03/02/2009 01:00 PM House JUDICIARY
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB13 | |
| HB9 | |
| HB101 | |
| Adjourn |
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | HB 101 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 13 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 9 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE JUDICIARY STANDING COMMITTEE
March 2, 2009
1:08 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Jay Ramras, Chair
Representative Nancy Dahlstrom, Vice Chair
Representative John Coghill
Representative Carl Gatto
Representative Bob Lynn
Representative Max Gruenberg
Representative Lindsey Holmes
MEMBERS ABSENT
All members present
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
HOUSE BILL NO. 13
"An Act relating to property crimes."
- HEARD AND HELD
HOUSE BILL NO. 9
"An Act relating to murder; authorizing capital punishment,
classifying murder in the first degree as a capital felony, and
allowing the imposition of the death penalty for certain
murders; establishing sentencing procedures for capital
felonies; and amending Rules 32, 32.1, and 32.3, Alaska Rules of
Criminal Procedure, and Rules 204, 209, 210, and 212, Alaska
Rules of Appellate Procedure."
- HEARD AND HELD
HOUSE BILL NO. 101
"An Act exempting the full value of life insurance and annuity
contracts from levy to satisfy unsecured debt, and amending the
description of earnings, income, cash, and other assets relating
to garnishment of life insurance proceeds payable upon the death
of an insured."
- HEARD AND HELD
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
BILL: HB 13
SHORT TITLE: PROPERTY CRIMES
SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S) COGHILL
01/20/09 (H) PREFILE RELEASED 1/9/09
01/20/09 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
01/20/09 (H) JUD, FIN
02/18/09 (H) JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120
02/18/09 (H) Heard & Held
02/18/09 (H) MINUTE(JUD)
03/02/09 (H) JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120
BILL: HB 9
SHORT TITLE: CAPITAL PUNISHMENT
SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S) CHENAULT
01/20/09 (H) PREFILE RELEASED 1/9/09
01/20/09 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
01/20/09 (H) JUD, FIN
02/23/09 (H) JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120
02/23/09 (H) Heard & Held
02/23/09 (H) MINUTE(JUD)
02/25/09 (H) JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120
02/25/09 (H) Heard & Held
02/25/09 (H) MINUTE(JUD)
03/02/09 (H) JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120
BILL: HB 101
SHORT TITLE: EXEMPTIONS: LIFE INSURANCE; ANNUITIES
SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S) COGHILL
01/30/09 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
01/30/09 (H) L&C, JUD
02/18/09 (H) L&C AT 3:15 PM BARNES 124
02/18/09 (H) Moved Out of Committee
02/18/09 (H) MINUTE(L&C)
02/20/09 (H) L&C RPT 3DP 3NR
02/20/09 (H) DP: LYNN, CHENAULT, COGHILL
02/20/09 (H) NR: BUCH, HOLMES, OLSON
03/02/09 (H) JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120
WITNESS REGISTER
GARDNER COBB, Captain
Anchorage Police Department (APD)
Municipality of Anchorage (MOA)
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HB 13.
ROB COX, President
Public Safety Employee Association (PSEA)
Palmer, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Expressed concerns with HB 13.
VICKI OTTE, Executive Director
Association of the ANCSA Regional Corporation Presidents-CEOs,
Inc.;
Chairman
MTNT Limited
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HB 9.
CHARLES CAMPBELL
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: As a former director of the [then] Division
of Corrections, testified in opposition to HB 9.
GEORGE SILIDES, Reverend
Rector
Holy Trinity Episcopal Church
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: During discussion of HB 9, testified in
opposition to the death penalty.
ALFRED McKINLEY, SR.
Alaska Native Brotherhood (ANB) Grand Camp
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: During discussion of HB 9, testified in
opposition to capital punishment.
ALBERT JUDSON
Haines, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: During discussion of HB 9, testified in
opposition to the death penalty.
MONTE SHADE
Fairbanks, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: During discussion of HB 9, testified in
support of the death penalty.
JIM BETTS, State Advocate
Alaska State Council
Knights of Columbus
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HB 9.
MIKE SMITH
Tanana Chiefs Conference (TCC)
Fairbanks, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided comments during discussion of
HB 9.
DEBORAH BLOOM
Willow, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: During discussion of HB 9, testified in
opposition to the death penalty.
DON ROBERTS, JR.
Kodiak, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: During discussion of HB 9, testified in
opposition.
JOHN NOVAK, Assistant District Attorney
3rd Judicial District (Anchorage)
District Attorneys
Department of Law (DOL)
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided comments during discussion of
HB 9.
SUSAN S. McLEAN, Acting Deputy Attorney General
Criminal Division
Department of Law (DOL)
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Responded to a question during discussion
of HB 9.
AMANDA MORTENSEN, Intern
Representative John Coghill
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented HB 101 on behalf of the sponsor,
Representative Coghill.
