Legislature(2021 - 2022)BUTROVICH 205
04/04/2022 01:30 PM Senate JUDICIARY
Note: the audio ![]()
and video ![]()
recordings are distinct records and are obtained from different sources. As such there may be key differences between the two. The audio recordings are captured by our records offices as the official record of the meeting and will have more accurate timestamps. Use the icons to switch between them.
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| SB189 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | SB 189 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 157 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
SB 189-CRIME OF SEX/HUMAN TRAFFICKING
1:37:29 PM
CHAIR HOLLAND announced the consideration of SENATE BILL NO. 189
"An Act relating to sex trafficking; establishing the crime of
patron of a victim of sex trafficking; relating to the crime of
human trafficking; relating to sentencing for sex trafficking
and patron of a victim of sex trafficking; establishing the
process for a vacatur of judgment for a conviction of
prostitution; and providing for an effective date."
CHAIR HOLLAND noted that this was the ninth hearing and a
committee substitute, Version I, was adopted. Amendments 1-17
were previously considered. He asked Senator Kiehl to reoffer
Amendment 8.
1:37:57 PM
SENATOR KIEHL moved to adopt Amendment 8, work order 32-
GS2029\I.17.
32-GS2029\I.17
Radford
3/30/22
AMENDMENT 8
OFFERED IN THE SENATE BY SENATOR KIEHL
TO: CSSB 189(JUD), Draft Version "I"
Page 1, line 5, following "substance;":
Insert "relating to the Council on Domestic
Violence and Sexual Assault;"
Page 22, following line 25:
Insert new bill sections to read:
"* Sec. 29. AS 18.66.010 is amended to read:
Sec. 18.66.010. Council on Domestic Violence and
Sexual Assault; purpose. There is established in the
Department of Public Safety the Council on Domestic
Violence and Sexual Assault. The purpose of the
council is to provide for planning and coordination of
services to victims of domestic violence, sex
trafficking, or sexual assault or to their families
and to perpetrators of domestic violence and sexual
assault and to provide for crisis intervention and
prevention programs.
* Sec. 30. AS 18.66.050 is amended to read:
Sec. 18.66.050. Duties of the council. The
council shall
(1) hire an executive director, and the
executive director may hire staff; the executive
director is in the exempt service under AS 39.25.110
and staff members are in the classified service under
AS 39.25.100;
(2) elect one of its members as presiding
officer;
(3) in consultation with authorities in the
field, develop, implement, maintain, and monitor
domestic violence, sexual assault, and crisis
intervention and prevention programs, including
educational programs, films, and school curricula on
the cause, prevention, and treatment of domestic
violence, sex trafficking, and sexual assault;
(4) coordinate services provided by the
Department of Law, the Department of Education and
Early Development, the Department of Public Safety,
the Department of Health and Social Services, the
Department of Corrections, and other state agencies
and community groups dealing with domestic violence,
sex trafficking, sexual assault, and crisis
intervention and prevention, and provide technical
assistance as requested by those state agencies and
community groups;
(5) develop and implement a standardized
data collection system on domestic violence, sex
trafficking, sexual assault, and crisis intervention
and prevention;
(6) conduct public hearings and studies on
issues relating to violence, including domestic
violence, sex trafficking, and sexual assault, and on
issues relating to the role of crisis intervention and
prevention;
(7) receive and dispense state and federal
money and award grants and contracts from
appropriations for the purpose to qualified local
community entities for domestic violence, sexual
assault, and crisis intervention and prevention
programs;
(8) oversee and audit domestic violence,
sexual assault, and crisis intervention and prevention
programs that receive money under this chapter;
(9) provide fiscal and technical assistance
to plan, organize, implement, and administer domestic
violence, sexual assault, and crisis intervention and
prevention programs;
(10) make an annual report to the governor
on the activities of the council, plans of the council
for new services and programs, and concerns of the
council, including recommendations for legislation
necessary to carry out the purposes of this chapter;
the council shall notify the legislature that the
report is available;
(11) adopt regulations in accordance with
AS 44.62 (Administrative Procedure Act) to carry out
the purposes of this chapter and to protect the
health, safety, well-being, and privacy of persons
receiving services financed with grants or contracts
under this chapter;
(12) consult with the Department of Health
and Social Services in the formulation of standards
and procedures for the delivery of services to victims
of domestic violence by health care facilities and
practitioners of healing arts and personnel in those
facilities as required in AS 18.66.300;
(13) consult with the Alaska Police
Standards Council and other police training programs
in the state to develop training programs regarding
domestic violence for police officers and for
correction, probation, and parole officers;
(14) consult with public employers, the
Alaska Supreme Court, school districts, and
prosecuting authorities who are required by
AS 18.66.300 - 18.66.310 to provide continuing
education courses in domestic violence to employees.
* Sec. 31. AS 18.66.060 is amended to read:
Sec. 18.66.060. Qualifications for grants and
contracts. A local community entity is qualified to
receive a grant or contract under this chapter if it
agrees to provide services approved by the council to
victims of domestic violence, sex trafficking, or
sexual assault or their families or to perpetrators of
domestic violence or sexual assault without regard to
ability to pay."
Renumber the following bill sections accordingly.
Page 23, following line 19:
Insert a new bill section to read:
"* Sec. 34. AS 18.66.990(2) is amended to read:
(2) "crisis intervention and prevention
program" means a community program that provides
information, education, counseling, and referral
services to individuals experiencing personal crisis
related to domestic violence, sex trafficking, or
sexual assault and to individuals in personal or
professional transition, excluding correctional half-
way houses, outpatient mental health programs, and
drug or alcohol rehabilitation programs;"
Renumber the following bill sections accordingly.
Page 29, line 19:
Delete "sec. 32"
Insert "sec. 36"
Page 29, line 26:
Delete "sec. 29"
Insert "sec. 32"
Page 29, line 27:
Delete "sec. 30"
Insert "sec. 33"
Page 29, line 29:
Delete "sec. 43"
Insert "sec. 47"
1:38:26 PM
CHAIR HOLLAND objected for discussion purposes.
