Legislature(2013 - 2014)CAPITOL 120
04/14/2014 01:00 PM House JUDICIARY
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB370 | |
| HB315 | |
| SB173 | |
| SB128 | |
| SB170 | |
| HB370 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | HB 315 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | SB 170 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | HB 370 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | SB 173 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | SB 128 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | SCR 2 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | HB 254 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
HB 315-JURY NULLIFICATION
2:06:02 PM
CHAIR KELLER announced that the next order of business would be
HOUSE BILL NO. 315, "An Act relating to juries in criminal
cases; and providing for an effective date."
2:06:26 PM
CHAIR KELLER opened public testimony.
2:07:04 PM
PAMELA GOODE, Delta Junction, informed the committee she was
representing herself as a private citizen. She stated her
support for HB 315 with the inclusion of the following
amendments [to HB 315, Version 28-LS1467\U, on page 1, line 14,
section 1, (c)]:
delete "Notwithstanding any other law;" add "No facts
tried by the jury shall be otherwise reexamined in any
court of the United States, according to the rules of
the common law."
MS. GOODE said with the aforementioned changes she supported the
bill. The bill is necessary for the restoration of justice
because currently there is bureaucratic code that oversteps
statute, statutes that overstep the U.S. Constitution, and
judges who have forgotten their proper lawful authority. She
gave an example of a person who committed a misdemeanor and had
to pay a fine. Ms. Goode opined that a jury of the
misdemeanant's peers would have determined that "he did nothing
wrong."
2:10:27 PM
RICHARD SVOBODNY, Deputy Attorney General, Central Office,
Criminal Division, Department of Law, provided a brief history
of his experience with racial prejudice 40 years ago. He
related current statistics that show over 100 American Indians
have been executed for murdering Caucasians, and the number of
Caucasians who have been executed for murdering American Indians
- in the entire history of the U.S. - is zero. He said, "That
is jury nullification." Mr. Svobodny turned to the procedural
problems associated with the bill and cautioned that if the bill
passes, the effect would be that the rules of evidence are
eliminated if the accused is convicted, and the trial moves to
jury nullification. He said, "Rules of evidence really don't
apply, [and] that's a change not in one court rule, but in all
the rules of evidence." He pointed out that although it is not
specified by the caption of the bill, this change would require
a two-thirds majority vote. Also, the bill changes a number of
rules of criminal procedure, but is not a suspension of rules.
The bill directs that after deliberation, if the jury finds a
person guilty, there is a "switch to whether that was just or
unjust," but the bill is silent on situations such as a hung
jury on the issue of whether the verdict is just or unjust. He
characterized the proposed legislation as ambiguous in that
regard.
2:15:36 PM
MR. SVOBODNY further cautioned about unforeseen consequences;
for example, the vast majority of weapons offenses in Alaska are
prosecuted by the state, not the federal government, thus these
cases would most likely be moved from state court to federal
court, which is counterproductive to the state's efforts to stem
federal overreach. He informed the committee that DOL is
opposed to the bill.
CHAIR KELLER asked whether courts ever levy penalties, fines, or
sanctions against a juror for wrongdoing.
MR. SVOBODNY said yes and no. Jurors can receive sanctions if
they don't show up for jury duty, and the court could sanction
jury members if it had issued an order to not read a newspaper
and a juror disregarded the order. However, he was unaware of
an instance where a court has imposed sanctions on the jurors,
although misconduct by jurors has led to the retrial of a case.
Chair Keller clarified that he was asking about sanctions in
response to a juror's decision, and Mr. Svobodny said "No, ...
the jury's deliberative process is privileged from disclosure."
REPRESENTATIVE LYNN asked whether the principles of the bill are
connected with a recent confrontation in Nevada involving a
cattle rancher whose cattle were seized by the Bureau of Land
Management (BLM), U.S. Department of the Interior, after the
rancher lost two cases in court.
MR. SVOBODNY said misconduct on the part of the federal
government is more transparent than the activities of a jury,
where deliberations are generally confidential. It may be that
the rancher has a moral or just cause - or not - but that does
not nullify the law, which was made by the legislature. [The
bill] is really saying, "The people can ignore the law you
make."
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG stated he would provide to the
committee an article about someone convicted of murder and after
25 years in jail, it was recently determined that he was
innocent.
2:21:42 PM
SARALYN TABACHNICK, Executive Director, Aiding Women in Abuse
and Rape Emergencies, Inc. (AWARE), said that one of her
concerns about HB 315 is that a defendant could subpoena the
testimony of a victim's counselor, thereby disregarding the
statutory victim counselor privilege established in the Alaska
Statutes in 1992. She pointed out that the legislature recently
strengthened the confidentiality statute to include military
counselors. Ms. Tabachnick cautioned that the proposed bill
could have a tremendous impact on whether victims speak
confidentially to advocates. Another concern is that the Rape
Shield Statute [AS 12.45.045] would essentially be repealed, and
this is a statute that was recently expanded by the legislature.
