Legislature(2011 - 2012)BUTROVICH 205
02/03/2011 09:00 AM Senate STATE AFFAIRS
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| SB7 | |
| SB30 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| *+ | SB 7 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | SB 30 | TELECONFERENCED | |
SB 30-RETURN OF SEIZED PROPERTY
10:01:15 AM
CHAIR WIELECHOWSKI announced consideration of SB 30.
SENATOR FRED DYSON, sponsor of SB 30, said the bill is about
restorative justice. Last year an identical bill, SB 297, made
it through the Judiciary Committee but no further. He said SB 30
is designed to further enhance the process of returning property
to victims whose property has been seized as a result of a
crime. In AS 12.36.020, the legislature added a separate
paragraph stating that if commercial fishing nets have been
stolen, those need to be returned right away. He knows of a
custom boat builder who was building a $300,000 boat, and one
night $40,000 worth of electronics disappeared. The builder got
about two-thirds back through visiting pawnshops and Craigslist,
but the police took it as evidence and he had to repurchase
$40,000 worth of gear. To avoid this situation, he said, some
people don't report the theft of equipment; instead, they
repossess it themselves.
10:05:19 AM
CHUCK KOPP, Staff to Senator Fred Dyson, said SB 30 gives
property owners the right to request a hearing for the return of
their property from police custody, and also requires that the
hearing request be submitted to the court. The court may order
return of the property upon satisfactory proof of ownership. As
the law changes, the agency could be in a position to show the
court that they can or cannot have the property returned. He
further explained that SB 30 provides the court may impose
reasonable conditions on an owner reclaiming property. Police
are often cast in the role of advocates for business owners, and
would like to return property to the owner as soon as possible,
but the defense may resist for various reasons. The court may
say you can use the property, but not lease or sell it. This
right of hearing for property owners is not currently provided
in law, which imposes a heavy burden on victims. Mr. Kopp added
that SB 30 is supported by the Alaska Peace Officers Association
and the Office of Victims Rights, and that the intent is not to
jeopardize prosecutions, but to make sure that evidence is only
held as long as absolutely necessary.
10:10:28 AM
CHAIR WIELECHOWSKI brought up the case in the Mat-Su Valley
where dogs were seized and are currently in custody, and asked
if the owner in that case could request return of the dogs.
MR. KOPP responded that under SB 30, the owner could request
return of the dogs, but he did not believe a judge would allow
them to be returned. In that case, the judge would probably
calendar a hearing after the trial date.
CHAIR WIELECHOWSKI asked what would be the standard for a judge
analyzing cases.
MR. KOPP replied that the court often makes determinations by
talking to both counsel and looking at the weight of evidence;
nothing in SB 30 prevents the court from making individual
determinations.
CHAIR WIELECHOWSKI noted that currently a person can file a
civil lawsuit requesting return of property, and asked what SB
30 changes.
MR. KOPP said an owner may request return of his property
without filing a lawsuit, and the court may impose reasonable
conditions on an order claiming property under this section.
CHAIR WIELECHOWSKI asked what agency would be involved.
MR. KOPP answered any agency which is responsible for the
enforcement or the prosecution of the law, such as state
troopers or municipal police, and the Department of Law.
CHAIR WIELECHOWSKI asked if the DOL would be required to go to
court.
MR. KOPP explained that the DOL would be required to file the
request for a hearing, and court could calendar the hearing at
its discretion.
CHAIR WIELECHOWSKI asked why SB 30 has an undetermined fiscal
note.
10:15:48 AM
MR. KOPP replied that the fiscal note is undetermined at
present, because the Department of Law doesn't know how many
people will request hearings; however, they do not expect a rush
of hearing requests.
CHAIR WIELECHOWSKI opened public testimony.
VICTOR KESTER, Executive Director, Office of Victims Rights
(OVR), testified in support of SB 30. The OVR believes SB 30
provides an important mechanism for property owners, because
often property crime victims have to wait months if not years
for return of their property. SB 30 would allow a victim to
request a hearing before a judge, and work with others to
determine the best interests of justice. Mr. Kester noted that
the OVR believes in the principle of restorative justice, and
said that SB 30 appropriately balances the interests of those
involved.
10:19:15 AM
CHAIR WIELECHOWSKI asked if anyone was present from the Alaska
State Troopers or the Court System.
RODNEY DIAL, Lieutenant, Alaska State Troopers, Department of
Public Safety (DPS), said the DPS is officially neutral on SB
30, and that the standard practice is to return property as
quickly as possible. Sometimes ownership is contested, so in
that case a court hearing would be good thing. He has supervised
evidence facilities and can't think of a case where someone has
needed property back immediately and did not receive it; they
always try to find means to make that happen, such as
photographing property.
CHAIR WIELECHOWSKI asked how many cases involve taking
possession of evidence.
LIEUTENANT DIAL replied that most cases result in evidence being
taken in some manner; maybe 10,000 cases per year, statewide,
result in property being seized and put into facilities. The
goal is always to get the property returned as soon as possible.
