Legislature(2005 - 2006)BUTROVICH 205

05/02/2006 08:30 AM Senate JUDICIARY

Download Mp3. <- Right click and save file as

* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
Moved SCS CSHB 414(JUD) Out of Committee
Heard & Held
Moved SCS CSHB 258(JUD) Out of Committee
Heard & Held
                    ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE                                                                                  
              SENATE JUDICIARY STANDING COMMITTEE                                                                             
                          May 2, 2006                                                                                           
                           8:45 a.m.                                                                                            
MEMBERS PRESENT                                                                                                               
Senator Ralph Seekins, Chair                                                                                                    
Senator Charlie Huggins, Vice Chair                                                                                             
Senator Gene Therriault                                                                                                         
Senator Hollis French                                                                                                           
Senator Gretchen Guess                                                                                                          
MEMBERS ABSENT                                                                                                                
All members present                                                                                                             
COMMITTEE CALENDAR                                                                                                            
CS FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 414(RLS) am                                                                                               
"An   Act   relating  to   the   interception   of  the   private                                                               
communications of a minor."                                                                                                     
     MOVED SCS CSHB 414(JUD) OUT OF COMMITTEE                                                                                   
CS FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 190(FIN)                                                                                                  
"An Act  relating to the  purchase of alcoholic beverages  and to                                                               
access  to licensed  premises; relating  to  civil liability  for                                                               
certain persons  accessing licensed premises;  requiring driver's                                                               
licenses and  identification cards  to be marked  if a  person is                                                               
restricted from  consuming alcoholic beverages  as a result  of a                                                               
conviction or  condition of probation  or parole and  relating to                                                               
fees  for the  marked license;  and requiring  the surrender  and                                                               
cancellation of driver's licenses under certain circumstances."                                                                 
          HEARD AND HELD                                                                                                        
CS FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 258(JUD)                                                                                                  
"An Act relating to aggravating  factors at sentencing for sexual                                                               
assault and sexual abuse."                                                                                                      
     MOVED SCS CSHB 258(JUD) OUT OF COMMITTEE                                                                                   
CS FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 442(JUD) am                                                                                               
"An  Act  relating  to  the   validity  of  advance  health  care                                                               
directives,  individual  health  care instructions,  and  do  not                                                               
resuscitate orders; relating to  the revocation of advance health                                                               
care directives; relating to do  not resuscitate orders; relating                                                               
to  resuscitative   measures;  relating  to  the   liability  and                                                               
discipline   of   health   care  providers,   institutions,   and                                                               
facilities; relating to proceedings for judicial relief;                                                                        
relating to an individual's capacity for making health care                                                                     
decisions; and providing for an effective date."                                                                                
     HEARD AND HELD                                                                                                             
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION                                                                                                     
BILL: HB 414                                                                                                                  
SHORT TITLE: INTERCEPTION OF MINOR'S COMMUNICATIONS                                                                             
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) KOTT                                                                                              
02/01/06       (H)       READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS                                                                        
02/01/06       (H)       HES, JUD                                                                                               
02/14/06       (H)       HES AT 3:00 PM CAPITOL 106                                                                             
02/14/06       (H)       Moved CSHB 414(HES) Out of Committee                                                                   
02/14/06       (H)       MINUTE(HES)                                                                                            
02/17/06       (H)       HES RPT CS(HES) 4DP 1NR 2AM                                                                            
02/17/06       (H)       DP: GARDNER, KOHRING, SEATON, WILSON;                                                                  
02/17/06       (H)       NR: CISSNA;                                                                                            
02/17/06       (H)       AM: ANDERSON, GATTO                                                                                    
02/23/06       (H)       JUD AT 10:00 AM CAPITOL 120                                                                            
02/23/06       (H)       Scheduled But Not Heard                                                                                
02/24/06       (H)       JUD AT 2:00 PM CAPITOL 120                                                                             
02/24/06       (H)       Heard & Held                                                                                           
02/24/06       (H)       MINUTE(JUD)                                                                                            
03/15/06       (H)       JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120                                                                             
03/15/06       (H)       -- Meeting Canceled --                                                                                 
03/20/06       (H)       JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120                                                                             
03/20/06       (H)       -- Meeting Canceled --                                                                                 
03/22/06       (H)       JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120                                                                             
03/22/06       (H)       Moved CSHB 414(JUD) Out of Committee                                                                   
03/22/06       (H)       MINUTE(JUD)                                                                                            
03/28/06       (H)       JUD RPT CS(JUD) 3DP 2NR 2AM                                                                            
03/28/06       (H)       DP: KOTT, ANDERSON, MCGUIRE;                                                                           
03/28/06       (H)       NR: GARA, COGHILL;                                                                                     
03/28/06       (H)       AM: WILSON, GRUENBERG                                                                                  
04/11/06       (H)       RLS AT 1:30 PM CAPITOL 106                                                                             
04/11/06       (H)       Moved CSHB 414(RLS) Out of Committee                                                                   
04/11/06       (H)       MINUTE(RLS)                                                                                            
04/12/06       (H)       RLS RPT CS(RLS) 3DP 4NR                                                                                
04/12/06       (H)       DP: COGHILL, MCGUIRE, KOHRING;                                                                         
04/12/06       (H)       NR:   BERKOWITZ,   HARRIS,   GUTTENBERG,                                                               
04/12/06       (H)       RETURNED TO RLS COMMITTEE                                                                              
04/24/06       (H)       TRANSMITTED TO (S)                                                                                     
04/24/06       (H)       VERSION: CSHB 414(RLS) AM                                                                              
04/25/06       (S)       READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS                                                                        
04/25/06       (S)       JUD                                                                                                    
04/27/06       (S)       JUD AT 8:30 AM BUTROVICH 205                                                                           
04/27/06       (S)       Scheduled But Not Heard                                                                                
04/28/06       (S)       JUD AT 9:30 AM BUTROVICH 205                                                                           
04/28/06       (S)       Scheduled But Not Heard                                                                                
05/02/06       (S)       JUD AT 8:30 AM BUTROVICH 205                                                                           
BILL: HB 190                                                                                                                  
SHORT TITLE: REQUIRED ID FOR PURCHASING ALCOHOL                                                                                 
