03/04/2013 01:00 PM House JUDICIARY
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| SJR2 | |
| SJR6 | |
| HB83 | |
| HB105 | |
| HB81 | |
| Adjourn |
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | HB 104 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | HB 105 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | SJR 2 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | SJR 6 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| += | HB 83 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 81 | TELECONFERENCED | |
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE JUDICIARY STANDING COMMITTEE
March 4, 2013
1:11 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Wes Keller, Chair
Representative Bob Lynn, Vice Chair
Representative Neal Foster
Representative Charisse Millett
Representative Lance Pruitt
Representative Max Gruenberg
MEMBERS ABSENT
Representative Gabrielle LeDoux
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
CS FOR SENATE JOINT RESOLUTION NO. 2(JUD)
Commending and supporting actions taken by the Office of the
Governor, the attorney general, and the commissioner of natural
resources to protect the state from federal government incursion
into the care and management of state resources and to promote
the economic prosperity of the state; and urging the United
States Congress and the President of the United States to limit
federal government overreach into management of state resources.
- MOVED HCS CSSJR 2(JUD) OUT OF COMMITTEE
SENATE JOINT RESOLUTION NO. 6
Urging the United States Congress not to relinquish to the
office of the President of the United States the legislative
duty to safeguard our most fundamental right; and urging the
President of the United States to refrain from any further
efforts to restrict ownership of firearms.
- MOVED HCS SJR 6(JUD) OUT OF COMMITTEE
HOUSE BILL NO. 83
"An Act relating to certain federal statutes, regulations,
presidential executive orders, and secretarial orders; relating
to the duties of the attorney general; and providing for an
effective date."
- MOVED CSHB 83(JUD) OUT OF COMMITTEE
HOUSE BILL NO. 105
"An Act relating to theft and property offenses; and providing
for an effective date."
- HEARD & HELD
HOUSE BILL NO. 81
"An Act making corrective amendments to the Alaska Statutes as
recommended by the revisor of statutes; and providing for an
effective date."
- HEARD & HELD
HOUSE BILL NO. 104
"An Act relating to election practices and procedures; relating
to public records; relating to the election of an advisory
school board in a regional educational attendance area; and
providing for an effective date."
- SCHEDULED BUT NOT HEARD
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
BILL: SJR 2
SHORT TITLE: LIMIT FEDERAL INTERVENTION IN STATE
SPONSOR(S): SENATOR(S) DYSON
01/16/13 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
01/16/13 (S) JUD
01/28/13 (S) JUD AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
01/28/13 (S) Heard & Held
01/28/13 (S) MINUTE(JUD)
02/01/13 (S) JUD AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
02/01/13 (S) Moved CSSJR 2(JUD) Out of Committee
02/01/13 (S) MINUTE(JUD)
02/04/13 (S) JUD RPT CS 2DP 1NR SAME TITLE
02/04/13 (S) DP: COGHILL, DYSON
02/04/13 (S) NR: OLSON
02/11/13 (S) TRANSMITTED TO (H)
02/11/13 (S) VERSION: CSSJR 2(JUD)
02/13/13 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
02/13/13 (H) JUD
03/04/13 (H) JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120
BILL: SJR 6
SHORT TITLE: OPPOSE EXECUTIVE ORDERS ON GUN CONTROL
SPONSOR(S): SENATOR(S) DYSON
01/25/13 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
01/25/13 (S) JUD
02/04/13 (S) JUD AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
02/04/13 (S) Heard & Held
02/04/13 (S) MINUTE(JUD)
02/08/13 (S) JUD AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
02/08/13 (S) Moved SJR 6 Out of Committee
02/08/13 (S) MINUTE(JUD)
02/11/13 (S) JUD RPT 3DP
02/11/13 (S) DP: COGHILL, WIELECHOWSKI, DYSON
02/20/13 (S) TRANSMITTED TO (H)
02/20/13 (S) VERSION: SJR 6
02/22/13 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
02/22/13 (H) JUD
03/04/13 (H) JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120
BILL: HB 83