1:38:34 PM
SENATOR KIEHL reminded the committee that Amendment 8 would add
the victims of sex trafficking to the duties of the Council on
Domestic Violence and Sexual Assault (CDVSA). He stated that he
had discussed the amendment with the council's executive
director. He said if Amendment 8 were to pass, CDVSA would
provide a fiscal note to identify the size and scope of victim
services needed and to identify any potential federal funds. He
suggested that the timing dovetails with the Governor's Council
on Human and Sex Trafficking. He directed attention to the 2013
State of Alaska Task Force on the Crimes of Human Trafficking,
Promoting Prostitution and Sex Trafficking recommendation that
CDVSA would be the right agency to take on this task.
1:40:40 PM
DIANE CASTO, Executive Director, Alaska Council on Domestic
Violence and Sexual Assault, Department of Public Safety (DPS),
Juneau, Alaska, stated that she was unsure of the impacts
Amendment 8 would have on the Council on Domestic Violence and
Sexual Assault (CDVSA). She wondered if the intent was for the
council to disperse funding to other agencies to provide
services or if CDVSA would take the lead to guide policies and
practices moving forward. She acknowledged the 2013 State of
Alaska Task Force on the Crimes of Human Trafficking, Promoting
Prostitution and Sex Trafficking report that identified CDVSA as
a potential agency to take on human and sex trafficking victims.
MS. CASTO related that she reached out to colleagues throughout
Alaska. She stated that sex trafficking is a federal crime,
although some crimes are state crimes. However, the services
that help victims reduce or manage their trauma and find jobs
would be provided by the state. She reviewed the past data
noting that currently, CDVSA serves 35 grantees, of which 26
offer shelter programs. The remaining grantees provide services,
including Child Advocacy Centers. She reminded members that sex
trafficking usually affects teenagers and young adults.
1:43:30 PM
MS. CASTO reported that in FY 2020, the council assisted with 30
cases involving victims of human or sex trafficking, which
represents a small fraction of CDVSA's overall services. For
example, CDVSA had 5,836 domestic violence, 1,226 sexual
assault, and 41 cases of human and sex trafficking, kidnapping,
and child pornography. Thus, the agency does not currently
handle significant numbers of human or sex trafficking cases.
She highlighted that many staff had received additional training
to handle sex trafficking victims, coordinating with the Federal
Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and other task forces working on
this issue. She summarized that human and sex trafficking is not
the council's primary role, but it dovetails with the duties and
goals of CDVSA. She expressed a willingness to carry out these
duties, but the legislature must indicate the expectations
explicitly.
1:45:11 PM
CHAIR HOLLAND noted that she mentioned that CDVSA provides
funding to other agencies for services to victims of domestic
violence and sexual assault.
MS. CASTO answered yes. She added that CDVSA provides funding to
35 agencies.
1:45:41 PM
SENATOR SHOWER asked whether Amendment 8 would require CDVSA to
request additional funding or staff.
MS. CASTO answered yes. She offered her view that no one has a
good idea of the number of sex trafficked victims. She suggested
that many sex trafficking victims are not reporting, and there
is insufficient data. She stated that some of the resources
needed for this population are different than those the council
provides for domestic violence and sexual assault victims. For
example, sex trafficked victims do not have housing, need
counseling, and must develop job skills to support themselves.
She noted that housing is typically the most expensive services,
so CDVSA does not provide much transitional housing.
SENATOR SHOWER stated that the fiscal impact is indeterminate.
He asked if CDVSA would provide these services or if some
funding would go to other agencies.
MS. CASTO agreed that the council would likely need to funnel
funds to other agencies. Thus, CDVSA must develop strong
relationships with corporations such as the Alaska Housing
Finance Corporation to coordinate and not duplicate efforts.
1:48:52 PM
SENATOR HUGHES said she was uncomfortable assigning this to
CDVSA since the council lacks staff and funding to take on
additional tasks. Further, she was unsure what the [Governor's
Council on Human and Sex Trafficking] would recommend. She asked
whether CDVSA serves on the council.
MS. CASTO answered no. She explained that CDVSA serves on the
Council on Missing and Murdered Indigenous Persons (MMIP).
However, Brenda Stanfill, [Executive Director of Alaska Network
on Domestic Violence and Sexual Assault], serves on the MMIP.
1:50:40 PM
SENATOR HUGHES agreed with Senator Kiehl but suggested that this
was premature. She indicated that CDVSA should participate with
the council, develop a plan, and report to the legislature with
a proposal. She reiterated her concern about adding duties to
CDVSA if they cannot carry them out.
1:51:37 PM
SENATOR KIEHL stated that he serves on that council. He pointed
out that it has been nine years since the previous task force
recommended changes, but no one has assigned the work. He
offered to report to the committee on any [Governor's Council on
Human and Sex Trafficking] recommendations.
1:52:24 PM
SENATOR HUGHES reiterated her concern about bypassing the
[Governor's Council on Human and Sex Trafficking] since the
legislature does not know what recommendations will come from
this new council. She suggested that perhaps adding assistance
for human and sex trafficking victims should be introduced as a
separate bill rather than to insert language in the crime bill.
CHAIR HOLLAND was unsure that passing Amendment 8 would mean
that CDVSA would violate the law by not taking action. He also
remarked that no one knows the extent of human and sex
trafficking in Alaska.
1:53:49 PM
SENATOR HUGHES directed attention to page 1, line 14 of
Amendment 8 to the 14 duties listed for the CDVSA. She
maintained that this was premature.
CHAIR HOLLAND pointed out that the 14 duties listed were ones
CDVSA currently provides for domestic violence and sexual abuse.
Amendment 18 would merely add sex trafficking to four of the 14
duties. He characterized Amendment 8 as a good fit.
1:55:04 PM
SENATOR SHOWER suggested making it clear in the legislative
intent that the committee does not intend to hold CDVSA
accountable until the Governor's Council on Human and Sex
Trafficking recommends actions.
