Legislature(1997 - 1998)
01/26/1998 01:30 PM Senate JUD
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE
January 26, 1998
1:30 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Senator Robin Taylor, Chairman
Senator Drue Pearce, Vice-Chairman
Senator Mike Miller
MEMBERS ABSENT
Senator Sean Parnell
Senator Johnny Ellis
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
SB 242 - FORFEIT GOOD TIME OF SOME SEX OFFENDERS
- MOVED SB 242 OUT OF COMMITTEE
PREVIOUS SENATE COMMITTEE ACTION
NO PREVIOUS SENATE COMMITTEE ACTION
WITNESS REGISTER
Senator Jerry Ward
State Capitol
Juneau, AK 99801-1182
Position Statement: Prime Sponsor of SB 242
Ms. Margo Knuth
Assistant Attorney General, Department of Law
PO Box 110300
Juneau, AK 99801-0300
Position Statement: Commented on SB 242
Mr. Blair McCune
Public Defender
900 West 5th Ave.
Anchorage, AK 99501
Position Statement: Commented on SB 242
Ms. Pam Karalunas
Fairbanks Child Sexual Abuse Task Force
PO Box 73893
Fairbanks, AK 99707
Position Statement: Supported SB 242
ACTION NARRATIVE
TAPE 98-2, SIDE A
Number 001
CHAIRMAN ROBIN TAYLOR called the Judiciary Committee meeting to
order at 1:37 p.m. and noted the presence of SENATOR MILLER and
SENATOR PEARCE. He stated SB 242 was up for discussion.
SENATOR WARD, prime sponsor of SB 242, presented the bill. He said
it is a simple bill that is explained in its title. The current
state policy, which he wholeheartedly endorses, allows 'good time'
for prisoners. He believes, however, if a prisoner fails to
complete a mandatory court-ordered treatment program they should
not be eligible for good time. This is the intent of the bill. He
did not know until recently that these prisoners were even eligible
for good time and his bill seeks to correct this.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR asked if an order is contained in a judge's
sentence, how would the Department of Corrections (DOC) avoid
complying with it.
SENATOR WARD explained it is up to the Commissioner to comply with
court orders and he thinks in most cases they try to follow through
with them. If the judge orders completion of a program, he thinks
the offender should go through with it for the protection of the
public. He says we can't afford to do anything less.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR expressed concern that court orders are not being
followed and that people at DOC are going to do whatever they feel
like doing. He was also concerned this same thing may be happening
in other areas also, like drug treatment programs. He said it
sounds to him like the orders are already in place, they are simply
not being complied with.
SENATOR WARD agreed, saying he was attempting to get information
regarding other types of court ordered treatment also. He saw this
particular problem as paramount and had the bill drafted as soon as
he became aware of it. He planned to continue gathering information
on the other programs and would not mind incorporating them into
this bill, if the committee desired.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR said there was other legislation pending regarding
drug treatment programs and registering of sex offenders. He said
when the original registration bill was passed its intent was all
sex offenders be registered. It came out later that through some
bureaucratic loophole it fell through the cracks at DOC, did not
happen and had to come back to the legislature.
SENATOR WARD said this is the reason this bill came about. He
expressed frustration that the public might get a false sense of
security if a convicted sex offender who failed to complete a
court-ordered rehabilitation program was released. He believed this
bill would be correcting an oversight.
MR. BLAIR MCCUNE, deputy director of the public defender's office
in Anchorage spoke next via teleconference. He brought to the
committee's attention Alaska Statute 33.16.22, which he said does
this already through the parole board. He said if a prisoner fails
to complete court-ordered treatment the parole board can revoke
their mandatory release parole. He explained mandatory release
parole is known as "good time" and has been revoked by the parole
board 30 different times in 1997. He said the revocation can only
occur when the programs have been made available to the prisoners;
if the programs are not made available, good time will not be
revoked. He did say the treatment is expensive and possibly not
made available to everyone.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR asked if he had actually been citing Alaska Statute
33.16.220(2) and Mr. McCune agreed he had been.
MS. PAM KARALUNAS, characterizing herself as an expert on child
sexual abuse, spoke from Fairbanks on behalf of the Fairbanks Child
Sexual Abuse Task Force. She expressed strong support for the bill
even after the previous testimony. She said this bill clarifies
what should be happening and she has not seen it happening now. She
recounted an example where an offender had been kicked out of a
treatment program and had been released on good time against the
advice of his therapist who was concerned enough to warn this
person's former spouse. He was released with much opposition from
the community and subsequently moved in a few blocks from his
former spouse. She told of her frustration that nothing can be done
about this and other similar cases she has witnessed. She stated
even if this law is already in effect this bill would help. She
believes sex offender release should be contingent on completing a
rehabilitation program and she feared when sex offenders are let
out of prison without one, they are let out to re-offend.
MS. MARGO KNUTH, assistant Attorney General with the Department of
Law (DOL), representing the Department of Corrections, spoke next.