SHORT TITLE: FEDERAL REGULATIONS & EXECUTIVE ORDERS
SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S) KELLER
01/22/13 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
01/22/13 (H) JUD
02/08/13 (H) JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120
02/08/13 (H) Heard & Held
02/08/13 (H) MINUTE(JUD)
02/18/13 (H) JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120
02/18/13 (H) Scheduled But Not Heard
02/25/13 (H) JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120
02/25/13 (H) Scheduled But Not Heard
02/27/13 (H) JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120
02/27/13 (H) Heard & Held
02/27/13 (H) MINUTE(JUD)
03/04/13 (H) JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120
BILL: HB 105
SHORT TITLE: PROPERTY CRIMES
SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S) THOMPSON
02/06/13 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
02/06/13 (H) JUD
03/04/13 (H) JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120
BILL: HB 81
SHORT TITLE: 2013 REVISOR'S BILL
SPONSOR(S): RULES BY REQUEST OF LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL
01/22/13 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
01/22/13 (H) JUD
03/01/13 (H) JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120
03/01/13 (H) Heard & Held
03/01/13 (H) MINUTE(JUD)
03/04/13 (H) JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120
WITNESS REGISTER
SENATOR FRED DYSON
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Sponsor of SJR 2.
SENATOR FRED DYSON
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Sponsor of SJR 6.
CHARLES KOPP, Staff
Senator Fred Dyson
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: During discussion of SJR 6, responded to
comments and a question on behalf of the sponsor, Senator Dyson.
JIM POUND, Staff
Representative Wes Keller
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: During discussion of HB 83, explained some
of the changes included in the proposed committee
substitute (CS), Version C, on behalf of the sponsor,
Representative Keller.
DAVID JONES, Senior Assistant Attorney General
Opinions, Appeals, & Ethics Section
Civil Division (Anchorage)
Department of Law (DOL)
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Responded to questions during discussion of
HB 83.
JANE W. PIERSON, Staff
Representative Steve Thompson
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented HB 105 on behalf of the sponsor,
Representative Thompson.
THOMAS W. STENSON, Legal Director
American Civil Liberties Union of Alaska (ACLU of Alaska)
Foundation
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided a comment during discussion of
HB 105.
DOUGLAS MOODY, Deputy Public Defender
Criminal Division
Central Office
Public Defender Agency (PDA)
Department of Administration (DOA)
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided comments during discussion of
HB 105.
CHRIS NETTLES (ph), Business Owner;
National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB)
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified against HB 105.
NANCY MEADE, General Counsel
Administrative Staff
Office of the Administrative Director
Alaska Court System (ACS)
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided comments and responded to
questions during discussion of HB 105.
ACTION NARRATIVE
1:11:50 PM
CHAIR WES KELLER called the House Judiciary Standing Committee
meeting to order at 1:11 p.m. Representatives Keller, Pruitt,
Gruenberg, and Foster were present at the call to order.
Representatives Lynn and Millett arrived as the meeting was in
progress. Representative LeDoux was excused.
SJR 2 - LIMIT FEDERAL INTERVENTION IN STATE
1:13:10 PM
CHAIR KELLER announced that the first order of business would be
CS FOR SENATE JOINT RESOLUTION NO. 2(JUD), Commending and
supporting actions taken by the Office of the Governor, the
attorney general, and the commissioner of natural resources to
protect the state from federal government incursion into the
care and management of state resources and to promote the
economic prosperity of the state; and urging the United States
Congress and the President of the United States to limit federal
government overreach into management of state resources.