1:55:36 PM
SENATOR HUGHES objected.
A roll call vote was taken. Senators Shower, Kiehl, and Holland
voted in favor of Amendment 8, and Senator Hughes voted against
it. Therefore, Amendment 8 was adopted by a 3:1 vote.
CHAIR HOLLAND stated that Amendment 8 was adopted on a vote of 3
yeas and 1 nay.
He asked Senator Kiehl to reoffer Amendment 17.
1:56:21 PM
SENATOR KIEHL moved to adopt Amendment 17, work order 32-
GS2029\I.18.
32-GS2029\I.18
Radford
3/29/22
AMENDMENT 17
OFFERED IN THE SENATE BY SENATOR KIEHL
TO: CSSB 189(JUD), Draft Version "I"
Page 5, lines 2 - 6:
Delete all material and insert:
"violates AS 11.41.365 and the victim is
(1) under 20 years of age; or
(2) in the legal custody of that person
[COMPELS OR INDUCES ANOTHER PERSON TO ENGAGE IN SEXUAL
CONDUCT, ADULT ENTERTAINMENT, OR LABOR IN THE STATE BY
FORCE OR THREAT OF FORCE AGAINST ANY PERSON, OR BY
DECEPTION]."
Page 5, lines 16 - 31:
Delete all material and insert:
"force or threat of force against any person [OBTAINS
A BENEFIT FROM THE COMMISSION OF HUMAN TRAFFICKING
UNDER AS 11.41.360, WITH RECKLESS DISREGARD THAT THE
BENEFIT IS A RESULT OF THE TRAFFICKING]."
Page 6, line 4, following "if":
Insert "(1) under circumstances not proscribed
under AS 11.41.340 - 11.41.355, and with the intent to
promote human trafficking, induces or causes another
person to engage in adult entertainment or labor by
(A) exposing or threatening to expose
confidential information, whether true or false, that
would subject a person to hatred, contempt, or
ridicule;
(B) destroying, concealing, or threatening
to destroy or conceal an actual or purported passport
or immigration document or another actual or purported
identification document of any person;
(C) threatening to report a person to a
government agency for the purpose of arrest or
deportation;
(D) threatening to collect a debt;
(E) instilling in a person a fear that
lodging, food, clothing, or medication will be
withheld from any person;
(F) providing a controlled substance or
withholding a controlled substance from the other
person; or
(G) deception; or
(2)"
Page 6, line 8, following "if":
Insert "(A) the person violates (a)(1) of this
section;
(B)"
1:56:30 PM
CHAIR HOLLAND objected for discussion purposes.
1:56:33 PM
SENATOR KIEHL reminded the committee that Amendment 17 would
provide a tiered structure to the human trafficking penalties as
in the sex trafficking penalties in Version I. It relates to the
level and severity of human trafficking crimes. He expressed
concern that without this amendment, all levels of human
trafficking would not take a tiered approach as in the sex
trafficking statutes. It should be a more serious crime to force
someone to have sexual contact for money than to induce someone
without force to engage in nude dancing. Amendment 17 creates a
tiered classification of crimes for human trafficking. It would
increase the penalties for some crimes, including creating an
unclassified felony to engage in human trafficking if the victim
was under 20 years of age or in the human trafficker's legal
custody. He believed that Amendment 17 would provide precise
language for some crimes but still maintain the same level of
class A and B felonies as in current law.
CHAIR HOLLAND solicited comments from the Department of Law.
1:59:04 PM
JOHN SKIDMORE, Deputy Attorney General, Office of the Attorney
General, Criminal Division, Department of Law, Anchorage,
Alaska, responded that there were several nuances. First, human
trafficking criminalizes the use of force or deception as a
class A felony under current law. This bill shifts the use of
force to a more serious offense than the use of deception. Under
SB 189, Version I, the use of force was increased to an
unclassified felony subject to sentencing provisions from 5-99
years. He clarified that it does not equate to force for sex
trafficking. He related that sex trafficking as an unclassified
felony is subject to sentencing provisions under AS
12.55.125(i), which is for sex offenses. The penalty for a first
offense is 20 to 30 years with a maximum of 99 years. Second,
under current law, deception is classified as a class A felony
with a sentencing range of 4-7 years for the first offense with
a maximum of 20 years. SB 189 retains the penalty. Under
Amendment 17, deception would be reduced from a class A felony
to a class B felony, subject to 1-3 years for the first offense
with a maximum of 10 years. It does not maintain but alters
current law. The administration's intent for human trafficking
was to bring clarity and identify that when force is used, it is
more significant than deception.
MR. SKIDMORE said he agrees with Senator Kiehl that offenders
should be treated more severely when force is used. However, the
department does not believe the penalties for deception should
be reduced, so the administration is opposed to Amendment 17.
2:02:41 PM
SENATOR HUGHES noted that she appreciated the administration
clarifying its opposition.
2:03:01 PM
SENATOR MYERS stated that Amendment 17 addresses the
circumstance when a victim is in the legal custody of the
perpetrator. He asked whether that was new language in the bill
or covered in existing law.
MR. SKIDMORE responded that someone in the individual's legal
custody is not expressly called out in current law or in SB 189,
Version I. He related his understanding that a subsequent
amendment in the members' packets was designed to address that
concern. Without the subsequent amendment, under the language of
Amendment 17, it would be a crime of human trafficking if the
victim was in the perpetrator's legal custody. However, it would
also make it a crime of human trafficking if a parent told their
children they would withhold food or clothing unless they did
their chores, which was not the sponsor's intent. He noted that
the department avoided discussions about custody due to the
confusion it might cause. He clarified that the bill would cover
if anyone were forced, induced, or caused to engage in human
trafficking.
2:06:06 PM
SENATOR KIEHL noted that the same issue that relates to custody
in human trafficking also relates to sex trafficking, which
should be addressed outside Amendment 17.
