti requested clarification,                                                                    
Representative Murkowski looked at the statutes.]                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
Number 2296                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
MS. GARRIGUES spoke up, saying that adding the definition to                                                                    
unlawful exploitation simply broadens the sorts of behavior that                                                                
they are looking at, making it a longer list.  She stated, "We                                                                  
saying they're inducing somebody to ask them to have sexual                                                                     
relations with you, either penetration or contact - that's defined                                                              
- or you're inducing them ... or asking them to engage in these                                                                 
other sorts of sexual behaviors."                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
MS. GARRIGUES responded to Ms. Carpeneti's testimony by saying                                                                  
"course of conduct" is a phrase used in the stalking statutes for                                                               
a number of years, and that was how the stalking statutes were                                                                  
originally defined.  She herself isn't aware of a great deal of                                                                 
difficulty with that, and juries seem to be able to deal with it.                                                               
Ms. Garrigues acknowledged that Ms. Carpeneti, having a statewide                                                               
view, may have different information.                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
MS. GARRIGUES next addressed Ms. Carpeneti's comments about the                                                                 
ladder of levels of offenses.  Mentioning that sexual abuse of a                                                                
minor in the fourth degree ("SAM 4") is a class A misdemeanor, she                                                              
pointed out that one definition for that offense is if somebody in                                                              
a position of authority has sexual relations with somebody who is                                                               
17 or 18 years of age; that clearly wouldn't apply here because                                                                 
this bill applies to minors under the age of 16.  The other                                                                     
definition of sexual abuse of a minor in the fourth degree is if                                                                
somebody under 16 years of age engages in relations with somebody                                                               
younger than 13; that wouldn't apply here either.  Ms. Garrigues                                                                
contended that it wouldn't foul up the hierarchy.                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
MS. GARRIGUES turned attention to the suggestion to equalize the                                                                
offense and the solicitation of it.  She reported that she had                                                                  
discussed it with Representative Brice the previous day, then                                                                   
stated:                                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
     It was our sense that it just didn't fit right that you                                                                    
     would say that a person who attempted or induced a child                                                                   
     over the Internet committed a crime that was the same                                                                      
     offense as somebody who actually committed that offense,                                                                   
     which is what I understand the department is                                                                               
     recommending. ... Yes, it's bad that they're doing it                                                                      
     over the Internet, but it was not our sense that that                                                                      
     somehow made it as serious as the completed offense of                                                                     
     sexual abuse.  So that was why we rejected the Department                                                                  
     of Law's recommendation.                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
Number 2402                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
MS. CARPENETI responded that Ms. Garrigues is correct that the bill                                                             
wouldn't apply to sexual abuse of a minor in the fourth degree.                                                                 
However, it would apply to sexual abuse of a minor in the third                                                                 
degree, which is a class C felony now, and for which solicitation                                                               
of that offense is a class A misdemeanor under current law.  It                                                                 
would also apply to the more serious offenses, bringing down the                                                                
penalty for those.  Ms. Carpeneti acknowledged that it is a tough                                                               
problem.  The rationale is that people who "surf" the Internet have                                                             
a huge number of vulnerable [potential] victims; she believes that                                                              
is the problem they are all trying to reach, but figuring out the                                                               
best way to do so is not easy.                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
[REPRESENTATIVE GREEN confirmed with Robert Buttcane, Juvenile                                                                  
Probation Officer, Youth Corrections, Division of Family and Youth                                                              
Services, Department of Health and Social Services, who was on                                                                  
teleconference, that he had heard the discussion.  A copy of                                                                    
Version G was faxed to Mr. Buttcane.  When asked about the effects                                                              
on the levels of offenses, Mr. Buttcane deferred to Ms. Carpeneti,                                                              
saying it is a legal question.]                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
TAPE 00-18, SIDE B                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
CHAIRMAN KOTT asked whether there were further questions, noting                                                                
that nobody else was signed up to testify.                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
Number 0059                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG pointed out that AS 11.41.436, sexual abuse                                                             
of a minor in the second degree, uses the word "induces."  He read,                                                             
in part, from subsection (a):  "An offender commits the crime of                                                                
sexual abuse of a minor in the second degree if ... (4) being 16                                                                
years of age or older, the offender aids, induces, causes, or                                                                   
encourages a person who is under 16 years of age to engage in                                                                   
conduct ...."  He suggested that the way the bill is, it is kind of                                                             
redundant.                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
CHAIRMAN KOTT agreed there could be some redundancy.  He closed                                                                 
public testimony on HB 354, then announced the intent to hold this                                                              
over and work with the sponsor on perhaps incorporating the DOL's                                                               
suggestions.  [HB 354 was held over.]                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
HB 163 - DIVISION OF ELECTIONS                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
CHAIRMAN KOTT briefly returned the committee's attention to HOUSE                                                               
BILL NO. 163, discussed earlier in the meeting.                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
Number 0164                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
LESIL McGUIRE, Legislative Assistant to Representative Pete Kott                                                                
