04/23/2024 03:00 PM House STATE AFFAIRS

                  HB 379-DUI DIVERSION PROGRAM                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
3:52:02 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR SHAW  announced that  the next order  of business  would be                                                               
HOUSE BILL NO. 379, "An  Act establishing the driving while under                                                               
the  influence diversion  program  for  eligible persons  charged                                                               
with driving while under the  influence; relating to judgment for                                                               
restitution;  relating  to   suspended  imposition  of  sentence;                                                               
relating  to records  kept by  the Department  of Administration;                                                               
relating to  operating a vehicle,  aircraft, or  watercraft while                                                               
under  the  influence  of an  alcoholic  beverage,  inhalant,  or                                                               
controlled   substance;  amending   Rule  9,   Alaska  Rules   of                                                               
Administration, and Rule 39, Alaska  Rules of Criminal Procedure;                                                               
and providing for an effective date."                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
3:52:31 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  MIKE PRAX,  Alaska  State  Legislature, as  prime                                                               
sponsor, presented HB 379.   He paraphrased the sponsor statement                                                               
[included  in  the  committee  packet],  which  read  as  follows                                                               
[original punctuation provided]:                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
     House  Bill  379  aims to  establish  a  DUI  Diversion                                                                    
     Program. Diversion  programs are intended to  provide a                                                                    
     framework to reduce  recidivism rates. By participating                                                                    
     in the  program and waiving certain  rights, successful                                                                    
     defendants may  avoid the most onerous  consequences of                                                                    
     a  DUI conviction,  such as  license suspensions,  jail                                                                    
     time,  and large  fines and  expensive insurance  rates                                                                    
     for  high-risk drivers.  The  prosecution also  obtains                                                                    
     benefits.   These   include   the  option   to   resume                                                                    
     prosecution  if  the  defendant  fails  to  follow  the                                                                    
     program's requirements  and a  significant streamlining                                                                    
     of  the prosecution  and  Alaska  Court System's  trial                                                                    
     caseload.                                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
     HB379 is modeled  after an Oregon program  set forth in                                                                    
     Oregon  Revised Statutes  §§ 813.200  to 813.270.  This                                                                    
     program  allows  first  DUI  offenders  in  simple  DUI                                                                    
     cases,  not  involving   other  charges  or  Commercial                                                                    
     Driver's  License (CDL)  issues, to  seek entry  into a                                                                    
     diversion  program.  If  they  complete  the  program's                                                                    
     requirements,  their DUI  conviction  is dismissed.  In                                                                    
     the  past,  various   district  attorney  offices  have                                                                    
     responded  that  they  have  the  discretion  to  offer                                                                    
     pretrial    diversion    in   DUI    cases.    Although                                                                    
     theoretically true, it rarely  happens from a practical                                                                    
     perspective.                                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
     To qualify  under the program set  by HB379, defendants                                                                    
     must meet  several criteria, applicable only  to first-                                                                    
     time offenders charged  with a simple DUI:  no prior or                                                                    
     pending DUI charges, no  other pending criminal charges                                                                    
     involved  in the  incident, no  pending  or (within  15                                                                    
     years)  prior DUI  diversion  programs,  not holding  a                                                                    
     CDL,  nor driving  commercial  motor  vehicles, at  the                                                                    
     time  of  the  incident,  and no  assault  or  homicide                                                                    
     charges involving the defendant's  operation of a motor                                                                    
     vehicle.                                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
     The  program requires  any defendant  eligible for  the                                                                    
     DUI  diversion program  to  file  a petition,  together                                                                    
     with a  $490 filing  fee, and  to request  admission to                                                                    
     the  program,  following   established  deadlines.  The                                                                    
     defendant must  then complete a screening  interview to                                                                    
     assess  any alcohol  or  substance  abuse problems  and                                                                    
     follow through with any  treatment program indicated by                                                                    
     the  screening interview.  They must  agree not  to use                                                                    
     alcoholic    beverages,   inhalants,    or   controlled                                                                    
     substances  during  the  program and  acknowledge  that                                                                    
     committing an  offense during  the program  will result                                                                    
     in a  violation of  the agreement.  It is  mandatory to                                                                    
     pay  attorney fees  and restitution  if ordered  by the                                                                    
     court.                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
