Legislature(2005 - 2006)CAPITOL 120
01/27/2006 01:00 PM House JUDICIARY
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB326 | |
| HB321 | |
| HB314 | |
| HB379 | |
| HB343 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | HB 150 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | HB 379 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | HB 343 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| = | HB 326 | ||
| = | HB 321 | ||
| = | HB 314 | ||
HB 343 - HARASSMENT 3:16:03 PM CHAIR McGUIRE announced that the final order of business would be HOUSE BILL NO. 343, "An Act relating to harassment." REPRESENTATIVE BOB LYNN, Alaska State Legislature, sponsor, mentioning that he has worked as a jailer, relayed that HB 343 was requested by correctional officers and those who want more protection from inmates and others who would throw bodily fluids and feces. Currently, such behavior - included in the crime of harassment - is prosecuted as a class B misdemeanor, engendering a sentence that can range from "0" days to 90 days; HB 343 would make such behavior a class A misdemeanor - which can engender a sentence ranging from "0" days to 1 year - and would specifically provide for a mandatory minimum sentence of 60 days if the victim is a uniformed or otherwise clearly identified peace officer, fire fighter, correctional employee, emergency medical technician, paramedic, ambulance attendant, or other emergency responder who was engaged in the performance of official duties at the time of the assault. REPRESENTATIVE LYNN noted that a letter provided by the chief police of the City of Fairbanks Police Department, Daniel P. Hoffman, says in part, "Being spit upon, having blood or feces flung at you ..., should never be considered 'just part of our job'"; that in a portion of a position paper provided by the Public Safety Employees Association, Inc. (PSEA), John Cyr says, "Any attempt to increase the penalty for this type of behavior is [overdue]"; that a letter provided by the president of the Alaska Association of Chiefs of Police (AACOP), Thomas Clemons, says in part, "... someone throwing bodily fluids at any individual is not only repulsive, but should have a penalty attached to it which will deter the activity, or at least punish the offender more appropriately than what is currently allowed under State Law"; and that a letter provided by the president of the board of directors of the Alaska Correctional Officers Association (ACOA), Daniel Colang, says in part, "Inmates have spit in the face of officers, tried to smear them with feces and in one case sprayed a female employee with a mixture of semen, urine and saliva. ... we need our leaders to protect us from the threat and danger of assault by bodily fluids." REPRESENTATIVE LYNN, in summary, said that HB 343 is aimed at protecting everyone, but especially those who protect the public's safety and respond to emergency situations. 3:20:29 PM JAMES A. HELGOE, Lieutenant, Legislative Liaison, Division of Alaska State Troopers, Department of Public Safety (DPS), stated simply that the Alaska State Troopers support HB 343. 3:21:11 PM MAE L. BARNEY, Correctional Officer II, Fairbanks Correctional Center, Division of Institutions, Department of Corrections (DOC), relayed that she is the correctional officer [mentioned in the letter from the ACOA] that had a mixture of semen, urine, and saliva sprayed on her, adding that another correctional officer was also a victim. In response to a question, she went on to describe that incident. MICHAEL SICA, Staff to Representative Bob Lynn, Alaska State Legislature, sponsor, asked, on behalf of Representative Lynn, that Ms. Barney comment regarding whether the correctional officers in Fairbanks support the bill. MS. BARNEY said all the correctional officers support HB 343. 3:24:59 PM RICHARD SCHMITZ, Public Information Officer, Office of the Commissioner - Juneau, Department of Corrections (DOC), stated simply that the DOC supports [HB 343], thinks it's a good bill, and would like to see it pass. REPRESENTATIVE WILSON noted that nurses are often subject to contact with the aforementioned substances. She asked whether nurses who work in emergency rooms would be covered under the bill. MR. SICA relayed that for a violation to occur under the bill, a person would have to intentionally subject another person to those substances. REPRESENTATIVE WILSON asked whether similar behavior by someone who is drunk or under the influence of drugs [would be covered by the bill]. MR. SICA suggested that someone else might be better able to address that question, but proffered that the intent of the bill is to make this type of behavior fall under the crime of harassment, which involves someone intentionally harassing or annoying another person. 