and Committee Aide, House Judiciary Standing Committee, Alaska                                                                  
State Legislature, informed members that she had spoken with Pamela                                                             
Finley, Revisor of Statutes, who had indicated the legislative                                                                  
drafting manual, page 58, specifically states that they must use                                                                
"chair" or "chairperson" instead of "chairman."  When Ms. McGuire                                                               
had asked where that policy came from, Ms. Finley had said it was                                                               
adopted and enacted by the legislature in 1982.  Ms. Finley had                                                                 
referred Ms. McGuire to AS 1.05.031(c), which states, "The revisor                                                              
shall edit and revise the laws as they are enacted by the                                                                       
legislature, without changing the meaning of any law, so as to                                                                  
avoid the use of pronouns denoting masculine or feminine gender."                                                               
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GREEN stated his belief that that has been violated                                                              
repeatedly.                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG pointed out that "chairman" isn't a                                                                     
pronoun, however.  [HB 163 was held over.]                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
HB 338 - CRIMES INVOLVING TECHNOLOGY OR I.D.                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIRMAN KOTT announced that the next item of business would be                                                                 
HOUSE BILL NO. 338, "An Act relating to crimes involving computers,                                                             
access devices, other technology, and identification documents;                                                                 
relating to the crime of criminal impersonation; relating to crimes                                                             
committed by the unauthorized access to or use of communications in                                                             
electronic storage; and providing for an effective date."  [The                                                                 
bill was sponsored by the House Rules Committee by request of the                                                               
Governor.]                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
CHAIRMAN KOTT noted that at one point he had brought this issue up                                                              
to one of the drafters, who had said it is covered elsewhere.  He                                                               
said he wants to hear why it is a good idea now.  He called on Ms.                                                              
Carpeneti to present the bill on behalf of the Governor.                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
Number 0250                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
ANNE CARPENETI, Assistant Attorney General, Legal Services Section-                                                             
Juneau, Criminal Division, Department of Law, came forward to                                                                   
explain HB 338.  She noted that when thinking about so-called                                                                   
cybercrime, one only has to listen to the news to realize that how                                                              
people commit crimes is expanding, if not changing, with new                                                                    
technology.  That is what interests the Governor in bringing the                                                                
statutes up-to-date a bit, especially to address so-called identity                                                             
theft, which has now reached Alaska.                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
MS. CARPENETI recounted how a Ketchikan woman's credit card and                                                                 
Social Security numbers were obtained over the Internet by a                                                                    
Seattle-area woman, who then opened a bank account, got checks                                                                  
printed, opened accounts at department stores, and actually bought                                                              
a car with a $6,000 check, at minimum.  The Ketchikan woman                                                                     
discovered it six months later when she went to open an account and                                                             
got a bad credit report; when trying to deal with Seattle-area                                                                  
police, however, she found she wasn't really considered the victim.                                                             
The problem with Alaska's statutes now is that in terms of criminal                                                             
impersonation, the person whose identity is taken isn't the victim;                                                             
rather, the victims are the credit card companies, banks and                                                                    
department stores that are victims of criminal theft.  The                                                                      
perpetrator hasn't been charged yet in the case just described, Ms.                                                             
Carpeneti noted, although the woman had continued buying things                                                                 
with the preprinted checks until the supply ran out.                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
MS. CARPENETI explained that the foregoing is one issue addressed                                                               
by the bill.  It makes criminal impersonation in the first degree                                                               
a class B felony.  The elements of the offense are to take a                                                                    
person's piece of identification, open an account with the intent                                                               
to defraud, and thereby damage the financial reputation of a                                                                    
person.  The person whose identity is used is the victim of the                                                                 
crime, and can proceed to report it to the police.  Ms. Carpeneti                                                               
told members:                                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
     In terms of prosecution and jurisdiction, our courts have                                                                  
     held that if the harm occurs in the state of Alaska, we                                                                    
     can prosecute if the person is not here.  That's not to                                                                    
     say that we're going to catch these people.  And the                                                                       
     problem of cybercrime is really a global problem.  It's                                                                    
     not just Alaska.  It's not just the United States.  It's                                                                   
     all over the world.                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
MS. CARPENETI related how at a cybercrime convention a month ago,                                                               
one eye-opening real-time presentation involved an investigator who                                                             
identified herself as a 12-year-old girl on the Internet and went                                                               
into various chatrooms.  Ms. Carpeneti said it was appalling what                                                               
happened, and one can only imagine what would happen to an actual                                                               
child doing that.  The other part of the presentation was the                                                                   
second investigator trying to figure out the whereabouts of the                                                                 
people talking to the allegedly 12-year-old girl; those people, it                                                              
turned out, were using servers all over the world.                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
MS. CARPENETI emphasized that investigation of people perpetrating                                                              
these crimes is a lot bigger than HB 338.  However, the reason for                                                              
introducing the bill is so that when they do catch these people,                                                                
Alaska's statutes are up-to-date and more useful than they                                                                      
