ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
SENATE JUDICIARY STANDING COMMITTEE
April 15, 2015
1:38 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Senator John Coghill, Vice Chair
Senator Mia Costello
Senator Peter Micciche
Senator Bill Wielechowski
MEMBERS ABSENT
Senator Lesil McGuire, Chair
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
CONFIRMATION HEARING
Commission on Judicial Conduct
George R. Boatright
CONFIRMATION ADVANCED
CS FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 83(JUD)
"An Act relating to collecting information about civil
litigation by the Alaska Judicial Council; repealing Rule
41(a)(3), Alaska Rules of Civil Procedure, and Rules 511(c) and
(e), Alaska Rules of Appellate Procedure; and providing for an
effective date."
-SCHEDULED BUT NOT HEARD
CS FOR SS FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 11(JUD) AM
"An Act restricting the publication of certain records of
criminal cases on a publicly available Internet website; and
providing for an effective date."
- MOVED CSSSHB 11(JUD) AM OUT OF COMMITTEE
COMMITTEE SUBSTITUTE FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 15(FIN)
"An Act relating to credits toward a sentence of imprisonment
for certain persons under electronic monitoring."
- HEARD & HELD
COMMITTEE SUBSTITUTE FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 75(JUD) AM
"An Act relating to the registration of marijuana establishments
by municipalities; relating to the definition of 'marijuana';
clarifying standards for personal use of marijuana by persons 21
years of age or older; prohibiting the public consumption of
marijuana; authorizing the registration of marijuana clubs;
relating to established villages and to local option elections
regarding the operation of marijuana establishments; and
providing for an effective date."
- HEARD & HELD
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
BILL: HB 11
SHORT TITLE: NO INTERNET ACCESS TO SOME CRIM. CASES
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) WILSON
01/21/15 (H) PREFILE RELEASED 1/9/15
01/21/15 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
01/21/15 (H) HSS, JUD
03/04/15 (H) SPONSOR SUBSTITUTE INTRODUCED
03/04/15 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
03/04/15 (H) JUD
03/20/15 (H) JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120
03/20/15 (H) -- MEETING CANCELED --
03/23/15 (H) JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120
03/23/15 (H) Heard & Held
03/23/15 (H) MINUTE(JUD)
04/01/15 (H) JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120
04/01/15 (H) Moved CSSSHB 11(JUD) Out of Committee
04/01/15 (H) MINUTE(JUD)
04/02/15 (H) JUD RPT CS(JUD) NT 3DP 3NR
04/02/15 (H) DP: MILLETT, KELLER, LEDOUX
04/02/15 (H) NR: CLAMAN, GRUENBERG, FOSTER
04/09/15 (H) TRANSMITTED TO (S)
04/09/15 (H) VERSION: CSSSHB 11(JUD) AM
04/10/15 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
04/10/15 (S) JUD
04/15/15 (S) JUD AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
BILL: HB 15
SHORT TITLE: CREDITS FOR TIME SERVED/GOOD TIME
SPONSOR(s): WILSON
01/21/15 (H) PREFILE RELEASED 1/9/15
01/21/15 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
01/21/15 (H) STA, FIN
01/23/15 (H) STA REFERRAL REMOVED
01/23/15 (H) JUD REFERRAL ADDED BEFORE FIN
02/18/15 (H) BILL REPRINTED 2/16/15
02/20/15 (H) JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120
02/20/15 (H) Heard & Held
