Legislature(2003 - 2004)
04/06/2004 04:21 PM 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. 357(JUD)
"An Act relating to restitution; and providing for an
effective date."
This was the first hearing for this bill in the Senate Finance
Committee.
Co-Chair Wilken stated, sponsored by Representative Samuels,
"requires judges to order restitution in every criminal case where
a victim has suffered a financial loss. It ensures that offenders
are ordered to make realistic restitution payments within a
reasonable timeframe."
REPRESENTATIVE RALPH SAMUELS testified that in 1994 the legislature
passed, and voters approved a constitutional amendment giving crime
victims certain rights. Article 1, Section 24 of the Alaska
Constitution, he pointed out, lists the specific rights, including
the rights of restitution from the accused. He stated this bill
conforms statutes to the constitution.
Representative Samuels noted the bill changes court ordered
restitution from an optional order to a mandatory required order.
He relayed that some victims may prefer to not receive restitution,
such as a family member, or a victim of a violent crime wanting to
"get on with their life" and have no reminders of the crime. In
these events, he stated that the victim has the option to not
receive restitution, but under the provisions of this legislation,
the ability of the offender to pay restitution, would not be a
factor in determining whether the money is owed. He noted that most
crimes against property are committed by young male offenders, who
are in a stage of life in which they do not have significant assets
or income. However, he stressed that this does not remove liability
for those individuals once they are in a position to pay
restitution.
Representative Samuels explained that changes made to the bill by
the Senate Judiciary Committee clarified the accounting procedures
of the legislation.
Representative Samuels stated this legislation would not change the
process, but rather hold those in arrears accountable for payment.
Co-Chair Green referenced stipulations providing that when a person
is charged with a crime, restitution must be determined without
considering the suspect's ability to pay; however, after
conviction, the offender's ability to pay could be considered in
ordering restitution.
Representative Samuels explained this language would provide judges
the latitude to prevent a liable party from becoming bankrupt; in
which case he pointed out, repayment would never be received,
regardless of whether the liable party earned sufficient income in
the future.
Co-Chair Green clarified that the court may not reduce an order of
restitution but may change the payment schedule.
Senator Dyson remarked that Representative Samuels is attempting to
correct inadvertent omissions of Senator Dyson's when these
statutes were amended several years prior.
DIANE WENDLANDT, Chief Assistant Attorney, General, Statewide
Section Supervisor, Collections and Supports Section, Civil
Division Department of Law, testified via teleconference from an
offnet location to answer questions related to the collections
process. She described the Senate Judiciary Committee amendment to
the bill to require that restitution payments received by the court
be transferred to the Department of Law for distribution.
Co-Chair Green noted other programs in which the court is required
to order restitution, although accounting difficulties have arisen
in the link between the court and the receiving agency. She asked
if the provisions of this legislation would encounter the same
difficulties.
Ms. Wendlandt responded that efforts are underway to correct the
situation and that implementing this legislation should be
successful. She expressed this legislation reflects the theory that
money should never "be turned away". She spoke to the reluctance of
some victims to accept restitution, particularly if the offenders
are known to them, and also when living in smaller communities.
Senator Olson asked if any opposition to this bill has been voiced.
Representative Samuels answered none has been received and that the
public defender has not testified to this legislation.
Senator Olson asked if other states implement similar procedures.
Representative Samuels was unsure of any.
Senator Dyson interjected that at least 35 other states have
implemented some form of restorative or restitution method. He
emphasized his support of this bill.
Senator Dyson offered a motion to report the bill from Committee
with individual recommendations and accompanying fiscal note.
Without objection SCS CS HB 357(JUD) MOVED from Committee with
fiscal note #1 from the Department of Administration and fiscal
note #2 from the Department of Law, both in indeterminate amounts.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|