1:13:26 PM
SENATOR FRED DYSON, Alaska State Legislature, sponsor, said of
CSSJR 2(JUD), "It's basically saying to the feds, 'We can manage
our own area and please don't keep extending your reach and
interfering with our stewardship of our land and slowing down
... development.'" Paraphrasing from a February 21, 2012,
article written by the Senate majority press secretary, he
offered his understanding that U.S. Senator Lisa Murkowski has
also spoken on the issue of federal overreach.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG referred to the language on page 1,
lines 11-12, of CSSJR 2(JUD) that reads, "challenged the federal
government in court for its misuse of the Endangered Species
Act", and suggested that the word, "interpretation" be used
instead of the word "misuse"; the language would then read,
"challenged the federal government in court for its
interpretation of the Endangered Species Act". He offered his
understanding that a court of appeals has recently ruled in
favor of the federal government and against the state in a case
involving polar bears.
SENATOR DYSON said he would not object to such a change, and
acknowledged that it might improve the resolution.
CHAIR KELLER closed public testimony on SJR 2.
1:17:42 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG made a motion to adopt Amendment 1, to
replace the word, "misuse" on page 1, line 12, with the word,
"interpretation". There being no objection, Amendment 1 was
adopted.
1:18:07 PM
REPRESENTATIVE PRUITT moved to report CSSJR 2(JUD), as amended,
out of committee with individual recommendations and the
accompanying fiscal notes. There being no objection,
HCS CSSJR 2(JUD) was reported from the House Judiciary Standing
Committee.
SJR 6 - OPPOSE EXECUTIVE ORDERS ON GUN CONTROL
1:18:40 PM
CHAIR KELLER announced that the next order of business would be
SENATE JOINT RESOLUTION NO. 6, Urging the United States Congress
not to relinquish to the office of the President of the United
States the legislative duty to safeguard our most fundamental
right; and urging the President of the United States to refrain
from any further efforts to restrict ownership of firearms.
1:18:46 PM
SENATOR FRED DYSON, Alaska State Legislature, sponsor, indicated
that SJR 6 addresses the Second Amendment to the U.S.
Constitution and the right of the people to keep and bear arms.
He offered his understanding that historically, tyrants and
oppressors have done all they could to disarm the population.
He then shared stories that he'd heard about. With regard to
SJR 6, he remarked, "This is another effort for us to state our
views and our concerns," and said he would appreciate the
committee's support.
REPRESENTATIVE LYNN characterized SJR 6 as being very timely.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG referred to the language on page 1,
lines 12-13, that read, "on January 16, 2013, President Barack
Obama issued 23 Executive Orders". He offered his understanding
that the President had instead issued items that fall under the
category of executive actions, not executive orders, and asked,
therefore, whether the term, "23 Executive Orders" could be
replaced with the term, "23 executive actions".
SENATOR DYSON indicated agreement.
1:27:24 PM
CHARLES KOPP, Staff, Senator Fred Dyson, Alaska State
Legislature, on behalf of the sponsor, Senator Dyson, and in
response to comments, offered his understanding that executive
orders and executive actions both have the force of law and mean
the same thing.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG referred to the language on page 3,
line 12, that read, "and defend those rights by whatever means
necessary", and said he didn't want the legislature to be seen
as inciting a riot, for example, and asked, therefore, whether
the word, "legal" could be inserted before the word, "means";
the language would then instead read, "and defend those rights
by whatever legal means necessary".
MR. KOPP indicated disfavor with such a change.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG argued that he didn't want the
legislature to be seen as endorsing violence.
REPRESENTATIVE MILLETT offered her belief that that language
wouldn't be so interpreted, and said she likes the language as
is.
SENATOR DYSON expressed a preference for keeping that language
as is.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG referred to the language on page 3,
line 25, that read, "refrain from any further efforts to
restrict firearms ownership", and suggested that either the
words, "contrary to law" or the words, "without congressional
approval" be added after the word "ownership". That language
would then be in keeping with the language on page 3, line 3,
that reads, "without the full consent of Congress".
SENATOR DYSON expressed disfavor with such a change.