SENATOR KIEHL acknowledged that he had missed the separate
treatment for deception in the human trafficking statutes. He
considered deception as a form of inducement. He welcomed a
conceptual amendment to Amendment 17 to increase the penalty for
inducement to a class A felony. He suggested that it could be
considered now or in subsequent committee.
2:07:22 PM
At ease
2:07:53 PM
CHAIR HOLLAND reconvened the meeting.
2:08:13 PM
MR. SKIDMORE responded that the challenges remain. One problem
was that the use of force was not increased to a higher offense
in Amendment 17. Instead, the use of force and deception were
treated the same. Although there should be a difference in
penalties for force and deception, the department does not want
to see the penalty reduced for the use of deception. He
cautioned that leaving the use of force and deception at the
same level means considering that conduct at the same level as a
person who provides assistance but does not directly induce or
cause the victim to be engaged in adult entertainment or labor.
Thus, the amendment would result in losing the tiered approach.
While he understands the proposal in Amendment 17, it would
create challenges structurally.
2:09:45 PM
SENATOR HUGHES pointed out that some may think of sex
trafficking as worse than human trafficking, but victims of
either could be miserable.
2:10:18 PM
CHAIR HOLLAND maintained his objection.
2:10:24 PM
SENATOR KIEHL stated that none of the tiering of penalties in
criminal law was perfect. Ultimately, it was important to look
at the underlying issues. He agreed with Senator Hughes that
forced labor was awful, but the bill compares levels of awful.
However, force is applied in every assault, so it was essential
to have some level of severity.
2:11:01 PM
A roll call vote was taken. Senators Kiehl and Shower voted in
favor of Amendment 17, and Senators Hughes, Myers, and Holland
voted against it. Therefore, Amendment 17 failed by a 2:3 vote.
CHAIR HOLLAND stated that Amendment 17 failed on a vote of 2
yeas and 3 nays.
2:11:46 PM
CHAIR HOLLAND moved to adopt Amendment 18, work order 32-
GS2029\I.22.
32-GS2029\I.22
Radford
3/31/22
AMENDMENT 18
OFFERED IN THE SENATE BY SENATOR HOLLAND
TO: CSSB 189(JUD), Draft Version "I"
Page 20, line 29:
Delete "AS 11.41.340 - 11.41.350"
Insert "AS 11.41.340 - 11.41.355"
2:11:47 PM
SENATOR SHOWER objected for discussion purposes.
2:11:53 PM
CHAIR HOLLAND explained that Amendment 18 contains language from
the first part of Amendment 13, which the committee considered
on 3/30/22. It would make the patron of a victim of sex
trafficking a registerable offense.
2:12:25 PM
SENATOR MYERS wondered if the department could discuss the level
of proof for a patron of sex trafficking and a patron of
prostitution.
2:12:54 PM
CHAIR HOLLAND asked Mr. Skidmore to respond.
2:12:58 PM
MR. SKIDMORE responded that proof beyond a reasonable doubt
would be required for both offenses. The department would need
to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that a patron of a victim of
sex trafficking purchased sex from the person and that the
individual was reckless of the fact that this was a victim of
sex trafficking. As a refresher, he stated that reckless is a
mental state defined in law that says the individual must be
aware of and consciously disregard a substantial and
unjustifiable risk that the circumstance exists.
MR. SKIDMORE explained that the person would purchase sex from
the victim but must be aware of and consciously disregard a
substantial and unjustifiable risk that the individual is sex
trafficked instead of a worker voluntarily engaging in
prostitution. He noted that the definition also states that it
must be a gross deviation from the standard of conduct that a
reasonable person would observe.
2:14:37 PM
MR. SKIDMORE said this does not relate to a mistake made or the
person missed a clue, but rather that it constitutes a gross
deviation from a substantial and unjustifiable risk. He offered
his view that the crime of a patron of a victim of sex
trafficking is not a crime that the Department of Law believes
will be easy to prove. He noted that purchasing sex from a
prostitute is a class A misdemeanor, not subject to the enhanced
penalties for a patron of a victim of sex trafficking.
2:15:57 PM
CHAIR HOLLAND asked whether the department had a position on
Amendment 18.
MR. SKIDMORE answered that the department believes a patron of a
victim of sex trafficking should be required to register as a
sex offender since that person helps support the predatory
nature of sex trafficking.
2:16:52 PM
SENATOR SHOWER removed his objection.
CHAIR HOLLAND found no further objection, and Amendment 18 was
adopted.
2:17:24 PM
CHAIR HOLLAND moved to adopt Amendment 19, work order 32-
GS2029\I.24.
32-GS2029\I.24
Radford
3/31/22
AMENDMENT 19
OFFERED IN THE SENATE BY SENATOR HOLLAND
TO: CSSB 189(JUD), Draft Version "I"
Page 26, line 12:
Delete "AS 11.41.340 - 11.41.350"
Insert "AS 11.41.340 - 11.41.355"
2:17:25 PM
SENATOR SHOWER objected for discussion purposes.
2:17:28 PM
CHAIR HOLLAND explained that Amendment 19 contained the second
half of the language from Amendment 13, which the committee
considered on 3/30/2022. It would make the patron of a victim of
sex trafficking an eligible offense for an administrative
subpoena.
2:17:45 PM
SENATOR KIEHL noted that some confusion arose about what crimes
or investigations require an investigative subpoena. He offered
his view that adding sex trafficking to administrative subpoenas
makes excellent sense. However, adding the patron concerns him
somewhat. He related his understanding that administrative
subpoenas do not go before a judge and that the attorney general
can issue them. He stated that the investigations of a patron of
a victim of sex trafficking would be similar to the initial
crime of prostitution. He expressed concern that there would be
too much potential overlap.
CHAIR HOLLAND asked Mr. Skidmore for the department's position
on Amendment 19.