currently are.  She pointed out that Alaska's statutes are in                                                                   
pretty good shape, but the criminal impersonation provision makes                                                               
it a class A misdemeanor to defraud people in another's name, and                                                               
it still doesn't address the issue of who is the victim of the                                                                  
crime.  This bill does that, with criminal impersonation in the                                                                 
first degree.                                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
Number 0489                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
MS. CARPENETI cited examples where the bill brings some of Alaska's                                                             
statutes up-to-date.  Where a statute says theft of a credit card,                                                              
fraudulent use of a credit card or obtaining a credit card by                                                                   
fraudulent means, the bill amends it to say "access device."                                                                    
Therefore, it isn't just the actual card that people carry around,                                                              
but is the number on the card, the phone number or the personal                                                                 
identification number (PIN), for example, which can be stolen from                                                              
someone and used to defraud them or someone else.  That is one of                                                               
the cleanups.                                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
MS. CARPENETI next brought attention to the "falsifying business                                                                
records" provision, which makes it illegal to go in without                                                                     
authorization and change business records by adding false                                                                       
information, taking away correct information or failing to put in                                                               
information where there is a duty to do so.  This also adds                                                                     
"electronic records" to the definition of "business records."  In                                                               
terms of deceptive business practices, that crime is really                                                                     
criminal consumer protection offenses, false advertising; it is                                                                 
made a class A misdemeanor in the statutes.  Ms. Carpeneti                                                                      
indicated HB 338 changes the penalty to a class C felony if it is                                                               
done via computer or a computer system or network.  People who                                                                  
perpetrate these crimes by computer have a much bigger audience and                                                             
base of victims, she pointed out.                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
MS. CARPENETI reported that the bill also expands the criminal use                                                              
of a computer, a class C felony, to include additional behavior                                                                 
such as adding misleading information; right now, it prohibits                                                                  
adding false information.  It would also include damaging a                                                                     
person's financial reputation or getting personal information that                                                              
one isn't authorized to get.  Ms. Carpeneti offered to address                                                                  
specific details of that section.  She told members the bill also                                                               
does some minor clarifying amendments.  In terms of child                                                                       
pornography, for example, it clarifies the law to provide that if                                                               
one produces an electronic depiction of a child engaged in these                                                                
various acts already talked about, that is included in the                                                                      
definition of child pornography.                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
MS. CARPENETI concluded by saying the bill has three parts.  It is                                                              
a little ground breaking with the new criminal impersonation                                                                    
statute, and then it brings the statutes up-to-date regarding the                                                               
way crimes are committed now.  She pointed out that the Court of                                                                
Appeals had decided recently that the credit card number is                                                                     
included in the fraudulent use of a credit card, but the court                                                                  
didn't expand that to various other access devices such as a bank                                                               
card for obtaining money or telephone access cards.  This bill                                                                  
expands the definitions so that if people steal those and use them                                                              
to defraud someone, the state can prosecute.                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
Number 0626                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
CHAIRMAN KOTT asked whether this bill addresses introduction of a                                                               
computer virus that affects a computer and causes it to crash.                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
MS. CARPENETI affirmed that.                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIRMAN KOTT asked how the state would follow through on that in                                                               
terms of the origination of the virus.                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
MS. CARPENETI said that is the problem, as far as catching the                                                                  
person who did it.  In addition to having the statutes up-to-date,                                                              
the state needs investigators who are trained to figure out who did                                                             
it.  She pointed out the fiscal note from the Department of Public                                                              
Safety (DPS) requesting training and equipment for investigators to                                                             
learn how to do that.  Although a couple of people in the state are                                                             
good at that now, more are needed.  Noting that the DPS could                                                                   
describe what they do, she stated her understanding that their                                                                  
techniques involve taking a whole computer and copying the                                                                      
information, leaving what was originally found on the computer.                                                                 
Untrained people may easily lose evidence, she pointed out.                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
Number 0707                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
CHAIRMAN KOTT asked whether it would be a class C felony if someone                                                             
came into his office and wiped out the hard drive.  He indicated it                                                             
would be under Section 11.                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
MS. CARPENETI affirmed that and agreed it is in Section 11.  She                                                                
noted that under paragraph (a)(6) on page 5, for example, that                                                                  
applies even if a person has access to the computer but has                                                                     
exceeded the authorized access and has introduced instructions,                                                                 
programs or other information that disrupts, disables or destroys                                                               
a computer system.                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
CHAIRMAN KOTT asked whether removing information on the hard drive                                                              
by using a keystroke, for example, would be included in the phrase                                                              