ACTION NARRATIVE
1:08:49 PM
CHAIR JAY RAMRAS called the House Judiciary Standing Committee
meeting to order at 1:08 p.m. Representatives Ramras,
Dahlstrom, Coghill, Gatto, Lynn, and Gruenberg were present at
the call to order. Representative Holmes arrived as the meeting
was in progress.
HB 13 - PROPERTY CRIMES
1:11:55 PM
CHAIR RAMRAS announced that the first order of business would be
HOUSE BILL NO. 13, "An Act relating to property crimes."
CHAIR RAMRAS noted that the committee has received letters from
the Office of Victims' Rights (OVR), the Alaska Peace Officers
Association (APOA), and the Public Safety Employees Association,
Inc. (PSEA), and all were critical of the concept of [raising
the threshold amounts for felony and misdemeanor] property
crimes.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG recalled that local law enforcement
agencies had opposed past iterations of this bill. He too
referenced the letter by the OVR dated 2/27/09, and offered his
understanding that it is meant to stand in place of any spoken
testimony by the OVR.
CHAIR RAMRAS acknowledged that HB 13 raises some interesting
policy questions, and that a felony conviction can change the
trajectory of a person's life.
1:18:23 PM
GARDNER COBB, Captain, Anchorage Police Department (APD),
Municipality of Anchorage (MOA), said that the APD does not
support HB 13 on the grounds that it won't serve the community
well. Regardless that the bill is meant to adjust for inflation
and address the concern that young people might be being treated
too harshly by having a felony conviction on their record, he
said his 30-some years' of law enforcement experience indicates
that prosecutors are pretty reasonable when considering young
people who are first time offenders, and take into account
several factors such as the circumstances, the nature of the
crime, and the person's record, and this often results in a
consolidation or reduction of charges or in a suspended
imposition of sentence (SIS) or in a dismissal of charges on
condition that restitution is paid.
CAPTAIN COBB said he is more concerned about career criminals
continuing to wreck havoc on the community, and shared his and
the APD's opinion that there is already too much slack in the
justice system for such people, and that the bill will not
address that problem but in fact goes in the opposite direction.
1:21:08 PM
ROB COX, President, Public Safety Employee Association (PSEA),
after relaying that he is in agreement with Captain Cobb, and
that he made similar points in his written testimony, opined
that HB 13 won't do anything to make law enforcement more
efficient or provide better protection for communities but will
instead just benefit criminals. Mr. Cox noted that in addition
to raising the threshold amount distinguishing misdemeanor
property crimes from felony property crimes [threefold], HB 13
also proposes to raise the threshold amount distinguishing class
B misdemeanor property crimes from class A misdemeanor property
crimes fivefold. He shared his fear that passage of HB 13 will
transform petty thefts and shoplifting crimes into financially
crippling losses for the victims, with little or no consequence.
MR. COX concurred with the comment that there is already too
much leniency within the system as is, and pointed out that
often class B misdemeanors - the threshold of which the bill is
proposing to increase to $250 - aren't even prosecuted, though
not because the courts or prosecutors don't care, but instead
because of their overwhelming caseload. Furthermore, plea
agreements occur with regard to felony-level charges. On the
issue of youthful offenders, he asked the committee to remember
that felony charges don't carry a label - only felony
convictions do - and in light of plea agreements and
[prosecutorial discretion], he said he thinks that the concern
about youthful offenders being labeled as felons is greatly
reduced. In conclusion, he said the only other rationale he's
heard for the bill is to inflation-proof property crimes, adding
that he considers that to be bad motivation for changing
statute.
MR. COX, in response to a question, remarked that $500 is still
a significant amount of money, and that at some point threshold
amounts distinguishing different levels of crime do need to be
set, and opined that with today's economy - even with the
effects of inflation - the current threshold amounts are
justifiable. In response to comments and a question, he offered
his understanding that Canada has sentencing laws specifically
pertaining to youthful offenders.
REPRESENTATIVE HOLMES said AS 11.46.130 appears to already
address repeat offenders, providing that two or more prior
property crime convictions could result in a felony charge even
if the original convictions were for misdemeanor property
crimes.
MR. COX concurred. In response to a question, he offered his
understanding that although job applications generally ask
whether the applicant has been convicted of a felony, a minor's
felony conviction "goes away" and he/she gets a "fresh start"
when he/she turns 18.
1:28:14 PM
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL clarified that it is not his intent to
inflation-proof property crimes; rather his intent is to
differentiate between "real" felons and misdemeanants. He
questioned whether the current felony threshold amount of $500
is simply being used as an additional tool to initially obtain
custody of people, and whether misdemeanant perpetrators of
property crimes are ever actually pursued. He said he would be
amenable, however, to having HB 13 held over in order to conduct
further research. The policy question to be addressed, he
opined, shouldn't be "How can we bargain justice?" but rather,
"What is real justice?"
CHAIR RAMRAS pointed out that homeowners and business owners
across the state are often dissatisfied with how little
attention is paid by law enforcement officers to property
crimes. The current level of response by law enforcement is not
adequate, he surmised, and warrants further consideration. He
then relayed that HB 13 would be held over.
