Legislature(1999 - 2000)
04/20/2000 09:10 AM Senate FIN
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
CS FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 372(JUD)
"An Act relating to criminal sentencing and
restitution."
PETER TORKELSON, Staff to Representative Dyson stated the
goal of this legislation was for crimes involving an
individual against another, bur rather for arson where a
life is possibly threatened, or for property damage. He
added that in these instances the court may permit a victim
and offender to work out a sentence that meets the needs of
the victim and in the courts opinion, serves the interest
of justice. He continued that if for some reason the
defendant did not follow through on the agreed terms, the
standard, criminal penalty could be applied. He noted that
in other states these programs have proven to be very
effective.
Senator Leman asked what the process was for approaching
the community for input into a criminal's sentences, in
other words, who would be participating in this process.
Mr. Torkelson responded that in some cases a crime may not
have one specific victim, for example, a public building is
damaged in downtown Anchorage. He pointed out that the
victim in this case might be the Downtown Merchant's
Association and one of their representatives might suggest
that in lieu of a fine, that the defendant help restore
what damage has been inflicted on this piece of property.
Senator Leman asked that in an instance such as this one,
whether some type of advertisement might be appropriate so
other citizens are aware that this option is available.
Mr. Torkelson responded that as part of its intent, this
legislation allows for announcements about the program. He
remarked that literal advertisements would be up to a
judge's discretion.
REPRESENTATIVE DYSON stated that in essence, all justice
systems throughout history have aimed at the restoration of
the victim to a pre-offense condition. He pointed out that
now, a criminal makes payment to governmental entities
rather than to the victim. He noted that this legislation
would rectify this situation. He added that this
legislation would require an offender to work to repay the
community or the victim for their crime.
Co-Chair Parnell referred to Section 3 of the bill, which
allows for the court's ability to set aside a proposed
amount, unless the defendant at sentencing establishes by
clear and convincing evidence the inability to pay the
amount proposed. He pointed out that presently, a
defendant is required to show by a preponderance of the
evidence his or her inability to pay. He wondered why this
standard with this legislation would be changed from
preponderance, to clear and convincing.
Mr. Torkelson responded that the Department of Law felt as
though the proposed draft language was crafted in a double
negative manner and difficult to apply. He continued that
the language was then crafted to reflect the clear and
convincing standard that now exists.
Co-Chair Parnell made a motion to move HB 372 with
individual recommendations and a Department of Corrections
zero fiscal note from Committee. Hearing no objection, HB
372 was MOVED FROM COMMITTEE.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|