CHAIR KELLER, after ascertaining that no one else wished to
testify, closed public testimony on SJR 6.
1:31:32 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG made a motion to adopt Amendment 1, to
delete the word, "Orders" on page 1, line 13, and replace it
with the word, "actions". There being no objection, Amendment 1
was adopted.
1:32:17 PM
REPRESENTATIVE LYNN moved to report SJR 6, as amended, out of
committee with individual recommendations and the accompanying
fiscal notes. There being no objection, HCS SJR 6(JUD) was
reported from the House Judiciary Standing Committee.
The committee took an at-ease from 1:33 p.m. to 1:34 p.m.
HB 83 - FEDERAL REGULATIONS & EXECUTIVE ORDERS
1:34:42 PM
CHAIR KELLER announced that the next order of business would be
HOUSE BILL NO. 83, "An Act relating to certain federal statutes,
regulations, presidential executive orders, and secretarial
orders; relating to the duties of the attorney general; and
providing for an effective date."
1:35:00 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG moved to adopt the proposed committee
substitute (CS) for HB 83, Version 28-LS0328\C, Gardner, 3/4/13,
as the working document. There being no objection, Version C
was before the committee.
1:35:26 PM
JIM POUND, Staff, Representative Wes Keller, Alaska State
Legislature, on behalf of the sponsor, Representative Keller,
explained that under Version C of HB 83, the legislative
findings outlined in Section 1 have been changed; the bill's
proposed new subsection (h) to AS 44.23.020 now uses the
phrases, "attorney general concludes" and "report the
conclusions", instead of the phrases, "attorney general finds"
and "report the findings"; and the bill's proposed new
AS 44.23.020(h)(3) now contains a proposed new subparagraph (D)
that requires the written opinion included in the attorney
general's report to also explain litigation the attorney general
is a party to or aware of regarding conflicts with a federal
statute, [federal] regulation, presidential executive order, or
secretarial order.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG questioned whether the phrase in
Version C's proposed new AS 44.23.020(h) that reads, "but also
finds" should be changed to the phrase, "but also concludes".
CHAIR KELLER, speaking as the sponsor of HB 83, relayed that he
didn't want to limit the number of reports the attorney general
provides.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG agreed. He offered his belief,
however, that the more correct word to use in the context of
Version C's proposed new AS 44.23.020(h) is "concludes", rather
than "finds".
1:42:01 PM
DAVID JONES, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Opinions,
Appeals, & Ethics Section, Civil Division (Anchorage),
Department of Law (DOL), disagreed. If the intent is to ensure
that the attorney general provides a report before waiting until
he/she is absolutely certain that a federal statute, [federal]
regulation, presidential executive order, or secretarial order
is unconstitutional or was not properly adopted, then using the
word, "finds" or "believes" or "determines" would be better than
using the word, "concludes".
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG indicated that he would be amenable to
using the word, "believes".
MR. JONES, in response to a question and comments, said it
couldn't hurt to add the term, "presidential executive action"
to the list of items the bill is addressing.
MR. POUND, in response to further comments, suggested that HB 83
be changed such that the list of items it's addressing also
includes presidential executive actions and secretarial actions.
CHAIR KELLER, offering his understanding that no one else wished
to testify, closed public testimony on HB 83.
1:48:45 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG made a motion to adopt Amendment 1, to
add the words, "and actions" on page 1, line 1, after the term,
"presidential executive orders", and on page 1, line 2, after
the term, "secretarial orders".
CHAIR KELLER noted that there were no objections. [Although not
formally stated, the committee treated Amendment 1 as having
been adopted.]
1:49:45 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG made a motion to adopt Amendment 2, to
add the words, "and actions" on page 1, line 10, both after the
term, "presidential executive orders", and after the term,
"secretarial orders".
CHAIR KELLER noted that there were no objections. [Although not
formally stated, the committee treated Amendment 2 as having
been adopted.]