HB 9 - CAPITAL PUNISHMENT
1:34:20 PM
CHAIR RAMRAS announced that the next order of business would be
HOUSE BILL NO. 9, "An Act relating to murder; authorizing
capital punishment, classifying murder in the first degree as a
capital felony, and allowing the imposition of the death penalty
for certain murders; establishing sentencing procedures for
capital felonies; and amending Rules 32, 32.1, and 32.3, Alaska
Rules of Criminal Procedure, and Rules 204, 209, 210, and 212,
Alaska Rules of Appellate Procedure." [Before the committee was
the proposed committee substitute (CS) for HB 9, Version 26-
LS0036\E, Luckhaupt, 2/18/09, which had been adopted as the work
draft on 2/23/09.]
1:35:11 PM
VICKI OTTE, Executive Director, Association of the ANCSA
Regional Corporation Presidents-CEOs, Inc.; Chairman, MTNT
Limited, noted that since 1970, there have been 130 prisoners on
death row in the U.S. who were found to be wrongfully convicted.
Once a prisoner is executed, she remarked, it can never be
undone. As an Alaska Native, she explained, she must loudly
object to HB 9; Alaska Natives will be disproportionately
affected by this proposed change in sentencing. Current
statistics indicate that in 2007, Alaska's population was 70
percent white, and 15 percent Alaska Native; however, Alaska's
prison population was 48 percent white and 36 percent Alaska
Native. Native people represent over twice the prison
population as they do the free population of Alaska. It is very
likely, therefore, that this proposed death penalty will affect
Native people twice as much. She said she herself has seen
Alaska Natives accept plea agreements just to "get it over
with," even when they were not guilty. Additionally, many
Alaska Natives, particularly those in rural Alaska, cannot
afford legal representation.
MS. OTTE relayed that Clinton T. Duffy, former prison warden of
San Quentin State Prison, made the following statement, "The
death penalty is the privilege of the poor." Court systems all
over the country, no matter how well intentioned, make mistakes,
she pointed out, adding, "We cannot afford to make a mistake
with someone's life." All studies done on the death penalty and
the cost of maintaining death row prison populations illustrate
that it is more expensive to execute a prisoner than to imprison
him/her for life. Why is the legislature considering
implementing something so barbaric at a time when the state
cannot afford it? If the legislature wants to spend that kind
of money, she said, then she challenges the legislature to spend
it instead on programs to keep Alaska's young people away from a
life of crime, such as providing more money on workforce
development.
MS. OTTE shared that her husband, who has spent 46 years in the
field of law enforcement in Alaska and has seen horrific
examples of what one human being can do to another, is opposed
to the implementation of the death penalty. Indicating that her
husband is not alone in that regard, she said that most of the
law enforcement officers in Alaska that she's had the
opportunity to get to know are adamantly opposed to
implementation of the death penalty. If vengeance is the
legislature's goal, then doesn't serving life in prison result
in greater suffering for the inmate than death? She encouraged
the members to go home tonight, look in the mirror, and ask
themselves whether they want to be personally responsible for
the death of another human being, whether they as Alaskans want
to lower themselves to the level of a killer, and whether they
themselves would take on the job of being the one to push the
button to end a person's life. She said that her assumption is
that their answers will be "No." In conclusion, Ms. Otte asked
members to please not pass HB 9 from committee.
MS. OTTE, in response to a question, reiterated that Alaska
Natives are overrepresented in the prison population, and that
people who cannot afford legal representation would be the ones
who would suffer the most.
1:39:38 PM
CHARLES CAMPBELL, after relaying that he is a former director of
the [then] Division of Corrections under the Hammond
Administration and, in various roles, has been involved with
corrections and criminal justice for quite some time, said he
opposes HB 9 and has opposed all death penalty restoration
proposals since coming to Alaska 30 years ago. He offered his
understanding that former Senator Robin Taylor, who'd introduced
a death penalty bill [during the Twentieth Alaska State
Legislature], has since indicated that he is now opposed to the
death penalty because of all the incidences of wrongful
convictions. Regardless that Alaskans pride themselves on being
different and not much inclined to be influenced by what people
think or do elsewhere, Mr. Campbell opined, it is not a good
idea to ignore the experience and tough lessons learned
elsewhere with regard to the death penalty, particularly given
that quite a few jurisdictions across the country are now
looking, for fiscal reasons, at ways to discontinue all death
penalty prosecutions, and given that legislation to repeal death
penalty statutes is under serious consideration in seven states
- with repeal likely to occur in three of those states.
