Legislature(1993 - 1994)
02/25/1993 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 SENATE BILL NO. 54(JUD):
"An Act relating to violations of laws by juveniles, to the
remedies for offenses and activities committed by juveniles
and to records of those offenses, and to incarceration of
juveniles who have been charged, prosecuted, or convicted as
adults; and providing for an effective date."
CO-CHAIR DRUE PEARCE announced that the Q-version of CSSB 54
dated 2-24-93 was being brought before the committee. She
pointed out seven fiscal notes came with the bill totaling
$318.2. Brant McGee, Director, Office of Public Advocacy,
joined the committee via teleconference from Anchorage.
SENATOR BERT SHARP moved for adoption CSSB 54 work draft
"Q". Hearing no objections, IT WAS SO ORDERED.
Co-chair Pearce invited Senator Rick Halford, sponsor of SB
54, to join the committee at the table. SENATOR HALFORD
said the changes in the Q-version were technical amendments.
The first major change is to provide for trial as adults by
16 and 17 year-olds who commit major felony crimes which are
essentially unclassified felonies or class A felonies. The
second change provides that if an individual had been
adjudged to be an adult or is convicted of a felony, he or
she will be tried as an adult. Thirdly, it provides for
availability of records to victims of delinquent crime, and
allows for mandatory restitution including the offender's
PFD.
Senator Halford stated that SB 54 affected several
departments. He said that DPS and DHSS show zero fiscal
notes. DOC shows a $10.0 fiscal note increasing over the
years. He felt that there should be a savings in DHSS even
though it may not be enforced. The largest fiscal notes are
from the Office of Public Advocacy (OPA), and the Public
Defender's Office (PDO). He said the Department of Law
showed a fiscal note. He felt the fiscal notes for OPA and
PDO could be reduced.
CO-CHAIR STEVE FRANK asked for specific crimes that are
covered under SB 54. Senator Halford outlined crimes that
were included in the bill. Co-chair Frank asked how many
juveniles would be effected by SB 54. JOHN SHEPHERD, aide
to Senator Halford, said that DOC anticipates an additional
10 long-term juveniles into the system each year and is
reflected in the fiscal note formula. DYFS anticipates 24
per year, DOL 25-30 cases a year. Senator Halford pointed
out that some of the cases would be waived up under existing
law. Mr. Shepherd said that between 10 and 20 juveniles are
waived up each year. Senator Halford pointed out that
juveniles unless they are waived are under DHSS not DOC and
can be held until a year or two after their eighteenth
birthday and not longer than their twentieth birthday.
SENATOR STEVE RIEGER asked if you were prosecuted as an
adult, and the charges are eventually lowered to a lesser
crime, the juvenile would go back into the juvenile system.
JACK CHENOWITH, Attorney, Legislative Legal Counsel and
author of SB 54, answered affirmatively. Senator Rieger
asked what second-degree misconduct involving a controlled
substance and what is kidnapping. Mr. Chenowith was not
able to define those crimes without referring to the
statute.
Senator Rieger asked if the repetitive nature of the crime
would effect 16-18 year olds. Mr. Chenowith said that SB 54
stated a minor 16 years of age or older, if charged with a
unclassified felony or a class A felony, would be charged as
an adult. Co-chair Pearce asked if 16 and 17 year old gang
members from another state could be captured if they had
been convicted on a lesser charge. Mr. Chenowith answered
negatively. He said they would had to have been convicted
of a felony. Senator Rieger asked for an explanation
solicitation to commit murder. Mr. Chenowith said he would
need a statute but essentially it was prompting another
individual to commit murder.
Senator Rieger directed attention to page 3, line 24, and
asked for an explanation. Mr. Chenowith said if a juvenile
is charged with an unclassified felony and other charges,
the felony causes the minor to treated as an adult.
Co-chief Pearce asked what records are sealed and who can
get to records that are not sealed. Senator Halford
understood that as a minor all records are sealed unless the
juvenile is tried in adult court. This would make it
difficult for an individual to sue and recover any losses.
Mr. Chenowith agreed that minor's records are sealed but if
a person can persuade a judge that he or she has a
legitimate interest, the records can be opened. He said
that in SB 54 a person who had a legitimate interest was
better defined.
Co-chair Pearce asked if SB 54 gave new responsibility to
parents of minors. Senator Halford said increasing the
liability of parents for actions of their minor children had
been considered. He said he was in support of increasing
parental liability but it should be combined with
legislation giving parents more control.
Co-chair Pearce directed attention to Co-chair Frank's
amendment
to CSSB 54 and invited Jack Chenowith to explain it. Mr.
Chenowith said the amendment he prepared that reversed the
presumption as to accessibility of records as to offenses
committed by minors 16 years of age and older. He cited the
change in amendment #1 by Senator Frank (copy on file), page
1, to be in Section 1. "unless the record is, by law, a
public record". This change makes an exception to the
public records law under which juvenile records are closed.
On page 2, changes to Section 8. amend CSSB 54 by making
"the records of a minor 16 years or older at the time of the
alleged offense and who was convicted or adjudicated a
delinquent for the commission of that offense," a public
record. On page 3 of amendment #1, he said the change said
that names and pictures of minors who are children in need
of aid are not available as public records. Names and
pictures of minors who were not 16 years of age or older at
the time of an alleged offense are not public record and not
available for inspection. Conversely, names and pictures of
minors 16 years of age or older are available for public
record.
