04/13/2012 08:00 AM Senate JUDICIARY
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB343 | |
| SB198 | |
| HB234 | |
| HB255 | |
| HB50 | |
| HB296 | |
| Adjourn |
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | SB 198 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 343 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | HB 234 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | HB 255 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | HB 50 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | HB 296 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
SENATE JUDICIARY STANDING COMMITTEE
April 13, 2012
9:33 a.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Senator Hollis French, Chair
Senator Bill Wielechowski, Vice Chair
Senator Joe Paskvan
Senator John Coghill
MEMBERS ABSENT
Senator Lesil McGuire
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
COMMITTEE SUBSTITUTE FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 343(JUD) AM
"An Act relating to disclosure of records of the Department of
Health and Social Services pertaining to children in certain
circumstances; and providing for an effective date."
- MOVED CSHB 343(JUD) AM OUT OF COMMITTEE
SENATE BILL NO. 198
"An Act establishing procedures relating to issuance,
suspension, or revocation of certification of police officers by
the police standards council; making certain court service
officers subject to certification by the police standards
council; making confidential certain information that personally
identifies a police officer; relating to requesting or requiring
police officers to submit to lie detector tests; repealing a
provision exempting certain police officers from a prohibition
against requiring certain employees to submit to lie detector
tests; and providing for an effective date."
- MOVED CSSB 198(JUD) OUT OF COMMITTEE
HOUSE BILL NO. 234
"An Act relating to picketing or protests at a funeral."
- MOVED SCS HB 234(STA) OUT OF COMMITTEE
COMMITTEE SUBSTITUTE FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 255(JUD)
"An Act relating to screen devices in motor vehicles;
prohibiting the driver of a motor vehicle from reading or typing
a text message or other nonvoice message or communication on a
cellular telephone, computer, or personal data assistant while
driving a motor vehicle; and providing for an effective date."
- MOVED CSHB 255(JUD) OUT OF COMMITTEE
COMMITTEE SUBSTITUTE FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 50(JUD)
"An Act relating to the purchase of alcoholic beverages at a
club and to access by certain persons under 21 years of age to a
club's licensed premises when alcoholic beverages are present."
- MOVED CSHB 50(JUD) OUT OF COMMITTEE
COMMITTEE SUBSTITUTE FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 296(JUD)
"An Act relating to service of process on prisoners; relating to
the crime of escape; deleting the repeal of a provision relating
to electronic monitoring as a special condition of probation and
parole for offenders whose offense was related to a criminal
street gang; amending Rule 4, Alaska Rules of Civil Procedure;
and providing for an effective date."
- MOVED CSHB 296(JUD) OUT OF COMMITTEE
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
BILL: HB 343
SHORT TITLE: DISCLOSURE OF CHILDREN'S RECORDS
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) MUNOZ
02/22/12 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
02/22/12 (H) HSS, JUD
03/15/12 (H) HSS AT 3:00 PM CAPITOL 106
03/15/12 (H) Moved CSHB 343(HSS) Out of Committee
03/15/12 (H) MINUTE(HSS)
03/16/12 (H) HSS RPT CS(HSS) 3DP 3NR
03/16/12 (H) DP: SEATON, MILLER, KERTTULA
03/16/12 (H) NR: MILLETT, HERRON, KELLER
03/26/12 (H) JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120
03/26/12 (H) Heard & Held
03/26/12 (H) MINUTE(JUD)
03/28/12 (H) JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120
03/28/12 (H) Moved CSHB 343(JUD) Out of Committee
03/28/12 (H) MINUTE(JUD)
03/30/12 (H) JUD RPT CS(JUD) 4DP 1NR 1AM
