04/22/1995 01:30 PM House FIN

  HOUSE BILL 201                                                               
                                                                               
       "An    Act    relating    to    prisoner    litigation,                 
       post-conviction  relief,  sentence   appeals,  amending                 
       Alaska  Administrative   Rule  10,   Alaska  Rules   of                 
       Appellate Procedure 204,  208, 209, 215, 521,  603, and                 
       604, and Alaska Rules of Criminal Procedure 11, 33, 35,                 
       and 35.1; and providing for an effective date."                         
                                                                               
  Representative Brown explained that Amendment #1 [Attachment                 
  of the appeal within a sixty day time period.                                
                                                                               
  LAURIE  OTTO,  DEPUTY ATTORNEY  GENERAL,  CRIMINAL DIVISION,                 
  DEPARTMENT OF  LAW, indicated that change made to the notice                 
  of  appeal  through the  amendment  was  the intent  of  the                 
  Department and that the amendment  provided clarification.                   
                                                                               
                                                                               
  Representative Brown  MOVED to  adopt Amendment  #1.   There                 
  being NO OBJECTION, it was adopted.                                          
                                                                               
  Representative Brown explained Amendment  #2 [Attachment #2]                 
  which would delete "60  days" and insert "120 days"  on Page                 
  18,  Line 14.  The language would then read: "(1) may modify                 
  or reduce a sentence within 120  days of the distribution of                 
  the written  judgement upon a  motion made  in the  original                 
  criminal case;".   Representative  Brown thought  the change                 
  would provide more flexibility in consideration of  sentence                 
  reduction.                                                                   
                                                                               
  Ms.   Otto   noted  that   120   days  would   be  adequate.                 
  Representative Brown  MOVED to  adopt Amendment  #2.   There                 
  being NO OBJECTION, it was adopted.                                          
                                                                               
                                                                               
                                2                                              
                                                                               
                                                                               
  Representative Brown MOVED to adopt Amendment #3 [Attachment                 
  for the burden of proof.  She advised that with the  current                 
  language, it would always be the  applicant that had to bear                 
  the burden of proof  by clear and convincing evidence.   The                 
  new  language  would  state  that   the  evidence  could  be                 
  different and it would then clarify that.                                    
                                                                               
  Ms. Otto agreed that this was a court rule and that it would                 
  provide greater  clarification.  There being  NO OBJECTIONS,                 
  Amendment #3 was adopted.                                                    
                                                                               
  Representative Navarre MOVED to delete  language on Page 17,                 
  Lines  26-28: "The  court may  not  grant a  new trial  to a                 
  defendant on the ground that  the jury's verdict is contrary                 
  to the weight of the evidence".  He stated that language was                 
  already included in Rule 33.                                                 
                                                                               
  Ms. Otto commented that the judge clearly has that authority                 
  now, and  would continue  to have  that authority  after the                 
  bill was  passed.   She  noted that  deleting that  language                 
  would not have a significant impact on the legislation.                      
                                                                               
  Representative  Martin pointed  out  that  the language  was                 
  within the text of Rule 33 and should remain in the proposed                 
  legislation.   Representative  Navarre stated  that the  new                 
  language was "narrowly"  defined.  He stressed  that removal                 
  of  that  language  would  not  have a  significant  impact.                 
  Representative Martin disagreed.                                             
                                                                               
  Co-Chair Hanley explained that the  addition of the language                 
  would create a slight policy change,  in that it would limit                 
  the time before  the jury meets.   Currently, that situation                 
  could be addressed before either the jury meets or after the                 
  verdict is provided.   Ms.  Otto agreed with  Representative                 
  Hanley.  She clarified that this would be a minor change and                 
  that it would  not affect the  contents; she added that  the                 
  Department of Law would support  the change.  Representative                 
  Martin OBJECTED to Amendment #3.                                             
                                                                               
  A roll call was taken on the MOTION to adopt Amendment #3.                   
                                                                               
       IN FAVOR:      Navarre,   Brown,   Grussendorf,  Kelly,                 
                      Kohring, Foster, Hanley                                  
       OPPOSED:       Therriault, Martin                                       
                                                                               
  Representatives Mulder and Parnell were  not present for the                 
  vote.                                                                        
                                                                               
  The MOTION PASSED (7-2).                                                     
                                                                               
  Representative Navarre MOVED to  report CS HB 201  (FIN) out                 
                                                                               
                                3                                              
                                                                               
                                                                               
  of Committee  with individual  recommendations and with  the                 
  accompanying fiscal notes.                                                   
                                                                               
  CS  HB 201  (FIN) was reported  out of Committee  with a "do                 
  pass"  recommendation  and  with zero  fiscal  notes  by the                 
  Alaska Court System,  the Department  of Law dated  2/27/95,                 
  the Department of Corrections dated  2/27/95, the Department                 
  of Public Safety dated 2/27/95 and  two by the Department of                 
  Administration dated 2/27/95.