1:56:55 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG - after brief discussion regarding the
scope of changes the committee and sponsor wished to make to
Version C's proposed new AS 44.23.020(h) - made a motion to
adopt Amendment 3, to delete the word, "concludes" on page 2,
line 15, and insert the word, "believes"; to delete the word,
"finds" on page 2, line 18, and insert the word, "believes"; and
to delete the word, "conclusions" on page 2, line 21, and insert
the word, "findings". There being no objection, Amendment 3 was
adopted.
[During the aforementioned brief discussion, Mr. Jones had
indicated that Amendment 3's proposed changes would clarify that
subsection (h) is not addressing absolute determinations
regarding preemption and constitutionality; in other words, the
attorney need not be "absolutely certain" before providing a
report to the chairs of the House and Senate Standing Judiciary
Committees.]
MR. POUND noted that with the adoption of Amendments 1 and 2,
conforming changes should be made elsewhere in the bill with
regard to adding presidential executive actions and secretarial
actions to the bill's list of items it's addressing.
1:58:20 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG made a motion to adopt Conceptual
Amendment 4, to conform the rest of HB 83 with the changes made
via Amendments 1 and 2 with regard to adding the words, "and
actions" to the bill's list of items it's addressing. There
being no objection, Conceptual Amendment 4 was adopted.
1:59:11 PM
REPRESENTATIVE LYNN moved to report the proposed CS for HB 83,
Version 28-LS0328\C, Gardner, 3/4/13, as amended, out of
committee with individual recommendations and the accompanying
fiscal notes.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG objected and asked whether any other
technical changes ought to be made to HB 83.
MR. POUND offered his belief that none were needed.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG removed his objection to the motion.
CHAIR KELLER, noting that there were no further objections,
announced that CSHB 83(JUD) was reported from the House
Judiciary Standing Committee.
The committee took an at-ease from 2:00 p.m. to 2:02 p.m.
HB 105 - PROPERTY CRIMES
2:02:52 PM
CHAIR KELLER announced that the next order of business would be
HOUSE BILL NO. 105, "An Act relating to theft and property
offenses; and providing for an effective date."
2:03:24 PM
JANE W. PIERSON, Staff, Representative Steve Thompson, Alaska
State Legislature, on behalf of the sponsor, Representative
Thompson, explained that the purpose of HB 105 is to raise the
monetary-threshold amount that distinguishes certain felony-
level offenses against property from like misdemeanor-level
offenses. A handout included in members' packets from the
National Conference of State Legislatures' (NCSL's) report
titled, "Principles of Effective State Sentencing and
Corrections Policy" says in part:
Review and revision of mandatory minimum sentences for
some offenders and update of felony theft thresholds
are among the significant ways state legislatures are
modernizing criminal codes to reflect current
circumstances and needs
MS. PIERSON offered her understanding that to date, 22 other
states have adjusted their monetary-threshold amounts [for the
crime of theft], and that Alaska's current monetary-threshold
amounts for the crimes of theft - outlined in AS 11.46 - were
adopted back in 1978 and have not since been adjusted [for
inflation]. Making such adjustments for property crimes is
common throughout the country, and a handout included in
members' packets outlining the monetary-threshold amounts for
all 50 states [and the District of Columbia] illustrates that 29
other [jurisdictions] now have a monetary-threshold amount
higher than Alaska's; that 14 other [jurisdictions] have a
monetary-threshold amount the same as Alaska's current amount;
and that [7 other jurisdictions] have a monetary-threshold
amount lower than Alaska's.
MS. PIERSON explained that currently under AS 11.46.130(a), a
person who steals something with a value of $500 or more could
be charged with the crime of theft in the second degree - a
class C felony - and, if convicted, then suffer the consequences
of being a felon for the rest of his/her life. Raising the
monetary-threshold amount for the crimes of theft is a policy
call for the legislature to make. She then referred to two
charts - titled in part, "Criminal Theft Charges" and "Criminal
Theft Charge Dispositions" - prepared by the Alaska Court System
(ACS) and included in members' packets, and relayed that the ACS
was available to address the statistics included therein, which
include statistics regarding the crime of theft in the second
degree for calendar year 2012.