     Alaska's  Therapeutic Courts  are  successful and  have                                                                    
     shown that rehabilitation  programs work. DUI Diversion                                                                    
     Programs   have  been   successful  in   other  states.                                                                    
     Implementing  a  similar  program in  our  state  would                                                                    
     bring significant  benefits. These programs  save court                                                                    
     resources   and  participants   have   an  avenue   for                                                                    
     addressing the root causes of the offense.                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
3:55:52 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR SHAW opened public testimony on HB 379.                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
3:56:05 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
WILLIAM  SATTERBERG,  representing  self,  testified  during  the                                                               
hearing on  HB 379 and provided  his background in law.   He said                                                               
that recently,  the amount of  driving under the  influence (DUI)                                                               
cases  has  become  apparent  along  with  other  cases  such  as                                                               
domestic abuse,  but DUI  cases are "tremendous."   He  noted 165                                                               
cases are  set to go to  trial next week in  Fairbanks, and there                                                               
are only  3 district court judges  to deal with these  cases.  He                                                               
opined that  the system is "jammed,"  and that of the  DUIs, most                                                               
are first-time offenders.   He related experiences  in Oregon and                                                               
that many first-time offenders never  offend again; they "get the                                                               
message."    He  offered  his   belief  that  the  statute  would                                                               
alleviate the  clogs in the  court system, the  district attorney                                                               
(DA) system,  and public defenders.   He stressed  the importance                                                               
of rehabilitation taking priority over  money.  He said he pushed                                                               
for  this statute  for over  four years  and that  he appreciated                                                               
Representative Prax bringing the legislation to the table.                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
4:03:01 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR SHAW,  after ascertaining  no one  else wished  to testify,                                                               
closed public testimony on HB 379.                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
4:03:11 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  PRAX   acknowledged  Mr.   Satterberg's  thorough                                                               
coverage of the proposed legislation.                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
4:03:32 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE CARPENTER  asked what would happen  to individuals                                                               
who  receive  a  second  DUI   but  have  already  completed  the                                                               
diversion program.                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  PRAX  answered  that  there would  be  a  harsher                                                               
sentence the second time.                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
4:04:11 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
ERIC  CORDERO,  Staff,  Representative Mike  Prax,  Alaska  State                                                               
Legislature, on  behalf of Representative Prax,  prime sponsor of                                                               
HB  379, explained  there  is a  limitation of  15  years; and  a                                                               
first-time  offender  cannot  be   a  participant  in  a  program                                                               
currently or a similar program in fifteen years.                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
4:05:20 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
JOHN  SKIDMORE,  Deputy   Attorney  General,  Criminal  Division,                                                               
Department of  Law, answered questions  during the hearing  on HB
.   He  addressed  Representative  Carpenter and  communicated                                                               
that  he could  refer to  Section 9  on page  9 of  the bill  for                                                               
clarification.   He  further expounded  on the  diversion program                                                               
and, having a second DUI, that  individual would still need to be                                                               
sentenced but  would not  be subject  to the  mandatory minimums.                                                               
He  noted bill  drafting  issues  and the  policy  call that  the                                                               
legislature may wish to make.                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE CARPENTER  summarized that the  mandatory minimums                                                               
would not apply to a first- or second-time DUI recipient.                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
MR.  SKIDMORE clarified  that after  successfully completing  the                                                               
program, the  mandatory minimum framework  does not apply  to the                                                               
individual.                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
4:07:36 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE STORY  asked whether  Mr. Skidmore  was suggesting                                                               
there  should  be  amendments  to   the  bill  to  reinstate  the                                                               
penalties and follow current statute.                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
MR.  SKIDMORE replied  yes, if  the legislature's  intent was  to                                                               
have  mandatory minimums  applied, then  there would  need to  be                                                               
amendments.                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
4:09:04 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  CARRICK  asked questions  of  Nancy  Meade.   She                                                               
expressed  confusion   over  the  mandatory  minimums,   and  the                                                               
situation when one  goes through a diversion  program but commits                                                               
a second DUI offense.                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
4:10:11 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
NANCY  MEADE, General  Counsel,  Alaska  Court System,  addressed                                                               