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) FOSTER                                                                                            
03/01/05       (H)       READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS                                                                        
03/01/05       (H)       L&C, JUD                                                                                               
03/22/05       (H)       L&C AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 17                                                                              
03/22/05       (H)       Heard & Held                                                                                           
03/22/05       (H)       MINUTE(L&C)                                                                                            
04/20/05       (H)       L&C AT 3:15 PM CAPITOL 17                                                                              
04/20/05       (H)       Moved CSHB 190(L&C) Out of Committee                                                                   
04/20/05       (H)       MINUTE(L&C)                                                                                            
04/22/05       (H)       L&C RPT CS(L&C) NT 3DP 2NR                                                                             
04/22/05       (H)       DP: CRAWFORD, LYNN, KOTT;                                                                              
04/22/05       (H)       NR: LEDOUX, GUTTENBERG                                                                                 
04/22/05       (H)       FIN REFERRAL ADDED AFTER JUD                                                                           
02/10/06       (H)       JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120                                                                             
02/10/06       (H)       Moved CSHB 190(JUD) Out of Committee                                                                   
02/10/06       (H)       MINUTE(JUD)                                                                                            
02/13/06       (H)       JUD RPT CS(JUD) NT 1DP 4NR                                                                             
02/13/06       (H)       DP: WILSON;                                                                                            
02/13/06       (H)       NR: GARA, KOTT, GRUENBERG, MCGUIRE                                                                     
03/14/06       (H)       FIN AT 1:30 PM HOUSE FINANCE 519                                                                       
03/14/06       (H)       Heard & Held                                                                                           
03/14/06       (H)       MINUTE(FIN)                                                                                            
03/24/06       (H)       FIN AT 1:30 PM HOUSE FINANCE 519                                                                       
03/24/06       (H)       Moved CSHB 190(FIN) Out of Committee                                                                   
03/24/06       (H)       MINUTE(FIN)                                                                                            
03/27/06       (H)       FIN RPT CS(FIN) NT 3DP 5NR                                                                             
03/27/06       (H)       DP: WEYHRAUCH, KERTTULA, FOSTER;                                                                       
03/27/06       (H)       NR: HAWKER, KELLY, MOSES, STOLTZE,                                                                     
04/24/06       (H)       TRANSMITTED TO (S)                                                                                     
04/24/06       (H)       VERSION: CSHB 190(FIN)                                                                                 
04/25/06       (S)       READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS                                                                        
04/25/06       (S)       JUD, FIN                                                                                               
04/27/06       (S)       JUD AT 8:30 AM BUTROVICH 205                                                                           
04/27/06       (S)       Scheduled But Not Heard                                                                                
04/28/06       (S)       JUD AT 9:30 AM BUTROVICH 205                                                                           
04/28/06       (S)       Scheduled But Not Heard                                                                                
05/02/06       (S)       JUD AT 8:30 AM BUTROVICH 205                                                                           
BILL: HB 258                                                                                                                  
SHORT TITLE: SEXUAL ASSAULT BY PERSON WITH HIV/AIDS                                                                             
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) LYNN                                                                                              
04/06/05       (H)       READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS                                                                        
04/06/05       (H)       HES, JUD                                                                                               
02/23/06       (H)       HES AT 3:00 PM CAPITOL 106                                                                             
02/23/06       (H)       <Bill Hearing Rescheduled to 2/28/06>                                                                  
02/28/06       (H)       HES AT 3:00 PM CAPITOL 106                                                                             
02/28/06       (H)       Scheduled But Not Heard                                                                                
03/21/06       (H)       HES AT 3:00 PM CAPITOL 106                                                                             
03/21/06       (H)       Moved CSHB 258(HES) Out of Committee                                                                   
03/21/06       (H)       MINUTE(HES)                                                                                            
03/24/06       (H)       HES RPT CS(HES) 7DP                                                                                    
03/24/06       (H)       DP: CISSNA, GATTO, GARDNER, KOHRING,                                                                   
                         ANDERSON, SEATON, WILSON                                                                               
04/10/06       (H)       JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120                                                                             
04/10/06       (H)       Moved CSHB 258(JUD) Out of Committee                                                                   
04/10/06       (H)       MINUTE(JUD)                                                                                            
04/12/06       (H)       JUD RPT CS(JUD) NT 5DP 1NR                                                                             
04/12/06       (H)       DP: GARA, WILSON, KOTT, GRUENBERG,                                                                     
04/12/06       (H)       NR: COGHILL                                                                                            
04/19/06       (H)       TRANSMITTED TO (S)                                                                                     
04/19/06       (H)       VERSION: CSHB 258(JUD)                                                                                 
04/20/06       (S)       READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS                                                                        
04/20/06       (S)       HES, JUD                                                                                               
04/26/06       (S)       HES AT 1:30 PM BUTROVICH 205                                                                           
04/26/06       (S)       Moved CSHB 258(JUD) Out of Committee                                                                   
04/26/06       (S)       MINUTE(HES)                                                                                            
04/27/06       (S)       HES RPT  4DP 1NR                                                                                       
04/27/06       (S)       DP: DYSON, WILKEN, GREEN, OLSON                                                                        
04/27/06       (S)       NR: ELTON                                                                                              
05/02/06       (S)       JUD AT 8:30 AM BUTROVICH 205                                                                           
BILL: HB 442                                                                                                                  
SHORT TITLE: HEALTH CARE DECISIONS                                                                                              
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) WEYHRAUCH                                                                                         
02/10/06       (H)       READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS                                                                        
02/10/06       (H)       HES, JUD                                                                                               
02/21/06       (H)       HES AT 3:00 PM CAPITOL 106                                                                             
02/21/06       (H)       Scheduled But Not Heard                                                                                
02/23/06       (H)       HES AT 3:00 PM CAPITOL 106                                                                             
02/23/06       (H)       Heard & Held                                                                                           
02/23/06       (H)       MINUTE(HES)                                                                                            
02/28/06       (H)       HES AT 3:00 PM CAPITOL 106                                                                             
02/28/06       (H)       Moved CSHB 442(HES) Out of Committee                                                                   
02/28/06       (H)       MINUTE(HES)                                                                                            
03/03/06       (H)       HES RPT CS(HES) NT 4DP 1NR                                                                             
03/03/06       (H)       DP: SEATON, GARDNER, KOHRING, WILSON;                                                                  
03/03/06       (H)       NR: CISSNA                                                                                             
03/24/06       (H)       JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120                                                                             
03/24/06       (H)       Scheduled But Not Heard                                                                                
03/27/06       (H)       JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120                                                                             
03/27/06       (H)       Moved CSHB 442(JUD) Out of Committee                                                                   
03/27/06       (H)       MINUTE(JUD)                                                                                            
03/29/06       (H)       JUD RPT CS(JUD) NT 5DP                                                                                 
