Legislature(2003 - 2004)
03/22/2004 08:04 AM Senate JUD
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HB 348-NOTICE TO CRIME VICTIMS
MS. KELLY HUBER, staff to Representative Bill Stoltze, sponsor
of HB 348, told members that this legislation will require law
enforcement officials and the prosecuting attorney to notify a
victim, upon first contact, about the Office of Victim Rights'
(OVR) ability to assist the victim with the legal process. HB
348 only applies to victims of felonies or class A misdemeanors
that are domestic violence crimes against a person. The
notification process is simple; it requires that the office name
and contact information be provided, which could be on a
business card or in a brochure. HB 348 is a straightforward bill
that passed the House unanimously.
CHAIR SEEKINS questioned whether the victim would sign a receipt
or statement proving that he or she was notified.
[SENATOR THERRIAULT arrived.]
MS. HUBER said the bill contains no enforcement provision but
that this same process works well in similar situations. Law
enforcement officials and the prosecuting attorney are already
aware of the need to notify victims of the OVR. She added,
"We're putting in a law to make sure that they know they need to
do it but we believe that there's a good working relationship
right now and it will be done."
CHAIR SEEKINS said he asked because, in the world of private
business, when someone has a right to receive something, the
business makes sure a receipt is on file. He wanted it on the
record that the legislature is not expecting that an
acknowledgement be kept in a permanent file.
SENATOR FRENCH maintained that it is easy to define when a
police officer first contacts a victim, which is usually when an
arrest takes place, but it is harder to define a prosecuting
attorney's first contact. He asked Ms. Huber about the sponsor's
intention and whether the other body discussed defining initial
contact.
MS. HUBER replied:
...I think there was some of that thought given to it
but that is why it's a simple contact information -
you don't have to go into any great detail on the
office or you can hand them a brochure. It can be as
simple as that. We're not asking for them to explain
the group or to define what they can do for a victim.
It's just a quick passing of information and so...it
can be as simple as handing this to them and that's it
and I think that that's how they're trying to
alleviate your concerns, it's just by the very basic
information to be passed to the victim.
SENATOR FRENCH expressed concern that the prosecutor and victim
often play phone tag; so exchanging information is not as simple
as using e-mail or having face-to-face contact.
MS. HUBER agreed the bill could require person-to-person
contact.
SENATOR FRENCH asked for time to give that some thought. He
noted:
I think you guys are doing the right thing here.
You're just trying to say look, early in the process
you should give them that information but, from a
prosecuting attorney's standpoint, I guess I have two
concerns. One, I can see it actually falling off on a
paralegal and two, frequently, the first time you have
contact with a person, it may be something as simple
as a note or a phone...."
MS. HUBER pointed out the language in the bill actually reads,
"...and from the prosecuting attorney assigned to the defense."
Therefore, it does not require that the notification be made at
first contact.
CHAIR SEEKINS interjected that language elsewhere in the bill
speaks to the requirement being satisfied if notification is
given at first contact.
MS. HUBER indicated the law enforcement officer has probably
already given notification.
SENATOR FRENCH asked if the requirement is either/or, regarding
a law enforcement officer and prosecuting attorney.
CHAIR SEEKINS said it applies to both; therefore the language is
redundant in that the requirement would be satisfied if the
investigating officer and the prosecuting attorney each give the
crime victim a brochure.
MS. HUBER indicated the notification can be given verbally. She
felt the intent is to make sure the two people who are most
prevalent in the case at the time notify the victim.
CHAIR SEEKINS suggested replacing "prosecuting attorney" with
"prosecuting attorney's office" to address Senator French's
concern.
SENATOR FRENCH indicated that the responsibility typically falls
on the district attorney to provide notification but if a
paralegal provides the notification, that's fine.
CHAIR SEEKINS said the intent is to make sure the victim is
aware of the OVR. He then remarked, "I just worry there, in
terms of construction, a little concerned, that we're saying
they can do this orally but we're saying it's satisfied if they
receive two brochures. So, what else would it take to satisfy
it?"
MS. HUBER responded that the bill also says "or written" and the
written material could be on a business card if no brochure was
available. She agreed the purpose of the legislation is to make
sure the victim knows of the OVR so that the OVR can help the
victim through the process. She added, "We're just trying to
make sure that happens early on, and that's the key here is that
sometimes they learn about it but they're too far into the
process that it doesn't help them as much as it could have."
SENATOR FRENCH related:
Mr. Chairman, I think Ms. Huber is exactly right. This
is basically trying to give them notification. There
is no sort of remedy under the bill.... No one's going
to get dinged for not doing it or they may get dinged
in a personnel interview but you're not going to get
called up in front of a judge and so I think the
intent is clear behind the bill and it's probably
written as clearly as you can write it given the
vagaries of human conduct.
CHAIR SEEKINS took public testimony.
MR. STEVE BRANCHFLOWER, Director of the Office of Victims'
Rights, stated support for HB 348 and said Ms. Huber outlined
the bill well.
LT. AL STOREY, Alaska State Troopers, Department of Public
Safety (DPS), told members that DPS supports the bill as
written. DPS does not believe it will place an extra burden on
officers as they already provide information on domestic
violence and crimes compensation to victims that fall in those
categories. If HB 348 is enacted, the new brochures will contain
information about the Violent Crimes Compensation Act.
With no further participants, CHAIR SEEKINS closed public
testimony.
SENATOR THERRIAULT moved HB 348 from committee with individual
recommendations and its attached fiscal note.
CHAIR SEEKINS announced that without objection, the motion
carried.
9:00 a.m.
HB 348-NOTICE TO CRIME VICTIMS
CHAIR SEEKINS notified members that a letter of intent was
attached to HB 348 and called a brief recess to give members a
chance to review it.
Upon reconvening, CHAIR SEEKINS specified that the letter of
intent was from the Chair of the House Judiciary Committee. He
read from that letter:
Section 2 of this act requires a victim's advocate to
include within brochures or other written material to
be given to certain crime victims information about
the Violent Crimes Compensation Board. It's the intent
of the House Judiciary Committee that this requirement
applies only to brochures or other written material
printed after the effective date of this act. The
victim's advocate may continue to supply brochures or
other material printed before the effective date of
this act until those brochures or materials are
exhausted.
CHAIR SEEKINS asked for a motion to include the letter of intent
as part of the committee's record.
SENATOR THERRIAULT moved that the Senate Judiciary Committee
adopt and recommend for consideration on the Senate floor the
House letter of intent.
CHAIR SEEKINS noted that without objection, the motion carried.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|