2:19:43 PM
MR. SKIDMORE responded that an administrative subpoena statute
gives the attorney general the authority to subpoena an internet
service provider for crimes that require a faster response time,
which is beneficial to law enforcement. He stated that the other
types of crimes are sex-related crimes where the internet plays
a significant role. He agreed with Senator Kiehl that the
internet plays a substantial role in sex trafficking. However,
he draws the distinction and does not want it to apply to crimes
committed by patrons. However, the Department of Law believes
that the person attempting to purchase sex is engaging in the
crime related to sex trafficking, as is the sex trafficker. He
acknowledged that the department has a higher accountability
since they induce or cause someone to engage in the conduct.
However, the buyer participates equally. He noted that an
investigation in sex trafficking also includes investigating a
patron. He said it makes sense to have the administrative
subpoena available for both participants because it relates to
the same transaction on the internet.
2:22:01 PM
SENATOR SHOWER removed his objection.
2:22:12 PM
SENATOR KIEHL objected. He stated that it becomes the question
of how widely to allow law enforcement to search internet
records and emails without going before a judge. He envisioned
that law enforcement would likely have probable cause to go
before a judge; however, the time-sensitive element is online
sex trafficking.
2:23:07 PM
SENATOR HUGHES offered her view that sex trafficking would not
exist without patrons. She said she is supportive of using
administrative subpoenas since they provide investigators with a
faster approach. She surmised that as more patrons realize the
law will be coming after them, it will reduce sex trafficking in
the state.
2:24:01 PM
SENATOR MYERS wondered whether the court system had any insight
into administrative subpoenas.
2:24:37 PM
SENATOR MYERS asked whether a judge having the ability to throw
out evidence obtained via an administrative subpoena would
provide a check on the prosecution.
2:25:14 PM
NANCY MEADE, General Counsel, Administrative Offices, Alaska
Court System, Anchorage, Alaska, responded that the court system
does not work with administrative subpoenas. She related that
the attorney general or his designee issues administrative
subpoenas without any involvement by the court. She envisioned
that these requests would come from Department of Law attorneys
via Mr. Skidmore. She stated that the statute says that the
superior court could issue an order requiring the internet
service provider to appear with the information described if the
internet service provider refuses to obey it. Thus, the court
could require the subject of the administrative subpoena to obey
it.
SENATOR MYERS asked whether a judge might find evidence provided
by the internet via an administrative subpoena inadmissible in a
case.
MS. MEADE anticipated that if the evidence were produced
pursuant to this statute, the court would likely not find it
inadmissible since the Department of Law would have the legal
authority to issue the subpoena. She noted that law enforcement
could still come to the court to request a subpoena to obtain
the information from the internet provider. She acknowledged
that the standard of proof differs from a subpoena since the
investigator would need to have probable cause to believe that a
crime was about to be committed or was underway. The
administrative subpoenas would be based on a reasonable cause to
believe, which is a lower standard for acquiring the
information.
2:28:00 PM
SENATOR HUGHES asked how long it would take for a person to
obtain a subpoena from the court.
MS. MEADE answered that an application for a subpoena could be
handled at any time since the court has magistrate judges on
call 24 hours a day.
2:28:40 PMs
SENATOR HUGHES asked whether weekends pose any delays.
MS. MEADE answered no; magistrate judges provide service 24
hours a day. She said law enforcement routinely calls at all
hours of the night and explains their probable cause orally. The
magistrate judge routinely processes them right away.
CHAIR HOLLAND related his understanding that the crime of being
a patron of a victim of a sex worker is not an eligible offense
for an administrative subpoena.
2:29:33 PM
MR. SKIDMORE answered yes, because the crime of patron of a
victim of sex trafficking does not yet exist.
CHAIR HOLLAND asked whether Amendment 19 would assume the patron
of a victim of sex trafficking would know that they were patrons
of a sex trafficking incident or if the person would believe
that they were a patron of a sex worker. He asked whether
Amendment 18 would elevate the crime for "johns" to a different
level.
MR. SKIDMORE responded that the statute requires reasonable
cause. He agreed that reasonable cause was not the same as
probable cause for a search warrant. However, there would need
to be some reason to believe the patron knew the individual was
a victim of sex trafficking to obtain records of the owner of
the specific IP address. He noted that the administrative
subpoenas were to help identify who was at the computer.
2:31:17 PM
SENATOR KIEHL maintained his objection.
SENATOR HUGHES asked whether law enforcement or the attorney
general would be applying for the administrative subpoena.
MR. SKIDMORE answered that the process would require a law
enforcement officer to make an application to the attorney
general's office. These law enforcement officers often obtain
assistance from the prosecutor, which would be referred to the
Deputy Attorney General. He acknowledged that he serves in that
capacity so he would issue the administrative subpoenas. He
noted that the agency receives some requests, and some requests
are denied due to insufficient information.
2:32:38 PM
SENATOR HUGHES wondered if it would take longer to go through
the administrative subpoenas process established in the attorney
general's office than to use the magistrate judges. She recalled
that in investigating online cases, it is possible to lose
contact, which might mean that the victim was subjected to
sexual contact.
2:34:23 PM
DAVID WILSON, Captain, Alaska State Troopers, Department of
Public Safety, Anchorage, Alaska, described the administrative
subpoena process, which begins when information of value occurs
online. The officer would initially issue a preservation request
to the provider to secure the information so that it is not
lost. The officer would begin the administrative subpoena to
retrieve the information. If the administrative subpoena were
denied, the officer would apply for a search warrant. He offered
his view that the administrative subpoena process is usually
more rapid, depending on the court's availability for a search
warrant. He noted that typically law enforcement requests the
search warrant in person. Thus, using the administrative
subpoena process would depend on whether the preservation
request secures the information.
SENATOR HUGHES asked whether the time factor means that
administrative subpoenas could help save victims more quickly.
CAPTAIN WILSON explained that it would be faster to go through
the administrative subpoenas, which could be helpful.
2:36:16 PM
SENATOR SHOWER expressed concern about casting the net a little
too wide.
2:36:49 PM
SAMANTHA CHEROT, Director, Public Defender Agency, Department of
Administration, Anchorage, Alaska, asked Senator Shower to
restate his question.