"introduces instructions" [page 5, line 17].                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MS. CARPENETI affirmed that that is what it was intended to mean.                                                               
                                                                                                                                
Number 0771                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GREEN referred to page 3, line 30 [obtaining an                                                                  
access device or identification document by fraudulent means, which                                                             
would be a class A misdemeanor.]  He asked whether the level of                                                                 
that crime has been reduced.                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MS. CARPENETI answered that in a way, yes, because obtaining an                                                                 
access device by fraudulent means was a class C felony under                                                                    
"theory one and two," and under "theory three," it was a class A                                                                
misdemeanor.  It is changed to a class A misdemeanor because theft                                                              
of a credit card is a class A misdemeanor.  As described in the                                                                 
sectional analysis she had provided, the provision for fraudulent                                                               
use of a credit card is changed so that the penalties conform to                                                                
theft penalties; if the bill were adopted, it would be a class B                                                                
felony to use an access device and obtain property in excess of                                                                 
$25,000.  So getting the device would be the same as stealing it,                                                               
and then use of it is changed a little so that the penalties are in                                                             
line with the theft penalties.                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
Number 0851                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GREEN referred to the top of page 7, expressing                                                                  
uncertainty about what to do if one accidentally picks up a                                                                     
communication through a satellite feed, for example.  He asked                                                                  
whether he would be guilty of a violation in that case.                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
MS. CARPENETI said she doesn't believe so, because it would be an                                                               
accident.  "You wouldn't have accessed it in terms of going and                                                                 
getting it without authorization," she added.  "It would have just                                                              
been sent to you."                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GREEN asked whether that is understood.                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
MS. CARPENETI said she thinks so.  She pointed out that AS 42.20                                                                
has specific statutes.  She suggested the possibility of looking at                                                             
it and maybe particularly providing, for this behavior, that                                                                    
accidental receipt isn't included in an offense.                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GREEN referred to the phrase "divulge the existence"                                                             
on page 7, line 5.  He asked whether, if a person had picked up                                                                 
information accidentally, that would exonerate another person who                                                               
then divulged its existence.                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MS. CARPENETI said she believes so; she offered to check that.  She                                                             
stated that in AS 42.20, for other types of interception of                                                                     
communications, it isn't a crime if it is accidental.                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
Number 0941                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE MURKOWSKI pointed out that this dovetails nicely                                                                 
with Representative Brice's bill [HB 354, just heard].  She asked                                                               
whether Ms. Carpeneti, in drafting this, had looked at going in the                                                             
direction of that bill as far as "trolling" on the Internet and the                                                             
necessity to provide certain protections.                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
MS. CARPENETI answered that they had been thinking more of theft-                                                               
type offenses when drafting this.  However, upon viewing it, [HB                                                                
354] did seem to fit nicely into crimes committed through                                                                       
technology.                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE MURKOWSKI suggested this might be a good place to                                                                
put the idea.                                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
Number 1007                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG expressed concern about substituting                                                                    
"access device" for "credit card."  He asked whether that has any                                                               
currency as legal terminology now.                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
MS. CARPENETI explained that when drafting it, she looked at the                                                                
federal law that has a similar definition, which she believes she                                                               
followed.  She pointed out that the legislature could delete things                                                             
they don't want in the definition.                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG voiced concern about clarity here.  As a                                                                
legislator, he knows to go back to the definitions, but the average                                                             
person may not know that.  In Section 5, for example, where perhaps                                                             
it is more appropriate, it says "access device or identification                                                                
document."  He noted that both of those terms are defined.  He                                                                  
inquired about other terms such as "access identification device."                                                              
                                                                                                                                
MS. CARPENETI agreed maybe the term "access device" is "New Age."                                                               
She said she would think about it to see if she can find something                                                              
more meaningful.                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG said PIN numbers are referred to here, but                                                              
not specifically; he surmised those would be included in                                                                        
identification documents.                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
MS. CARPENETI explained that she considered the PIN as being                                                                    
included in the access device definition.  Although a PIN has                                                                   
identification aspects, "document" is really defined as a paper                                                                 
document rather than a number.  She asked whether Representative                                                                
Rokeberg was saying they should state "PIN - personal                                                                           
identification number" so  it is absolutely clear.                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG said he just had a little trouble with                                                                  
"access device."                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
Number 1170                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG turned attention to page 4, Section 10,                                                                 
deceptive business practices.  He expressed his understanding that                                                              