03/30/12 (H) DP: GRUENBERG, KELLER, PRUITT, THOMPSON
03/30/12 (H) NR: LYNN
03/30/12 (H) AM: HOLMES
04/06/12 (H) TRANSMITTED TO (S)
04/06/12 (H) VERSION: CSHB 343(JUD) AM
04/07/12 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
04/07/12 (S) JUD
04/11/12 (S) JUD AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
04/11/12 (S) Heard & Held
04/11/12 (S) MINUTE(JUD)
04/13/12 (S) JUD AT 8:00 AM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
BILL: SB 198
SHORT TITLE: POLICE OFFICER PROTECTIONS/CERTIFICATION
SPONSOR(s): STATE AFFAIRS
02/17/12 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
02/17/12 (S) STA, JUD
03/01/12 (S) STA AT 9:00 AM BUTROVICH 205
03/01/12 (S) Heard & Held
03/01/12 (S) MINUTE(STA)
03/06/12 (S) STA AT 9:00 AM BUTROVICH 205
03/06/12 (S) Moved CSSB 198(STA) Out of Committee
03/06/12 (S) MINUTE(STA)
03/07/12 (S) STA RPT CS 1DP 2NR 1AM NEW TITLE
03/07/12 (S) DP: WIELECHOWSKI
03/07/12 (S) NR: MEYER, GIESSEL
03/07/12 (S) AM: PASKVAN
03/19/12 (S) JUD AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
03/19/12 (S) Heard & Held
03/19/12 (S) MINUTE(JUD)
03/21/12 (S) JUD AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
03/21/12 (S) Heard & Held
03/21/12 (S) MINUTE(JUD)
03/26/12 (S) JUD AT 2:00 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
03/26/12 (S) Heard & Held
03/26/12 (S) MINUTE(JUD)
03/28/12 (S) JUD AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
03/28/12 (S) Scheduled But Not Heard
03/30/12 (S) JUD AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
03/30/12 (S) Scheduled But Not Heard
04/02/12 (S) JUD AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
04/02/12 (S) Scheduled But Not Heard
04/13/12 (S) JUD AT 8:00 AM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
BILL: HB 234
SHORT TITLE: PICKETING AND PROTESTS AT FUNERALS
SPONSOR(s): THOMAS
04/09/11 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
04/09/11 (H) MLV, JUD
02/09/12 (H) MLV AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120
02/09/12 (H) Moved Out of Committee
02/09/12 (H) MINUTE(MLV)
02/10/12 (H) MLV RPT 4DP 1NR 2AM
02/10/12 (H) DP: GATTO, LYNN, THOMPSON, SADDLER
02/10/12 (H) NR: AUSTERMAN
02/10/12 (H) AM: MILLER, CISSNA
02/20/12 (H) JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120
02/20/12 (H) Moved Out of Committee
02/20/12 (H) MINUTE(JUD)
02/22/12 (H) JUD RPT 5DP 2NR
02/22/12 (H) DP: LYNN, KELLER, THOMPSON, PRUITT,
GATTO
02/22/12 (H) NR: GRUENBERG, HOLMES
03/06/12 (H) TRANSMITTED TO (S)
03/06/12 (H) VERSION: HB 234
03/12/12 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
03/12/12 (S) STA, JUD
04/05/12 (S) STA AT 9:00 AM BUTROVICH 205
04/05/12 (S) Heard & Held
04/05/12 (S) MINUTE(STA)
04/10/12 (S) STA AT 9:00 AM BUTROVICH 205
04/10/12 (S) Scheduled But Not Heard
04/11/12 (S) STA RPT SCS 4DP 1NR NEW TITLE
04/11/12 (S) DP: WIELECHOWSKI, KOOKESH, GIESSEL,
MEYER
04/11/12 (S) NR: PASKVAN
04/11/12 (S) STA AT 9:00 AM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
04/11/12 (S) Moved SCS CSHB 234(STA) Out of
Committee
04/11/12 (S) MINUTE(STA)
04/13/12 (S) JUD AT 8:00 AM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
BILL: HB 255
SHORT TITLE: READING OR TYPING MESSAGE WHILE DRIVING
SPONSOR(s): GARA, THOMAS, GATTO, P.WILSON, GRUENBERG, TUCK
01/17/12 (H) PREFILE RELEASED 1/6/12
01/17/12 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
01/17/12 (H) TRA, JUD, FIN
01/26/12 (H) TRA AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 17
01/26/12 (H) Moved Out of Committee
01/26/12 (H) MINUTE(TRA)
01/27/12 (H) TRA RPT 5DP
01/27/12 (H) DP: FEIGE, PRUITT, PETERSEN, GRUENBERG,
P.WILSON
02/08/12 (H) JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120
02/08/12 (H) Heard & Held
02/08/12 (H) MINUTE(JUD)
02/10/12 (H) JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120
02/10/12 (H) Moved CSHB 255(JUD) Out of Committee
02/10/12 (H) MINUTE(JUD)
02/13/12 (H) JUD RPT CS(JUD) NT 4DP 1DNP 1NR
02/13/12 (H) DP: GRUENBERG, HOLMES, PRUITT, GATTO
02/13/12 (H) DNP: KELLER
02/13/12 (H) NR: LYNN