03/29/06       (H)       DP: GARA, COGHILL, GRUENBERG, KOTT,                                                                    
04/10/06       (H)       TRANSMITTED TO (S)                                                                                     
04/10/06       (H)       VERSION: CSHB 442(JUD) AM                                                                              
04/12/06       (S)       READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS                                                                        
04/12/06       (S)       HES, JUD                                                                                               
04/21/06       (S)       HES AT 1:30 PM BUTROVICH 205                                                                           
04/21/06       (S)       -- Meeting Canceled --                                                                                 
04/24/06       (S)       HES AT 1:30 PM BUTROVICH 205                                                                           
04/24/06       (S)       POSTSECONDARY    TUITION   FOR    FOSTER                                                               
04/25/06       (S)       JUD AT 8:30 AM BUTROVICH 205                                                                           
04/25/06       (S)       Scheduled But Not Heard                                                                                
04/28/06       (S)       HES AT 1:30 PM BUTROVICH 205                                                                           
04/28/06       (S)       Moved CSHB 442(JUD) am Out of Committee                                                                
04/28/06       (S)       MINUTE(HES)                                                                                            
04/29/06       (S)       HES RPT  5DP                                                                                           
04/29/06       (S)       DP: DYSON, ELTON, WILKEN, GREEN, OLSON                                                                 
05/02/06       (S)       JUD AT 8:30 AM BUTROVICH 205                                                                           
WITNESS REGISTER                                                                                                              
Representative Pete Kott                                                                                                        
Alaska State Capitol                                                                                                            
Juneau, AK 99801-1182                                                                                                           
POSITION STATEMENT:  Introduced HB 414                                                                                        
Michael O'Hare, Legislative Aide                                                                                                
Staff to Representative Kott                                                                                                    
Alaska State Capitol                                                                                                            
Juneau, AK 99801-1182                                                                                                           
POSITION STATEMENT:  Answered questions on HB 414                                                                             
Annie Carpeneti, Assistant Attorney General                                                                                     
Criminal Division                                                                                                               
Department of Law                                                                                                               
PO Box 110300                                                                                                                   
Juneau, AK  99811-0300                                                                                                          
POSITION STATEMENT:  Commented on HB 414 and HB 190                                                                           
Paul LaBolle, Legislative Aide                                                                                                  
Staff to Representative Richard Foster                                                                                          
Alaska State Capitol                                                                                                            
Juneau, AK 99801-1182                                                                                                           
POSITION STATEMENT:  Introduced HB 190                                                                                        
Representative Harry Crawford                                                                                                   
Alaska State Capitol                                                                                                            
Juneau, AK 99801-1182                                                                                                           
POSITION STATEMENT:  Answered questions regarding HB 190 for the                                                              
Susan Parkes, Deputy Attorney General                                                                                           
Criminal Division                                                                                                               
Department of Law                                                                                                               
PO Box 110300                                                                                                                   
Juneau, AK  99811-0300                                                                                                          
POSITION STATEMENT:  Answered questions regarding HB 258                                                                      
Jacqueline Tupou, Legislative Aide                                                                                              
Staff to Representative Bruce Weyhrauch                                                                                         
Alaska State Capitol                                                                                                            
Juneau, AK 99801-1182                                                                                                           
POSITION STATEMENT:  Introduced HB 442                                                                                        
John Dawson, Attorney                                                                                                           
Davis Wright Tremaine LLC                                                                                                       
POSITION STATEMENT:  Commented and answered questions regarding                                                               
HB 442                                                                                                                          
Mike Schneider, Attorney                                                                                                        
Anchorage, Alaska                                                                                                               
POSITION STATEMENT:  Testified in opposition to HB 442                                                                        
ACTION NARRATIVE                                                                                                              
CHAIR  RALPH   SEEKINS  called  the  Senate   Judiciary  Standing                                                             
Committee meeting to  order at 8:45:56 AM.  Present were Senators                                                             
Hollis French, Gene Therriault,  Gretchen Guess, Charlie Huggins,                                                               
and Chair Ralph Seekins.                                                                                                        
         HB 414-INTERCEPTION OF MINOR'S COMMUNICATIONS                                                                      
8:46:57 AM                                                                                                                    
CHAIR  RALPH  SEEKINS  announced  CSHB  414(RLS)  to  be  up  for                                                               
MICHAEL  O'HARE, Staff  to Representative  Pete Kott,  introduced                                                               
the bill.  It is a simple  bill that intends to  protect children                                                               
from  predators  by allowing  parents  to  monitor their  child's                                                               
conversations.  Parents   who  currently   listen  in   on  their                                                               
children's conversations are breaking the  law and are subject to                                                               
criminal prosecution. The  bill would allow for a  court to enter                                                               
into  an ex  parte  order to  authorize a  wiretap  if the  court                                                               
determines  probable cause.  Section 1  contains a  definition of                                                               
"probable  cause."  The  bill  would also  allow  the  parent  or                                                               
guardian of  a minor to  intercept private  communications except                                                               
for any communications between the  minor's attorney, guardian ad                                                               
litem, or child custody investigator.                                                                                           
8:48:35 AM                                                                                                                    
The information  could be considered  as evidence by a  judge and                                                               
admitted  in an  official  proceeding  if it  is  found that  the                                                               
parent was acting in good faith  and had a reasonable belief that                                                               
the interception was necessary for the welfare of the minor.                                                                    
8:49:44 AM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE  PETE  KOTT,  bill   sponsor,  added  that  it  is                                                               
currently  illegal for  a  parent  to listen  in  on a  telephone                                                               
conversation  in  his   or  her  own  home.   He  emphasized  the                                                               
importance  of giving  parents tools  to  lawfully monitor  their                                                               
children for their own welfare.  The bill would "cut the mischief                                                               
off  at the  pass",  he  said, and  would  allow  the parents  to                                                               
monitor,  under  reasonable  situations, the  oral  conversations                                                               
between their minor child and another party.                                                                                    
8:52:23 AM                                                                                                                    