SENATOR SHOWER asked whether lowering the standard of proof by
issuing administrative subpoenas instead of search warrants
would create any concerns.
MS. CHEROT answered that it would create concerns because the
probable cause standard necessary to obtain a search warrant
provides protections, and administrative subpoenas do not
require judicial review. However, she deferred to the
legislature regarding the policy decision.
2:38:07 PM
SENATOR KIEHL maintained his objection.
2:38:18 PM
A roll call vote was taken. Senators Hughes and Holland voted in
favor of Amendment 19, and Senators Myers, Kiehl, and Shower
voted against it. Therefore, Amendment 19 failed on a 2:3 vote.
CHAIR HOLLAND stated that Amendment 19 failed on a vote of 2
yeas and 3 nays.
2:38:54 PM
CHAIR HOLLAND moved to adopt Amendment 20, work order 32-
GS2029\I.21.
32-GS2029\I.21
Radford
4/1/22
AMENDMENT 21
OFFERED IN THE SENATE BY SENATOR HOLLAND
TO: CSSB 189(JUD), Draft Version "I"
Page 6, following line 11:
Insert a new section to read:
"Sec. 11.41.367. Human trafficking applicability
of certain activities. A normal caretaker request of a
child or a normal interaction with a child is not a
violation of AS 11.41.360 - 11.41.366."
Page 6, line 12:
Delete "Sec. 11.41.367"
Insert "Sec. 11.41.368"
Page 6, line 16:
Delete "Sec. 11.41.368"
Insert "Sec. 11.41.369"
Page 28, line 27:
Delete "AS 11.41.366 - 11.41.368"
Insert "AS 11.41.366 - 11.41.369"
2:38:57 PM
SENATOR SHOWER objected for discussion purposes.
2:39:22 PM
MR. SKIDMORE explained that Amendment 20 would clarify that
requiring one's children to do chores does not constitute forced
labor, and the parent is not guilty of human trafficking in AS
11.41.360-366. He stated that AS 11.41.360 establishes human
trafficking in the first degree and AS 11.41.363 establishes
human trafficking in the second degree. He said AS 11.41.366
relates to human trafficking in the third degree. He noted that
this was not drafted to apply to sex trafficking, only human
trafficking. He related that the amendment makes good sense. He
referred to lines 7-17 of Amendment 20 as conforming changes,
and that lines 3-5 provided the changes.
2:41:38 PM
SENATOR HUGHES stated that the language refers to a child
instead of a minor. She wanted to ensure that it covered
teenagers. She asked whether using a caretaker would cover a
situation in a school where students might have to pick up trash
or mop the cafeteria floor if the students are misbehaving in
the classroom.
MR. SKIDMORE responded that he was not aware of a specific
definition for a child so that it would cover anyone under the
age of 18. He stated that Amendment 20 could include caretaker
since it doesn't specify parent. He pointed out that one other
element included in human trafficking does not mean someone is
being told to engage in certain labor. Still, the statute
provides a list of ways that specify how it would be
inappropriate to coerce minors. For example, it includes
exposing confidential information that would expose someone to
ridicule, withholding passport identification documents,
threatening to accuse someone of a crime, deception, and
withholding food, clothing, or shelter. He highlighted these
because he struggles to fathom a scenario in which a teacher or
school administrator can engage in any of those things. However,
if they did, it may go beyond their caretaker responsibilities
in a school setting.
2:44:08 PM
SENATOR KIEHL stated that the discussion helped. He
characterized Amendment 20 as a good amendment.
2:44:24 PM
SENATOR SHOWER removed his objection.
2:44:28 PM
CHAIR HOLLAND found no further objection, and Amendment 20 was
adopted.
2:44:51 PM
CHAIR HOLLAND moved to adopt Amendment 21, work order 32-
GS2029\I.20.
32-GS2029\I.20
Radford
4/4/22
AMENDMENT 21
OFFERED IN THE SENATE BY SENATOR HOLLAND
TO: CSSB 189(JUD), Draft Version "I"
Page 2, line 4:
Delete "AS 11.41.340 - 11.41.355"
Insert "AS 11.41.340 - 11.41.357"
Page 2, line 19:
Delete "commercial sexual conduct"
Insert "a commercial sexual act"
Page 2, line 23:
Delete "commercial sexual conduct"
Insert "a commercial sexual act"
Page 2, line 25:
Delete "commercial sexual conduct"
Insert "a commercial sexual act"
Page 2, line 30:
Delete "(1)"
Page 2, lines 30 - 31:
Delete "commercial sexual conduct"
Insert "a commercial sexual act"
Page 3, line 1:
Delete "(A)"
Insert "(1)"
Page 3, line 2:
Delete "(B)"
Insert "(2)"
Page 3, line 3:
Delete "(C) commercial sexual conduct involving"
Insert "(3)"
Page 3, line 4:
Delete "; or"
Insert "."
Page 3, lines 5 - 20:
Delete all material.
Page 3, lines 25 - 26:
Delete "commercial sexual conduct"
Insert "a commercial sexual act"
Page 3, line 31:
Delete "commercial sexual conduct"
Insert "a commercial sexual act involving sexual
penetration or masturbation of one person by another
person"
Page 4, line 2:
Delete "commercial sexual conduct"
Insert "a commercial sexual act"
Page 4, line 3:
Delete "conduct"
Insert "acts"
Page 4, line 8, following "fee":
Insert ";
(3) "sexual conduct" means genital or anal
intercourse, cunnilingus, fellatio, or masturbation of
one person by another person"
Page 4, lines 17 - 18:
Delete "commercial sexual conduct"
Insert "a commercial sexual act involving sexual
penetration or masturbation of one person by another
person"
Page 4, line 20:
Delete "conduct"
Insert "act"
Page 4, following line 29:
Insert a new section to read:
"Sec. 11.41.357. Inducing or causing a person to
engage in a commercial sexual act. For purposes of
AS 11.41.340 - 11.41.355, a person induces or causes
another person to engage in a commercial sexual act by
(1) exposing or threatening to expose
confidential information, whether true or false, that
would subject a person to hatred, contempt, or
ridicule;
(2) destroying, concealing, or threatening
to destroy or conceal an actual or purported passport
or immigration document or another actual or purported
identification document of a person;
(3) threatening to report a person to a
government agency for the purpose of arrest or
deportation;
(4) threatening to collect a debt;
(5) instilling in a person a fear that
lodging, food, clothing, or medication will be
withheld;
(6) providing a controlled substance to or
withholding a controlled substance from the other
person; or
(7) deception."