04/04/12 (H) FIN AT 1:30 PM HOUSE FINANCE 519
04/04/12 (H) Moved CSHB 255(JUD) Out of Committee
04/04/12 (H) MINUTE(FIN)
04/05/12 (H) FIN RPT CS(JUD) NT 6DP 2NR
04/05/12 (H) DP: FAIRCLOUGH, GARA, DOOGAN, EDGMON,
COSTELLO, THOMAS
04/05/12 (H) NR: T.WILSON, STOLTZE
04/10/12 (H) TRANSMITTED TO (S)
04/10/12 (H) VERSION: CSHB 255(JUD)
04/11/12 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
04/11/12 (S) JUD
04/13/12 (S) JUD AT 8:00 AM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
BILL: HB 50
SHORT TITLE: ACCESS TO LICENSED PREMISES
SPONSOR(s): SADDLER
01/18/11 (H) PREFILE RELEASED 1/7/11
01/18/11 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
01/18/11 (H) L&C, JUD
04/04/11 (H) L&C AT 3:15 PM BARNES 124
04/04/11 (H) Moved Out of Committee
04/04/11 (H) MINUTE(L&C)
04/05/11 (H) L&C RPT 5DP 2NR
04/05/11 (H) DP: CHENAULT, THOMPSON, SADDLER,
JOHNSON, OLSON
04/05/11 (H) NR: HOLMES, MILLER
03/14/12 (H) JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120
03/14/12 (H) Heard & Held
03/14/12 (H) MINUTE(JUD)
03/16/12 (H) JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120
03/16/12 (H) Moved CSHB 50(JUD) Out of Committee
03/16/12 (H) MINUTE(JUD)
03/21/12 (H) JUD RPT CS(JUD) 6DP
03/21/12 (H) DP: LYNN, GRUENBERG, KELLER, PRUITT,
THOMPSON, GATTO
04/05/12 (H) TRANSMITTED TO (S)
04/05/12 (H) VERSION: CSHB 50(JUD)
04/06/12 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
04/06/12 (S) L&C, JUD
04/10/12 (S) L&C AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
04/10/12 (S) Moved HB 50 Out of Committee
04/10/12 (S) MINUTE(L&C)
04/11/12 (S) L&C RPT 4DP 1NR
04/11/12 (S) DP: EGAN, GIESSEL, PASKVAN, MENARD
04/11/12 (S) NR: DAVIS
04/13/12 (S) JUD AT 8:00 AM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
BILL: HB 296
SHORT TITLE: ESCAPE/SERVICE ON PRISONERS/MONITORING
SPONSOR(s): JUDICIARY
01/25/12 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
01/25/12 (H) JUD, FIN
02/01/12 (H) JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120
02/01/12 (H) Heard & Held
02/01/12 (H) MINUTE(JUD)
02/10/12 (H) JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120
02/10/12 (H) Heard & Held
02/10/12 (H) MINUTE(JUD)
02/13/12 (H) JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120
02/13/12 (H) Scheduled But Not Heard
02/15/12 (H) JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120
02/15/12 (H) Moved CSHB 296(JUD) Out of Committee
02/15/12 (H) MINUTE(JUD)
02/17/12 (H) JUD RPT CS(JUD) NT 4DP 1NR
02/17/12 (H) DP: LYNN, GRUENBERG, THOMPSON, GATTO
02/17/12 (H) NR: KELLER
03/21/12 (H) FIN AT 1:30 PM HOUSE FINANCE 519
03/21/12 (H) Scheduled But Not Heard
03/30/12 (H) FIN AT 1:30 PM HOUSE FINANCE 519
03/30/12 (H) Heard & Held
03/30/12 (H) MINUTE(FIN)
04/03/12 (H) FIN AT 1:30 PM HOUSE FINANCE 519
04/03/12 (H) Moved CSHB 296(JUD) Out of Committee
04/03/12 (H) MINUTE(FIN)
04/04/12 (H) FIN RPT CS(JUD) NT 4DP 5NR
04/04/12 (H) DP: FAIRCLOUGH, GARA, GUTTENBERG,
DOOGAN
04/04/12 (H) NR: T.WILSON, NEUMAN, COSTELLO, EDGMON,
STOLTZE
04/10/12 (H) TRANSMITTED TO (S)
04/10/12 (H) VERSION: CSHB 296(JUD)
04/11/12 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
04/11/12 (S) JUD
04/13/12 (S) JUD AT 8:00 AM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
WITNESS REGISTER
THOMAS PRESLEY, Intern
Senator Bill Wielechowski
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, AK
POSITION STATEMENT: Explained the CS for SB 198 on behalf of the
sponsor.
KACI SHROEDER, Staff
Representative Bill Thomas Jr.
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, AK
POSITION STATEMENT: Introduced HB 234 on behalf of the sponsor.
JEFFREY MITTMAN, Director
ACLU of Alaska
Anchorage, AK
POSITION STATEMENT: Raised constitutional issues with HB 234.
ANNE CARPENETI, Assistant Attorney General
Criminal Division
Department of Law (DOL)
POSITION STATEMENT: Introduced HB 296 on behalf of the sponsor,
the House Judiciary Committee.
CARMEN GUTIERREZ, Deputy Commissioner
Department of Corrections (DOC)
Anchorage, AK
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions related to HB 296.