SENATOR GUESS commented  that lines 10-15 on page 1  appear to be                                                               
out of sync with what the bill was trying to do.                                                                                
MR.  O'HARE  responded  that the  paragraph  in  question  merely                                                               
defines "probable cause."                                                                                                       
CHAIR SEEKINS asked how the bill would tie in with federal law.                                                                 
REPRESENTATIVE  KOTT replied  it  would not  violate the  federal                                                               
eavesdropping statutes.                                                                                                         
CHAIR  SEEKINS asked  whether the  definition of  parent includes                                                               
MR.  O'HARE referred  to the  definition of  "parent" on  page 4,                                                               
line 12.                                                                                                                        
CHAIR   SEEKINS  noted   that  the   definition  didn't   specify                                                               
ANNIE CARPENETI,  Assistant Attorney  General, Department  of Law                                                               
(DOL),  testified  that  the  stepparent would  have  to  be  the                                                               
adoptive parent in order to be covered under the law.                                                                           
8:56:36 AM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE KOTT consented that  an adoptive stepparent should                                                               
be included in the definition of parent.                                                                                        
SENATOR GRETCHEN GUESS  asked whether the bill could  be used for                                                               
one  parent to  gain  access  to a  child  talking  to the  other                                                               
MS. CARPENETI  responded that  concern was  addressed on  page 3.                                                               
The bill  puts many  limitations on the  circumstances to  when a                                                               
parent  could put  a wiretap  on a  child. She  said the  DOL has                                                               
additional concerns that she would  like to address at the proper                                                               
SENATOR  GENE  THERRIAULT  referred  to   page  3,  line  21  and                                                               
questioned the meaning of "acting in good faith."                                                                               
8:58:57 AM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE  KOTT replied  the court  would have  to determine                                                               
what  that means.  After review  of all  the evidence,  the judge                                                               
will have to determine whether the  parent acted on good faith in                                                               
behalf of the  minor. The parents would have  to legitimize their                                                               
MS. CARPENETI  added that was  also a concern  of the DOL.  It is                                                               
not a very clear hurdle.                                                                                                        
SENATOR GUESS referred to page 2,  line 4 and asked Ms. Carpeneti                                                               
to define the term "objectively reasonable belief."                                                                             
MS.  CARPENETI explained  "objectively reasonable  person" is  an                                                               
often-used  term   in  legal  interpretations  and   it  means  a                                                               
reasonable  person's standard  and not  necessarily a  subjective                                                               
CHAIR SEEKINS asked  Ms. Carpeneti to describe  the concerns that                                                               
the DOL has with the bill.                                                                                                      
MS. CARPENETI  said the criminal  division supported the  bill in                                                               
its  process  through  the  House  Judiciary  version,  but  were                                                               
concerned  with the  House Rules  Committee Substitute  (CS) that                                                               
was amended during the House Floor Session.                                                                                     
9:02:20 AM                                                                                                                    
MS. CARPENETI stated the main  concerns are with the subjectivity                                                               
of the phrase "acting in good  faith" and in the limits placed on                                                               
the provision  of when it  is allowable  to wiretap a  child. She                                                               
posed an example of a parent who  has a hunch that their child is                                                               
in danger  and wants to overhear  a conversation. She said  it is                                                               
in everyone's best interest that the  parent be able to listen to                                                               
that telephone conversation on less  than probable cause and that                                                               
the  evidence  should  be  admissible   in  a  court  of  law  if                                                               
necessary. Short  of probable cause,  it is the parent's  duty to                                                               
interfere when a person is preying on their child, she said.                                                                    
MS.  CARPENETI  reiterated  the  Department's  concern  with  the                                                               
limits  placed on  the provision.  "Whatever evidence  the parent                                                               
gathers ought to be admissible in court", she said.                                                                             
CHAIR  SEEKINS  asked  the  reason   behind  the  amendment  that                                                               
incorporated the strict limitations.                                                                                            
REPRESENTATIVE KOTT  informed the  committee it was  an amendment                                                               
by Representative Max Gruenberg  and his argument was "vehemently                                                               
CHAIR SEEKINS  asked Representative Kott  how he would  amend the                                                               
REPRESENTATIVE KOTT deferred to Ms. Carpeneti.                                                                                  
MS.  CARPENETI said  the  DOL  would like  to  go  back to  House                                                               
Judiciary version and then add the stepparent in.                                                                               
CHAIR SEEKINS called a brief at ease at 9:04:53 AM.                                                                           
9:08:16 AM                                                                                                                    
CHAIR  SEEKINS called  the meeting  back to  order and  asked Mr.                                                               
O'Hare to  describe the differences  between the  House Judiciary                                                               
Committee version and the amended House Rules Committee version.                                                                
MR. O'HARE advised  that Section 1 in version L  does not contain                                                               
the probable  cause definitions.  The ninth  exception on  page 3                                                               
does not  include the  evidentiary definitions  nor does  it have                                                               
the inclusion of a child custody investigator.                                                                                  
9:10:02 AM                                                                                                                    
SENATOR GUESS asked  Ms. Carpeneti whether there was  a reason to                                                               
state the definition of "probable cause" in the bill.                                                                           
MS. CARPENETI informed  her that it is a very  common standard in                                                               
the courts and indicated that it didn't need to be defined.                                                                     
CHAIR SEEKINS  expressed a  preference to  work from  version 24-                                                               
SENATOR  CHARLIE  HUGGINS made  a  motion  to move  the  language                                                               
contained  in  version L  to  be  considered a  Senate  Judiciary                                                               
Standing  Committee Substitute  and  to be  the working  document                                                               
before the committee. Hearing no objections, the motion carried.                                                                
CHAIR SEEKINS  posed a hypothetical  example of a  stepparent who                                                               
believed his stepchild was in danger  and said he should have the                                                               
opportunity to protect that child and be covered by the law.                                                                    
SENATOR GUESS  said part  of her  supports that  and part  of her                                                               
does  not since  those situations  tend to  be very  delicate and                                                               
9:14:03 AM                                                                                                                    
SENATOR HOLLIS  FRENCH shared Senator Guess's  concern but stated                                                               
so long  as the  stepparent was  living in the  same home  as the                                                               
natural parent and  the child he was agreeable to  it. He said he                                                               
sees this as a defensive measure and not offensive.                                                                             
SENATOR  FRENCH moved  Amendment 1.  Include "stepparent"  in the                                                               
definition of  "parent." Hearing  no objections, Amendment  1 was                                                               