2:23:14 PM
FRANK TURNEY informed the committee he is a jury activist. He
said he was in support of HB 315 "with amendments added"
[amendments not provided]. Mr. Turney agreed with others that
the bill as written leaves too much "wiggle room" and he
expressed his support for amendments that have been provided to
Representative Tammie Wilson. He informed the committee that
the freedoms of religion, speech, and assembly under common law
were established by the "William Penn file of jury acquittals."
Mr. Turney provided a short history of another instance of jury
nullification in 1735 that - he opined - led to the cherished
tradition of freedom of the press in America. He urged for the
committee to not rush to judgment in order to satisfy the
Department of Law, and read from a statement accredited to Judge
Weeks as follows:
You know, jurors don't have the right, but they've got
the power.
MR. TURNEY said having power gives a right, especially when
there is no victim. He further urged the committee to research
this matter. He spoke of his personal experience with juries
over 25 years and stressed that 26 states under the preamble of
free speech recognize jury nullification rights. He concluded
that when the U.S. Constitution was written "they dropped the
ball on jury rights."
2:27:27 PM
MARIA RENSEL said she was speaking for herself in favor of the
bill and "the amendments that were mentioned by [previous
speaker] Pam Goode." She stated that HB 315 is the first step
to restoring jury rights in Alaska, and expressed her belief
that jury nullification does not equal racism. Ms. Rensel
supported adding to the bill a statement "that the judges in
every state shall be bound by the Constitution" and referred to
her written comments that have been forwarded to the committee.
She spoke of her personal experience serving on a jury in
Fairbanks. Ms. Rensel said jury nullification rights began with
the Magna Carta and are also guaranteed by the U.S.
Constitution. Her experience on a jury led her to believe that
"we have been indoctrinated or educated out of our vote, out of
our rights." She provided a brief history of the jury's right
to judge laws as well as the facts, and questioned whether the
government is a government of the people or a government of the
lawyers. Ms. Rensel remarked:
Both the trial jury and the grand jury are the
people's everyday way of reining in governments at
every level. ... The only way that we can ... really
clean up encroachments by our local, state, and
federal governments is to be able to investigate
things and act on juries. ... The elections can only
ensure our democracy but it's really the jury's right
to nullify and judge the law as well as the facts that
will ensure our republic.
2:31:37 PM
JOHN BRADING read several short quotes from a book entitled
"Citizen's Rule Book," published by Whitten Printers, and from
an essay by Lysander Spooner dated 1850. He also referenced two
legal cases: State of Georgia v. Brailsford (1794) and United
States v. Dougherty, 1972.
MR. BRADING asked the committee to restore honor to "we the
people."
2:34:28 PM
ALYSSA WILLIAMS said she was representing herself and read from
a document [not provided]. She said, "Currently in Alaska, if
you are called to jury duty you are expected to forget or
forfeit this responsibility; you are thrown out for knowing that
you were responsible for judging not only the facts, but the
law." Ms. Williams stated that judges and prosecutors are
responsible to protect life, liberty, and property, and "should
not be allowed to sway convictions for their own benefit."
Constitutionality, not tyranny, should be applied in the courts.
Furthermore, the jury is to defend and justly convict the
individual and not protect the government or the law. Ms.
Williams concluded that HB 315 is needed and asked for the
committee's support of the bill.
2:36:30 PM
MARK W. ECK stressed to the committee that jurors are citizens
as are defendants and members of the committee "when they're not
in office." He said the bill would secure the rights of jurors.
When jurors are called to serve, potential jurors are asked if
they believe in the rights of jurors. If the answer is yes,
they are dismissed from the jury, which is "a violation of not
only our rights as jurors, but as people." He quoted from the
Fully Informed Jury Association as follows:
The primary function of the independent juror is not,
as many think, to dispense punishment to fellow
citizens accused of breaking various laws, but rather
to protect fellow citizens from tyrannical abuses of
power by government.
MR. ECK continued to explain that the jury is the final defense
from unjust laws that take away the natural rights of the
people. He said jury duty is an honor, not a chore, because one
puts himself/herself in the position of the defendant and
decides whether the defendant wronged another. However, a
defendant is given another tool of defense against an unjust law
or application of such, and under HB 315, the defendant would be
able to explain the rights of jury duty to the jury, in addition
to instruction from a government official, and the opportunity
is given to the prosecution to rebut the information given to
the jury. The citizens of Alaska need this bill to further
secure their liberty in today's uncertain times. He remarked:
By moving this bill forth, with the people's desired
amendments, you will be setting an example for the
rest of the country and will go down in history as
protectors of liberty and the rights of we the people
of the United States of America and the citizens of
Alaska.
2:39:19 PM
ALEX MOORE said he strongly supports the rights for jury
nullification because all Americans have constitutional rights.
He provided an example of a man who committed a traffic
violation to do what he thought was right. Mr. Moore said, "If
you are trying to remove these rights to have a conscience, and
decide what is wrong and right, then you're not really acting as
a citizen." He strongly urged for the passage of the bill.
[HB 315 was held over.]