DOUGLAS MOODY, Attorney
Public Defender Agency
Department of Administration (DOA)
Anchorage, AK
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified that HB 296 aligns the statutes
with the decision in Bridge v. State.
ACTION NARRATIVE
9:33:05 AM
CHAIR HOLLIS FRENCH called the Senate Judiciary Standing
Committee meeting to order at 9:33 a.m. Present at the call to
order were Senators Coghill, Paskvan, Wielechowski, and Chair
French.
HB 343-DISCLOSURE OF CHILDREN'S RECORDS
9:33:28 AM
CHAIR FRENCH announced the consideration of HB 343, "An Act
relating to disclosure of records of the Department of Health
and Social Services pertaining to children in certain
circumstances; and providing for an effective date." The bill
was heard previously and public testimony was taken. Finding no
further questions or discussion, he asked for a motion.
9:33:48 AM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI moved to report CS for HB 343, version I.A,
from committee with individual recommendations and attached
fiscal note(s).
9:34:04 AM
CHAIR FRENCH announced that without objection CSHB 343(JUD)am
moved from the Senate Judiciary Standing Committee.
SB 198-POLICE OFFICER PROTECTIONS/CERTIFICATION
9:34:15 AM
CHAIR FRENCH announced the consideration of SB 198, "An Act
establishing procedures relating to issuance, suspension, or
revocation of certification of police officers by the police
standards council; making certain court service officers subject
to certification by the police standards council; making
confidential certain information that personally identifies a
police officer; relating to requesting or requiring police
officers to submit to lie detector tests; repealing a provision
exempting certain police officers from a prohibition against
requiring certain employees to submit to lie detector tests; and
providing for an effective date." He asked for a motion to adopt
the proposed committee substitute (CS).
9:34:20 AM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI moved to adopt CS for SB 198, labeled 27-
LS1306\U, as the working document.
CHAIR FRENCH announced that without objection, version U was
before the committee.
9:34:56 AM
THOMAS PRESLEY, intern to Senator Wielechowski, explained that
the CS removed Section 2 relating to clear and convincing
evidence.
CHAIR FRENCH reviewed a letter from the ACLU that expressed
three concerns. The primary concern was addressed by removing
Section 2. Another concern related to the confidentiality
provision in what is now Section 5. As currently drafted,
confidentiality is so tight a police officer who is a bad actor
would be insulated from accountability for his or her actions.
For example, a woman who was assaulted by an unknown police
officer would be unable to even look at a photo array of the
officers on duty when she was assaulted.
He directed attention to page 3, lines 18 and 20. Both paragraph
(1) and (2) say a police officer's information is confidential
unless the officer has been lawfully arrested. He suggested
removing the terms "lawfully arrested" in both instances and
replace it with the terms "under investigation."
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI agreed that was reasonable.
9:36:50 AM
CHAIR FRENCH moved Amendment 1.
AMENDMENT 1
Page 3, line 18:
Delete "lawfully arrested"
Insert "under investigation"
Page 3, line 20:
Delete "lawfully arrested"
Insert "under investigation"
CHAIR FRENCH found objection and announced Amendment 1 is
adopted.
He noted that the ACLU also expressed concern about the weight
given to prior findings of fact, but his view was that it was a
nuanced issue about which reasonable minds could differ.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI explained that the intent was to give
substantial weight to the finding when the arbitrators and the
courts find that a disciplinary action was not warranted.
SENATOR COGHILL expressed reservations and asked the sponsor to
remind him why it was the right thing to do to give an officer
the ability to refuse to take a lie detector test.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI explained that the basis for the exclusion
is that several court cases questioned the validity of polygraph
tests.
MR. PRESLEY added that at one point the Supreme Court decided to
allow individual jurisdictions to use their discretion on how to
use polygraph information. This gave credence to the idea that
the tests were not necessarily unreliable, but certainly quasi-
scientific.
SENATOR COGHILL said he continued to have reservations, but
realized that a refusal could actually be incriminating.
CHAIR FRENCH found no further questions or discussion and asked
for a motion.
9:40:58 AM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI moved to report CS for SB 198, version U
[as amended], from committee with individual recommendations and
attached fiscal note(s).
CHAIR FRENCH announced that without objection CSSB 198(JUD)
moved from the Senate Judiciary Standing Committee.
9:41:15 AM
At ease
HB 234-PICKETING AND PROTESTS AT FUNERALS
9:42:55 AM
CHAIR FRENCH announced the consideration of HB 234, "An Act
relating to picketing or protests at a funeral." He asked for a
motion to bring the bill before the committee.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI motioned to bring HB 234 before the
committee.
