Legislature(1995 - 1996)
02/08/1995 01:30 PM Senate JUD
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE
February 8, 1995
1:30 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Senator Robin Taylor, Chairman
Senator Lyda Green, Vice-Chairman
Senator Mike Miller
Senator Al Adams
Senator Johnny Ellis
MEMBERS ABSENT
None
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
SENATE BILL NO. 60
"An Act providing an exemption from gambling and certain alcoholic
beverage laws for gambling conducted by cruise ships for their
ticketed passengers in the offshore water of the state; relating to
promotions on board cruise ships; defining `cruise ship'; providing
for exemption procedures for certain cruise ships before they can
conduct gambling in the offshore water of the state; providing an
exemption from the coin-operated device tax for cruise ships
exempted from the gambling laws; and providing for an effective
date."
SENATE BILL NO. 6
"An Act relating to registration of a motor vehicle and suspension
of a driver's license for failure to appear in court or failure to
pay a fine."
SENATE BILL NO. 14
"An Act relating to criminal mischief."
SENATE BILL NO. 13
"An Act relating to the admissibility of evidence and testimony in
criminal and civil proceedings; directing the admissibility into
evidence of deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) profiles in civil and
criminal proceedings; amending Rules 702(a) and 703 of the Alaska
Rules of Evidence to modify the rule relating to the basis or
foundation for the admissibility of expert opinion testimony that
is based on scientific evidence; and amending Rules 401, 403, and
705 of the Alaska Rules of Evidence."
SJUD - 2/8/95
SENATE BILL NO. 10
"An Act revising Rule 16, Alaska Rules of Criminal Procedure,
relating to discovery and inspection in criminal proceedings, to
adopt the comparable federal rule."
PREVIOUS SENATE COMMITTEE ACTION
SB 60 - No previous action.
SB 6 - See State Affairs minutes dated 2/2/95.
SB 14 - See Judiciary minutes dated 2/1/95.
See Judiciary minutes dated 2/6/95.
SB 13 - See Judiciary minutes dated 2/1/95.
See Judiciary minutes dated 2/6/95.
SB 10 - See Judiciary minutes dated 2/6/95.
WITNESS REGISTER
Senator Bert Sharp
Alaska State Legislature
State Capitol
Juneau, AK 99801-1182
POSITION STATEMENT: Sponsor of SB 60
Joe Ambrose
Legislative Aide to Senator Taylor
Alaska State Legislature
State Capitol
Juneau, AK 99801-1182
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on SB 6
Juanita Hensley
Chief, Driver Services
Division of Motor Vehicles
Department of Public Safety
PO Box 20020
Juneau, Alaska 99811-0200
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on SB 6
Margot Knuth
Criminal Division
Department of Law
PO Box 110300
Juneau, AK 99811-0300
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on SB 14
Sgt. Joe D'Amico
Division of Alaska State Troopers
Department of Public Safety
5700 E. Tudor Rd.
Anchorage, AK 99507-1225
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on SB 14
ACTION NARRATIVE
TAPE 95-5, SIDE A
Number 001
CHAIRMAN ROBIN TAYLOR called the Judiciary Committee meeting to
order at 1:35 p.m. Present were Senators Taylor, Green, Adams and
Miller. The first order of business was SB 60.
SJUD - 2/8/95
SB 60 CRUISE SHIP GAMBLING & PROMOTIONS
SENATOR BERT SHARP , sponsor, informed committee members that an
identical bill passed the Legislature in 1994 but was vetoed by the
previous Governor. SB 60 accommodates the concerns that arose and
were approved during the committee process. SB 60 authorizes the
Department of Commerce and Economic Development to offer an
exemption for cruise ships which would allow the continuation of
shipboard casino operations while in Alaskan waters. Casino
gambling on cruise ships is a worldwide accepted practice. Casino
operations would not be allowed while the ship is in port or within
3 miles of a port of call. By allowing gambling activities on
state waters, the state would benefit from the collection of
exemption fees, ranging from $7,500 to $40,000 per ship (depending
on passenger size). Casino gambling has no impact on Alaskan
communities as only ticketed passengers are allowed on board while
the casinos are in operation. In the interest of maintaining world
class cruise amenities on board Alaska destination cruises, Senator
Sharp urged the committee's support of SB 60.
Number 44
SENATOR ADAMS asked what the Administration's position is on SB 60.
SENATOR SHARP understood this Administration to be more friendly to
SB 60 than the past Administration.
Number 65
SENATOR ADAMS made a motion to move SB 60 out of committee with
individual recommendations. Without objection, the motion passed.
