Legislature(2011 - 2012)CAPITOL 120
02/27/2012 01:00 PM House JUDICIARY
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB221 | |
| HB278 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| *+ | HB 278 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| += | HB 221 | TELECONFERENCED | |
HB 278 - SEX OFFENDER PROBATION CONDITIONS
1:21:40 PM
VICE CHAIR THOMPSON announced that the final order of business
would be HOUSE BILL NO. 278, "An Act allowing as a condition of
probation for a defendant convicted of certain sex offenses a
prohibition against the defendant's residing at a residence
where outdoor recreational equipment suitable for use by
children under 16 years of age is located on the property."
1:22:12 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG moved to adopt the proposed committee
substitute (CS) for HB 278, Version 27-LS1197\M, Gardner,
2/23/12, as the working document.
REPRESENTATIVE PRUITT objected for the purpose of discussion.
1:22:35 PM
REPRESENTATIVE PETE PETERSEN, Alaska State Legislature, sponsor,
explained that by altering the statute pertaining to conditions
of probation - AS 12.55.100 - HB 278 would provide the court
with the discretionary authority to set, as an additional
condition of probation for those convicted of certain sex
offenses, a prohibition pertaining to outdoor recreational
equipment suitable for use by children under 16 years of age.
This bill was engendered by a situation [that occurred in
Anchorage] in which a man sexually abused three children after
luring them onto his property with such equipment. The intent
of HB 278 is to prevent such situations from occurring.
According to some national statistics from the Center for Sex
Offender Management (CSOM) - [some of which are] included in
members' packets - one in four girls and one in seven boys have
been sexually assaulted; 67 percent of all people who've been
sexually assaulted are children 17 years of age and younger; 86
percent of all children who are sexually assaulted are female;
previously-convicted perpetrators are much more likely to
reoffend; and child molesters - over a four- to five-year period
- have a recidivism rate of 12.7 percent. Sex offenders - as a
group - are very heterogeneous, and so it's important to treat
each case uniquely and individually, he remarked, indicating
that HB 278 would provide for just that type of treatment,
giving Alaska courts another tool with which to tailor a sex
offender's probation. Again, the bill would only apply in
situations involving certain sex offenses, and the proposed
additional condition of probation would be discretionary, rather
than mandatory. House Bill 278, he relayed in conclusion, is
supported by Victims for Justice (VFJ), the Alaska Peace
Officers Association (APOA), and the Alaska Association of
Chiefs of Police, Inc. (AACOP).
VICE CHAIR THOMPSON said he supports the concept of HB 278, but
remarked that the bill itself seems pretty broad.
1:26:30 PM
MONICA SOUTHWORTH, Staff, Representative Pete Petersen, Alaska
State Legislature, on behalf of the sponsor, Representative
Petersen, in response to questions, offered her understanding
that no other state has a condition of probation like the one
HB 278 is proposing, but pointed out that some of Alaska's
existing conditions of probation already address the private
property of certain convicted sex offenders; for example, there
are conditions pertaining to [residing on property near school
grounds,] to possessing or using a computer, and to using or
creating an Internet site.
VICE CHAIR THOMPSON questioned whether snow machines or
basketballs would qualify as "outdoor recreational equipment"
for purposes of the bill.
MS. SOUTHWORTH said, "I suppose."
VICE CHAIR THOMPSON again remarked on the seeming broadness of
the bill.
REPRESENTATIVE PRUITT expressed concern that such broadness
could potentially violate the constitutional rights of convicted
sex offenders.
REPRESENTATIVE PETERSEN offered his belief that by applying only
to the behavior of installing outdoor recreational equipment on
one's property or at one's residence - rather than to the
behavior of residing at a residence where such equipment is
located - Version M would address such concerns.
REPRESENTATIVE LYNN characterized the intent of the bill as
good, but questioned whether the court already has the authority
to provide for such a condition of probation.
REPRESENTATIVE PETERSEN offered his belief that the court does
have that authority now. However, specifying it in statute
would ensure that the court itself knows it has that authority,
particularly in light of the aforementioned Anchorage situation.
In response to other questions, he ventured that if a convicted
sex offender already had such equipment on his/her property or
at his/her residence, then, depending on the specific facts of
the case, the court could order the person to dismantle the
equipment, or to relocate, or to ask the actual property owner
to dismantle the equipment, as a condition of probation.
VICE CHAIR THOMPSON questioned whether such would constitute a
taking by the state.
REPRESENTATIVE PETERSEN said he didn't know. In response to
other questions, he indicated that the bill's proposed
prohibition would only apply while the convicted sex offender is
on probation; and reiterated that depending on the specific
facts of the case, a convicted sex offender could be ordered to
relocate or to [work with] the actual property owner regarding
installing/dismantling such equipment.
1:35:59 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG expressed a preference for the original
version of the bill, and suggested, therefore, that his motion
to adopt Version M as the work draft be tabled.
The committee took a brief at-ease.