02/20/15 (H) MINUTE(JUD)
03/18/15 (H) JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120
03/18/15 (H) Heard & Held
03/18/15 (H) MINUTE(JUD)
03/23/15 (H) JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120
03/23/15 (H) Moved CSHB 15(JUD) Out of Committee
03/23/15 (H) MINUTE(JUD)
03/25/15 (H) JUD RPT CS(JUD) NT 2DP 4NR
03/25/15 (H) DP: CLAMAN, LEDOUX
03/25/15 (H) NR: MILLETT, KELLER, GRUENBERG, FOSTER
04/03/15 (H) FIN AT 1:30 PM HOUSE FINANCE 519
04/03/15 (H) <Bill Hearing Canceled>
04/06/15 (H) FIN AT 1:30 PM HOUSE FINANCE 519
04/06/15 (H) Heard & Held
04/06/15 (H) MINUTE(FIN)
04/10/15 (H) FIN AT 1:30 PM HOUSE FINANCE 519
04/10/15 (H) Moved CSHB 15(FIN) Out of Committee
04/10/15 (H) MINUTE(FIN)
04/11/15 (H) FIN RPT CS(FIN) NT 6DP 3AM
04/11/15 (H) DP: SADDLER, PRUITT, WILSON, GATTIS,
EDGMON, THOMPSON
04/11/15 (H) AM: GARA, KAWASAKI, GUTTENBERG
04/13/15 (H) TRANSMITTED TO (S)
04/13/15 (H) VERSION: CSHB 15(FIN)
04/14/15 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
04/14/15 (S) JUD
04/15/15 (S) JUD AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
BILL: HB 75
SHORT TITLE: MARIJUANA REG;CLUBS;MUNIS;LOCAL OPT ELECT
SPONSOR(s): COMMUNITY & REGIONAL AFFAIRS
01/23/15 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
01/23/15 (H) CRA, JUD
02/21/15 (H) CRA AT 10:00 AM BARNES 124
02/21/15 (H) -- MEETING CANCELED --
02/24/15 (H) CRA AT 8:00 AM BARNES 124
02/24/15 (H) Heard & Held
02/24/15 (H) MINUTE(CRA)
03/03/15 (H) CRA AT 8:00 AM BARNES 124
03/03/15 (H) Moved CSHB 75(CRA) Out of Committee
03/03/15 (H) MINUTE(CRA)
03/05/15 (H) CRA AT 8:00 AM BARNES 124
03/05/15 (H) Moved CSHB 75(CRA) Out of Committee
03/05/15 (H) MINUTE(CRA)
03/06/15 (H) CRA RPT CS(CRA) NT 3DP 3NR
03/06/15 (H) DP: NAGEAK, SEATON, TILTON
03/06/15 (H) NR: DRUMMOND, REINBOLD, HUGHES
03/11/15 (H) JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120
03/11/15 (H) Heard & Held
03/11/15 (H) MINUTE(JUD)
03/18/15 (H) JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120
03/18/15 (H) <Bill Hearing Canceled>
03/25/15 (H) JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120
03/25/15 (H) <Bill Hearing Canceled>
03/27/15 (H) JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120
03/27/15 (H) Moved CSHB 75(JUD) Out of Committee
03/27/15 (H) MINUTE(JUD)
03/30/15 (H) JUD RPT CS(JUD) NT 1DP 3NR 3AM
03/30/15 (H) DP: LEDOUX
03/30/15 (H) NR: MILLETT, CLAMAN, FOSTER
03/30/15 (H) AM: LYNN, KELLER, GRUENBERG
04/02/15 (H) TRANSMITTED TO (S)
04/02/15 (H) VERSION: CSHB 75(JUD) AM
04/03/15 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
04/03/15 (S) CRA, JUD
04/07/15 (S) CRA AT 3:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
04/07/15 (S) Heard & Held
04/07/15 (S) MINUTE(CRA)
04/14/15 (S) CRA AT 3:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
04/14/15 (S) Moved SCS CSHB 75(CRA) Out of Committee
04/14/15 (S) MINUTE(CRA)
04/15/15 (S) JUD AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
WITNESS REGISTER
GEORGE R. BOATRIGHT, Nominee
Commission on Judicial Conduct
Wasilla, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified as nominee to the Commission on
Judicial Conduct.
REPRESENTATIVE TAMMIE WILSON
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Sponsor of HB 11 and HB 15.
BARBARA BARNES, Staff
Representative Tammie Wilson
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Introduced HB 11 and answered questions
about HB 15 on behalf of the sponsor.