MS. PEIRSON assured the committee that in raising Alaska's
monetary-threshold amount distinguishing felony-level theft
crimes from misdemeanor-level theft crimes, the sponsor is not
indicating a belief that thieves should go free or not be
charged. Nobody likes a thief, and nobody wants to see a thief
go unpunished. Property crime victimizes everyone; whether a
victim is left feeling violated for having his/her possessions
stolen, or whether consumers are left with the financial burden
of making up for retail theft - everyone experiences the
problems caused by theft. Under HB 105, guilty persons will
still face justice, and the court could still require that
restitution and fines be paid, and could still be aggressive in
sentencing perpetrators to the fullest extent of the law. The
sponsor, she relayed, requests that the committee consider
HB 105 and its passage.
2:07:26 PM
MS. PEIRSON went on to explain that Section 1 of HB 105 would
amend AS 11.46.130(a) - again, addressing the class C felony
crime of theft in the second degree - by raising the monetary-
threshold amount from $500 to $1,500; conviction of a class C
felony could result in a maximum prison sentence of up to five
years and a maximum fine of up to $50,000. Section 2 of HB 105
would amend AS 11.46.140(a) - addressing the class A misdemeanor
crime of theft in the third degree - by raising the monetary-
threshold amount from a range of between $50 and $500, to a
range of between $250 and $1,500; conviction of a class A
misdemeanor could result in a maximum prison sentence of up to
one year and a maximum fine of up to $10,000. Section 3 of
HB 105 would amend AS 11.46.150(a) - addressing the class B
misdemeanor crime of theft in the fourth degree - by raising the
monetary-threshold amount from less than $50 to less than $250;
conviction of a class B misdemeanor could result in a maximum
prison sentence of up to 90 days and a maximum fine of up to
$2,000.
MS. PIERSON explained that with regard to the proposed new
monetary-threshold amounts, Section 4 of HB 105 would make
conforming changes to AS 11.46.220(c), addressing the crimes of
concealment of merchandize. Section 5 would make conforming
changes to AS 11.46.260(b), addressing the crimes of removal of
identification marks. Section 6 would make conforming changes
to AS 11.46.270(b), addressing the crimes of unlawful
possession. Section 7 would make conforming changes to
AS 11.46.280(d), addressing the crimes of issuing a bad check.
Section 8 would make conforming changes to AS 11.46.285(b),
addressing the crimes of fraudulent use of an access device.
Section 9 would make conforming changes to AS 11.46.360(a)(2),
addressing [one manifestation of] the class C felony crime of
vehicle theft in the first degree. Sections 10, 11, and 12,
respectively, would make conforming changes to AS 11.46.482(a),
to AS 11.46.484(a), and to AS 11.46.486(a) - addressing,
respectively, the class C felony crime of criminal mischief in
the third degree, the class A misdemeanor crime of criminal
mischief in the fourth degree, and the class B misdemeanor crime
of criminal mischief in the fifth degree.
MS. PIERSON relayed that Section 13 would make conforming
changes to AS 11.46.530(b), addressing the crimes of criminal
simulation. Section 14 would make conforming changes to
AS 11.46.620(d), addressing the crimes of misapplication of
property. Section 15 would make conforming changes to
AS 11.46.730(c), addressing the crimes of defrauding creditors.
Section 16 would add an applicability provision to Alaska's
uncodified law, stipulating that the statutes changed by the
provisions of HB 105 would apply to offenses committed on or
after the effective date of the Act, that being July 1, 2013, as
stipulated via Section 17 of the bill.
2:13:51 PM
REPRESENTATIVE MILLETT, pointing out that $500 is a lot of
money, questioned the rationale behind telling criminals, via
the adoption of HB 105, that they may now steal up to [$1,499]
worth of merchandize before being charged with a felony.