Number 069
SJUD - 2/8/95
SB 6 LICENSING/REGISTRATION SUSPENSION/DENIAL
The next order of business was SB 6. SENATOR TAYLOR, sponsor,
asked JOE AMBROSE to testify before the committee. MR. AMBROSE
stated the intent of SB 6 is to encourage individuals to make court
appearances and pay outstanding fines related to moving vehicle
citations and parking offenses. Each year, 25,000 traffic
citations for moving violations go unpaid in Alaska, according to
the Department of Public Safety. SB 6 is designed to provide the
court system, and municipalities, throughout Alaska, with
additional leverage in the collection of fines. It would also
apply to an individual who fails to appear in court when ordered.
SB 6 passed the Senate in a 17-3 vote last year as SB 166. SB 6
would be a valuable tool for use by the courts in addressing the
problems created by those who choose to ignore the law, especially
those who fail to make court ordered appearances or to pay fines
imposed by the court. SB 6 is based on statutes from other states.
In the State of Washington, over 50 percent of those who receive
notice of possible sanctions clear up outstanding matters within
one week. SB 6 ties the failure to settle moving violations to the
driver's license and parking violations to vehicle registration
which mirrors California law.
Number 096
SENATOR ADAMS asked why both moving and parking violations are
included in SB 6, since parking violations are under the
jurisdiction of municipalities. MR. AMBROSE replied SB 6 is based
on the California statute which operates the same way. When the
bill went through the process last year, there seemed to be quite
a bit of interest from the urban areas to give them leverage when
attempting to collect parking fines.
Number 114
SENATOR ADAMS questioned whether the sentence that allows the
department to require electronic reporting in Section 2 could
create a burden for municipalities. He asked whether this could be
considered an unfunded mandate imposed by the state on
municipalities. SENATOR TAYLOR replied that is not the intention;
the sentence refers to the use of personal computers and disks as
most municipalities now use. SENATOR ADAMS asked, if SB 6 passes,
what the time frame would be for municipalities to install the
electronic devices, and to notify the state of parking violations.
Number 140
MR. AMBROSE explained SB 6 calls for electronic reporting which
would allow a municipality, with a stack of uncollectible parking
citations, to make a report to the Division of Motor Vehicles.
When that individual tries to renew a vehicle registration,
outstanding fines would have to be paid prior to registering the
vehicle. SENATOR ADAMS discussed a scenario in which a person with
several vehicles driven by other family members might be prevented
from registering a vehicle because an outstanding parking citation
on one of the vehicles exists. MR. AMBROSE referred to line 5 of
page 2 which states actual notice must be given to the applicant.
SENATOR ADAMS expressed concern with the inclusion of parking
violations in SB 6.
Number 182
JUANITA HENSLEY, Chief of Driver Services for the Division of Motor
Vehicles (DMV), testified. She stated that a similar bill was
introduced several years ago in the Legislature to assist
municipalities in the collection of parking fines. Two years ago,
Senator Taylor introduced a bill to deal with moving violations.
At the request of some of the municipalities, the parking citation
provision was added. To ease the burden on the Department of
Public Safety, the department requested that municipalities have
electronic access to motor vehicle registration files to place a
hold on vehicle registrations until outstanding fines are paid.
She noted line 7 of Section 2 refers to any vehicle, so that all
fines on vehicles owned by the applicant would have to be paid
before a vehicle could be registered.
SENATOR ADAMS asked if the DMV would notify the owner of the
violation a second time, after issuance of the citation. MS.
HENSLEY explained notification would occur when the person
attempted to register the vehicle.
Number 232
SENATOR ELLIS asked what entity in Anchorage would be transferring
information to the DMV. MS. HENSLEY replied the Anchorage Parking
Authority. SENATOR ELLIS asked for clarification of the term "any
vehicle." MS. HENSLEY replied it would include any vehicle subject
to registration in Title 28, such as passenger cars, trucks, and
commercial vehicles, but not 3 and 4 wheelers. SENATOR ELLIS
expressed concern that the Anchorage Parking Authority would be the
entity transferring information.
SENATOR ADAMS asked what time line will be used for municipality
notification to the state. MS. HENSLEY stated there has not been
any discussion on a time line. SENATOR TAYLOR noted the time for
notification would be determined by the municipality.
SENATOR ADAMS referred to the fiscal note from the Trial Court
System and asked how the percentages of revocations and
terminations were determined. MS. HENSLEY was not familiar with the
fiscal note from the Court System. She explained that Section 3 of
SB 6 allows the court to suspend a driver's license. In 1994 the
Court System estimated it would suspend approximately 2500 drivers'
licenses out of the 25,000 unpaid moving violations.
Number 296
SENATOR ELLIS asked if an individual has an unpaid parking ticket
on a personal vehicle, would that outstanding fine effect the
registration of business vehicles registered by that individual.