9:43:24 AM
KACI SHROEDER, staff to Representative Bill Thomas Jr., sponsor
of HB 234, introduced HB 234 on behalf of the sponsor. She
stated that in the last several years it has become popular to
use funerals as a means of expressing political speech. The
sponsor believes it is necessary to balance that right with the
right of a family to grieve without disruption. This will bring
Alaska in line with forty six states that have adopted similar
legislation by establishing a 150-foot buffer zone around a
funeral service.
A person commits the crime of disorderly conduct if they
knowingly picket with reckless disregard that it occurs inside a
cemetery, church or other facility or within 150 feet of the
outer boundary of that facility. In addition, the picketing
cannot occur an hour before, during, or after the funeral.
Picketing means an act that actually disrupts or disturbs the
funeral.
9:44:43 AM
JEFFREY MITTMAN, Director, ACLU of Alaska, said he was
testifying on HB 234 to highlight its constitutional issues. He
noted that he submitted written testimony. He said the first
concern is that the current draft targets speech that is
"directed towards a funeral," which is not content neutral. He
suggested revising the phrase to say "conduct that interferes
with a funeral." This would cover noise that is so loud it
disrupts the occasion and conduct that is so close by that it
interferes with ingress and egress. He suggested crafting the
bill more narrowly to outlaw the worst conduct.
9:46:39 AM
CHAIR FRENCH asked if under his proposal, mourners would be able
to hear the voices of the protesters.
MR. MITTMAN replied they would potentially be exposed to
fleeting noise that was not excessively loud when entering and
leaving. That would probably be permissible as the courts give
more leeway to protecting speech in the public sphere.
9:47:58 AM
CHAIR FRENCH asked if mourners at a graveside would be able to
hear the voices of the protesters while the funeral service was
being conducted.
MR. MITTMAN said disrupting a graveside service would be covered
because the conduct - the level of noise - was interfering. That
would be a reasonable time, place, and manner restriction.
9:48:51 AM
CHAIR FRENCH closed public testimony and delivered a short
speech on the First Amendment. He said despite the black and
white language in the constitution, most people realize they
have to make some accommodation in the world. Holding someone
responsible for yelling "fire" in a crowded theatre is an
example of such an accommodation; most people recognize that as
wrong. He opined that HB 234 makes a very fair accommodation in
the world.
SENATOR COGHILL asked if the 150-foot buffer was defensible.
MS. SCHROEDER said it falls within the boundary of what has been
held constitutional in other states, and would allow the
picketers to deliver their message.
CHAIR FRENCH reviewed the March 10, 2011 memo from Legislative
Legal that points out that Chief Justice Roberts of the U.S.
Supreme Court has, where a law was content neutral, allowed
time, place, and manner restrictions and regulation of public
speech. The memo also points out that a state court rejected a
300-foot buffer zone for picketing and approved a 36-foot buffer
zone.
9:52:55 AM
SENATOR COGHILL noted that the bill amends the disorderly
conduct statute, and asked if the action was the content.
CHAIR FRENCH replied the bill says picketing is content neutral.
SENATOR COGHILL asked if it wouldn't fall out to the disorderly
part of the conduct rather than the picketing specifically.
CHAIR FRENCH opined that the best parallel in this statute is
paragraph (5) on page 2, lines 22-23. It's very close to the
fighting words doctrine, which is saying hateful words to
someone's face and provoking a fight.
9:54:25 AM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI moved to report the Senate CS for HB 234,
version T, from committee with individual recommendations and
attached fiscal note(s).
CHAIR FRENCH announced that without objection SCS HB 234(STA)
moved from the Senate Judiciary Standing Committee.
At ease from 9:54 a.m. to 9:55 a.m.
HB 255-READING OR TYPING MESSAGE WHILE DRIVING
9:55:37 AM
CHAIR FRENCH announced the consideration of HB 255, "An Act
relating to screen devices in motor vehicles; prohibiting the
driver of a motor vehicle from reading or typing a text message
or other nonvoice message or communication on a cellular
telephone, computer, or personal data assistant while driving a
motor vehicle; and providing for an effective date." He asked
for a motion to bring the bill before the committee.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI motioned to bring HB 255 before the
committee.
9:56:05 AM
REPRESENTATIVE LES GARA, sponsor of HB 255, stated that in 2008
the Legislature passed a bill that was thought to prohibit
texting while driving. However, in the last year several judges
have said the bill wasn't written with enough specificity to
include texting. HB 255 fixes the problem by reinstating the ban
on texting, and extending it to include other nonvoice
communication devices that may come along as technology evolves.
The six co-sponsors believe it is important to have a texting
law on the books because texting while driving is more dangerous
than any other type of cellphone conduct. Information in the
packet shows that a driver who texts a 4.6 second message will
travel the length of a football field without paying attention
to the road. A car and driver study indicates that texting while
driving is more dangerous than drunk driving. According to the
National Conference of State Legislatures, a driver who is
texting is 20 times more likely to cause a crash or near
collision compared to times when that driver is not texting. The
AAA Foundation on Traffic Safety found that while one-third of
people text while they drive, ninety-four percent of the
respondents said they recognize that texting is dangerous. The
public recognizes this behavior is dangerous and supports
regulation, he said. He described two texting-related accidents;
one was in Fairbanks and the other in Anchorage.