NANCY MEADE, General Counsel
Administrative Staff
Alaska Court System
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions related to HB 11 and HB
75.
GENEVIEVE WOJTUSIK, Staff
Senator Lesil McGuire
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Spoke to the changes in the Senate CS for
HB 15.
RON TAYLOR, Commissioner
Department of Corrections (DOC)
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Responded to questions related to HB 15.
DENNIS JOHNSON, Program Director
Alaska Pretrial Services
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Discussed the 24/7 program during the
hearing on HB 15.
REPRESENTATIVE CATHY TILTON
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Sponsor of HB 75.
HEATH HILYARD, Staff
Representative Cathy Tilton
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Described the policy components of HB 75.
ACTION NARRATIVE
1:38:02 PM
VICE CHAIR JOHN COGHILL called the Senate Judiciary Standing
Committee meeting to order at 1:38 p.m. Present at the call to
order were Senators Micciche, Costello, and Vice Chair Coghill.
^Confirmation Hearing: Commission on Judicial Conduct
CONFIRMATION HEARING
Commission on Judicial Conduct
1:39:15 PM
VICE CHAIR COGHILL announced the first order of business would
be a confirmation hearing. He asked Mr. Boatright to tell the
committee about himself and his interest in serving on the
Commission on Judicial Conduct.
GEORGE R. BOATRIGHT, Nominee, Commission on Judicial Conduct,
said he lives in Wasilla. He's been in Alaska since the 1960s
and has more than 40 years of experience in law enforcement.
He's been retired for about three years and looks forward to
this public service.
VICE CHAIR COGHILL asked if he'd had the opportunity to attend
any commission meetings.
MR. BOATRIGHT answered no.
VICE CHAIR COGHILL asked if he sought the nomination.
MR. BOATRIGHT replied he was solicited.
VICE CHAIR COGHILL asked if he'd had a chance to look at the
goals of the commission and how he might help achieve them.
MR. BOATRIGHT replied he received the commission workbook
yesterday and pursued it a little. He opined that his background
in investigations and confidential personnel issues compliments
this service.
1:42:31 PM
SENATOR MICCICHE asked if he understands some of the issues and
if he can explain why he feels he's equipped and fair in
evaluating different processes.
MR. BOATRIGHT replied he learned in dealing with law enforcement
personnel that complaints are oftentimes lodged for ulterior
reasons. In the judicial context, complaints about a judge have
to be based on conduct and whether his or her actions comply
with the ethical standards. It's not a matter of agreeing or
disagreeing with a judge's findings.
SENATOR MICCICHE asked how he would have handled the potential
prosecutorial misconduct, assuming the Senator Ted Stevens
prosecution was a state case.
MR. BOATRIGHT replied he wasn't familiar with the case.
VICE CHAIR COGHILL summarized the federal case and advised that
it was a different set of circumstances.
SENATOR MICCICHE asked how he would view it if someone did not
have a fair trial in a state case.
MR. BOATRIGHT replied it would be unconscionable. It's of
paramount importance for someone to be able to demonstrate their
innocence and that right can't be infringed upon.
1:48:02 PM
VICE CHAIR COGHILL announced that in accordance with AS
39.05.080 the Senate Judiciary Standing Committee recommends
forwarding the appointment of George Boatright to a joint
session for consideration. He reminded members that signing the
report in no way reflects individual members' intent to vote for
or against the conformation of the individual. Finding no
objection, the name George Boatright was forwarded to the full
body for consideration.
At ease from 1:49:26 pm to 1:46:57 pm.
HB 11-NO INTERNET ACCESS TO SOME CRIM. CASES
1:49:57 PM
VICE CHAIR COGHILL reconvened the meeting and announced the
consideration of HB 11. "An Act restricting the publication of
certain records of criminal cases on a publicly available
Internet website; and providing for an effective date."
BARBARA BARNES, Staff, Representative Tammie Wilson, introduced
HB 11, reading from the following sponsor statement:
"Every person is presumed innocent until proven
guilty". HB 11 directs the Alaska Court System to
remove from its public internet website records of
criminal cases that were acquitted of all charges, by
dismissal of all charges, or by acquittal of some
charges and dismissal of remaining charges after 60
days have elapsed from the date of acquittal or
dismissal of the case.