REPRESENTATIVE PRUITT removed his objection to the motion to
adopt Version M as the work draft.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG made a motion to table his motion to
adopt proposed committee substitute (CS) for HB 278, Version 27-
LS1197\M, Gardner, 2/23/12, as the work draft. There being no
objection, it was so ordered.
1:39:21 PM
JEFFREY A. MITTMAN, Executive Director, American Civil Liberties
Union of Alaska (ACLU of Alaska), after mentioning that he'd
provided written testimony detailing the ACLU of Alaska's
concerns with HB 278, pointed out that a convicted sex
offender's inability to find housing once released from prison
can lead to him/her reoffending. He suggested, therefore, that
HB 278 be changed such that the proposed condition of probation
would instead be a prohibition on "creating" an attraction for
children, rather than a prohibition on either "residing" or
"installing".
1:41:11 PM
CARMEN GUTIERREZ, Deputy Commissioner, Office of the
Commissioner - Anchorage, Department of Corrections (DOC) -
after briefly describing how the DOC currently treats those
convicted of sex offenses against children under its sex
offender containment model, and providing some statistics
regarding the resulting recidivism rates - explained that
research indicates that HB 278 would not provide Alaska's
probation officers with a useful tool. She, too, noted that a
convicted sex offender's inability to find housing once he/she
is released from prison can lead to him/her reoffending, and
that the court already has the authority to provide for special
conditions of probation such as the one proposed by the bill
regarding outdoor recreational equipment. She added that
probation officers, if they find anything inappropriate at a
probationer's home, already have the authority to require
him/her to change his/her living situation.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG questioned the constitutionality of
existing AS 12.55.100(e)(2)(A)-(C).
MR. MITTMAN and MS. GUTIERREZ agreed to research that issue
further.
MS. GUTIERREZ, in response to another question, reiterated that
a convicted sex offender's inability to find housing once he/she
is released from prison can lead to him/her reoffending.
1:54:08 PM
NANCY MEADE, General Counsel, Administrative Staff, Office of
the Administrative Director, Alaska Court System (ACS), said
that the ACS has no position on HB 278. She, too, noted that
the court already has the authority to provide for special
conditions of probation when they are reasonably related to the
initial offense, adding that it's the DOC that makes
recommendations regarding what conditions ought to be imposed.
1:55:21 PM
SUSAN SULLIVAN, Executive Director, Victims for Justice (VFJ),
said that the board of directors of the VFJ shares the sponsor's
concern for victims and potential victims of pedophiles, and
believes HB 278's proposed condition of probation to be
reasonable, not burdensome, particularly given its discretionary
nature.
1:56:52 PM
TRACEY WOLLENBERG, Deputy Public Defender, Appellate Division,
Central Office, Public Defender Agency (PDA), Department of
Administration (DOA), expressed concern that the language of
HB 278's proposed discretionary condition of probation is over-
broad and vague, and thus could leave a convicted sex offender
out on probation without any housing options. For example, the
term, "outdoor recreation equipment" is not yet defined in the
bill, and so could refer to a broad range of items commonly
found in people's homes, and the word, "property" could refer to
an apartment building, over which a tenant who is a convicted
sex offender would have no control. Convicted sex offenders out
on probation are already severely limited with regard to where
they can live, and HB 278 would only increase those limitations
and perhaps create more problems than it would solve. The
perceived problem, she posited, can already be addressed without
the bill, because the court has the authority to impose
conditions of probation that are reasonably related to the
initial offense. In conclusion, she, too, agreed to research
the constitutionality of existing AS 12.55.100(e)(2)(A)-(C).
REPRESENTATIVE PETERSEN, in response to comments, indicated that
he would continue to work on addressing the concerns raised.
VICE CHAIR THOMPSON relayed that HB 278 would be held over [with
the motion to adopt Version M as the work draft having been
tabled].
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| HB221-ACS-TRC-2-24-2012.pdf |
HJUD 2/27/2012 1:00:00 PM |
HB 221 |
| HB 278 Hearing Request Memo.pdf |
HJUD 2/27/2012 1:00:00 PM |
HB 278 |
| HB 278 Sponsor Statement.pdf |
HJUD 2/27/2012 1:00:00 PM |
HB 278 |
| HB0278A.pdf |
HJUD 2/27/2012 1:00:00 PM |
HB 278 |
| HB278 Letter - Victims for Justice.pdf |
HJUD 2/27/2012 1:00:00 PM |
HB 278 |
| HB278-LAW-CRIM-02-23-12.pdf |
HJUD 2/27/2012 1:00:00 PM |
HB 278 |
| HB 278 AkDOC 2010 Sex Offender Stats.pdf |
HJUD 2/27/2012 1:00:00 PM |
HB 278 |
| HB 278-DOC-OC-02-25-12.pdf |
HJUD 2/27/2012 1:00:00 PM |
HB 278 |
| HB 278 AkDOC 2009 Sex Offender Stats.pdf |
HJUD 2/27/2012 1:00:00 PM |
HB 278 |
| HB 278 CSOM Understanding Sex Offenders.pdf |
HJUD 2/27/2012 1:00:00 PM |
HB 278 |