A person who violates this law is guilty of a class A
misdemeanor, although drivers with a clean record have generally
been sentenced to community service or a fine rather than jail
time. However, a driver who was texting and driving drunk was
sentenced to the mandatory three days in jail for drunk driving.
Another person failed to appear in court two times and was
sentenced to one day in jail. The original bill provided that a
person who violates this law and causes injury to another person
is guilty of the next level of crime. The reasoning was that it
is close to premeditated for a driver to enter a car knowing he
or she will engage in dangerous behavior. HB 255 maintains that
sentencing scheme.
The original bill made an accommodation for personnel in
emergency vehicles to use display devices that are attached to
the dashboard. To accommodate the prevalence of wireless
devices, that provision was amended to clarify that police,
fire, or emergency medical personnel may use a screen device
that is attached or not "if the user reasonably believes the
information on the device is necessary to respond to a health,
safety, or criminal matter."
REPRESENTATIVE GARA said the only criticism he's heard is that
there are other behaviors that distract drivers like eating,
drinking coffee or yelling at the kids. He said he didn't know
how to write a law to say when it is and is not okay to do those
things, but he did know how to write a law that says you can't
text while driving. He noted that the founder of Mothers Against
Drunk Driving (MADD) has taken on texting and cellphones as her
new issue. He said it's not possible to address cellphone use
this session due to diverging opinions among legislators, but it
is possible to address texting because people can agree that it
is dangerous.
REPRESENTATIVE GARA said he's been asked why this isn't
prosecuted under the negligent driving or distracted driving
statutes, and the answer relates to the statistic that shows
that one-third of drivers text while driving. Those people will
be on the jury, which would make it very difficult to get the
unanimity needed for a conviction. If the jury instruction says,
"Was the person texting while driving?" the jury will have to
answer yes and the defendant will be convicted. He concluded
that a texting law is needed and most states already have one.
10:05:43 AM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI reviewed the language in Section 2, page 1,
line 14 through page 2, line 2, and observed that the new
language appears to include not only texting but also
communicating while a screen device is operating.
REPRESENTATIVE GARA clarified that was the name of the crime,
not the elements. The elements of the crime are on page 2, lines
3-11. Paragraph (1) is the existing statute and paragraph (2)
contains the new language. He noted that the word "computer" was
inserted because the Chair reported an incident of someone
typing on a laptop while driving.
CHAIR FRENCH recounted the incident and said, "I flipped my
lid."
REPRESENTATIVE GARA read the new language in paragraph (2).
(2) the person is reading or typing a text message or
other nonvoice message or communication on a cellular
telephone, personal data assistant, computer, or any
other similar means capable of providing a visual
display that is in the view of the driver in a normal
driving position while the vehicle is in motion and
while the person is driving.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked if surfing the Internet while driving
would be a crime under this language.
REPRESENTATIVE GARA said yes; to surf the Internet a person has
to push the keys and that is typing.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI continued to question whether the new
language would cover surfing the Internet.
REPRESENTATIVE GARA responded that the person is reading.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked if reading applies to text messaging
only.
REPRESENTATIVE GARA said reading applies to anything on the
computer or personal data device. "We don't want you reading
while you're driving," he said.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI said he wasn't disagreeing, but he didn't
necessarily interpret the language that way. "It'll be good to
get some language on the record about what we're outlawing
here," he said.
REPRESENTATIVE GARA said reading is probably well covered in the
first section, which is current law, but it's also intended to
be covered in the new section. "It's just reading a text or
other nonvoice message or communication and that's what you're
doing when you're surfing the net."
10:09:19 AM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI posed a hypothetical situation of a driver
getting lost and typing an address into map quest.
REPRESENTATIVE GARA said that would be fine, and added that the
original bill included a list of exceptions.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI again asked about typing in an address.
REPRESENTATIVE GARA said it does not apply to equipment that
displays navigational or global positioning or maps. It would be
okay to type in an address on an iPhone.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked about looking up a name on a
cellphone.
REPRESENTATIVE GARA said that's fine and even unlocking a
cellphone is acceptable. He directed attention to page 2, line
18. "It is not a crime if you're using your portable cellular
telephones or personal data assistants being used for voice
communication..." He opined that typing in the code and phone
number is for a voice communication, and all forms of cellphone
talking is exempt with the understanding that other bills
address that issue.
CHAIR FRENCH noted that Lieutenant Dial with the Department of
Public Safety and Doug Moody with the Public Defender Agency
were available to answer questions.