REPRESENTATIVE KOTT  noted that  page 3  lists exceptions  and he                                                               
suggested  adding "child  custody investigator"  to that  list of                                                               
SENATOR  FRENCH moved  Amendment 2.  Page 3,  line 15,  after the                                                               
word "attorney"  insert "child custody investigator."  Hearing no                                                               
objections, Amendment 2 was adopted.                                                                                            
9:16:36 AM                                                                                                                    
SENATOR  FRENCH  asked  whether  the  bill  would  protect  older                                                               
brothers and sisters who eavesdropped.                                                                                          
MS.  CARPENETI said  it would  depend on  the circumstances.  She                                                               
said,  "This is  a private  over-hearing of  conversations and  I                                                               
think it would  be addressed based on the  circumstances. I think                                                               
it would be admissible if it were a brother."                                                                                   
SENATOR FRENCH  asked whether the  older brother or  sister would                                                               
be allowed to testify in court.                                                                                                 
MS.  CARPENETI  believed so.  She  said  evidence gathered  by  a                                                               
private person  is not  subject to the  Fourth Amendment  [of the                                                               
United States  Constitution] and depending on  the circumstances,                                                               
should be admissible.                                                                                                           
SENATOR  FRENCH  clarified  that  the  bill  would  allow  for  a                                                               
listening device  to be  put on  a telephone  to capture  all the                                                               
conversations of a minor child.                                                                                                 
MS. CARPENETI added  that it would also allow for  taping of cell                                                               
phone conversations as well, provided the parent had a warrant.                                                                 
9:19:16 AM                                                                                                                    
MS. CARPENETI  commented that the  House Rules  Committee version                                                               
restricted when  the law  could be  used and  said that  with the                                                               
working version, anything overheard  could be admissible in court                                                               
so long as the police weren't involved.                                                                                         
SENATOR  FRENCH  asked Ms.  Carpeneti  whether  the bill  was  in                                                               
conformity with federal law.                                                                                                    
MS. CARPENETI deferred to the  chairman but said she would assume                                                               
that all Title 42 wiretap exceptions do comply.                                                                                 
REPRESENTATIVE KOTT asserted the bill was in compliance.                                                                        
9:22:16 AM                                                                                                                    
SENATOR  HUGGINS asked  Ms. Carpeneti  to  explain the  amendment                                                               
that Representative Gruenberg added  to the House Rules Committee                                                               
MS.  CARPENETI said  she was  not present  and did  not know  his                                                               
stated intentions but  his words limit the  interception and made                                                               
for reasonable  belief that  the child was  in danger.  The DOL's                                                               
position was  that a parent should  be able to act  on "less than                                                               
probable cause." They  should be able to act on  a suspicion or a                                                               
hunch that  their child is  in danger. The amendment  limited the                                                               
circumstances  under   which  the  evidence  gathered   would  be                                                               
admissible  in a  court of  law. The  DOL's response  is that  it                                                               
seems reasonable that  when a parent stumbles  over evidence that                                                               
their child is  potentially in danger, that evidence  ought to be                                                               
9:24:58 AM                                                                                                                    
SENATOR  HUGGINS  moved SCS  CSHB  414(JUD)  from committee  with                                                               
individual  recommendations and  attached  fiscal note(s).  There                                                               
being no objection, the motion carried.                                                                                         
           HB 190-REQUIRED ID FOR PURCHASING ALCOHOL                                                                        
9:33:24 AM                                                                                                                    
CHAIR  RALPH  SEEKINS  announced  CSHB  190(FIN)  to  be  up  for                                                               
PAUL LABOLLE, Staff to  Representative Richard Foster, introduced                                                               
the bill. Alaska has some of  the strictest drunk driving laws in                                                               
the nation and  yet approximately 30 percent  of fatal collisions                                                               
involved  DUI's.  The bill  would  attempt  to decrease  alcohol-                                                               
related accidents  by requiring that  drunk drivers have  a stamp                                                               
on their  license or identification  card that would  alert those                                                               
who  sell alcohol  that  it  is illegal  for  that individual  to                                                               
purchase  or  consume  alcohol.  The  bill  would  also  allow  a                                                               
financial  incentive  for the  vendors  but  would not  make  the                                                               
program mandatory for them to comply.                                                                                           
SENATOR CHARLIE  HUGGINS speculated  about the practicality  of a                                                               
restaurant owner refusing to serve a paying customer.                                                                           
MR. LABOLLE said  that was addressed in the first  hearing of the                                                               
bill and is the reason that it is voluntary.                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE  HARRY  CRAWFORD  aired a  number  of  proprietors                                                               
would  like  the  ability  to  restrict  patrons  from  consuming                                                               
9:37:13 AM                                                                                                                    
SENATOR HOLLIS FRENCH  expressed support for the  bill but agreed                                                               
with Senator  Huggins that requiring  restaurants to  perform the                                                               
license check doesn't make sense.                                                                                               
MR. LABOLLE  said the main  problem with requiring them  to check                                                               
is with  liability. If an employee  decided not to check  the ID,                                                               
that  person  might have  recourse  to  sue  the vendor  for  not                                                               
preventing them from drinking.                                                                                                  
CHAIR SEEKINS said  the bill seems to provide  a double standard.                                                               
He pointed out  that a vendor could run an  entrapment scheme and                                                               
collect $1,000 while allowing the person to consume alcohol.                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE CRAWFORD  responded that the $1,000  incentive was                                                               
the  reason for  the bill.  The offender  would have  that $1,000                                                               
hanging over his head anywhere (s)he goes.                                                                                      
9:40:04 AM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE  CRAWFORD asserted  that  Alaska is  not making  a                                                               
dent in alcohol-related crimes and he  hopes the bill will have a                                                               
positive impact.                                                                                                                
CHAIR SEEKINS agreed with the intent of the bill.                                                                               
9:41:31 AM                                                                                                                    
SENATOR  FRENCH said  the  bill  would have  the  most effect  on                                                               
people who are under 30 years  old and get "carded". He expressed                                                               
support for the bill.                                                                                                           
SENATOR GRETCHEN GUESS  expressed support for the  bill and asked                                                               
the reason it would pertain only  to DUI's and not other drinking                                                               
9:43:36 AM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE CRAWFORD  said the bill started  out pertaining to                                                               