MR. CAMPBELL posited that it has become quite obvious that the
death penalty is the most problematic and useless of all
criminal justice sanctions - and extremely expensive. He
surmised that others have already spoken on the death penalty's
inordinate cost, its lack of value as a deterrent, and its lack
of fairness in application. He emphasized that the death
penalty is destructive to the families of murder victims. He
offered his understanding that in 1972, the U.S. Supreme Court
struck down the use of the death penalty throughout the country,
and then, after four years, the Gregg v. Georgia decision
restored the constitutionality of capital punishment but with
very stringent requirements, and so the appeals of capital
punishment cases now take many years - never less than six or
seven years - and meanwhile the families of murder victims
cannot properly get on with their grieving, cannot have closure
to the terrible tragedy they've experienced.
MR. CAMPBELL surmised that these delays tend to encourage
ongoing bitterness, frustration, and unhappiness for years. It
is so much better, he opined, when the matter can be settled in
a year or two as is the case in Alaska and other states
enlightened enough to not have the death penalty; a 99-year
sentence with appeals exhausted within a year or two is more
useful in bringing closure. In conclusion, he urged members to
listen to the pleas and advice of all those who've testified,
and to lay "this ill-considered death penalty idea aside once
and for all."
MR. CAMPBELL, in response to questions, said that although the
loved ones of a murdered person may not ever have closure, a
punishment that is actually administered comes closer to
providing closure; that even if it could be shown that the cost
of execution was less than the cost of lifetime incarceration,
he would not change his mind; and that even if it were certain
that an innocent person would not be executed, he would not
change his mind. Remarking that he has been involved with the
field of corrections for 60 years, he said he has been opposed
to the death penalty for much longer than that due to the
teachings of his father - a Baptist preacher during the time
that Bruno Hauptmann was on death row; his father made it clear
to him that the death penalty was wrong. Convinced by the
evidence, he added, he also happens to have strong moral beliefs
[against] the death penalty.
1:46:55 PM
GEORGE SILIDES, Reverend, Rector, Holy Trinity Episcopal Church,
noting that prior speakers have already addressed [many of the
points he was going to raise], said that the Episcopal church,
as a denomination, has gone on record since 1958 as being
opposed to the death penalty, and that members of the Episcopal
church, in large, in Alaska, are very much opposed to the death
penalty. He said that as the former vicar of St. Stephen's
Episcopal Church in Fort Yukon, Alaska, and as regional
missioner along the Yukon [River] - from Eagle to Stevens
Village - he's worked among people who didn't have the kind of
law enforcement presence that might have been helpful in many
kinds of criminal cases. He said he finds it difficult to
believe that the State - already lacking the resources necessary
to do a proper job of investigating lesser crimes - has at its
disposal the resources necessary to properly investigate the
circumstances surrounding a death penalty case sufficient to
justify executing someone - something that can never be undone
should exculpatory evidence later come to light.
FATHER SILIDES explained that for 12 years, as a priest living
in San Francisco, California, it was his unfortunate privilege
and honor to make regular visits to San Quentin State Prison as
part of a renewal ministry, and to stand vigil outside the gate
of the prison at every execution. The emotions of everyone
outside the prison gate - regardless of which side of the death
penalty issue they were on - were the same every single time an
execution occurred. He said that although some would argue that
it is helpful for [the legislature and Alaska's citizens] to
have the conversation HB 9 is engendering, the vitriol that
would arise once a law like HB 9 is passed "is beyond the
understanding of any of those who have not witnessed it." [That
vitriol] would deeply rend the social fabric of the state and,
in particular, whenever an execution takes place, of the
community where the death house is located.
FATHER SILIDES predicted that those who aren't present at any
execution that takes place will lob [verbal] bombs at each other
via e-mail and the Internet and media sound bites. This does
nothing, he opined, to enhance the quality of life for the rest
of the citizens of the state as they, at each and every
execution, go through the process of debating "whether this is
the person, this time, who should properly be executed, or
whether, perhaps, we might be able convince someone of an
extenuating [circumstance] that prevents us [from] having to
take responsibility for ending another human life." He urged
the committee to not put the state in the position of having to
undergo the same kind of agony that plagues the states with the
death penalty each and every time an execution takes place.
1:52:02 PM
FATHER SILIDES, in response to the question of what he would say
to the family member of a murder victim, said that from personal
experience, there is no final comfort to be provided by himself,
though some comfort can be given when "one meets the person in
their pain and acknowledges it and says that the crime is
heinous and the pain is beyond measure." The moral depravity of
the person who may have committed the crime is not at issue;
instead at issue is the moral strength, fabric, and ongoing life
of the person who is suffering, the one who's lost, and what
kind of life does he/she want to live going forward. He added:
That isn't heard, sometimes, immediately, but it does
seem to take seed ..., does seem to come to fruition
later, that they do not want to, in any way, become
the person who committed the crime. ... It takes a
deep relating to a person to be able to say what
follows from that. ... There is no generic answer to
the question other than, most of the time, the answer
lies at ... who they are and who they wish to become,
and the journey is going to be through terrible pain,
in any case. But I guess my counsel has always been,
"Do you want to be responsible, for the rest of your
life, should you ever come to a clarity of mind and
peace about the death, to have it infected by being
responsible for further injury."