SENATOR PASKVAN warned that it may not be a crime to drive 60
miles an hour and look at a navigational or global positioning
device, but a person will be held responsible if he or she does
that and hurts someone. There's a clear distinction between it
not being a crime and the responsibility for reasonable and
acceptable conduct while driving, he stated.
REPRESENTATIVE GARA agreed that a person would still fall under
the negligent and reckless driving statutes for reckless use of
those exceptions.
CHAIR FRENCH confirmed that reckless driving is still a crime in
Alaska and noted that he was reviewing the elements of that
crime.
SENATOR PASKVAN observed that those were criminal statutes and
he was referring to civil liability. He emphasized that a person
will be held responsible if he or she kills someone while
driving. Taking your eyes off the road to look at map quest
because you're lost will not be an excuse. Some people think
it's acceptable to drive 60 miles an hour and hit someone, but
they're wrong. They will be held responsible.
REPRESENTATIVE GARA responded that the sponsors have that same
understanding. The bill does not exempt civil liability for
negligent conduct. If a person is negligent and hurts somebody,
the rule is "You broke it, you fix it."
10:13:30 AM
SENATOR COGHILL asked if the purpose of the phrase "any other
similar means" on page 2, line 9, is to accommodate future
technology.
REPRESENTATIVE GARA said yes; today an iPhone is a personal data
assistant but the iPhone 5 may be called something different.
The intent is that if it's got a screen and a person can type on
it and read it, then it's a similar means.
SENATOR COGHILL observed that it's a visual distraction, and the
bill is trying to say that visual distractions, excluding the
exceptions, will generally be a primary crime.
REPRESENTATIVE GARA said yes.
10:14:35 AM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked if using Siri (Speech Interpretation
and Recognition Interface) would be a violation.
REPRESENTATIVE GARA replied it is not a crime to voice text, and
the Department of Law has given assurance that it will not
prosecute those cases where it isn't possible to tell whether
the voice text application was open, because that's not a crime
beyond a reasonable doubt. This will change as technology
advances, but that capability isn't available today.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked if a "normal driving position"
included turning to look at an iPhone that's located on the
passenger seat. "I would think that we would want that covered,
but it's just clarifying for the record," he said.
10:16:51 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GARA explained that the terminology in paragraph
(2) prohibits texting or using other nonvoice messaging while
driving. It is intended to disallow the argument that the driver
had one eye on the road. Normal driving position means the
driver is driving and his or her full attention is on the road.
CHAIR FRENCH closed public testimony. Finding no further
committee discussion, he asked the will of the committee.
10:18:32 AM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI moved to report CS for HB 255, version T,
from committee with individual recommendations and attached
fiscal note(s).
CHAIR FRENCH announced that without objection CSHB 255(JUD)
moved from the Senate Judiciary Standing Committee.
At ease from 10:18 a.m. to 10:20 a.m.
HB 50-ACCESS TO LICENSED PREMISES
10:20:10 AM
CHAIR FRENCH announced the consideration of HB 50, "An Act
relating to the purchase of alcoholic beverages at a club and to
access by certain persons under 21 years of age to a club's
licensed premises when alcoholic beverages are present."
10:20:21 AM
REPRESENTATIVE DAN SADDLER, sponsor of HB 50, said the bill is
about access to patriotic clubs that may be licensed premises,
but is not intended to allow minors to consume alcohol in these
establishments. HB 50 has two basic elements. Section 1 would
make it easier for service members and their spouses who are
over age 21 to visit licensed premises such as an American
Legion or VFW hall at the club's invitation.
Section 2 would allow service members and their spouses who are
under age 21, and have appropriate identification, to enter
licensed premises of patriotic clubs if they are members or
guests of a member. He noted that if the host leaves the
premises, the minors must also leave. He explained that
patriotic clubs are often used for off-base meetings of military
units and to exclude those who are under age 21 can negatively
affect unit cohesion and morale.
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER reiterated that HB 50 does not permit
underage drinking. It simply clarifies that military personnel
and their spouses who are over age 21 do not have to wait for a
special occasion to visit a patriot club, and that military
personnel and their spouses who are under age 21 can visit, but
not consume alcohol, as long as they are members or guests. He
noted that the packet contained documentations of support.
10:22:28 AM
CHAIR FRENCH asked if the bill had any opposition.
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER said no.
CHAIR FRENCH observed that the bill addresses only the narrow
category of patriotic clubs, not licensed premises in general.
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER [nodded.]
10:23:04 AM
CHAIR FRENCH closed public testimony and reviewed the supporting
documentation in the packet. Finding no further committee
discussion, he asked the will of the committee.
10:23:39 AM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI moved to report CS for HB 55 from committee
with individual recommendations and attached fiscal note(s).