all alcoholic  offenses but was tailored  due to a lack  of solid                                                               
communication  through  the  different branches  and  systems  of                                                               
government. The DUI  notification is already set up  and, to keep                                                               
the costs  down, the  bill pertains only  to the  DUI conviction.                                                               
"Consider it a pilot program," he said.                                                                                         
SENATOR  HUGGINS asked  whether it  would  still be  legal for  a                                                               
restricted person to drink at home.                                                                                             
REPRESENTATIVE CRAWFORD said no.                                                                                                
MS. CARPENETI concurred that when a  judge orders a person not to                                                               
consume alcohol, that carries over into the home.                                                                               
SENATOR  HUGGINS expressed  concern that  the bill  would not  do                                                               
anything substantive.                                                                                                           
REPRESENTATIVE CRAWFORD  responded that  the same model  has been                                                               
used for  underage drinkers and  has made an enormous  impact. He                                                               
urged the committee to move the bill.                                                                                           
SENATOR HUGGINS responded that anyone could  use a fake ID to get                                                               
alcohol.  He  said he  supports  the  concept  but the  bill  has                                                               
9:48:52 AM                                                                                                                    
SENATOR  GUESS  commented it  is  extremely  difficult to  police                                                               
everyone  but the  bill provides  speed bumps  and could  prevent                                                               
people from drinking and driving.                                                                                               
CHAIR SEEKINS  said if  it were  up to him,  anyone who  has been                                                               
convicted  of an  alcohol-related crime  would be  prevented from                                                               
purchasing and consuming alcohol.                                                                                               
DUANE BANNOCK,  Director, Division of Motor  Vehicles (DMV), said                                                               
the  Division has  spent much  time discussing  implementation if                                                               
the bill were  to become law. The DMV has  contact with the court                                                               
systems  in cases  of DUI's  and failures  to submit  to chemical                                                               
testing. They  have existing established communications  but will                                                               
need  additional  contact so  that  they  will  be able  to  know                                                               
exactly  which   person  is  subject   to  the   marked  license.                                                               
Practically speaking, it  would take minimal effort  to provide a                                                               
special mark on the license or ID card.                                                                                         
The  arresting  officer  is  the one  who  takes  the  offender's                                                               
driver's  license  away but  often  times  a person  has  already                                                               
received a  new license  before the  DMV is  notified of  the DUI                                                               
CHAIR SEEKINS asked  the kind of notification that  DMV gets when                                                               
an officer confiscates a license.                                                                                               
MR. BANNOCK admitted  that it takes a couple of  days for them to                                                               
receive notification.                                                                                                           
10:00:26 AM                                                                                                                   
SENATOR FRENCH asked  Mr. Bannock where the mark  would be placed                                                               
on the license.                                                                                                                 
MR. BANNOCK said probably at the top near the mountains.                                                                        
10:02:51 AM                                                                                                                   
CHAIR SEEKINS  said he  would like  to spend  more time  with the                                                               
sponsors and so he held CSHB 190(FIN) in committee.                                                                             
         HB 258-SEXUAL ASSAULT BY PERSON WITH HIV/AIDS                                                                      
10:05:25 AM                                                                                                                   
CHAIR RALPH SEEKINS announced HB  258 to be up for consideration.                                                               
[Although not  mentioned or formally adopted,  the committee used                                                               
SCS CSHB 258, \Y Version Work Draft, as the working document.]                                                                  
REPRESENTATIVE BOB LYNN  introduced the bill, which  would make a                                                               
rape  or  sexual assault  by  anyone  infected with  HIV/AIDS  an                                                               
aggravating factor at  sentencing. The issue is  not about sexual                                                               
orientation  and  has support  from  a  variety of  agencies,  he                                                               
Twenty-four  states have  similar  laws  and, considering  Alaska                                                               
leads  the nation  in  rapes  and sexual  assault,  is time  that                                                               
Alaska  joined  them.  The  bill  is  a  proactive  measure  that                                                               
acknowledges the additional pain and suffering of the victims.                                                                  
A new  section was recently added  at the request of  Senator Con                                                               
Bunde to correct  an error in the statutes made  by SB 218, which                                                               
the governor has signed into  law. The new section clarifies that                                                               
the crime of  "sexual abuse of a minor in  the second degree when                                                               
engaging in consensual sexual penetration"  is committed when the                                                               
age difference is  at least three years and the  offender is in a                                                               
position of authority.                                                                                                          
10:09:38 AM                                                                                                                   
SENATOR GRETCHEN  GUESS stated  for the  record that  Senator Con                                                               
Bunde  and she  both asked  Representative Lynn  to add  that new                                                               
section  to the  bill. She  questioned using  the word  "fear" on                                                               
page  2, line  26 and  suggested that  could be  misconstrued and                                                               
used as an aggravating factor.                                                                                                  
MIKE SICA, Staff to Representative  Lynn, responded that the word                                                               
was  added in  the  House  Judiciary Committee  due  to the  fear                                                               
factor during  the extended time span  that a victim has  to wait                                                               
to find out  whether or not they contracted the  disease from the                                                               
10:12:39 AM                                                                                                                   
SENATOR HOLLIS FRENCH referred to  Section 1 and asked the reason                                                               
for setting the bar at 18 years old.                                                                                            
SUSAN PARKES,  Deputy Attorney General, Department  of Law (DOL),                                                               
advised the committee that Senator  French is correct in that the                                                               
arithmetic doesn't  make sense  but the statute  prior to  SB 218                                                               
reads  that way  and the  bill would  return the  statute to  the                                                               
previous law.                                                                                                                   
SENATOR FRENCH  moved Amendment 1.  Page 2, line 15,  delete "18"                                                               
and insert "19." Hearing no objections, Amendment 1 was adopted.                                                                
MS. PARKES noted there would be  a title change on the bill since                                                               
it adds Section  1. She expressed support for the  bill on behalf                                                               
of the DOL.                                                                                                                     
10:17:26 AM                                                                                                                   
SENATOR  FRENCH  asked  how assaults  by  persons  infected  with                                                               
HIV/AIDS have been handled in the past.                                                                                         
MS.  PARKES  said the  DOL  tries  to  use the  aggravator  "most                                                               