Page 5, line 1:
Delete "AS 11.41.340 - 11.41.355"
Insert "AS 11.41.340 - 11.41.357"
Page 5, line 13:
Delete "AS 11.41.340 - 11.41.355"
Insert "AS 11.41.340 - 11.41.357"
Page 10, line 21:
Delete ""commercial sexual conduct" means sexual
conduct"
Insert ""commercial sexual act" means a sexual
act"
Page 10, line 31, through page 11, line 1:
Delete all material and insert:
"(72) "sexual act" means sexual penetration
or sexual contact;"
Renumber the following paragraph accordingly.
Page 11, line 3:
Delete "commercial sexual conduct"
Insert "a commercial sexual act"
Page 26, line 22:
Delete "AS 11.41.340 - 11.41.355"
Insert "AS 11.41.340 - 11.41.357"
Page 28, line 11:
Delete "commercial sexual conduct prohibited by
AS 11.41.340 - 11.41.355"
Insert "a commercial sexual act prohibited by
AS 11.41.340 - 11.41.357"
Page 28, line 16, following "AS 11.41.360(b)":
Insert ", 11.41.470(7); AS 11.56.765(c)(3),
11.56.767(c)(3)"
Page 28, line 23:
Delete "AS 11.41.340 - 11.41.355"
Insert "AS 11.41.340 - 11.41.357"
2:44:55 PM
SENATOR SHOWER objected for discussion purposes.
2:45:17 PM
KACI SCHROEDER, Assistant Attorney General, Legal Services
Section, Criminal Division, Department of Law, Juneau, Alaska,
explained that Amendment 21 was a clean-up amendment. It
addresses confusion caused by pulling the definition of sexual
conduct into AS 11.81.900, which created an unintended
consequence. The intent was to leave the statutes relating to
prostitution and revise the sex trafficking statutes. Under
Amendment 21 if a person were sex trafficked, it would relate to
a sexual act, which is sexual penetration or sexual contact.
However, prostitution, prostitution enterprise, and place of
prostitution would remain the same; they relate to engaging in
sexual conduct. Although the definitions are largely the same,
some differences are quite important.
2:46:28 PM
SENATOR KIEHL indicated that he had prepared several conceptual
amendments to address drafting errors.
2:46:53 PM
SENATOR KIEHL moved to adopt Conceptual Amendment 1 to Amendment
21, which read:
Amendment pg 2, ln. 24-27: Delete all material
Amendment pg.3, ln. 13-14: Delete "involving sexual
penetration or masturbation of one person by another
person"
[The committee treated it as though Chair Holland had objected
for discussion purposes.]
2:47:05 PM
CATHY SCHLINGHEYDE, Staff, Senator Jesse Kiehl, Alaska State
Legislature, Juneau, Alaska, stated that Conceptual Amendment 1
to Amendment 21 would make two technical corrections. She
directed attention to page 2, lines 24-27. Conceptual Amendment
1 would delete the language so that the definition of a place of
prostitution or a prostitution enterprise remains sexual
conduct. She said this matches with the definition of a place of
prostitution in this bill and the new definition of sexual
conduct added by Amendment 21.
MS. SCHLINGHEYDE explained that the second change on page 3,
lines 13-14, changes the definition of patron of a victim of sex
trafficking, so that crime will match the other sex trafficking
statutes and not be covered in the prostitution statutes.
2:48:11 PM
MS. SCHROEDER agreed with Ms. Schlingheyde that Conceptual
Amendment 1 cleans up drafting mistakes.
2:48:47 PM
CHAIR HOLLAND objected for discussion purposes.
2:49:28 PM
CHAIR HOLLAND removed his objection; he found no further
objection, and Conceptual Amendment 1 to Amendment 21 was
adopted.
2:49:43 PM
SENATOR KIEHL moved Conceptual Amendment 2 to Amendment 21,
which read:
Amendment pg.3 ln. 24: after "sexual act' insert
'including'
2:49:55 PM
CHAIR HOLLAND objected for discussion purposes.
2:50:08 PM
MS. SCHLINGHEYDE explained that Conceptual Amendment 2 to
Amendment 21 would add language to Amendment 21 on page 3, line
24, to Sec. 11.41.357, after "act," add "including." It would
then read, "... a person induces or causes another person to
engage in a commercial sexual act including by ...." A list of
ways to induce or cause another person to engage in a commercial
sexual act follows. Thus, the list will become nonexclusive to
allow the Department of Law to include other examples using the
totality of the circumstances to induce.
2:50:39 PM
MS. SCHROEDER agreed that Conceptual Amendment 2 to Amendment 21
would allow the Department of Law to argue things not on the
list.
CHAIR HOLLAND noted that the Department of Law was in favor of
Conceptual Amendment 2 to Amendment 21.
2:50:54 PM
SENATOR KIEHL explained Conceptual Amendment 2 to Amendment 21.
He stated that during one of the early discussions on the bill,
the Department of Law stated the intent to create a nonexclusive
list of the ways that a person could be induced or caused. Thus,
if a perpetrator withheld or provided alcohol to someone with
alcohol addiction to induce the person to engage in a commercial
sex act, the department could argue that the victim was not
acting voluntarily but was caused to engage in prostitution. He
offered his view that this language was valuable.
2:51:59 PM
CHAIR HOLLAND asked if Conceptual Amendment 2 to Amendment 21
adding the language "including" would be considered an unlawful
delegation.