this adds to the existing statute and raises the penalty if it                                                                  
includes using a computer.                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
MS. CARPENETI affirmed that.                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG commented that one uses a computer in                                                                   
almost every business practice anymore.  He asked whether there is                                                              
a particular point here.                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
MS. CARPENETI answered that the point is that deceptive business                                                                
practices perpetrated over the Internet or via computer have a much                                                             
bigger audience than a sign in a grocery store misrepresenting the                                                              
availability of a sale item, for example.                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG suggested a cash register could be called                                                               
a computer, resulting in a class C felony.                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
MS. CARPENETI pointed out that "computer" is defined in Alaska's                                                                
statutes.                                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG asked whether a hand-held "Palm Pilot"                                                                  
would be included, for example.                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
MS. CARPENETI indicated she would like to read the statute again.                                                               
                                                                                                                                
Number 1251                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG drew attention to page 5, subsection (a).                                                               
He said it seems they are on the edge of disallowing any type of                                                                
"cookie" to be placed on a person's hard drive or even on a server.                                                             
He indicated a cookie is a code or file implanted onto a person's                                                               
hard drive that allows a down-line server to recognize an                                                                       
individual and create data specifically for that person.  Cookies                                                               
are put in without people's knowledge now.  He said he is a little                                                              
uncomfortable about prohibiting things.                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
Number 1395                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE MURKOWSKI brought up the issue of telephone scams                                                                
where technically the access device or number hasn't been stolen or                                                             
forged but was inadvertently provided because someone was misled.                                                               
                                                                                                                                
MS. CARPENETI said she believes that would be covered by "obtaining                                                             
an access device by fraudulent means."  Once that number was                                                                    
obtained, if it were used fraudulently to obtain goods or services,                                                             
the case could be prosecuted as fraudulent use of an access device,                                                             
depending on the circumstances.                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
Number 1500                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG pointed out that the "cookie" problem is                                                                
actually in Section 17, which relates to electronic storage.  He                                                                
indicated it seems Section 17 would prohibit the implanting of                                                                  
cookies, which occurs without people's knowledge and which many                                                                 
people may want.                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
MS. CARPENETI asked whether Representative Rokeberg was saying                                                                  
there is a problem with this statute.                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG stated that it is right on the edge and                                                                 
there is "a de facto lack of affirmative authorization on the                                                                   
establishment of some of these types of methodologies."  He alluded                                                             
to policy questions arising from the use of "cookies" [because                                                                  
there is a potential for misuse by those who implant them], but                                                                 
indicated he doesn't believe addressing that issue is the intent of                                                             
the bill.                                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
MS. CARPENETI clarified that the intent of this section is to                                                                   
prohibit people from getting into other people's e-mail or voice                                                                
mail.  She offered to talk with Representative Rokeberg about it                                                                
and to find a "cookie" expert.                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
Number 1735                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
BLAIR McCUNE, Deputy Director, Public Defender Agency, Department                                                               
of Administration, testified via teleconference from Anchorage.  He                                                             
said he thinks what Representative Rokeberg was saying about the                                                                
possible overbreadth of the bill is his own main concern.  The way                                                              
"access device" is defined was troubling to his agency as well.  He                                                             
can understand the need to include more than just the physical card                                                             
these days.  However, it seems the definition should create the                                                                 
bundle of information necessary to do a financial transaction,                                                                  
rather than just individual parts of it.  This would make having a                                                              
Social Security number alone be an "access device," for example.                                                                
Furthermore, to use a credit card number over the phone, one needs                                                              
the number plus the expiration date.  He restated the need to get                                                               
at that packet of information, rather than individual items, which                                                              
may include something as innocuous as one's residence address.                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
MR. McCUNE reported that the other main problem is the relationship                                                             
between the harm caused and the level of offense.  He referred to                                                               
Section 6, criminal impersonation in the first degree, and making                                                               
this a class B felony.  If someone is fooling around with a                                                                     
computer and doing things they shouldn't be doing, that is bad, he                                                              
agreed; however, how bad it is depends on the ultimate level of                                                                 
harm, not just that a computer has been used.  Mr. McCune said he                                                               
believes that applies to Section 9 and 10 as well.  As pointed out,                                                             
other business practices can be worse than those using a computer.                                                              
He emphasized that the relationship to the harm should be looked at                                                             
carefully and worked out before this goes on.                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
MR. McCUNE advised the committee that his agency has similar                                                                    