FATHER SILIDES, in response to another question, said that the
responsibility of every [murder] is always that of the
perpetrator - the crime lies with the person who does the
killing - regardless of whether he/she is a convicted killer who
escapes from prison or is released on a technicality or
continues to [murder] in spite of steps being taken to stop
him/her; the actual criminal behavior is his/hers. He said his
counsel is, "the social fabric is ours to preserve regardless of
those that seek to destroy it."
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL pointed out that the State is tasked with
holding people accountable and protecting its citizens, and
surmised that the question being raised is whether the current
justice system is adequate to that task.
1:59:19 PM
ALFRED McKINLEY, SR., Alaska Native Brotherhood (ANB) Grand Camp
- after mentioning that he is a member of ANB Grand Camp's
Executive Committee, and is a delegate to the Central Council of
the Tlingit and Haida Indian Tribes of Alaska (CCTHITA) and
serves on its Judiciary Committee - posited that one of the
reasons why the death penalty was abolished during territorial
days was because the people of Alaska recognized it as being
discriminatory. Discrimination is still a problem, and should
HB 9 pass, only the minorities will be affected. Currently
Alaska Natives receive longer sentences, and often can't afford
to hire a private defense lawyer. Furthermore, there is no law
enforcement presence in many rural villages, and thus there is
no one to address even the problem of bootleg alcohol and drug
importation.
MR. McKINLEY indicated that a former police chief, Frank C.
White, Sr., relayed to him that back during territorial days,
Alaska Natives would get arrested for certain things that white
people wouldn't get arrested for, and were being charged with
more serious crimes than white people were for the same acts.
He also indicated that Alaska Natives oppose capital punishment
because of the discrimination present in the justice system. In
conclusion, he referred to proposed AS 12.58.010 and its
stipulation that it will be the attorney general who would seek
the death penalty, and pointed out that the attorney general is
appointed and thus it's a political position.
REPRESENTATIVE HOLMES, in response to a question, explained that
the provisions in the bill referring to the supreme court are
referring to the Alaska Supreme Court.
2:04:57 PM
ALBERT JUDSON said he is diametrically opposed to the death
penalty, and relayed that an April 9, 2007, a report by the
American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) illustrates that of the
3,350 people on death row, over 40 percent are African American,
and that a disproportionate number of Native Americans, Latinos,
Asians, mentally disabled persons, and poor people comprise the
rest. Use of the term "capital punishment" is ironic, he
opined, in that those with the capital don't get punished.
Capital punishment is not a deterrent, either; states with the
death penalty don't have lower crime rates or lower murder
rates. The death penalty contributes further to the disparity
of race because there is a rush to judgment and everything is
assumed just because the defendant is a member of a minority
group. Since 1973, 123 people in 25 states [have been
exonerated or released from death row], and out of those 123
people, 23 innocent people had spent most of their life in
prison, on death row. He offered his understanding that 25 of
[the 123] people have been executed, and 25 were found not
guilty because of DNA evidence.
MR. JUDSON said that in 1970, 55 people were executed, and that
between 1980 and 1985, 20 people were executed; it is not known
how many of those [75 people] were actually innocent. There is
a disproportionate number of Alaska Natives who are imprisoned,
and once they are in the prison system, regardless of what they
were charged with, they simply become part of the woodwork
because of a lack of effective counsel. He opined that public
defenders are not as effective as private attorneys, and that
the points he's raised should be considered by members before
they go any further with HB 9. In response to a question, he
offered his belief that the disproportionate number of Alaska
Natives in Alaska's prison system is due to a combination of
things. For example, when he has discussions with Native
leaders, the thought is that the thing that has had the biggest
negative impact on Native peoples was the introduction of the
current financial system because it destroyed their system of
bartering and their economic sustainability.
2:11:55 PM
MONTE SHADE said he is absolutely for the death penalty and, as
a white person, favors the execution of as many white candidates
as will qualify for that penalty. He said he has never viewed
the death penalty as a punishment but only as a deterrent. He
then offered his belief that the execution of Russian deserters
during the campaign against Berlin decreased the number of
deserters thereafter; that the execution of Private Eddie Slovik
in World War II resulted in the end of all desertions by U.S.
soldiers; and that the execution of Bruno Hauptmann resulted in
the end of all kidnappings until after World War II. He then
mentioned the names of [executed] convicted killers Martha Beck,
Raymond Fernandez, Carla Faye Tucker, Gary Gilmore, John Wayne
Gacy [Jr.], and Ted Bundy, and referred to the Boston Strangler.
MR. SHADE offered his understanding that Cuba has a "death rate
of .02 per 100,000 residents, Turkey .04 per 100,000, Saudi
Arabia .04"; that "countless other death penalty nations" have
no problem at all with murder; and that the U.S. has a 16-times
greater per capita murder rate than the aforementioned nations.
