Legislature(1993 - 1994)
01/21/1994 01:30 PM House FIN
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
SENATE BILL NO. 19
"An Act relating to the crime of conspiracy."
Representative Brown provided members with AMENDMENT 3 (copy
on file). Representative Brown MOVED to ADOPT AMENDMENT 3.
She expressed concern that an individual's "mere presence at
the time that two or more persons agreed to engage in or
cause the performance of a serious felony offense," not be
construed as agreement in the action.
Representative Brown MOVED to AMEND Amendment 3 by adding a
"." after "offense" and deleting the rest of Amendment 3.
There being NO OBJECTION, it was so ordered.
EDWARD MCNALLY, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, ANCHORAGE, DEPARTMENT OF
LAW testified via the teleconference network from Anchorage.
He asserted that Amendment 3 is unnecessary, redundant and
possibly confusing to existing law. He observed that in at
least three separate citations existing law states that mere
presence or knowledge of a crime is not sufficient for
prosecution.
DEAN GUANELI, CHIEF ASSISTANT ATTORNEY, DEPARTMENT OF LAW
suggested that if Amendment 3 is adopted that it be added to
subsection (a) on page 1.
Co-Chair Larson MOVED to AMEND Amendment 3 by adding
Amendment 3 to page 1, line 8 of CSSB 19 (FIN)am. There
being NO OBJECTION, it was so ordered.
Representative Parnell asked if the fact that mere presence
is not enough to convict a person under the statutes would
be part of the jury instructions. Mr. McNally believed
that juries would receive such instructions.
BRANT MCGEE, DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF PUBLIC ADVOCACY, DEPARTMENT
OF ADMINISTRATION testified via the teleconference network
from Anchorage. He pointed out that conspiracy is a new
offense. He maintained that the court may not apply the
same construction to a conspiracy statute that they do to a
homicide statute.
2
Mr. Guaneli asserted that a charge would not be made without
additional evidence. Representative Hanley restated that
intent and existing case law provides that mere presence is
not sufficient to bring a charge without an agreement,
intent and an overt action.
Representative Brown MOVED to ADOPT AMENDMENT 3, as AMENDED.
Representative Martin OBJECTED. A roll call vote was taken
on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Brown, Hanley, Parnell, MacLean, Larson
OPPOSED: Martin, Foster
Representatives Grussendorf, Hoffman, Navarre and Therriault
were not present for the vote.
The MOTION PASSED (5-2).
Representative Brown provided members with AMENDMENT 4 (copy
on file). She MOVED to ADOPT AMENDMENT 4. She explained
that the amendment would disallow a conspiracy comprised of
two persons if one of the persons was a law enforcement
official or a person working in cooperation with a law
enforcement official.
Mr. Guaneli expressed objection to Amendment 4. He asserted
that the amendment would limit prosecution. He observed
that an undercover law enforcement officer may be approached
in a narcotics sale by an individual who obtains the
narcotics from a third unseen individual. He pointed out
that individuals that work undercover with law enforcement
officers may commit crimes at a later time. Their previous
association with law enforcement officers may hinder
prosecution of an unrelated act of conspiracy.
Mr. McNally expressed concern that in a two person
conspiracy case if one defendant cooperates with law
enforcement the conspiracy charge would be nullified.
RANDY CRAWFORD, ALASKA STATE TROOPERS, DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC
SAFETY testified via the teleconference network from
Anchorage. He pointed out that most operations involving
undercover agents are recorded. He noted that it is typical
for persons being arrested to come forward with information
about a third person or about an additional crime involving
others.
Representative MOVED to ADOPT AMENDMENT 4. A roll call vote
was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Brown
OPPOSED: Foster, Hanley, Martin, Parnell, MacLean, Larson
3
Representatives Grussendorf, Hoffman, Navarre and Therriault
were not present for the vote.
The MOTION FAILED (1-6).
Representative Brown provided members with AMENDMENT 5 (copy
on file). She MOVED to ADOPT AMENDMENT 5. She explained
that the amendment would allow an individual involved in a
conspiracy to renounce their involvement.
Mr. Guaneli observed that the amendment would address how
the end of the conspiracy is calculated for purpose of the
five year statute of limitations. He did not think the
amendment was necessary. He asserted that language
contained in the legislation better clarifies the
calculation.
Representative Brown referred to subsection 3 of Amendment
5, "the defendant abandons the agreement by advising the
persons with whom the defendant agreed".
Mr. Guaneli observed that when an individual agrees to
engage in a criminal act a process is begun that can "take
on a life of its own," even if the individual renounces
their involvement. He added that it is difficult to prove a
renunciation that takes place in secret.
(Tape Change, HFC 94-10, Side 1)
Representative Brown WITHDREW AMENDMENT 5. There being NO
OBJECTION, it was so ordered.
Representative Martin MOVED to report HCS CSSB 19 (FIN) out
of Committee with individual recommendations and with the
accompanying fiscal notes. There being NO OBJECTION, it was
so ordered.
Co-Chair Larson noted that the bill would not be transmitted
until absent members have a chance to review the Committee's
proceedings on Monday, 1/24/94.
HCS CSSB 19 (FIN) was reported out of Committee with a "do
pass" recommendation and with four fiscal impact notes, two
by the Department of Administration, one by the Department
of Corrections and one by the Alaska Court System; and with
two zero fiscal notes, one by the Department of Law and one
by the Department of Public Safety.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|