concerns with Sections 11, 17 and 18 regarding people who have                                                                  
exceeded their authorized access to obtain personal information.                                                                
In his own office, for example, people may have stretched the limit                                                             
of authorized access in getting some file.  Making it against the                                                               
law to do those kinds of things, even though it is a class A                                                                    
misdemeanor, is pretty troubling.  Mr. McCune expressed hope that                                                               
more work can be done on the bill to narrow it down.                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
Number 2045                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG stated his understanding that the Public                                                                
Defender Agency doesn't get involved in domestic relations cases.                                                               
                                                                                                                                
MR. McCUNE answered no.  The closest they come to that is                                                                       
representing parents in child-in-need-of-aid (CINA) cases, where                                                                
social workers become involved with the families.                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
Number 2098                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
DAVID HUDSON, Lieutenant, Division of Alaska State Troopers,                                                                    
Department of Public Safety (DPS), testified via teleconference                                                                 
from Anchorage on behalf of the DPS.  He said the department                                                                    
certainly looks forward to this bill's passage.  They recognize                                                                 
that enforcement of "computer crimes" and related criminal activity                                                             
is extremely difficult now.  As technology advances and changes,                                                                
there have been a multitude of incidents in which the DPS has been                                                              
hampered.  Certainly, some definitions in the bill will be                                                                      
advantageous to the DPS, such as the change from "credit cards" to                                                              
"access devices," as will utilizing numbers and names.                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
LIEUTENANT HUDSON said certainly some things on the Internet today                                                              
are accessed by using a person's name and Social Security number.                                                               
From a law enforcement perspective, as Ms. Carpeneti had said, it                                                               
is very difficult.  It is a learning process for the DPS.  They                                                                 
must stay on top of this regarding specialties and specialists.                                                                 
Training is continually evolving in society today for determining                                                               
how to investigate these crimes.  Department personnel aren't                                                                   
experts in these areas by any means, he pointed out, and technology                                                             
is advancing in leaps and bounds.  Lieutenant Hudson mentioned                                                                  
proactive formats regarding bills and laws to be able to access                                                                 
some of this information and study it, and hopefully to be able to                                                              
solve future assistance needs in Alaska.  He concluded by restating                                                             
that the DPS looks forward to this bill moving forward.                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
Number 2226                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG asked how many DPS personnel work in this                                                               
area now, and with what kinds of support and equipment.                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
LIEUTENANT HUDSON answered that right now they have a white-collar                                                              
crime section headquartered in Anchorage, with one sergeant and two                                                             
troopers, to his belief.  He indicated their equipment isn't as                                                                 
technologically advanced as what they see youngsters using across                                                               
the nation, however, and they need to advance on that level.  That                                                              
section's specialties cover a wide range; other than computer                                                                   
crime, they also deal with gaming, fraud and accounting issues, for                                                             
example.  Lieutenant Hudson expressed with certainty that the                                                                   
department isn't as up-to-date as training would allow through                                                                  
various courses conducted by federal and commercial crime                                                                       
investigation units.                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
LIEUTENANT HUDSON reported that the DPS has some other police                                                                   
officers around the state, and a young officer at the University of                                                             
Alaska Fairbanks security office is doing some very good work and                                                               
is recognized statewide for some of his knowledge regarding                                                                     
computer-related crimes; furthermore, the Anchorage Police                                                                      
Department has personnel working on this.  They try to get those                                                                
people together as often as possible to learn from one another.  He                                                             
agreed with Ms. Carpeneti that it involves a multitude of things,                                                               
including trying to teach personnel how to save potential evidence                                                              
in computers when they come across computers in drug-related                                                                    
conspiracies and other crimes of that nature.  "It's a very                                                                     
widespread effort, and we probably don't have as many people as we                                                              
would like specializing in this area," Lieutenant Hudson concluded.                                                             
                                                                                                                                
Number 2406                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG asked whether one person in the entire                                                                  
force could be categorized as a "computer geek" who really knows                                                                
what he is doing.                                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
LIEUTENANT HUDSON said the sergeant in the white-collar crime                                                                   
section is probably the best-trained person in this area.  However,                                                             
they recently researched some other training that he or some of his                                                             
subordinates could attend, to help bring them in line in this                                                                   
direction.  Lieutenant Hudson emphasized that technology is                                                                     
advancing so rapidly that the department will probably always be in                                                             
a catch-up position.                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG asked whether the DPS can access the                                                                    
Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) for support in the Anchorage                                                              
area.                                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
LIEUTENANT HUDSON affirmed that.  [Although not on tape, it was                                                                 