In some cases, the property is forfeited to the state, or
destroyed because it is contraband. He further stated that he
has supervised evidence facilities in Southeast Alaska for six
years, and can't remember a case where he was not able to
quickly get critical equipment or property returned to an owner.
CHAIR WIELECHOWSKI stated one concern is that, if you have
10,000 cases where evidence is seized, and if even ten percent
of people ask for hearings, there is potential for thousands of
cases going to court.
LIEUTENANT DIAL said the request would probably go through him,
as a facilities manager, and he would probably call the district
attorney to resolve the problem; if SB 30 passed, he would do
the same thing, and the DA's office would have to determine if
it wanted to request a hearing or return the evidence. He would
not expect the request for a court hearing to be made in most
cases.
CHAIR WIELECHOWSKI asked what kind of evidence is typically
seized.
LIEUTENANT DIAL answered that the vast majority is physical
evidence, such as recordings and photos. In a property crime
they would seize stolen property that they recover. If it is
stolen property, they would prefer to retain the item for trial,
and most people agree.
CHAIR WIELECHOWSKI asked if he was aware of cases where people
were forced to file a civil suit.
LIEUTENANT DIAL replied that in 20 years he has not seen that.
CHAIR WIELECHOWSKI asked if it was a problem in other
jurisdictions.
LIEUTENANT DIAL said he has been stationed at every geographic
location in the state and has not seen a problem, because the
policy is always to return evidence as soon as possible.
10:27:44 AM
SENATOR GIESSEL asked him to define "as soon as possible."
LIEUTENANT DIAL said the idea is to return the property
immediately. There are cases where it's possible to photograph
the property on scene and return it right away; in more complex
cases, such as felony cases, it can be a matter of days.
10:28:46 AM
CHAIR WIELECHOWSKI announced he would hold SB 30 for further
consideration.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| SB 7 Sponsor Statement Rev. 1-26-2011.pdf |
SSTA 2/3/2011 9:00:00 AM |
Felons' Right to Vote or Be Jurors SB 7 |
| SB 7 Supporting Document - ACLU Model Testimony.pdf |
SSTA 2/3/2011 9:00:00 AM |
Felons' Right to Vote or Be Jurors SB 7 |
| SB 7 Supporting Document - NCSL Legisbrief - Felon Voting Rights.pdf |
SSTA 2/3/2011 9:00:00 AM |
Felons' Right to Vote or Be Jurors SB 7 |
| SB 7 Supporting Document -The Sentencing Project - US Senate.pdf |
SSTA 2/3/2011 9:00:00 AM |
Felons' Right to Vote or Be Jurors SB 7 |
| SB 7 Sectional Summary 27-LS0083A.pdf |
SSTA 2/3/2011 9:00:00 AM |
Felons' Right to Vote or Be Jurors SB 7 |
| SB 30 Fiscal Note (Law).pdf |
SSTA 2/3/2011 9:00:00 AM |
Return of Seized Property SB 30 |
| SB 30 Sponsor Statement.pdf |
HJUD 2/13/2012 1:00:00 PM SSTA 2/3/2011 9:00:00 AM |
Return of Seized Property SB 30 |
| SB 7 Fiscal Note (DOE).pdf |
SSTA 2/3/2011 9:00:00 AM |
Felons' Right to Vote or Be Jurors SB 7 |
| SB 30 Sectional Analysis.pdf |
HJUD 2/13/2012 1:00:00 PM SSTA 2/3/2011 9:00:00 AM |
Return of Seized Property SB 30 |
| SB 30 Senator Dyson Notes.pdf |
SSTA 2/3/2011 9:00:00 AM |
Return of Seized Property SB 30 |
| SB 30 Supporting Document - APOA.pdf |
SSTA 2/3/2011 9:00:00 AM |
Return of Seized Property SB 30 |
| SB 30 Supporting Document - Office of Victim's Rights.pdf |
SSTA 2/3/2011 9:00:00 AM |
Return of Seized Property SB 30 |
| SB 7 Statement Support ACLU 2011 02 02.pdf |
SSTA 2/3/2011 9:00:00 AM |
Felons' Right to Vote or Be Jurors SB 7 |
| SB 7 Corrections Dept Processing Felons.pdf |
SSTA 2/3/2011 9:00:00 AM |
Felons' Right to Vote or Be Jurors SB 7 |
| SB 7 NAACP Ltr of Support 2-3-2011.pdf |
SSTA 2/3/2011 9:00:00 AM |
SB 7 |
| SB 7 Supporting Document - NCSL State Survey Permanent Disenfranchisment Feb 2011.pdf |
SSTA 2/3/2011 9:00:00 AM |
SB 7 |
| SB 7 Supporting Document - NCSL State Survey of Voting Rights Feb 2011.pdf |
SSTA 2/3/2011 9:00:00 AM |
SB 7 |