serious"  and that  has become  more difficult  to use  since the                                                               
case Washington v Blakely.                                                                                                      
SENATOR FRENCH  asked whether the  DOL had concerns over  the use                                                               
of the word "fear" on page 2, line 26.                                                                                          
MS. PARKES  responded she  was not  at the  hearing where  it was                                                               
added on but it  would have to be a reasonable  fear. Part of the                                                               
DOL's  concern  involving penetration  is  that  there are  cases                                                               
where a jury may find an  "attempt" or they hang on "penetration"                                                               
but  convict  on  "contact."  They  would  be  able  to  use  the                                                               
aggravator  because of  the "fear"  risk.  She said  she was  not                                                               
concerned that it would cause problems.                                                                                         
SENATOR  FRENCH asked  whether the  offender would  have to  have                                                               
AIDS for the aggravator to be used.                                                                                             
MS.  PARKES responded  they would  have to  have been  previously                                                               
diagnosed. A judge  would not allow the aggravator to  be used if                                                               
the person didn't have the disease.                                                                                             
CHAIR SEEKINS noted there was no opposition to the bill.                                                                        
SENATOR  GUESS asked  the  Chair to  hold the  bill  so that  the                                                               
committee could make sure it was correct before moving it out.                                                                  
CHAIR SEEKINS said he had  no problem holding CSHB 258(JUD) until                                                               
the next day so the committee could "see the clean language."                                                                   
                  HB 442-HEALTH CARE DECISIONS                                                                              
10:22:50 AM                                                                                                                   
CHAIR  RALPH  SEEKINS  announced  CSHB  442(JUD)  to  be  up  for                                                               
JACQUELINE  TUPOU,  Staff   to  Representative  Bruce  Weyhrauch,                                                               
introduced the  bill. HB  442 would  make a  minor change  to the                                                               
Health  Care  Decisions Act  ("Alaska  Act")  of 2004  and  would                                                               
provide  clearer  direction  to those  implementing  health  care                                                               
Current law  imposes a  duty of  investigation upon  doctors when                                                               
carrying out  the health care  directives of their  patients. The                                                               
bill would amend  current statute to conform the  language in the                                                               
Alaska Act  to that of the  Uniform Act, thus requiring  a doctor                                                               
to act  in "good faith"  when time  is critical for  the patient.                                                               
The  bill   substitutes  the  word  "physician"   for  "attending                                                               
physician."  It clarifies  when CPR  can be  used, and  indicates                                                               
under what  circumstances a Do  Not Resuscitate" (DNR)  order may                                                               
be revoked.                                                                                                                     
10:25:03 AM                                                                                                                   
SENATOR  GRETCHEN  GUESS  asked  Ms. Tupou  to  explain  the  new                                                               
additions in Section 5.                                                                                                         
MS.  TUPOU reported  that was  to address  a specific  situation,                                                               
such  as a  person with  terminal cancer  with a  DNR order.  She                                                               
posed  a hypothetical  situation where  that person  breaks their                                                               
hip  and during  anesthesia and  surgery the  person "flatlines."                                                               
The bill  would allow for  the doctor  to administer CPR  in that                                                               
case  because he  would  be just  "correcting  his own  mistake."                                                               
Section 5 identifies  that in a secondary matter,  and nothing to                                                               
do  with   the  initial  qualifying  condition;   the  healthcare                                                               
provider could perform resuscitation.                                                                                           
SENATOR HOLLIS  FRENCH asked whether  there was a cleaner  way to                                                               
write subsection (i).                                                                                                           
MS.  TUPOU  said  she  thought   it  was  relatively  clear.  She                                                               
suggested that  a representative  from Providence  Alaska Medical                                                               
Center  could  explain  it  further.   She  added  that  (i)  was                                                               
clarifying that  a healthcare  provider could  perform CPR  if it                                                               
has nothing  to do with the  initial condition and (j)  says that                                                               
an  emergency  medical technician  is  not  held to  making  that                                                               
10:28:48 AM                                                                                                                   
JOHN  DAWSON,   Attorney  with  Davis,  Wright,   Tremaine,  LLC,                                                               
testified  that  he  represents Providence  Anchorage  Anesthesia                                                               
Medical Group. He  said that provision (j) under Section  5 is an                                                               
exception  to an  exception to  an exception  and the  reason for                                                               
that structure is  that the original exception  referenced in (e)                                                               
simply says that a physician  may not, for reasons of conscience,                                                               
refuse to abide by DNR orders.                                                                                                  
In other circumstances,  the physician may refuse to  abide by an                                                               
individual instruction  based on  conscience but DNR  orders were                                                               
not one of those types  of instructions. Subsection (i) basically                                                               
says  notwithstanding what  (e) says  a physician  may refuse  to                                                               
abide by  DNR instructions if  necessary to  remedy complications                                                               
arising out  of the  physician's services.  Subsection (j)  is an                                                               
exception to  that exception and was  a request by the  people in                                                               
the field who do not want to have that discretion.                                                                              
10:30:54 AM                                                                                                                   
SENATOR  FRENCH  said  for  the   record,  people  in  the  field                                                               
(paramedics,  firefighters, police  officers) are  always allowed                                                               
to perform  CPR on an ailing  person but once the  person gets to                                                               
the hospital, the DNR order kicks in.                                                                                           
MR. DAWSON countered  that a person in the field  must abide by a                                                               
DNR  order   as  well  unless   an  online   physician  indicates                                                               
SENATOR FRENCH asked  how a person in the field  would know about                                                               
a DNR order.                                                                                                                    
MR.  DAWSON  said   there  is  generally  a   bracelet  or  other                                                               
identifying item on the person.                                                                                                 
MS.  TUPOU  interrupted  to  inform  the  committee  that  Alaska                                                               
participates  in  the  "Comfort  One  Program"  and  people  wear                                                               
bracelets to make healthcare officials aware of their wishes.                                                                   
10:32:28 AM                                                                                                                   
MIKE  SCHNEIDER, Attorney,  testified  that he  practices law  in                                                               
Anchorage, mainly with personal injury.  He said he has done very                                                               
few medical  negligence cases  in over 30  years in  practice and                                                               
there have been  about a dozen plaintiff's verdicts  cases in the                                                               
history of  the State and Territory  of Alaska. He said  the bill                                                               
was basically a "solution in  search of a problem" and speculated                                                               