recorded in the log notes.]                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
TAPE 00-19, SIDE A                                                                                                              
Number 0046                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
ROBERT BUTTCANE, Juvenile Probation Officer, Youth Corrections,                                                                 
Division of Family and Youth Services, Department of Health and                                                                 
Social Services, testified via teleconference from Anchorage in                                                                 
support of HB 338.  He indicated the department views this, in a                                                                
sense, as a preemptive proposal that would help hold delinquent                                                                 
offenders accountable when they cause harm to others through the                                                                
use of computers or electronic technologies.  He sees it as an                                                                  
opportunity to establish standards for appropriate or inappropriate                                                             
use of these modern technologies.                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
MR. BUTTCANE spoke strongly in favor of the use of the term "access                                                             
device," in particular.  In delinquency casework, they have had                                                                 
trouble holding accountable young offenders who have taken other                                                                
people's ATM [automated teller machine] cards, for example,                                                                     
because an ATM card isn't a credit card and has no intrinsic value.                                                             
In those instances, the department has had to resort to other                                                                   
things that are more indirect, such as theft of lost or mislaid                                                                 
property.  Using "access device" in the definition under theft in                                                               
the third degree, rather than "credit card," would give the                                                                     
department the opportunity to say to a young person who takes                                                                   
somebody else's ATM card that it is stolen property with a value of                                                             
more than $50 and less than $500, and that it is not okay.                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
MR. BUTTCANE reported that the same holds true when someone steals                                                              
another's computer system password.  Although there hadn't been a                                                               
number of those cases referred to the department in the delinquency                                                             
system, there have been discussions with school personnel.  In                                                                  
Anchorage, at least, there have been two occasions where students                                                               
gained access to parts of the school system's computer; in one                                                                  
case, access was to a teacher's personal electronic files, and in                                                               
other case, access was to an area that would have led to grades,                                                                
had the student been able to continue.                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
MR. BUTTCANE recognized that some of that behavior is already                                                                   
included under existing statutes, but said expansion of the                                                                     
criminal use of a computer is a preemptive step.  Although the bill                                                             
itself may need some more work, trying to deal with these                                                                       
technologies is difficult.  "Having this in place I think will                                                                  
support us in finding our way in what is correct and what is                                                                    
incorrect," he concluded, indicating the desire to work on this                                                                 
bill and move forward on it.                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
Number 0325                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
CHAIRMAN KOTT, noting that nobody else had signed up to testify,                                                                
closed public testimony.  He asked Representative Rokeberg whether                                                              
he still has concerns about the "cookie" problem.                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG affirmed that.  He referred to Mr. McCune's                                                             
testimony and Section 10, deceptive business practices.  He said he                                                             
believes the department is looking to make a higher standard of                                                                 
criminal offense, turning it into a class C felony, if there is use                                                             
of the Internet, not a computer.  He restated concern about having                                                              
a cash register be considered a computer, so that if a clerk who                                                                
had intentionally overcharged somebody for merchandise could be                                                                 
guilty of a class C felony for a $2 crime.  He noted that Mr.                                                                   
McCune had echoed his own concerns about Sections 17 and 18.                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG also voiced concern about how the language                                                              
should be drafted to ensure that it doesn't hinder technology.                                                                  
Although the legislature certainly should keep the interests of                                                                 
consumers and individuals in mind foremost, he said they shouldn't                                                              
interrupt "e-commerce" by passing legislation that has a chilling                                                               
effect on it.  He said he doesn't feel qualified to make a                                                                      
suggestion but isn't comfortable with the direction being taken in                                                              
some of these sections.  However, there is a need for this                                                                      
legislation; if the courts use a strict reading of "credit card,"                                                               
for example, that needs to be fixed as soon as possible.  The                                                                   
troopers also need some help and should have a "geek" on hand,                                                                  
which would cost $145,000 out of the $250,000 fiscal note for the                                                               
bill; he commented that it seems pretty justifiable.                                                                            
Representative Rokeberg stated concern that the bill is omnibus                                                                 
legislation.                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
Number 0599                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
CHAIRMAN KOTT asked whether there were further comments.  He                                                                    
announced the intention of trying to address Representative                                                                     
Rokeberg's concerns and to work with the Public Defender Agency on                                                              
a couple of the issues brought up.  He informed members that HB 338                                                             
would be held over.                                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
HB 366 - CRIME VICTIMS RIGHTS & DOMESTIC VIOLENCE                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
CHAIRMAN KOTT announced that the next item of business would be                                                                 
HOUSE BILL NO. 366, "An Act relating to the rights of crime                                                                     
victims, the crime of violating a protective order or injunction,                                                               
mitigating factors in sentencing for an offense, and the return of                                                              