CHAIR FRENCH announced that without objection, CSHB 55(JUD)
moved from the Senate Judiciary Standing Committee.
At ease from 10:23 a.m. to 10:24 a.m.
HB 296-ESCAPE/SERVICE ON PRISONERS/MONITORING
10:24:07 AM
CHAIR FRENCH announced the consideration of HB 296, "An Act
relating to service of process on prisoners; relating to the
crime of escape; deleting the repeal of a provision relating to
electronic monitoring as a special condition of probation and
parole for offenders whose offense was related to a criminal
street gang; amending Rule 4, Alaska Rules of Civil Procedure;
and providing for an effective date." He asked for a motion to
bring the bill before the committee.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI motioned to bring CS for HB 296(JUD) before
the committee.
10:25:13 AM
ANNE CARPENETI, Assistant Attorney General representing the
Criminal Division, Department of Law (DOL), introduced HB 296 on
behalf of the sponsor, the House Judiciary Committee. She
explained that the bill addresses an issue that arose in the
court case Bridge v. State. Mr. Bridge walked away from the
unsecured halfway house, Northstar Center, while awaiting trial
on a class B misdemeanor charge. The Alaska Court of Appeals
held that Northstar Center did not qualify as a correctional
center and that the class B felony offense of escape in the
second degree should not apply in that circumstance. HB 296
reflects that decision and provides that a person charged with a
misdemeanor who walks away from a non-secure facility be subject
to prosecution of a misdemeanor offense.
She said the bill defines "secure correctional facility" only
for purposes of the escape law. She noted two other changes.
Section 1 cross references the definition of correctional
facility in Title 33 and clarifies that the superintendent can
deliver process to a person who is incarcerated. Section 4
deletes the repeal of a provision relating to electronic
monitoring of gang members under certain circumstances.
10:29:17 AM
CHAIR FRENCH asked what the bill does to tie the definition of
"correctional facility" under AS 09.05.050 to the definition
under AS 33.30.901.
MS. CARPENETTI replied it's strictly for civil process; it
clarifies that a superintendent of a jail can accept service and
deliver it to an inmate.
CHAIR FRENCH asked if prisoners in Alaska are housed in
facilities other than prisons, jails, halfway houses, and by
electronic monitoring.
MS. CARPENETI deferred to Ms. Gutierrez.
10:31:17 AM
CARMEN GUTIERREZ, Deputy Commissioner, Department of Corrections
(DOC), confirmed that those were the forms of detention and that
the bill addresses prisons and jails.
CHAIR FRENCH observed that the bill clarifies that it's a class
B felony to escape from a prison or jail while under official
detention for a misdemeanor.
MS. GUTIERREZ confirmed that under this provision a misdemeanant
escaping from a secure correctional facility would be prosecuted
for a class B felony offense. A felon residing in a community
residential center who walks away will be prosecuted for a class
C felony offense. She explained that the bill intends to align
the statutory language with Bridge v. State; a misdemeanant
offender who walks away from a community residential center will
be prosecuted as a class A misdemeanor.
10:33:36 AM
CHAIR FRENCH asked Ms. Carpeneti to repeat the explanation of
repealing the repealer in Section 4.
MS. CARPENETTI explained that legislation was enacted in 2007 to
allow electronic monitoring of gang members under certain
circumstances. That bill had a self-enforcing repealer section
dated 12/31/2012. The assumption is that the repealer is being
repealed because that method of control has been helpful.
10:35:07 AM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI reported that that was his bill and the
repealer was added to provide an opportunity to test the method.
He said he was pleased that it was being put back in.
CHAIR FRENCH asked what the Department of Correction's
experience has been with electronic monitoring of gang members.
MS. GUTIERREZ replied it has been a beneficial tool.
CHAIR FRENCH asked if the committee should be aware of any
particular instance of a gang member on electronic monitoring.
MS. GUTIERREZ said no; DOC uses electronic monitoring as an
added control method of monitoring gang members who have been
released on probation after having served their sentence.
10:36:18 AM
DOUGLAS MOODY, Attorney, Public Defender Agency, Department of
Administration (DOA), offered to answer questions.
CHAIR FRENCH asked if HB 296 fixes the problems that arose in
Bridge v. State.
MR. MOODY said yes; it aligns the current statutory scheme with
the decision.
10:37:16 AM
CHAIR FRENCH closed public testimony and asked the will of the
committee.
10:37:20 AM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI moved to report CS for HB 296 from
committee with individual recommendations and attached fiscal
note(s).
CHAIR FRENCH announced that without objection, CSHB 296(JUD)
moved from the Senate Judiciary Standing Committee.
10:37:30 AM
There being no further business to come before the committee,
Chair French adjourned the meeting at 10:37 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|