Those [death penalty] nations make an example of the condemned;
they don't hide their execution, they display and widely
publicize them, and this slows the murder rate in those
countries to a crawl, he opined, adding that life sentences mean
nothing as a deterrent in those countries. He offered his
understanding that the European Union (EU) spends "tens of
millions of dollars through U.S. organizations" to fight against
or abolish the death penalty in the U.S., but that many EU
member governments are attempting to reestablish the death
penalty in order to deal with crime, murder, and terrorism.
MR. SHADE went on to say:
Alaska, too, is a an extremely murderous state, and
due to the 2-minute attention spans [of] so many
residents, I must bring to their memory the horrific
slaughter and dismemberment of a multitude of Native
women on Chena Hot Springs Road; also the killing
spree from Fairbanks to Manly Hot Springs, the murder
of a State police officer, and a number of others by
an animal named [Silka] ... in Manley Hot Springs; the
(indisc.) road killings by ... [a U.S.] Air Force NCO;
and then also the seven or eight murders in Bethel;
and who can forget the baker from Anchorage who hunted
down dozens of women as if they were nothing but
insects and then slaughtered them. The one example,
though, kept so quite in the North and so typical of
an Alaska serial crime, though not in Alaska: 58
innocent women raped, tortured, murdered, and
dismembered then fed to his hogs, which he butchered
and sold to dozens of Alaskans traveling through
British Columbia to Alaska.
2:16:39 PM
JIM BETTS, State Advocate, Alaska State Council, Knights of
Columbus, said that both he and the Knights of Columbus are
opposed to the passage of HB 9, and expressed a preference for
burying the bill, not another body. He stressed that HB 9 must
be defeated. He added:
Remember that we are an evolving creation, and we as
humans are mandated to improve and not diminish our
human condition. The idea that we might deprive
another human [of] life ... as quid pro quo - an eye
for an eye - is an old and untenable cliche. The idea
that the death penalty is a deterrent - we are not
convinced. We must not live in a culture of death.
... We are not here to create another wrong, if we
execute another person who may be innocent. We have
alternatives; life imprisonment without possibility of
parole speaks volumes to the journey we have made from
crude logic, barbarism, and brutality.
Let us evolve our actions, let us set the bar of human
response above these base animal [instincts], to leave
the cruelty and the nihilists, and move to a world
where we turn our cheeks to kneejerk-punishment
reactions. Now is the time to be heard, unabashed,
certain and resolved, that life in any form is to be
cherished. Life is precious, from the womb to the
tomb, and, as such, we turn away from the culture of
death and create instead a culture of life. Death,
and death alone, will be the time for final reckoning,
and all humans will reconcile with god - that judgment
is his and his alone.
MR. BETTS, in response to a question, he offered his belief that
the goal of incarceration is to restrict the access of certain
individuals to the general population.
2:20:20 PM
MIKE SMITH, Tanana Chiefs Conference (TCC), after noting that
the TCC is composed of the 42 communities and tribes in the
Interior, said that historically, the tribes in the region have
a well-documented concern about racial disparities in Alaska's
justice system experienced by Alaska Natives. The TCC, in fact,
has a standing resolution on this issue. The statistics clearly
illustrate that Alaska Natives have a higher rate of
convictions, and receive more onerous sentences than any other
racial group in Alaska; Alaska Natives comprise only 15-18
percent of Alaska's population, but comprise roughly 36 percent
of correctional-facility inmates. During territorial days, the
majority of convicted murderers were white, but the majority of
people executed were Natives and other minorities.
MR. SMITH surmised that the critical issue is not whether people
favor or oppose the death penalty, but rather who will be
executed under the death penalty. The well-documented
imposition of the death penalty upon innocent people is an
obvious concern, but of equal concern is the disproportionate
imposition of the death penalty upon racial minorities - the
importance of race as a factor in the imposition of capital
punishment is also well documented. For example, under federal
law, the death penalty may be imposed for certain drug-
trafficking crimes, and the [U.S. Government Accountability
Office (GAO)] has documented that 75 percent of those convicted
under that law were white, but that 89 percent of those executed
under that law were racial minorities. Racial inequality is
injected into the justice system at various points of discretion
exercised by police, prosecutors, judges, and juries. At each
of these points of discretion, decisions are dominated by non-
Native people. This discretion in Alaska and elsewhere in the
nation disfavors racial minorities, and acts against their best
interest.
MR. SMITH said that the TCC has long been concerned about the
disparate treatment of Native people by the Alaska justice
system, and that this concern was recently highlighted by the
racially-charged Hartman murder trial in Fairbanks in which some
people feel State prosecutors used what he characterized as
racial arguments and circumstantial evidence to obtain the
wrongful conviction of [three] young Native men in front of a
predominately white jury. Questions have been raised about the
failure of the police to make serious inquiries about white
persons of interest in this murder case; the Hartman murder
trial has raised serious concerns regarding the basic fairness
of the Alaska justice system towards Alaska Natives, and once
again reaffirms the longstanding concern that TCC delegates and
the TCC itself have about such inequalities. In conclusion, he
opined that before addressing the justness of a death penalty,
Alaska first needs to address the inequities within its criminal
justice system. Until that time, the question legislators must
face is whether it is proper to execute minorities in
disproportionate numbers compared to their population.