Co-chair Frank felt that juveniles should be accountable for
their actions as well as adults and the public had the right
to know. Senator Rieger pointed out that at the end of page
3 of the amendment #1, the last sentence was not complete.
Senator Rieger directed attention to page of CSSB 54. He
asked if after 5 years records could be petitioned to be
closed. Mr. Chenowith stated that under current law there
was a mechanism in place by which criminal proceedings can
be sealed after a period of five years. In CSSB 54 that
stays in place except if the individual has not complied
with the orders of the court, then the record would not be
sealable. He reaffirmed that amendment #1 opened the record
of a minor 16 years or older at the time he/she was involved
in the alleged offense. SENATOR GEORGE JACKO asked if the
court records were public record before the minor was
convicted. Mr. Chenowith said that only the name and
picture would be public record before a conviction.
SENATOR TIM KELLY asked if minors were fingerprinted at the
time of arrest. Mr. Shepherd believed that minors were
fingerprinted but their fingerprints were not entered into
the system for tracking purposes unless they are 16 years or
older and have already been convicted.
Co-chair Pearce asked Brant McGee, Director, Office of
Public Advocacy, via teleconference, to respond to CSSB 54.
BRANT MCGEE stated that he had doubts about the fiscal notes
attached to the bill including the one for OPA and felt they
were contradictory. He said if prior testimony was true
that stated 10 percent of the felony crimes were committed
by juveniles, then the impact on DOL would be more than a
zero fiscal note. In respect to OPA's fiscal note, he
explained that CSSB 54 would cause more felony trials to
take place and felony trials were the most expensive. In
looking at numbers generated by Family and Youth Services,
FY92 under category 1A, it is stated that 28 of the 60 He
said that by changing whole categories of defense into adult
court cost would be increased for a number of other larger
categories of cases. He said the waiver provisions of the
statute were restricted to a small percentage of cases.
End SFC-93 #28, Side 2
Begin SFC-93 #30, Side 1
Co-chair Pearce invited Randall Hines, Associate
Coordinator, Division of Family Youth Services, Youth
Corrections Program, Department of Health & Social Services,
and Rick Barrier, Efficiency Analyst, Department of
Corrections, to join the committee at the table.
RICK BARRIER agreed that several set of numbers appeared in
the analysis for CSSB 54. He said that CSSB 54 would cause
the Department of Corrections to pick up additional inmates
even if the charge is dropped to a lesser offense and the
minor is returned to juvenile court. He said the fiscal
note does not reflect that fact. He said the long term
financial impact could be quite significant. In addition,
the time served for juveniles would be longer and that will
increases costs. This is a difficult to reflect on a fiscal
note. He said some would end up in an adult facility
anyway.
RONALD HINES offered statistics regarding waivers requested.
He said in FY91, there were eleven waivers requested and
five granted by the court. In FY92, ten were requested and
9 were granted. In FY87, 8 waivers were requested, and 15
waivers were requested in FY88 & FY89. Senator Rieger asked
by DHSS did not show a negative fiscal note. Mr. Hines said
the amount of referral that this group of offenders
represents is small compared to the caseload.
In answer to Co-chief Pearce, Senator Halford said he did
not remember if there were any recommendations about
juvenile offenders in the Commissioner's task force. In
understanding the fiscal notes, Senator Halford stated that
two things were happening. One was the transfer of
responsibility, and the other the change in length of the
sentencing. He felt that there had to be a subsequent
reduction in DHSS for any increase there was in DOC.
Senator Sharp pointed out that the juveniles considered were
serious and repeat offenders. He felt the protection of the
public would be served by CSSB 54. Costs incurred may come
earlier but would be offset by keeping the minor from
committing other offenses at the public's expense.
Co-chair Frank MOVED for adoption of amendment 1 dated
February 25 1993. Senator Rieger OBJECTED. Senator Rieger
was opposed to Section 9. in that protections usually
pertaining to minors did not apply just because the juvenile
was charged not convicted. Senator Rieger MOVED that an
amendment be made to amendment 1 by removing Section 9.
Co-chair Frank felt that if an individual was charged, the
public had a right to know and proposed that protection of
minors had gone too far. SENATOR GEORGE JACKO said he was
in favor of the amendment. He felt the individuals' names
and pictures should not be released to the public because of
the detrimental effects upon them and their families.
Senator Sharp confirmed that there was a small number of
juveniles waived for judication. Mr. Hines repeated that in
FY92 there were 10 requests made to the court to waive
juveniles into adult court and 9 were granted. Senator
Rieger asked what happened to the one minor that was not
waived. Mr. Hines said the department recognizes the
potential for humiliation for other family members if the
minors' name and pictures are released and was sensitive to
that fact.
Co-chair Pearce asked for a roll call vote on the adoption
of the amendment by Senator Rieger to amendment 1.
YEA: Rieger, Kelly, Jacko
NAY: Frank, Pearce, Sharp
The amendment FAILED to be adopted by a vote of 3 to 3.
Co-chair Pearce MOVED for adoption of amendment 1. Senator
Rieger OBJECTED. He voiced his objection to Section 9.
which removed the protection of public record prematurely
before a juvenile is convicted. A roll call vote was taken
on amendment 1.
YEA: Sharp, Kelly, Frank, Pearce
NAY: Jacko, Rieger
The amendment was ADOPTED by a vote of 4 to 2.
Recess 10:20am
Reconvene 10:25am
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|