CourtView, the Alaska Trial Courts online publicly
accessible database, provides access for persons
seeking information on the status of criminal and
civil cases, the nature of criminal charges filed
against persons, and the final outcome of litigation.
Court View forever shows the arrest and charging
documents for persons who were never convicted,
allowing society to scrutinize any individual, for any
reason, and socially chastise the innocent. In spite
of CourtView user warnings, that a charge is not to be
considered a conviction, this public posting of a
person's name and charges can have dire consequences
on the individual's livelihood and inherent liberties.
From housing to employment prospects, the innocent are
socially judged guilty by the very presence of their
names on CourtView regardless of the outcome of the
case.
By very definition, a person is not a criminal if
acquitted at trial, or if their case is dismissed by
the courts. In American jurisprudence, we are
considered innocent until proven guilty. HB 11
champions this principle. We ask that Alaskans who
have not been found guilty of any wrong doing be given
the right to emancipation of social distrust and
inherent prejudices.
1:53:04 PM
VICE CHAIR COGHILL asked Ms. Meade to comment on whether or not
case files would be confidential and if the court could meet the
60-day deadline.
1:53:40 PM
NANCY MEADE, General Counsel, Administrative Staff, Alaska Court
System, clarified that the Court System is neutral on HB 11. She
confirmed that under the wording of this bill, case files would
be public, not confidential. The bill directs the Court System
to remove the cases from CourtView within 60 days of disposition
of the case, and that can be done. The court believes it can
comply with the legislative intent to do it retroactively,
although there may be some glitches in that piece, she said.
VICE CHAIR COGHILL asked the sponsor's staff if the information
that was removed from CourtView would be available through a
records search at the courthouse.
MS. BARNES replied that's correct.
VICE CHAIR COGHILL asked Ms. Meade how someone would access
those paper files at the courthouse after they had been removed
from the website.
MS. MEADE replied the court is working on the process. Initially
they were thinking that people could go to one of the 40 some
courthouses and submit a request for the clerk to look up those
dismissed and acquitted cases. The other alternative is for the
court to create a third portal on CourtView that would be
available at courthouses so a citizen could look up somebody by
their last name and find something more than is on the public
version. They haven't figured out how to do that yet, or if
that's the best option, but they will before the effective date.
VICE CHAIR COGHILL asked if it will impose a financial burden on
the Court System to create the third portal.
MS. MEADE replied the Court System submitted a zero fiscal note
with the knowledge that it would require staff time and perhaps
actual dollars to comply with the bill.
1:58:08 PM
SENATOR MICCICHE asked how often someone who is convicted of
domestic violence is found to have a long track record of
dismissals and acquittals.
MS. MEADE replied she didn't know how often that happens, but
she understands the concern. Some people would not have anything
on CourtView yet they may have had cases filed against them that
ended in dismissal or acquittal for some reason or another. She
recalled that concern was voiced last year.
SENATOR MICCICHE said he wanted it clear for the record that
acquittals and dismissals would still be available at the
courthouse.
MS. MEADE confirmed that was correct.
SENATOR COSTELLO asked what recourse people would have if they
didn't have a courthouse in their community.
MS. MEADE explained that courthouses are spread throughout the
state so that every community has access to a court. For
example, the court in Palmer serves Big Lake and the Bethel
court serves the community of Eek. People that want to do
research under this bill would have to go to the courthouse that
serves their community.
SENATOR MICCICHE asked if someone could request the records
telephonically.
MS. MEADE responded that the Court System doesn't offer that
service as a regular practice because of staffing limitations,
but the court does exercise a rule of reason.
VICE CHAIR COGHILL invited the sponsor to comment.
REPRESENTATIVE TAMMIE WILSON, sponsor of HB 11, described the
bill as a "happy in between" of former Senator Dyson's bill.
