Legislature(1995 - 1996)
03/28/1995 03:35 PM Senate STA
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
SSTA - 3/28/95
HB 74 ASSAULT BY ADULTS ON CHILDREN
SENATOR SHARP brings up HB 74 as the next order of business before
the Senate State Affairs Committee and calls the first witness.
TAPE 95-13, SIDE B
REPRESENTATIVE CON BUNDE, prime sponsor of HB 74, relays
information contained in the sponsor substitute to the committee.
Representative Bunde states there is a lot of public support behind
HB 74.
Number 555
SENATOR RANDY PHILLIPS commented he has had one phone call on HB
74, and that call was in opposition to HB 74. Senator Phillips
asks where the case is right now.
REPRESENTATIVE BUNDE responds the case is in the process of going
to trial. Prosecutors are having to be "encouraged" to take the
case to trial; they were going to plea bargain.
SENATOR RANDY PHILLIPS asks what the maximum penalty would be.
PATTY SWENSON, Aide to Representative Bunde, replies the maximum
penalty would be one year incarceration and a $5,000 fine.
REPRESENTATIVE BUNDE adds he has not heard of any instance in which
first time misdemeanants have been required to serve prison time.
There is usually a suspended sentence.
SENATOR RANDY PHILLIPS refers to the old saying which basically
states law shouldn't be made because of one case. He also asked
how HB 74 would affect a property owner's right to protect his or
her property.
Number 535
REPRESENTATIVE BUNDE replies, out of the hundreds, if not over one
thousand responses he has received, Senator Phillips is only about
the fourth person to assert that HB 74 might affect a property
owner's right to protect their property. Will a property owner be
charged with a felony for protecting his or her property?
Representative Bunde stresses that prosecutorial discretion will
protect the property owner. First, the kid threatening the
property or the property owner will have to convince a prosecutor
that he was attacked, and was not the cause of the attack. He
understands the concern, but does not see it as a problem.
SENATOR RANDY PHILLIPS reiterates the only call he has received on
HB 74 was in opposition to the bill, for the previously mentioned
scenario. We are referring to one case; unless there are a number
of cases in which this problem is occurring, he hates to pass a law
because of one case.
SENATOR DONLEY thinks, in regards to Senator Phillips' concern that
law not be made because of one case, that there are probably a lot
of cases in which HB 74 would apply, which have simply not been as
visible as the one case which was the impetus behind the bill.
SENATOR RANDY PHILLIPS asks Senator Donley if he thinks HB 74 would
affect the rights of property owners to protect their property.
Number 515
SENATOR DONLEY responds that any steps a property owner takes to
defend his or her property would not be made any more legal or
illegal by HB 74. It just changes the potential maximum penalty.
SENATOR RANDY PHILLIPS is worried that if a property owner
physically escorts a trespasser from his or her property, they will
be charged with a felony.
SENATOR DONLEY replies a property owner is, and would still be
allowed, to use reasonable force to protect his or her property.
SENATOR RANDY PHILLIPS asks if a property owner could use a
shotgun.
SENATOR DONLEY responds that is not reasonable force; that is
deadly force. HB 74 will not affect whether the property owner's
defense is legal or not.
SENATOR RANDY PHILLIPS asks what if the trespasser is destroying
property.
SENATOR DONLEY replies HB 74 will not affect the parameters of what
property owners can and cannot do to defend their property.
REPRESENTATIVE BUNDE adds that, under existing statute, reasonable
force may be used to defend one's property. In some cases,
reasonable force could be pretty aggressive; in other cases,
depending on the situation, a property owner's response could be
considered assault. Representative Bunde understands Senator
Phillips' concern. HB 74 will not change the restrictions by which
a property owner is constrained in defending his or her property or
life. The only change would be, if there was a charge brought
against a property owner, and if the prosecutor was convinced that
it was a really egregious case, the property owner could be charged
with a felony instead of a class A misdemeanor. We all know that
in practical application, a first time conviction receiving the
maximum penalty allowed for a class A misdemeanor is more severe
than the minimum penalty for a felony. There is public outcry that
this tool be available to prosecutors, if necessary.
[Representative Bunde show the committee approximately 500
signatures on petitions in favor of HB 74, and informs the
committee he has more in his office.]
Number 480
SENATOR DONLEY states he is concerned with the use of deadly force,
because he thinks there is too much constraint put on property
owners, in that one is supposed to allow one's self to be
endangered before protecting one's self. He did look into that as
Judiciary Chairman several years ago, and satisfied himself that
Alaska Statutes are pretty good on that subject. Deadly force is
allowable when one is physically threatened. Other reasonable
force is allowed to protect one's property. To go beyond that, to
allow property owners to shoot people because they are carrying off
a bird bath--I don't know if you would want to do that.
SENATOR RANDY PHILLIPS thinks the question needs to be asked.
Secondly, should law be made on one publicized case?
SENATOR DONLEY agrees with that, but he thinks that whole area of
law should be revisited and that there should be stronger assault
laws. It is a shame it has to be driven by the event that was the
impetus for HB 74. He thinks there is a problem with assault being
taken to lightly by the justice system. Judges, police, and
prosecutors become desensitized to assault with all the murders,
rapes, and kidnappings with which they have to deal.
SENATOR LEMAN makes a motion to discharge HB 74 from the Senate
State Affairs Committee with individual recommendations.
CHAIRMAN SHARP, hearing no objection, orders HB 74 be released from
committee with individual recommendations.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|