MS. SCHROEDER deferred to Mr. Skidmore.
MR. SKIDMORE answered no. He stated that this acknowledges that
other conduct is not expressed in the list. The difference
between sex trafficking and human trafficking is that human
trafficking pertains to labor. Sex trafficking relates to
purchasing sex in exchange for something of value which is
illegal. An individual could attempt to woo someone or develop a
romantic relationship with the victim that could result in
obtaining intimate images of an individual and then threatening
to expose them. Although it could qualify as exposing
confidential information, it was not exactly the same thing. He
said that is the reason the department would prefer adding the
language "including" instead of "buying." The perpetrator could
offer the victim housing, food, clothing, and a better life. He
clarified that although it would not be withholding anything,
they are similar concepts. Further, someone might threaten to
harm a person's pet, or withhold affection. He cautioned there
are myriad ways in which sex traffickers induce or cause someone
to engage in this conduct, so it isn't possible to create an
all-inclusive list. Instead, the bill provides examples of the
types of threats, but it was never intended to be a complete
list.
2:55:29 PM
CHAIR HOLLAND removed his objection; he found no further
objection and Conceptual Amendment 2 to Amendment 21 was
adopted.
CHAIR HOLLAND stated that Amendment 21, as amended, was before
the committee.
2:56:05 PM
SENATOR SHOWER removed his objection.
CHAIR HOLLAND found no further objection, and Amendment 21, as
amended, was adopted.
2:56:42 PM
SENATOR KIEHL moved to adopt Amendment 22, work order 32-
GS2029\I.23.
32-GS2029\I.23
Radford
4/2/22
AMENDMENT 22
OFFERED IN THE SENATE BY SENATOR KIEHL
TO: CSSB 189(JUD), Draft Version "I"
Page 3, line 18, following both occurrences of "a":
Insert "schedule IA, IIA, IIIA, IVA, or VA"
Page 5, line 27, following both occurrences of "a":
Insert "schedule IA, IIA, IIIA, IVA, or VA"
2:56:44 PM
CHAIR HOLLAND objected for discussion purposes.
2:56:43 PM
SENATOR KIEHL explained that Amendment 22 relates to the list
MR. Skidmore just described. He stated that human trafficking
and sex trafficking specifically identify providing a controlled
substance or withholding a controlled substance as a means to
control victims. This bill specifies all of the controlled
substances except for cannabis. However, cannabis is legal under
Alaska law. Amendment 22 would not make providing cannabis an
automatic qualifier for inducing or causing victims. Instead, it
would treat cannabis in the same manner as alcohol when sex
traffickers use it to entice or cause victims to engage in
certain conduct, by allowing the investigator to consider it in
the totality of circumstances.
2:58:02 PM
CHAIR HOLLAND asked Mr. Skidmore to comment on Amendment 22.
MR. SKIDMORE replied that the Department of Law defers to the
legislature on how to address marijuana. He said he agrees with
Senator Kiehl's analysis that it treats marijuana in much the
same way it treats alcohol. It acknowledges that someone could
be so addicted to marijuana that withholding it may cause them
to engage in this conduct. Further, it recognizes that both
substances are legal, but cannabis alone would not automatically
qualify as the cause or inducement. The Department of Law has no
position on Amendment 22 because it is a policy call for the
committee.
2:59:06 PM
SENATOR HUGHES asked whether the department was confident that
nothing is excluded from the list of controlled substances and
that Amendment 22 would only remove marijuana from the list.
MR. SKIDMORE answered that schedule VI only applies to
marijuana.
2:59:42 PM
CHAIR HOLLAND removed his objection; he found no further
objection, and Amendment 22 was adopted.
3:00:03 PM
CHAIR HOLLAND asked Nancy Meade if she had any comment on the
new fiscal note from the Alaska Court System.
3:00:45 PM
SENATOR SHOWER stated that the legislature understood that there
would be additional costs when it repealed Senate Bill 91. He
viewed SB 189 as addressing some concerns. He said he viewed the
costs of implementing human trafficking and sex trafficking as a
necessary burden. He remarked that this process is not over
because rehabilitation will require some additional costs.
MS. MEADE explained that the fiscal note related to the vacatur
of judgment reflects the additional work for the court system.
She noted that the court system had developed a preliminary way
to handle the vacatur of judgments.
3:02:26 PM
CHAIR HOLLAND solicited the will of the committee.
3:02:31 PM
SENATOR SHOWER moved to report the committee substitute (CS) for
SB 189, work order 32-GS2029\I, as amended, from committee with
individual recommendations and attached fiscal note(s).
CHAIR HOLLAND found no objection, and CSSB 189(JUD) was reported
from the Senate Judiciary Standing Committee.
SENATOR HUGHES thanked the Alaska Court System and the
Department of Law for their efforts on SB 189. She noted that
this important topic was often mentioned in the last few years.
She offered her view that SB 189 was a good bill.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| SB 189 Amendment #18 (I.22).pdf |
SJUD 4/4/2022 1:30:00 PM |
SB 189 |
| SB 189 Amendment #19 (I.24).pdf |
SJUD 4/4/2022 1:30:00 PM |
SB 189 |
| SB 189 Amendment #20 (I.21).pdf |
SJUD 4/4/2022 1:30:00 PM |
SB 189 |
| SB 189 Amendment #21 (I.20).pdf |
SJUD 4/4/2022 1:30:00 PM |
SB 189 |
| SB 189 Amendment #22 (I.23).pdf |
SJUD 4/4/2022 1:30:00 PM |
SB 189 |
| CSSB189 version I Fiscal Note (ACS).pdf |
SJUD 4/4/2022 1:30:00 PM |
SB 189 |
| SB 189 - Letter of Opposition (powered by justice).pdf |
SJUD 4/4/2022 1:30:00 PM |
SB 189 |
| SB 189 Letter of Opposition.docx |
SJUD 4/4/2022 1:30:00 PM |
SB 189 |