MS. HENSLEY answered affirmatively. SENATOR TAYLOR explained every
time the individual attempted to register any vehicle, outstanding
fines would have to be paid first. SENATOR ELLIS requested
information on the schedule of fines and penalties for outstanding
parking citations. SENATOR TAYLOR noted the municipalities
requested the inclusion of parking violations to strengthen the
municipalities' position against people who waste police officers'
time and court time by not taking responsibility for the payment of
fines. Currently the municipalities request bench warrants for
these people.
SENATOR ADAMS asked what the Department of Public Safety's position
would be if Section 2 was deleted. MS. HENSLEY stated the
Department would have no problem with the deletion of Section 2.
Number 345
SENATOR MILLER moved SB 6 out of committee with individual
recommendations. SENATOR ADAMS objected. He stated Section 2
needs to be eliminated. SENATOR TAYLOR stated SB 6 has a further
referral to the Senate Finance Committee, where the municipalities
should be requested to present a justification for Section 2.
SENATOR ELLIS asked the committee to officially request information
on the schedule of parking fines and penalties for late payment.
SENATOR TAYLOR agreed. A roll call vote was taken on the motion
with the following results: Senators Taylor, Green and Miller
voted "Yea," and Senators Adams and Ellis voted "Nay." The motion
passed.
SJUD - 2/8/95
SB 13 DNA EVIDENCE
The next item on the agenda was SB 13. SENATOR TAYLOR announced a
committee substitute had been prepared (Work Draft G, 2/2/95,
Chenoweth) which modifies the standard by which the court
determines whether expert testimony is admissible. The
modification allows the use of cutting edge technology, specific to
DNA testing (page 4, lines 26-30). This specification
significantly narrows the definition.
Number 386
SENATOR MILLER made a motion to adopt CSSB 13 in lieu of the
original bill. SENATOR ADAMS objected for the purpose of
discussion. He asked if the only difference between the original
bill and the committee substitute is that the CS limits the
amendment to Rule 702(a) to refer to DNA testing only. SENATOR
TAYLOR replied affirmatively, and explained an earlier work draft,
(F) dated 1/31/95, referred to any expert of any kind (lines 18 and
29 of page 4). Work Draft G narrows expert testimony to DNA
evidence.
SENATOR ADAMS asked if Senator Ellis' question regarding Native
American profiles had been addressed. SENATOR ELLIS replied, to
his knowledge, the FBI did not find any studies along those lines.
Number 418
SENATOR MILLER made a motion to move CSSB 13 (Work Draft G) out of
committee with individual recommendations. There being no
objection, the motion carried.
Number 425
SJUD-2/8/95
SB 14 INCREASED PENALTIES FOR JOYRIDING
SENATOR TAYLOR announced SB 14 was the next item on the agenda. At
his request, the Department of Law prepared an amendment to include
juveniles. The amendment (Amendment #1) makes joyriding a moving
traffic violation therefore both adult and juvenile violators would
be treated the same. SENATOR ELLIS asked if this provision would
trigger the new law that requires the mandatory waiver of juveniles
into adult court. SENATOR TAYLOR answered no, currently juveniles
are tried in adult court for moving traffic violations, such as
speeding or driving in a negligent manner. The amendment would
specifically designate joyriding as a moving traffic violation.
SENATOR TAYLOR moved the adoption of Amendment #1. Due to
objection, the motion was under discussion.
Number 470
Margot Knuth, Assistant Attorney General with the Department of
Law, testified. She explained Amendment #1 would specify joyriding
as a criminal offense in Title 28. Title 47.10.010 (the statute
governing juvenile proceedings) requires that juveniles committing
offenses listed in Title 28 be waived to adult court. By creating
the offense in Title 28, juveniles over 16 years of age would be
tried as adults. The offense would also be reflected in the
offender's record. Driving privileges could then be suspended.
The amendment reflects several concerns of the Department of Law.
The first concern is the fiscal impact of raising first joyriding
offenses to a felony level, especially if juveniles are included,
because the number of joyriding incidents has doubled in Anchorage
alone. If first offenses are designated as felonies, the
Department of Law would have to prosecute those cases because
felonies can only be prosecuted by the State, therefore the cases
currently being handled by the Anchorage Municipality would be
transferred to the State. To further increase the workload, the
juvenile offenders, which comprise 50 percent of the cases, would
also be referred to the Department of Law. The number of new
felony cases prosecuted by the Department would be 400 to 800 per
year. Secondly, juveniles would not be affected by changing the
first offense to a felony, because delinquency rules require those
offenders be treated as juveniles and the offense would not be
reflected in their records.