That bill would have sealed all the records whereas HB 11
directs the court to remove records of criminal cases from
CourtView [60 days] after a criminal case is acquitted or
dismissed, but that information is still available at the
courthouse.
SENATOR MICCICHE opined that it's important that the information
is still available. He described the bill as a fair compromise.
SENATOR COSTELLO asked how other states address this issue.
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON said she couldn't find anything similar to
this when she researched county records.
VICE CHAIR COGHILL asked Ms. Meade to address the question.
2:06:48 PM
MS. MEADE said there is a broad spectrum of thinking about what
is appropriate to post online and it's handled in a variety of
ways. Some courts post every document while others exclude
family and criminal law. The Alaska Court System favors public
court records, although there has to be a balance. If this is
the policy call of the legislature, the court will follow it.
2:08:40 PM
SENATOR MICCICHE moved to report SSHB 11 from committee with
individual recommendations and attached zero fiscal note.
VICE CHAIR COGHILL announced that without objection CSSSHB
11(JUD) AM is reported from the Senate Judiciary Standing
Committee.
HB 15-CREDITS FOR TIME SERVED/GOOD TIME
2:09:14 PM
VICE CHAIR COGHILL announced the consideration of HB 15. "An Act
relating to credits toward a sentence of imprisonment for
certain persons under electronic monitoring." He asked for a
motion to adopt the Senate CS.
At ease from 2:10 pm to 2:11 pm.
2:11:05 PM
SENATOR COSTELLO motioned to adopt the Senate CS for CSHB 15,
labeled 29-LS0102\X, as the working document.
VICE CHAIR COGHILL objected for discussion purposes.
2:11:28 PM
GENEVIEVE WOJTUSIK, Staff, Senator Lesil McGuire, spoke to the
changes in the Senate CS for HB 15. Version X adds a new
paragraph (21) to AS 12.55.155(d) on page 2, lines [17-20]. This
is the content of SB 82 that the committee heard and reported
out. It allows a judge to consider participation in the 24/7
sobriety program as a mitigating factor at the time of
sentencing. The new paragraph states that "the defendant, as a
condition of release ordered by the court, successfully
completed an alcohol and sub stance abuse monitoring program
established under AS 47.38.020." At the request of the
Department of Law, the word "complied" was changed to
"completed" to align with language that is already in statute.
VICE CHAIR COGHILL withdrew his objection and version X was
before the committee.
2:13:06 PM
REPRESENTATIVE TAMMIE WILSON, sponsor of HB 15, stated support
for the Senate CS. She explained that the legislation would
allow the courts to grant a defendant credit toward a sentence
for the time spent under electronic monitoring. The purpose of
the bill is to encourage people to get help as soon as possible
versus sitting in jail awaiting trial. Currently private vendors
are offering electronic monitoring in the major cities, but she
knows that the Department of Corrections would be excited to
enter this realm.
SENATOR COSTELLO said she appreciates the cost savings the bill
represents. She asked the cost of a hard bed, the average cost
of residential treatment, and the daily cost of electronic
monitoring.
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON replied the cost of a prison bed is $158
per day and the cost of electronic monitoring in Fairbanks is
about $105 per week. Specialty additions such as alcohol
monitoring cost more. She didn't know the cost of residential
treatment.
SENATOR COSTELLO asked her to discuss the opportunity for people
to remain employed while they're on electronic monitoring.
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON explained that this allows a person to
remain in the community, with certain restrictions depending on
the charge, and therefore hold down their job rather than
sitting in jail. She cited an example and shared that the person
said it's been easier for him to stop drinking because he knows
the immediate consequence if he takes a drink.
2:17:53 PM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI joined the committee.
VICE CHAIR COGHILL asked Commissioner Taylor if DOC manages the
monitoring systems.
RON TAYLOR, Commissioner, Department of Corrections (DOC),
answered no; DOC does not monitor the private companies that
offer electronic monitoring services.
