Legislature(2015 - 2016)BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
04/15/2015 01:30 PM Senate JUDICIARY
Note: the audio ![]()
and video ![]()
recordings are distinct records and are obtained from different sources. As such there may be key differences between the two. The audio recordings are captured by our records offices as the official record of the meeting and will have more accurate timestamps. Use the icons to switch between them.
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| Confirmation Hearing: Commission on Judicial Conduct | |
| HB11 | |
| HB15 | |
| HB75 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| + | HB 83 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | HB 11 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | HB 75 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | HB 15 | TELECONFERENCED | |
HB 15-CREDITS FOR TIME SERVED/GOOD TIME
2:09:14 PM
VICE CHAIR COGHILL announced the consideration of HB 15. "An Act
relating to credits toward a sentence of imprisonment for
certain persons under electronic monitoring." He asked for a
motion to adopt the Senate CS.
At ease from 2:10 pm to 2:11 pm.
2:11:05 PM
SENATOR COSTELLO motioned to adopt the Senate CS for CSHB 15,
labeled 29-LS0102\X, as the working document.
VICE CHAIR COGHILL objected for discussion purposes.
2:11:28 PM
GENEVIEVE WOJTUSIK, Staff, Senator Lesil McGuire, spoke to the
changes in the Senate CS for HB 15. Version X adds a new
paragraph (21) to AS 12.55.155(d) on page 2, lines [17-20]. This
is the content of SB 82 that the committee heard and reported
out. It allows a judge to consider participation in the 24/7
sobriety program as a mitigating factor at the time of
sentencing. The new paragraph states that "the defendant, as a
condition of release ordered by the court, successfully
completed an alcohol and sub stance abuse monitoring program
established under AS 47.38.020." At the request of the
Department of Law, the word "complied" was changed to
"completed" to align with language that is already in statute.
VICE CHAIR COGHILL withdrew his objection and version X was
before the committee.
2:13:06 PM
REPRESENTATIVE TAMMIE WILSON, sponsor of HB 15, stated support
for the Senate CS. She explained that the legislation would
allow the courts to grant a defendant credit toward a sentence
for the time spent under electronic monitoring. The purpose of
the bill is to encourage people to get help as soon as possible
versus sitting in jail awaiting trial. Currently private vendors
are offering electronic monitoring in the major cities, but she
knows that the Department of Corrections would be excited to
enter this realm.
SENATOR COSTELLO said she appreciates the cost savings the bill
represents. She asked the cost of a hard bed, the average cost
of residential treatment, and the daily cost of electronic
monitoring.
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON replied the cost of a prison bed is $158
per day and the cost of electronic monitoring in Fairbanks is
about $105 per week. Specialty additions such as alcohol
monitoring cost more. She didn't know the cost of residential
treatment.
SENATOR COSTELLO asked her to discuss the opportunity for people
to remain employed while they're on electronic monitoring.
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON explained that this allows a person to
remain in the community, with certain restrictions depending on
the charge, and therefore hold down their job rather than
sitting in jail. She cited an example and shared that the person
said it's been easier for him to stop drinking because he knows
the immediate consequence if he takes a drink.
2:17:53 PM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI joined the committee.
VICE CHAIR COGHILL asked Commissioner Taylor if DOC manages the
monitoring systems.
RON TAYLOR, Commissioner, Department of Corrections (DOC),
answered no; DOC does not monitor the private companies that
offer electronic monitoring services.
VICE CHAIR COGHILL asked if DOC would be part of the discussion
about placing a defendant on electronic monitoring instead of
sending them to jail awaiting trial.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR replied the court is making that
determination.
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON clarified that this is not directed by the
court. She explained that when someone is charged, the court
either sets bail or designates a third party to monitor the
defendant 24/7. The defendant would bring the monitoring company
to court and request electronic monitoring as a third party
custodian. The court would question the vendor's representative
just as it would any third party custodian.
VICE CHAIR COGHILL asked if someone who requests this type of
monitoring is admitting guilt or just precluding other risk
tools the court would use.
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON replied electronic monitoring is already
being done but no credit is given at sentencing for the time
spent under electronic monitoring.
VICE CHAIR COGHILL asked what happens if there's a violation.
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON replied the defendant would go back to
jail if they violated a condition of release while on electronic
monitoring. She expressed hope that DOC would eventually make
use of this tool.
2:23:46 PM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI directed attention to page 1, line 11, and
asked if the definition of "criminal offense" includes a
probation or parole violation.
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON replied this is just pretrial so a person
would not be on parole or probation.
VICE CHAIR COGHILL asked Ms. Meade to describe how the court
would see this option on a third party release.
NANCY MEADE, General Counsel, Administrative Staff, Alaska Court
System, explained that a defendant who has a bail condition of a
third party custodian could use a professional vendor as their
third-party custodian. In Anchorage, Fairbanks, Palmer, and
Kenai, the defendant who has that requirement to get out of jail
can bring the vendor's representative and ask the judge to issue
an order approving that company as a third party custodian. The
order would include conditions such using the ankle monitor and
certain exclusion zones. The vendor would have the
responsibility of reporting any transgression to the court. They
would know that the person violated one of the conditions set by
the court because the ankle monitor would send an electronic
alert to the vendor's business office where the monitoring takes
place.