She expounded on the remarks made by Mr. McCune, saying the
prisoners ordered by the court into programs are being examined and
reviewed by the parole board. She informed the committee that there
were 33 cases of prisoners failing to complete their court-ordered
program last year. In 31 of those cases the parole board revoked
the mandatory good time accrued for these prisoners and reinstated
their full sentences. She added that in two cases the parole board
concluded the revocation of good time was unnecessary. She said
that discretion would be lost under this bill and those prisoners
would also lose their good time. She explained this was the basis
for the fiscal note. She distinguished between mandatory parole and
discretionary parole and said there are no sex offenders being
granted discretionary parole without having completed the treatment
program. She explained mandatory parole was the law that presumed
a prisoner would be released unless there was a basis for
revocation. She said failing to comply with a court order would
provide that basis. She said the intent of the legislation is
appropriate but the impact would be fairly minimal.
SENATOR PEARCE asked why the parole board failed to revoke good
time in the other two cases.
MS. KNUTH was not sure but offered that in some cases a program may
not be effective for an individual due to language problems or
other circumstances.
SENATOR PEARCE questioned whether the revocation rate had been more
than ninety per cent in previous years.
Number 192
MS. KNUTH responded that it had.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR asked if the fiscal note assumed there were no sex
offenders currently in probationary status.
MS. KNUTH explained that such a person in probationary status would
also be on parole and would be examined under the conditions of
parole. She stated that with such a serious offense all sex
offenders on probation would also be on parole.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR referred to the fiscal note, asking if the
department was contemplating two revocations.
MS. KNUTH said of the 33 offenders who did not complete their
program, the parole board revoked 31 cases on their own. Under this
law the other two would be revoked as the parole board would no
longer maintain discretion over it.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR commented that the department must have already
budgeted for the 31 individuals.
MS. KNUTH agreed, saying the fiscal note reflects two more.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR marveled at the ability of the department to budget
so exactly in advance. He asked if the parole board requires people
to complete the program or to pass the program.
MS. KNUTH said they must successfully complete the program.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR asked if the course could be completed by sitting
in a room listening to someone talk for an allotted time or if
change is assessed and action is required. He wondered how we could
still have so much recidivism if this course is being completed.
MS. KNUTH clarified that most people are not completing the
program. She said some people reach the end of their sentence
before they can and others simply will not participate.
SENATOR PEARCE asked what the sentence for first degree sexual
assault might be.
MS. KNUTH replied it would be eight years for a first offense,
fifteen years for a second. However, most people are convicted of
a class A or B felony which carry approximately five and four years
respectively. A large number of sex offenders in the state are
being convicted of a class B felony and serving two to fours years,
often not long enough to complete the program.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR asked if this passed would there be someone
certifying they had completed the program or keeping them
incarcerated for the full period of the original sentence. He asked
if one of the two cases in which good time was not revoked was the
case mentioned by Ms. Karalunas.
MS. KNUTH answered she did not believe so and clarified that many
judges recommend the program rather than order it, in which case
that legislation would not apply. She stated a recommendation was
not the same mandate as a court order.
SENATOR PEARCE asked if it was recommended and not ordered would
the parole board have the authority to revoke good time.
MS. KNUTH replied no.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR expressed concern. He believes sometimes judges
might submit recommendations rather than orders due to frustration
that their orders may be disregarded by the correctional system. He
emphasized the separation of the three branches of government and
recalled his orders not being complied with in his years on the
bench. He said a judge can impose his best sentence and hope for
the best. He added he is somewhat satisfied at this point with the
actions of the parole board.
SENATOR PEARCE stated that the difficulty with sex offenders is
that DOC has no hammer over the people who are incarcerated if the
program has only been recommended. Unless judges actually order the
completion of the program, neither the DOC nor the parole board
have a hammer over the offender if they do not complete the
program.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR asked if the program was recommended whether the
department could require it or only offer it.
MS. KNUTH replied it could only be offered and availability is
subject to the resources available. She said a larger sex offender
program might be helpful.
SENATOR PEARCE inquired what form the treatment takes.
MS. KNUTH said she did not have much information about it but could
find out.
SENATOR MILLER asked CHAIRMAN TAYLOR if the legislation passed he
would foresee judges making more order rather than recommendations.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR replied absolutely yes. If a judge knew an order
would have major impact on a sentence he would definitely do it.
MS. KNUTH added that prosecutors would have a training session
after the session to inform and educate them about any new laws and
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR said the judicial branch would go through the same
process.
SENATOR WARD mentioned the idea that Florida is getting tough on
sex offenders - if they do not complete their program they not only
lose any good time accrued, they get an extra one third of their
sentence added on to it. He was not suggesting that here, only
bringing it to light.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR interjected that option is available to the court
here also and SENATOR WARD agreed.
SENATOR PEARCE asked if the chair intended to move the bill and
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR affirmed that was intention if it pleased the
committee. SENATOR PEARCE encouraged SENATOR WARD and MS. KNUTH to
review the two cases in which good time was not revoked and see
what happened there. She would like to see if the numbers of cases
revoked was consistent over a number of years. She said she would
not like to 'slam dunk' the parole board by removing their
discretion.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR noted the bill will be heard in the finance
committee due to the fiscal note. He asked if there was further
testimony on the bill.
SENATOR PEARCE moved the bill move out of committee with individual
recommendations. Without objection, the bill was moved and CHAIRMAN
TAYLOR adjourned the meeting at 2:15.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|