MR. SMITH, in response to a question, said that the TCC is
concerned about the disproportionate penalties imposed upon on
minorities.
CHAIR RAMRAS expressed his hope that racial injustices will
become a thing of the past.
2:26:45 PM
DEBORAH BLOOM said she is heartened to learn that only two
legislators have signed on as sponsors/cosponsors of HB 9.
After relaying that she has had family members who've been
murdered and was once raped in her own home, opined that she is
therefore familiar with the criminal justice system in Alaska,
adding that she is absolutely opposed to the death penalty.
Until it can be said that there are "perfect prosecutions," that
there is no need for appeals courts, and that there are no
innocent people [being incarcerated], there is no need for a
death penalty, because an execution can't be undone. She said
that she has proof of a criminal prosecution in which the police
fabricated evidence to show the jury and thereby committed
perjury; this illustrates that Alaska does not have perfect
prosecutions. If the death penalty is reinstated, she
indicated, then the State should also make prosecutors liable
for any wrongfully executed persons - they should themselves be
charged with the crime of "intentional murder" since it was
their intention to seek the death penalty. Given all the
problems already existing in the criminal justice system, Alaska
should not have a death penalty, she concluded.
2:30:57 PM
DON ROBERTS, JR., said, "I speak against this, ... it's simply
wrong." He characterized the arguments for making [executions]
fast or cheap or racially fair by executing more white people as
just side issues which don't make sense to him. It is simply
wrong, he reiterated, regardless of any steps taken to fix
inherent problems. The sponsor statement speaks of justice, he
noted, and said he can't help but wonder whether "that's really
a cup that you'd want to drink from at the same time; I see too
much in ... our state that is unjust and wrong, and people just
in positions that they shouldn't be." To take a life is simply
the wrong thing to do, he concluded. In response to a question,
he said that although he would want vengeance against someone
who murdered or raped a loved one of his, that is not justice,
and, again, it is simply wrong to kill a human being.
2:35:27 PM
JOHN NOVAK, Assistant District Attorney, 3rd Judicial District
(Anchorage), District Attorneys, Department of Law (DOL),
characterizing HB 9 as an important bill, relayed that he would
be speaking to the argument that a sentence of life imprisonment
without possibility of parole is an adequate sentence with which
to protect the public. He offered his belief that that is
simply not the case - innocent people are still killed by people
who are serving life sentences. He then spoke of a case
involving Raymond Cheely and Douglas Gustafson, who, in 1990,
participated in a drive-by shooting on the Glenn Highway between
Eagle River and Anchorage, killing one person - a passenger in
another car. Tried separately, both Mr. Cheely and Mr.
Gustafson were convicted and each received a sentence in excess
of [59] years. However, while in prison, they - along with Mr.
Gustafson's brother and sister - plotted to kill George Kerr, a
passenger in their vehicle at the time of the shooting who had
testified against them. The four conspirators made and sent a
bomb to Mr. Kerr, but because he was out of town at the time,
the bomb instead killed his father and maimed his mother.
MR. NOVAK indicated that the four conspirators had also made
plans to kill the trial judge and the prosecutor in [their
original cases], and were convicted of [killing Mr. Kerr's
father] in federal court. Mr. Novak asserted that had the death
penalty been available, it would have acted as a deterrent in
that situation because once Mr. Cheely and Mr. Gustafson were
executed for the original murder, they wouldn't have been able
to kill again.
MR. NOVAK then spoke of a case involving Tim Donnelly and Peter
Schwin; Mr. Donnelly, while serving time in federal prison for a
drug-related murder, murdered another inmate. Another case, he
relayed, involves Carl Abuhl, who, while serving a 60-year
sentence for a murder he committed in Ketchikan, killed his
cellmate. During Mr. Abuhl's subsequent trial, Mr. Novak
asserted, Mr. Abuhl confessed to further murders and said that
he wanted to be executed. Mr. Novak indicated that the
aforementioned cases demonstrate that [convicted murderers],
even while serving prison sentences, continue to kill. He went
on to say:
Is there a way to protect the innocent people in our
community short of capital punishment? I submit that
there isn't. I don't think there's going to be a lot
of cases where ... [the State is] going to be seeking
the death penalty, but in my experience, are there
some cases? You bet.
MR. NOVAK shared his belief that when he's spoken to his
colleagues about Mr. Gustafson and Mr. Cheely, they'd all
recognized the appropriateness of the death penalty in that
case. Acknowledging that HB 9 might be improved upon, he opined
that there is no appropriate less-harsh alternative to the death
penalty in the case of Mr. Gustafson and Mr. Cheely.
2:46:03 PM
REPRESENTATIVE HOLMES asked Mr. Novak whether he is advocating
for HB 9.