MS. PIERSON - acknowledging that theft is a terrible crime that
hurts people in a variety of ways - ventured that with the
passage of so much time since Alaska's current monetary-
threshold amounts were originally established, it is now
appropriate for the legislature to review them, particularly
given that they're in the low range compared to what most other
[jurisdictions in the country] now provide for. Furthermore, a
good percentage of theft crimes are not currently being resolved
at the felony level, and thus the changes proposed by the bill
could result in Alaska's law being more reflective of current
practice. She also acknowledged, though, that a lot of people,
particularly retailers, don't view HB 105 favorably.
REPRESENTATIVE MILLETT opined that HB 105 would be sending a
message that stealing is okay if the amount is low enough. "A
seasoned thief," she ventured, knows the statutory thresholds,
and so isn't going to steal something with a value that exceeds
a particular threshold.
MS. PIERSON offered her belief that most thieves are not that
intelligent and therefore don't weigh the consequences
associated with the value of what they are stealing.
REPRESENTATIVE PRUITT disagreed, opining that thieves are indeed
aware of the value of what they are stealing. He then referred
to Section 4 - addressing the crimes of concealment of
merchandise - and questioned why HB 105 is not also proposing a
monetary-threshold for concealing merchandise that is a firearm.
2:19:37 PM
MS. PIERSON explained that there was never a monetary threshold
outlined in statute for merchandise that is a firearm to begin
with.
CHAIR KELLER mentioned that his son has had property stolen from
him, and indicated that his concern with HB 105's proposed
changes revolves around the fact that the bill would indeed be
sending a message to Alaskans, many of whom have also been the
victim of theft and/or know others who have been. Enforcement
and investigatory resources for theft crimes are limited,
leaving only Alaska's stiff penalties for the crime of theft to
act as a deterrent, and yet the bill is proposing to raise
Alaska's monetary-threshold amounts for the crimes of theft.
MS. PIERSON again acknowledged that whether to raise Alaska's
current monetary-threshold amounts is a policy call for the
legislature to make. In response to questions, she relayed that
the bill's proposed changes would apply regardless of whether
that which was stolen was personal property or retail
merchandise, and indicated that the bill is intended to raise
the question of whether Alaska's current monetary-threshold
amounts for the crime of theft are still appropriate and in line
with those provided for elsewhere in the country. The value of
$500 is a lot different today than it was back in 1978, when
Alaska's current monetary-threshold amounts were originally
established, she asserted. In response to comments, she added
that members' packets now contain statistics regarding the
average sentence lengths associated with certain offenses
against property.
2:25:59 PM
THOMAS W. STENSON, Legal Director, American Civil Liberties
Union of Alaska (ACLU of Alaska) Foundation, in response to a
question, indicated that the changes proposed by HB 105 don't
raise any constitutional issues, and mentioned that prosecuting
a felony offense is more expensive than prosecuting a
misdemeanor offense. He too acknowledged that whether to raise
Alaska's current monetary-threshold amounts for theft crimes is
a policy call for [the legislature] to make.
2:27:14 PM
DOUGLAS MOODY, Deputy Public Defender, Criminal Division,
Central Office, Public Defender Agency (PDA), Department of
Administration (DOA), indicated a belief that reviewing Alaska's
current monetary-threshold amounts for theft crimes is
appropriate. He ventured that under HB 105's proposed changes,
perhaps more victims of theft crimes would eventually be
compensated for their losses if their perpetrators are not
convicted of a felony. Referring to [the bill's proposed
changes to] the statutes pertaining to the crimes of criminal
mischief in the third through fifth degrees, he also pointed out
that because costs for transporting goods have risen, the
destruction of almost any item in a rural area of the state
could nowadays constitute a felony-level crime under Alaska's
current monetary-threshold amounts. Pointing out that existing
law already addresses repeat offenders, he also ventured that
HB 105's proposed changes would be of benefit to first-time
offenders because they would be able to [steal something worth
up to $1,499 before being charged with a felony, and thereby]
avoid all the problems associated with a felony conviction.