Ms. Knuth explained the amendment leaves criminal mischief offenses
where they are now, and adds to Title 28 the joyriding offense
which would be recorded as a first offense unless the offender
causes $500 or more in damages to the vehicle, which is currently
a felony. The intent is to target the hundreds of cases in
Anchorage in which cars are taken but either not damaged, or in
which damages cost less than $500. By placing the offense in Title
28, it will remain a misdemeanor and can be prosecuted by
municipalities and the State, and an offender's license would
automatically be suspended upon conviction. This method would be
enforceable on a consistent and thorough basis, and could be
considered an incremental approach to the problem.
Ms. Knuth noted she has been advised by Anchorage police officers
that license suspension is the single most effective means of
getting a juvenile's attention. By including this measure in Title
28, points from the offense would carry over to further license
actions if the person re-offends.
Number 526
SENATOR ADAMS noted the amendment allows the offense to be
considered a Class C felony, which is punishable by a fine of up to
$50,000 or five years of prison. He asked what other types of
crimes are categorized as Class C felonies. MS. KNUTH stated this
amendment does not change a second offense to a Class C felony;
that is already in statute. Other Class C felonies include
possession of cocaine, theft of property valued at more than $500,
and reckless tampering with the pipeline. She noted Senator
Leman's original bill would have made a first occasion joyriding
offense a Class C felony and would elevate a second offense to a
Class B felony. The amendment maintains first offenses as
misdemeanors, but allows a Class C felony designation for the
second offense.
SENATOR ADAMS asked Ms. Knuth if she believed joyriding should be
classified with other Class C felonies. MS. KNUTH replied she was
unaware of the Administration's position on the existing law that
makes joyriding a felony when it is a second offense.
SENATOR ADAMS noted the fiscal note from the Alaska State Troopers
indicates there are 700 thefts per year, yet reflects no costs
associated with the passage of SB 14. He questioned the
underestimation of costs.
SGT. JOE D'AMICO, Alaska State Troopers (AST), responded to Senator
Adams' concern. He noted the Alaska State Troopers response to
vehicle thefts would not be affected by raising the offense to a
felony since the type and amount of investigations conducted by the
AST would not change. He estimated the AST solves about two-
sevenths of the reported cases. Approximately half of the reported
cases are not treated as criminal mischief cases, usually because
of the juvenile factor. If the offense is classified as a felony,
approximately 100 cases would be prosecuted, and the only
difference would be a Grand Jury hearing which would have a
negligible fiscal impact on the Alaska State Troopers. He stated
of the 700 cases, 2 went to trial.
SENATOR ADAMS asked if the State would be required to prosecute the
cases in court if the offense is changed to a felony. SGT. D'AMICO
replied affirmatively. SENATOR ADAMS expressed doubt that the AST
would have sufficient funds to apprehend these offenders. He
questioned the need for a supplemental appropriation and the
additional 8 positions requested by the Alaska State Troopers.
SGT. D'AMICO stated if the crime is changed from a misdemeanor to
a felony, the investigative responsibility would not shift from the
municipality to the Alaska State Troopers, therefore there would be
no fiscal impact. The fiscal impact would occur in the agency
prosecuting the cases.
TAPE 95-5, SIDE B
SENATOR TAYLOR asked if there was further objection to the
amendment. SENATOR ADAMS maintained his objection. A roll call
vote was taken with the following result: Senators Green, Miller,
and Taylor voted "Yea" and Senators Ellis and Adams voted "Nay."
SENATOR MILLER moved SB 14 as amended out of committee with
individual recommendations. SENATOR ELLIS asked if the committee
would be receiving a revised fiscal note from the Court System.
SENATOR TAYLOR replied that would have to be presented to the
Finance Committee. SENATOR ELLIS expressed concern that the
amendment makes a significant fiscal impact to the bill.
Number 556
Ms. Knuth clarified the amended version is the less expensive
version. Elevating first offenses to felonies and including
juveniles would have increased the costs significantly. The
approach taken by the committee in adopting the amendment is more
economical than any other approach considered by the committee.
The original fiscal notes are much closer to being accurate to the
amended version.
SENATOR TAYLOR stated the motion before the committee was to move
SB 14 as amended from committee with individual recommendations.
SENATOR ADAMS objected. A roll call vote was taken with the
following results: Senators Miller, Taylor and Green voted "Yea"
and Senators Ellis and Adams voted "Nay." The motion passed.
SJUD - 2/8/95
SB 10 CRIMINAL DISCOVERY RULES
The committee took up SB 10. SENATOR ADAMS asked the committee if
they could wait to see what comes out of the Rules Committee
regarding the State Supreme Court ruling, prior to taking action.
SENATOR TAYLOR delayed further hearing on SB 10 until Friday,
February 10.
SENATOR TAYLOR adjourned the meeting at 2:27 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|