This is happening now and a person can be on electronic
monitoring for a substantial amount of time awaiting trial. The
intent of the sponsor is that a person who purchases a contract
with a third party vendor would receive credit.
MS. MEADE clarified that the court is neutral on the bill but
can comply. The court does not approve or monitor third party
venders; it is a private contract and a defendant pays the
business between $300 and $600 per month for the service. The
court approves the contract if it believes both will be able to
fulfill their responsibilities. Under the bill, the defendant
would inform the judge that they would seek credit for the time
they paid for the electronic monitor, and that they want an
order that comports with the statute so they can receive credit.
At the time of sentencing the court will look at the order and
deduct the time spent on electronic monitoring if the defendant
didn't violate any of the conditions.
SENATOR MICCICHE asked why current law specifically prohibits
the court from granting credit for electronic monitoring when it
allows credit for time spent in a residential treatment program.
MS. MEADE explained that the residential treatment described in
AS 12.55.027 is required to have the characteristics of
incarceration. She recalled a case where a defendant asked to
receive credit for the time served on electronic monitoring, but
the court was constrained by the statute and decided that the
time didn't qualify. Later the legislature codified that and
added a subsection to 027 saying a person does not get credit
for electronic monitoring.
SENATOR MICCICHE asked if electronic monitoring has a particular
range.
MS. MEADE replied the range varies according to the order by the
court.
2:31:43 PM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked if taking a drink would be considered
a criminal offense under the provision in Section 2 if the court
order prohibited alcohol consumption.
MS. MEADE answered in the affirmative. Disobeying anything in
the bail order is violating a court order and that is a crime.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked if a person would lose all the credit
for the time spent on electronic monitoring if they violated
their conditions of bail on day 364.
MS. MEADE replied that would be an interpretation of the
statute, but the district attorney would argue that the person
is not entitled to the credit because they violated the court
order, which is a criminal offense.
2:33:12 PM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked the sponsor's intent.
BARBARA BARNES, Staff, Representative Tammie Wilson, offered her
understanding that a person who violates the conditions of bail
set by the court would not receive credit. She acknowledged that
it may be open to interpretation and added "If you break the
law, you're not going to get the credit and I believe that is
the intent of the sponsor."
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI urged the committee to clarify its intent
because this provision would be litigated and the court would
look to these committee hearings for the legislative intent.
SENATOR MICCICHE observed that both Sections 1 and 2 use the
term may so the court is not required to grant credit. It would
be on a case-by-case basis.
MS. MEADE agreed that it does allow the court some discretion,
but it would it would be unusual for a judge to deny credit for
some non-statutory reason.
VICE CHAIR COGHILL questioned whether it would add clarity to
add "only" on page 1, line 10, following "monitoring."
2:36:16 PM
DENNIS JOHNSON, Program Director, Alaska Pretrial Services
(APS), Anchorage, Alaska, stated that APS administers the Alaska
24/7 Sobriety program in the third judicial district. They have
two offices with testing facilities in the Anchorage area and
are expanding to Palmer. APS provides pretrial electronic
monitoring, which is what HB 15 and SB 82 are directly related
to. He reported that APS currently has about 126 active 24/7
participants and about 162 offenders under active electronic
monitor. They provide daily supervision for people who live and
work from the North Slope and Barrow through Kodiak and down to
Juneau. He opined that both HB 15 and SB 82 provide a cost
effective way to monitor and give credit to offenders who are
working toward sobriety and court compliance.
Addressing an earlier question about range, he said it varies
depending on the severity of the alleged offense. He believes
that Alaska Pretrial is more strict that other professional
vendors. He said the bill is a cost-effective tool to help
people who are trying to change their behavior for the better.
SENATOR MICCICHE asked if his company offers both proximity and
alcohol monitoring.
MR. JOHNSON answered yes; Alaska Pretrial Services uses active
GPS with two way communication. He described geo-fencing on an
unclassified felon who is confined to his house. If he steps
outside his residence, APS receives an immediate alarm and a
case officer responds and notifies law enforcement. This system
was developed for community safety, victim safety, and
compliance; exclusion zones can be established around a victim's
residence, school or place of work and range from 10 feet to
five miles.
VICE CHAIR COGHILL asked the sponsor if the intent is that a
person would lose all credit if they violated the conditions of
bail.
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON replied it would be up to the court. She
added "If I was in charge I'd make them lose it all because I
think that's a bigger incentive."
Responding to an earlier question, she explained that "private
residence" was changed to "residence" to include halfway houses.
2:46:38 PM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI commented that Section 2 will be litigated
and then directed attention to page 2, line 12. That line talks
about the court imposing restrictions on a person's freedom of
movement and behavior. He asked if the court always imposes
restrictions on both freedom of movement and behavior.
MS. MEADE confirmed that there would be restrictions on freedom
of movement if the electronic monitoring had a GPS component.
She guessed that a standard bail condition of commit no crimes
would be interpreted as a restriction on behavior.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI suggested the Department of Law (DOL) look
and consider whether or not to replace the final "and" with "or"
on page 1, line 12.
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON said she didn't ask about that
specifically, but Department of Law did have a lot of input.
2:48:45 PM
VICE CHAIR COGHILL said his preference is for the bill to
clearly say that a person would lose all credit for a violation
of a bail condition. He held HB 15 in committee for further
consideration.