MR. MOODY, in response to a question regarding how often a
felony theft charge gets [pled down] to a misdemeanor theft
charge, offered his understanding that it differs in different
areas of the state depending on the individual prosecutor.
Misdemeanor-level cases tend to get resolved more quickly and
cost less, he also noted.
2:36:38 PM
CHRIS NETTLES (ph), Business Owner; National Federation of
Independent Business (NFIB), after mentioning that he owns a
business that's been stolen from numerous times without anything
ever being resolved, testified in opposition to HB 105's
proposed increases to Alaska's monetary-threshold amounts,
offering his belief that the bill would increase theft crime in
his area.
2:38:43 PM
NANCY MEADE, General Counsel, Administrative Staff, Office of
the Administrative Director, Alaska Court System (ACS), first
relayed that the ACS takes no position on HB 105. Referring to
the aforementioned charts provided by the ACS, she mentioned
that although they illustrate facts related to theft charges
filed and the disposition of theft cases, the charts do not
outline how many charges were filed for cases in which the
property stolen was valued at between $500 and $1,500; such
cases would be the only type impacted by HB 105's proposed
changes. According to the chart titled in part, "Criminal Theft
Charges", during calendar year 2012, about half of the 3611
total theft crimes charged were felony-level thefts, and the
crime of theft in the second degree and the crime of theft in
the third degree were charged about equally often. According to
the chart titled in part, "Criminal Theft Charge Dispositions",
during calendar year 2012, there were [513] felony convictions,
and [1,208] misdemeanor convictions.
MS. MEADE indicated that one could extrapolate from the
statistics in those two charts that approximately one-third of
the felony charges resulted in a conviction, and three-fourths
of the misdemeanor charges resulted in a conviction. She noted
that some felony charges get pled down to misdemeanor charges;
according to the charts, for example, the misdemeanor crime of
theft in the third degree was charged only 1146 times in 2012,
but there were 1447 dispositions involving that crime, and 952
[cases involving the felony crime] of theft in the second degree
were dismissed by the prosecution for a variety of reasons. In
conclusion, she also noted that felony cases are addressed by
the Alaska Superior Court, whereas misdemeanor cases are
addressed by Alaska's district courts, which generally dispose
of cases more quickly and less expensively than the Alaska
Superior Court.
MS. MEADE, in response to questions and comments, indicated that
the initial criminal charges filed determine which court shall
address a particular case; that under Rule 11 of the Alaska
Rules of Criminal Procedure, prosecutors have discretion to
enter into plea agreements, which must be reasonable and provide
for supervisory oversight; and that there can be good reasons
for entering into a particular plea agreement. In conclusion,
she too noted that conviction of a [class A misdemeanor] could
result in a maximum prison sentence of up to one year and a
maximum fine of up to $10,000.
CHAIR KELLER relayed that HB 105 would be held over.
The committee took an at-ease from 2:49 p.m. to 2:50 p.m.
HB 81 - 2013 REVISOR'S BILL
2:50:54 PM
CHAIR KELLER announced that the final order of business would be
HOUSE BILL NO. 81, "An Act making corrective amendments to the
Alaska Statutes as recommended by the revisor of statutes; and
providing for an effective date."
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG relayed that after speaking with the
Department of Law (DOL) regarding the change proposed by
Section 5 of HB 81 - that of adding a missing preposition, "to",
thereby correcting a typographical error found in
AS 11.51.100(a)(3), which addresses one manifestation of the
crime of endangering the welfare of a child in the first degree
- he no longer has any concerns with HB 81.
[HB 81 was held over.]
2:51:16 PM
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the House
Judiciary Standing Committee meeting was adjourned at 2:51 p.m.