3:27:05 PM REPRESENTATIVE WILSON pointed out that drunken people do things intentionally. MR. SICA surmised, then, that such behavior would be covered under the bill. REPRESENTATIVE GARA offered his understanding that the bill differentiates between activity directed at a police officer or emergency responder and activity directed at a member of the public. MR. SICA concurred with that summation. REPRESENTATIVE GARA suggested that they might want to exempt saliva and perhaps sweat, and gave an example wherein two kids start spitting at each other during a schoolyard fight. MR. SICA indicated that the sponsor had intended for saliva to be included in the bill but perhaps had not intended for sweat to be included, and so he will research that issue further. REPRESENTATIVE GARA acknowledged that when one spits at another person, the intention is to annoy that person. MR. SICA concurred, and offered his belief that [spitting at someone] is already included under the harassment statute as a class B misdemeanor. REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG noted that AS 11.61.120(a)(5) already makes subjecting another person to offensive physical contact a crime of harassment, and surmised that the bill would make that behavior a class A misdemeanor - as harassment in the first degree - if the offensive physical contact involves the use of human or animal bodily fluids or feces. MR. SICA concurred with that summation. 3:30:28 PM SUSAN A. PARKES, Deputy Attorney General, Criminal Division, Office of the Attorney General, Department of Law (DOL), relayed that the DOL supports HB 343, and that the sponsor did consult with the DOL in drafting the bill. REPRESENTATIVE WILSON again asked whether the bill would cover emergency room nurses who have intoxicated patients spit at them or throw other items at them. MS. PARKES said that the DOL would have to prove the factual question of whether the person took that action with the intent to harass or annoy, and in the case of an intoxicated person or a person under the influence of some substance, the level of intoxication or impairment could also be a factor. If the person is spewing profanities, looking the victim in the eye, is coherent enough to engage in other intentional acts, and spits or throws other bodily fluids on the victim, a jury could easily make a finding that although the person was intoxicated, he/she intended his/her conduct. 3:33:08 PM REPRESENTATIVE GARA offered his understanding that spitting is not covered under existing law. REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG argued that spitting is covered under AS 11.61.120(a)(5) in that it would be considered "offensive physical contact". MS. PARKES concurred, adding that the concern of correctional officers is that this behavior is currently only a class B misdemeanor, which they argue is insufficient. The intent of the bill, she suggested, is to recognize that throwing bodily fluids or feces is serious conduct and that protecting those who ensure the public's safety and respond to emergency situations is a priority. CHAIR McGUIRE asked why the bill shouldn't just be limited to those who protect the public's safety and respond to emergency situations. REPRESENTATIVE LYNN opined that no one should be subjected to having bodily fluids or feces thrown at him/her, and offered his understanding that this is occurring to people other than those who protect the public's safety and respond to emergency situations. 3:35:52 PM REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG indicated that he has a potential conflict of interest and asked to be excused from voting. CHAIR McGUIRE objected [thus requiring Representative Gruenberg to vote should it be necessary]. REPRESENTATIVE GARA asked whether spitting would be considered "offensive physical contact". MS. PARKES said, "That is the theory that we prosecute it under, and ... we've gotten convictions under that theory. 3:37:56 PM REPRESENTATIVE WILSON referred to page 3, lines 2-4 - which lists the people against whom an offense would garner a mandatory minimum sentence - noted that medical personnel are not included, and suggested that they should be. REPRESENTATIVE LYNN said he would view such a change to be a friendly amendment. REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG suggested that such a change may warrant a title change. He then referred to the Alaska Court of Appeals case, McKillop v. State, and opined that the ruling in that case makes the current statute regarding the crime of harassment virtually unworkable. He asked the sponsor whether he would be amenable to curing that problem via HB 343. REPRESENTATIVE LYNN said he would follow the advice of the DOL on that issue. MS. PARKES recommended that that issue be taken up with the drafter. MR. SICA relayed that the drafter had simply indicated that the harassment statute was the most appropriate section of statue with which to address the behavior the sponsor was concerned about. 3:41:00 PM REPRESENTATIVE GARA said he is uncomfortable making it a crime to throw [or project] sweat or saliva at regular people. He asked the sponsor to consider amending the bill such that it would only be a crime to throw or project sweat or saliva if the victim was someone [listed in Section 4]. REPRESENTATIVE LYNN suggested that if someone has taken the time to collect enough sweat to throw it at another person, that illustrates real intent. MS. PARKES pointed out that Section 4 of the bill is merely a sentencing provision that sets a mandatory minimum sentence for the behavior listed in Section 2 if the victim is someone listed in Section 4, and opined that Representative Gara's suggested change could be problematic. CHAIR McGUIRE relayed that HB 343 would be held over.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|