Representative  Carrick and  as  previously  stated, noted  there                                                               
were drafting issues  in the bill on page 9.   She suggested that                                                               
Mr.  Skidmore  could explain  the  wording  on  lines 9  and  10,                                                               
because where it fits was not "terribly clear."                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  CARRICK asked  the  bill sponsor  where the  $490                                                               
filing  fee came  from,  and she  noted the  up-front  cost of  a                                                               
mandatory minimum  first time DUI  being $1,800.   She questioned                                                               
the overall cost of the infraction.                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
4:12:54 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE PRAX  answered that the  body would have  to think                                                               
about whether that is a  significant enough barrier to discourage                                                               
people or  not.   He added  that it  was a  reasonable compromise                                                               
being the cost of a first-time DUI conviction.                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
4:13:54 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE CARPENTER  asked Mr. Skidmore whether  there would                                                               
be a  legal problem with  a higher  penalty for a  second offense                                                               
than if someone did not complete the diversion program.                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
MR. SKIDMORE  responded that was  an interesting question  and he                                                               
would pursue it.                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
4:16:20 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MS.  MEADE  added that  the  legislature  could write  a  statute                                                               
addressing a second DUI and mandatory minimums.                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
4:17:01 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE CARRICK  requested more information from  the bill                                                               
sponsor  on  other states  that  have  enacted something  similar                                                               
surrounding  a   DUI  diversion  program  and   the  requirements                                                               
involved.                                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE PRAX responded that he would research the data.                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
4:18:08 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  STORY  commented that  she  was  still trying  to                                                               
understand how  the program would  work and referred  to comments                                                               
from an  invited testifier.   She expressed her confusion  on how                                                               
the convictions work in relation to the diversion program.                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE PRAX deferred the inquiry to Ms. Meade.                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
4:19:15 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MS.  MEADE drew  attention  to the  word "shall"  on  page 11  in                                                               
reference to  first-time offenders.  The  prosecutor could object                                                               
or agree, then  the court would decide whether the  person was an                                                               
appropriate candidate for the program.   She further expounded on                                                               
how  the process  would  affect the  offender's  record within  a                                                               
timeline.                                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
4:21:39 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  CARPENTER  sought  clarity  on how  the  bill  is                                                               
currently drafted in reference to the word "shall".                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
MS.  MEADE pointed  out  on page  11, line  26,  that the  person                                                               
"shall" file the petition.  She  added that the verbiage could be                                                               
modified later.                                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
4:22:13 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  CARRICK expressed  her interest  in the  bill and                                                               
asked Ms.  Meade for an  example where the term  "suspended entry                                                               
of judgement" was used.                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
MS. MEADE  replied that  the suspended  entry of  judgement (SEJ)                                                               
disallows that type of resolution  for certain case types such as                                                               
violent ones that  would not be eligible by statute.   It is used                                                               
for drugs, theft, and a number of things, she said.                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
4:23:55 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  C.  JOHNSON  questioned whether  Alaska  had  the                                                               
bandwidth  or  capability, where  there  are  not many  treatment                                                               
programs, to be able to offer  such a program to the multitude of                                                               
people that would take advantage of it.                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
MS. MEADE clarified  that the bill allowed for  an extension, and                                                               
she referenced  page 16, line 16.   She offered a  scenario where                                                               
it could  be determined  after screening that  a person  does not                                                               
need  treatment.   She further  explained that  according to  the                                                               
bill,  the  individual must  follow  the  recommendations of  the                                                               
screener.   She  agreed  with  the statement  about  the lack  of                                                               
resources in the state.                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
4:28:21 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR SHAW,  considering the depth of  conversation, foresaw many                                                               
amendments  that the  committee  would work  through  at a  later                                                               
date.                                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
4:28:50 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE   PRAX   expressed   his   appreciation   of   the                                                               
perspective given from the invited testifiers.                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
4:29:03 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR SHAW announced that HB 379 was held over.