certain seized property to victims; expanding the scope of the                                                                  
prohibition of compromise based on civil remedy of misdemeanor                                                                  
crimes involving domestic violence; amending Rules 10, 11, 13, 16,                                                              
and 17, Alaska District Court Rules of Civil Procedure and Rule 9,                                                              
Alaska Rules of Administration."  [The bill had been introduced by                                                              
the House Rules Committee at the request of the Governor.]                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
Number 0663                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
ANNE CARPENETI, Assistant Attorney General, Legal Services Section-                                                             
Juneau, Criminal Division, Department of Law, came forward on                                                                   
behalf of the Governor to present HB 366.  She explained that this                                                              
is a cleanup bill in a sense.  It takes care of four areas that                                                                 
have been problematic in terms of victims in Alaska.  She said she                                                              
would describe those briefly and then answer any questions.                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
MS. CARPENETI reported that the first area deals with consequences                                                              
for violation of a protective injunction in a children's case.                                                                  
Title 47 allows a court to enjoin an adult from having contact with                                                             
a child if there is established the fact that the adult has                                                                     
sexually or physically abused the child or has put the child in                                                                 
serious danger.  Currently there are no consequences other than                                                                 
contempt of court.  As in a violation of a protective order in a                                                                
domestic violence (DV) case, the bill provides that it is a class                                                               
A misdemeanor to violate a court order that a person not contact a                                                              
child after a finding that the person has caused sexual or physical                                                             
abuse to the child.                                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
MS. CARPENETI explained that second, the bill adopts a less formal                                                              
procedure for an owner of property, which was seized by the police                                                              
from a pawnbroker, to get it back when the pawnbroker wants a                                                                   
hearing because of uncertainty as to who is the owner.  Right now,                                                              
the alleged owner has to file a lawsuit.  This bill adopts a                                                                    
procedure by which a person can file a form supported by an                                                                     
affidavit; it also gives the pawnbroker an opportunity to be heard                                                              
and to file a supporting affidavit.  To get property back under                                                                 
these circumstances, therefore, one doesn't have to hire a lawyer                                                               
and participate in a lawsuit.                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
Number 0780                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
MS. CARPENETI advised members that third, the bill cleans up                                                                    
something that she believes was overlooked in 1996 when the                                                                     
legislature adopted the domestic violence and victim protection                                                                 
Act.  She explained:                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
     We tried, in those cases, to go back into the statutes                                                                     
     outside Title 11 and outside Title 18, where there are                                                                     
     ... family relationships described, and just use the                                                                       
     definition of "domestic violence."  In this particular                                                                     
     case, right now ... our statutes allow for civil                                                                           
     compromise of certain misdemeanors, and that is when ...                                                                   
     the defendant and the victim come in and say, "We've                                                                       
     compromised this case; would you please dismiss it,                                                                        
     judge?"  And it's not an appropriate thing in domestic                                                                     
     violence cases, just because of the power and the                                                                          
     manipulation that's a part of that offense.  So although                                                                   
     ... the current statute does forbid civil compromise in                                                                    
     most of our domestic violence relationships, it doesn't                                                                    
     include all of them.  So we have ... in this bill                                                                          
     substituted a crime involving domestic violence for these                                                                  
     particular relationships.                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
MS. CARPENETI reported that fourth, the bill adopts a mitigating                                                                
factor - which has already been recognized by the courts as a                                                                   
nonstatutory mitigator - when a defendant in a criminal case                                                                    
behaves in a way that mitigates the crime's effect on the victim by                                                             
pleading guilty within 30 days after the defendant is arraigned.                                                                
She concluded that these are not major changes in law but are                                                                   
cleanups.  This adopts it as a statutory mitigator rather than a                                                                
nonstatutory mitigator, which would require that the case be sent                                                               
to a three-judge panel for sentencing if the court were to consider                                                             
that particular factor.                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
Number 0899                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
CHAIRMAN KOTT asked whether there were any questions and whether                                                                
anyone else wanted to testify; there was no interest shown.  He                                                                 
closed public testimony.                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG asked Chairman Kott whether he had                                                                      
contacted any pawnbrokers about this bill.                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
CHAIRMAN KOTT said no and added that he assumes they are okay with                                                              
it.                                                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
Number 0940                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GREEN made a motion to move HB 366 out of the                                                                    
committee with individual recommendations and the attached zero                                                                 
fiscal note(s).  There being no objection, it was so ordered and HB                                                             
366 was moved from the House Judiciary Standing Committee.                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
ADJOURNMENT                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
Number 0989                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
CHAIRMAN KOTT adjourned the House Judiciary Standing Committee                                                                  
meeting at 3:07 p.m.                                                                                                            

Document Name Date/Time Subjects