what the sponsor's intent was. He  stated that he has never heard                                                               
of a  verdict based on the  kinds of liability theories  that the                                                               
bill seeks to address.                                                                                                          
10:35:18 AM                                                                                                                   
MR.  SCHNEIDER criticized  Section  8 and  said  if a  healthcare                                                               
provider,  through  a  medical  screw up,  makes  an  error  that                                                               
initiates a  life saving  effort, that  provider could  choose to                                                               
allow that  person to die  and be  immunized if that  decision is                                                               
made on  a "good faith  basis." He  took issue with  deleting the                                                               
language  in AS  13.52.080(a)  and suggested  that  it lessens  a                                                               
healthcare provider's responsibilities to the patient.                                                                          
10:37:45 AM                                                                                                                   
CHAIR SEEKINS  said the way  he reads  it the phrase  "good faith                                                               
basis"  refers  to  determining  the  validity  of  the  advanced                                                               
healthcare directive  and not  in how  the provider  delivers the                                                               
medical services.                                                                                                               
MR. SCHNEIDER  agreed but said as  he reads Section 9  it gives a                                                               
healthcare  provider the  ability to  allow a  patient to  die in                                                               
order to  cover up  a negligent  act, and  under Section  8 their                                                               
interpretation is subject only to a good faith standard.                                                                        
CHAIR  SEEKINS said  he  interprets Section  9 to  say  if a  DNR                                                               
prevents them  from attempting to  resuscitate a  patient because                                                               
of complications,  there is no  criminal or civil  liability. But                                                               
subsection  (c) doesn't  apply if  the complications  suffered by                                                               
the patient are caused by gross negligence or reckless actions.                                                                 
MR. SCHNEIDER  agreed but  suggested the  committee add  the word                                                               
"negligence" in front of "gross negligence" on line 16.                                                                         
MR. DAWSON  added Section 9 begins  with a premise that  there is                                                               
in place a valid DNR order. A  physician should not be sued if he                                                               
honors a DNR order that has been  put in place by the patient, he                                                               
said. The  "good faith" requirement  pertains to whether  the DNR                                                               
order is valid or not.                                                                                                          
10:43:41 AM                                                                                                                   
SENATOR  FRENCH asked  Mr. Dawson  to comment  on a  hypothetical                                                               
situation  of a  simple act  of  negligence that  results in  the                                                               
death  or  impairment of  a  patient.  He  asked the  reason  for                                                               
excluding that scenario from a DNR action.                                                                                      
MR. DAWSON responded:                                                                                                           
     If we were  to include the exception  for negligence we                                                                    
     would essentially  swallow up  the ability of  a doctor                                                                    
     ever to  comply with  a DNR order.  The very  nature of                                                                    
     the Act to begin with is  that we want doctors to honor                                                                    
     the wishes of their patients.  At the same time we want                                                                    
     them to  honor that, we  don't want them to  be worried                                                                    
     about  liability when  they do  so. The  reason why  we                                                                    
     allow  this particular  scenario  where  you have  mere                                                                    
     negligence  is so  that a  doctor will  not be  worried                                                                    
     about  getting sued  every  time that  there  is a  DNR                                                                    
     order in place.                                                                                                            
MS. TUPOU argued  that Representative Weyhrauch is  very aware of                                                               
the need for litigation and  protecting the consumer and the bill                                                               
is not  a "doctor exoneration bill."  It is meant to  address the                                                               
existing problem  that people who  have DNR's can't  find doctors                                                               
who  will operate  on them.  She  contended that  a doctor  would                                                               
never  want  to perform  surgery  on  a  DNR  person due  to  the                                                               
excessive liability.                                                                                                            
10:47:43 AM                                                                                                                   
MR. SCHNEIDER replied, "Name one  verdict. Name two claims. Ain't                                                               
SENATOR GUESS said  she could not formulate her  response yet but                                                               
she could not support the bill on that premise.                                                                                 
CHAIR SEEKINS held CSHB 442(JUD) in committee.                                                                                  
         HB 258-SEXUAL ASSAULT BY PERSON WITH HIV/AIDS                                                                      
10:49:20 AM                                                                                                                   
CHAIR RALPH SEEKINS brought discussion  back to HB 258. [Although                                                               
not formally  adopted, before the  committee was the  amended SCS                                                               
CSHB 258, \Y Version Work Draft.]                                                                                               
SENATOR GRETCHEN  GUESS indicated that the  earlier amendment was                                                               
causing  drafting  problems  that  the Department  of  Law  would                                                               
SUSAN PARKES,  Deputy Attorney General, Department  of Law (DOL),                                                               
advised the  committee that the  drafter noted that  although the                                                               
math does not  appear to make sense,  the use of the  age "18" is                                                               
simply an  indicator of the  age of  adulthood and is  the reason                                                               
for the use. The drafter does  not recommend replacing the age 18                                                               
with 19 as suggested in Amendment 1 of the bill.                                                                                
SENATOR  FRENCH  said  he  would  have to  take  issue  with  the                                                               
MR. SICA offered to re-check with  the drafter but said his other                                                               
point  was that  being  18  years of  age  "or  older" helps  the                                                               
mathematics work out.                                                                                                           
SENATOR GUESS agreed.                                                                                                           
SENATOR FRENCH disagreed. He said the  way the math charts out is                                                               
that no 18 year old can violate this law.                                                                                       
SENATOR GUESS  said there  are nine other  places in  the statute                                                               
that refer back to it and it will work out.                                                                                     
CHAIR SEEKINS agreed.                                                                                                           
10:52:07 AM                                                                                                                   
SENATOR  FRENCH  moved  to rescind  the  committee  action.  [The                                                               
committee  previously  adopted  Amendment  1  to  SCS  CSHB  258,                                                               
Version \Y.] Hearing no objection, the motion carried.                                                                          
CHAIR  SEEKINS  asked for  a  motion  to  move the  bill  without                                                               
SENATOR  FRENCH  moved  SCS CSHB  258(JUD)  from  committee  with                                                               
individual recommendations and attached  fiscal notes. Hearing no                                                               
objection, the motion carried.                                                                                                  
There being  no further  business to  come before  the committee,                                                               
Chair Seekins adjourned the meeting at 10:53:29 AM.                                                                           

Document Name Date/Time Subjects