Legislature(1995 - 1996)
05/05/1996 10:05 AM Senate FIN
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
SENATE CS FOR CS FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 204(JUD)
"An Act relating to the administrative revocation of a
minor's license to drive; creating criminal offenses of
minor operating a vehicle after consuming alcohol, a
minor's refusal to submit to chemical test, and driving
during the 24 hours after being cited for minor
operating a vehicle after consuming alcohol or refusal
to submit to chemical test; establishing penalties for
these offenses; relating to court ordered drug and alcohol
screening, evaluation, referral, and programs; relating
to implied consent to certain testing if operating a
motor vehicle, aircraft, or watercraft; relating t o a n
instrument's working tolerance in a chemical breath test;
relating to the authority of a court to impose a suspended
sentence after failure to complete a treatment program
upon conviction of felony driving while intoxicated o r
felony refusal to submit to a chemical test; relating to
the period of time a court may consider for determining
prior convictions in sentencing a person convicted of
felony driving while intoxicated or felony refusal to
submit to a chemical test; amending Rules 6 and 32.1,
Alaska Rules of Criminal Procedure, to allow the use of
hearsay evidence before a grand jury in a prosecution for
felony driving while intoxicated or felony refusal to
submit to a chemical test and to not require a
presentence report for a first felony driving while
intoxicated or first felony refusal to submit to a
chemical test; and providing for an effective date."
Anne Carpeneti, Assistant Attorney General was invited to
join the committee and testified on behalf of the bill. She
referred to the inexperience of children who drive combined
with the use of alcohol results in a deadly combination.
This bill would add three new statutes to Title 28 which
would provide that children would not be allowed to drive
after having had any amount of alcohol. A person who would
be arrested for probable cause for drinking and driving, if
they would refuse a breath test, they could also be cited
for that. It would require a peace officer that arrested a
child for drinking and driving or refusal to take a
breathalyzer must give them a warning that they would not be
allowed to drive within a 24-hour period after they had been
cited. The offenses are violations with the provision of
maximum of $1,000 fine plus community work service or
combination of both. Pending a child's conviction they
would be subject to administrative revocation of their
driver's license or privilege to drive. First offense would
be 90 days under the provisions adopted by the legislature
last year. She noted there were four clean-up issues to the
felony drunk driver statute passed last year. It would
allow computer printouts rather than certified copies of the
judgments of prior DWI convictions to be presented to the
Grand Jury.
(tape change to SF-96, #112, side 1)
Senator Sharp asked if this bill only applied to juveniles
and Ms. Carpeneti said the zero tolerance provisions in this
bill apply to all under 21. She said the felony clean-up
provision applied to all felony DWI cases. Senator Donley
asked her to explain the zero tolerance level. She said
this bill adopted zero tolerance level approach to drinking
and driving for juveniles. If a police officer at the time
of a stop has probable cause to believe the juvenile has
been drinking before driving the officer would take the
individual to the nearest police station for a breathalyzer.
If the juvenile blows any amount of alcohol in their blood
stream they will be cited for driving after drinking.
Senator Donley said he supported this bill and he is
convinced this is an important step. The medical evidence
is overwhelming that alcohol has a much greater impact on
the driving ability of young drivers than on experienced
drivers. In response to comments by Senator Rieger Ms.
Carpeneti said it was already illegal for juveniles to drink
but it was far more serious for them to drink and drive.
Senator Donley referred to the section dealing with the
suspended imposition of sentence. She said the court in
sentencing an individual for DWI is required to sentence the
person to be screened and may also provide in the court
order the treatment suggested by the screening agency,
including in-patient treatment. If the individual failed to
complete the treatment ordered the statute required the
sentencing judge to impose the entire remaining suspended
time of incarceration without discretion as to how much time
was appropriate. This bill would amend it to allow the
court to send the person back to treatment. Alcohol
treatment does not usually take on the first try and
sometimes it will take two or three times. This would allow
the court to send the individual back into treatment and
also gives the court the discretion of partial imposition of
sentence. Senator Donley felt this was a step backward.
Ms. Carpeneti said the sponsor of the bill is in support of
this specific provision and MADD supports the bill also.
Senator Rieger asked if other hearsay evidence is acceptable
to a grand jury and Ms. Carpeneti said generally hearsay
evidence is not admissable at a grand jury. This bill would
allow an exception for the use of computer print-outs for
prior records. She explained what "hearsay" evidence was
and that in usual circumstances a document must be
authenticated by an individual before it is admissible. She
referred to page 11 and the Breath Test Result Validity.
Under this test the court would accept the results without
having to make adjustments for margin of error or working
tolerances. Senator Rieger said .02 was a working threshold
but basically meant zero tolerance. Ms. Carpeneti said
children need to get the message that the tolerance level is
zero. She felt using the .02 would give children the
message that it was o.k. to drink if one did not exceed the
.02 level. Co-chairman Halford commented on section 17 and
Ms. Carpeneti said it was added on the floor. She said this
was not in the original bill and did not feel it was
necessary to have in. Co-chairman Halford said all
violations would be based on a statistical violation that
would be beyond the instruments tolerance to zero. Senator
Donley said most cases are not prosecuted under .12 because
it had been established there was a .02 discrepancy in
breathalyzers. It is difficult to obtain convictions if one
is below .12 rather than .1.
Laurie Otto, Criminal Division, Department of Law was
invited to join the committee. She concurred with Senator
Donley. She said most cases registering .11 were within the
limits and would not be prosecuted. What is needed to be
shown now in DWI cases was that the machine was working and
was calibrated correctly. Ms. Otto said that since it is
known the margin of error is above what the offense level is
it would be a logical amendment. This would make a better
statute. Senator Donley said he would move that as a
conceptual amendment. Discussion took place between
Senators Donley and Rieger regarding blood alcohol levels.
Co-chairman Halford asked if there was objection to the
conceptual amendment that applies the machine tolerance to
all statutes on the books currently except the new zero
tolerance for minors and there being no objection the
conceptual amendment was adopted. Senator Zharoff asked if
there would be a message to young people that it would not
be o.k. to drink and drive but it would be o.k. to drink at
home but Ms. Carpeneti said she did not feel that was the
message. There was still a prohibition on minor consuming.
Senator Sharp moved SCS CSHB 204(FIN) and without objection
it was reported out with individual recommendations and zero
fiscal notes from Department of Health and Social
Services/Alcohol SAFety Action Program; Department of Public
Safety/AST; Department of Public Safety/Driver Services;
Department of Law/Criminal; Department of
Administration/PDA; Department of Administration/OPA; and
the Alaska Court System.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|