MR. NOVAK said that on behalf of the DOL, he is simply pointing
out the need for specific deterrence, but is not able to speak
to whether the administration supports HB 9 specifically. He
added, "What I can tell you is based on my experience in the
Department of law: the Department of Law believes it's
appropriate in certain cases."
REPRESENTATIVE HOLMES noted that prior testimony indicated that
the Department of Law did not take a position on HB 9.
2:47:08 PM
SUSAN S. McLEAN, Acting Deputy Attorney General, Criminal
Division, Department of Law (DOL), to clarify, stated that the
administration supports the death penalty in concept but
believes that the details with regard to what specific
legislation it would support have yet to be worked out.
REPRESENTATIVE LYNN questioned whether the murders committed by
the aforementioned people while they were incarcerated could
have still been carried out during the usual lengthy appeal
process associated with death penalty cases.
MR. NOVAK said "Certainly," adding that in his experience, cases
that don't involve the death penalty commonly go on for years
and years and years. In Anchorage, he relayed, the time it
takes for a [murder] trial to begin is commonly three years from
the time a person is charged. He noted that he, himself, is
currently working on murder cases that are more 25 years old.
The concept that litigation on "non-capital" murder cases stops
is just wrong, he concluded - "they go on and they go on and
they go on." Throughout all that time, he has to call the
family members of murder victims and keep them updated about
their ongoing cases.
REPRESENTATIVE LYNN surmised, then, that the aforementioned
additional murders could still have been committed even if the
death penalty had been in place.
[HB 9, Version E, was held over.]
HB 101 - EXEMPTIONS: LIFE INSURANCE; ANNUITIES
2:49:54 PM
CHAIR RAMRAS announced that the final order of business would be
HOUSE BILL NO. 101, "An Act exempting the full value of life
insurance and annuity contracts from levy to satisfy unsecured
debt, and amending the description of earnings, income, cash,
and other assets relating to garnishment of life insurance
proceeds payable upon the death of an insured."
2:50:36 PM
REPRESENTATIVE DAHLSTROM moved to adopt the proposed committee
substitute (CS) for HB 101, Version 26-LS0176\E, Bailey,
2/19/09, as the work draft. There being no objection, Version E
was before the committee.
2:50:50 PM
AMANDA MORTENSEN, Intern, Representative John Coghill, Alaska
State Legislature, explained that HB 101 would exempt the full
value of life insurance and annuity [contracts] from attachment
by creditors, thereby protecting Alaskan families and their
ability to plan for their future. And although HB 101 will not
prevent creditors from garnishing a person's other assets in
order to satisfy a debt, it would protect the death benefits of
a spouse or dependant of the debtor if he/she is not yet
deceased. Retirement plans are currently protected under
federal law, and HB 101 would offer similar protection to
someone who had used an annuity contract in lieu of a retirement
plan. With the uncertainty of the social security system,
Alaskan families need to be able to legitimately plan for their
future.
MS. MORTENSEN - noting that Title 9 pertains to the Code of
Civil Procedure, that Chapter 09.38 pertains to the Alaska
Exemptions Act, that AS 09.38.025 pertains to exemption of
unmatured life insurance and annuity contracts, and that AS
09.38.030 pertains to exemption of earnings and liquid assets -
explained that Section 1 of the bill would remove the existing
$10,000 exemption cap on life insurance and annuity contracts,
and that Section 2 would remove the words "or payable" from AS
09.38.030(e)(4) in order to clarify a potential ambiguity
regarding garnishing a death benefit on an individual who has
not yet passed away.
MS. MORTENSEN relayed that as of May 2007, 10 other states
exempt life insurance and annuity contracts - 100 percent - from
creditors. In conclusion, she noted that Version E also no
longer contains the word "unsecured" in the title; this will
allow the bill to apply to debts other than just unsecured
debts.
2:53:10 PM
REPRESENTATIVE HOLMES expressed interest in hearing more about
the concept of including all debts as opposed to just unsecured
debts.
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL, speaking as the sponsor of HB 101, noted
that that issue arose in the bill's last committee of referral,
and offered his belief that HB 101 is clear with regard to which
products will be exempt from garnishment.
[HB 101, Version E, was held over.]
2:55:32 PM
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the House
Judiciary Standing Committee meeting was adjourned at 2:55 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| CS101.pdf |
HJUD 3/2/2009 1:00:00 PM |
|
| HB101Packet.pdf |
HJUD 3/2/2009 1:00:00 PM |
HB 101 |
| HB13Support.pdf |
HJUD 3/2/2009 1:00:00 PM |
HB 13 |
| HB9Support7.pdf |
HJUD 3/2/2009 1:00:00 PM |
HB 9 |
| HB9Support8.pdf |
HJUD 3/2/2009 1:00:00 PM |
HB 9 |
| HB13Support1.pdf |
HJUD 3/2/2009 1:00:00 PM |
HB 13 |
| HB9Support10.pdf |
HJUD 3/2/2009 1:00:00 PM |
HB 9 |
| HB9Support12.pdf |
HJUD 3/2/2009 1:00:00 PM |
HB 9 |