VICE CHAIR COGHILL asked if DOC would be part of the discussion
about placing a defendant on electronic monitoring instead of
sending them to jail awaiting trial.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR replied the court is making that
determination.
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON clarified that this is not directed by the
court. She explained that when someone is charged, the court
either sets bail or designates a third party to monitor the
defendant 24/7. The defendant would bring the monitoring company
to court and request electronic monitoring as a third party
custodian. The court would question the vendor's representative
just as it would any third party custodian.
VICE CHAIR COGHILL asked if someone who requests this type of
monitoring is admitting guilt or just precluding other risk
tools the court would use.
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON replied electronic monitoring is already
being done but no credit is given at sentencing for the time
spent under electronic monitoring.
VICE CHAIR COGHILL asked what happens if there's a violation.
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON replied the defendant would go back to
jail if they violated a condition of release while on electronic
monitoring. She expressed hope that DOC would eventually make
use of this tool.
2:23:46 PM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI directed attention to page 1, line 11, and
asked if the definition of "criminal offense" includes a
probation or parole violation.
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON replied this is just pretrial so a person
would not be on parole or probation.
VICE CHAIR COGHILL asked Ms. Meade to describe how the court
would see this option on a third party release.
NANCY MEADE, General Counsel, Administrative Staff, Alaska Court
System, explained that a defendant who has a bail condition of a
third party custodian could use a professional vendor as their
third-party custodian. In Anchorage, Fairbanks, Palmer, and
Kenai, the defendant who has that requirement to get out of jail
can bring the vendor's representative and ask the judge to issue
an order approving that company as a third party custodian. The
order would include conditions such using the ankle monitor and
certain exclusion zones. The vendor would have the
responsibility of reporting any transgression to the court. They
would know that the person violated one of the conditions set by
the court because the ankle monitor would send an electronic
alert to the vendor's business office where the monitoring takes
place.
This is happening now and a person can be on electronic
monitoring for a substantial amount of time awaiting trial. The
intent of the sponsor is that a person who purchases a contract
with a third party vendor would receive credit.
MS. MEADE clarified that the court is neutral on the bill but
can comply. The court does not approve or monitor third party
venders; it is a private contract and a defendant pays the
business between $300 and $600 per month for the service. The
court approves the contract if it believes both will be able to
fulfill their responsibilities. Under the bill, the defendant
would inform the judge that they would seek credit for the time
they paid for the electronic monitor, and that they want an
order that comports with the statute so they can receive credit.
At the time of sentencing the court will look at the order and
deduct the time spent on electronic monitoring if the defendant
didn't violate any of the conditions.
SENATOR MICCICHE asked why current law specifically prohibits
the court from granting credit for electronic monitoring when it
allows credit for time spent in a residential treatment program.
MS. MEADE explained that the residential treatment described in
AS 12.55.027 is required to have the characteristics of
incarceration. She recalled a case where a defendant asked to
receive credit for the time served on electronic monitoring, but
the court was constrained by the statute and decided that the
time didn't qualify. Later the legislature codified that and
added a subsection to 027 saying a person does not get credit
for electronic monitoring.
SENATOR MICCICHE asked if electronic monitoring has a particular
range.
MS. MEADE replied the range varies according to the order by the
court.
2:31:43 PM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked if taking a drink would be considered
a criminal offense under the provision in Section 2 if the court
order prohibited alcohol consumption.
MS. MEADE answered in the affirmative. Disobeying anything in
the bail order is violating a court order and that is a crime.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked if a person would lose all the credit
for the time spent on electronic monitoring if they violated
their conditions of bail on day 364.
MS. MEADE replied that would be an interpretation of the
statute, but the district attorney would argue that the person
is not entitled to the credit because they violated the court
order, which is a criminal offense.
2:33:12 PM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked the sponsor's intent.
BARBARA BARNES, Staff, Representative Tammie Wilson, offered her
understanding that a person who violates the conditions of bail
set by the court would not receive credit. She acknowledged that
it may be open to interpretation and added "If you break the
law, you're not going to get the credit and I believe that is
the intent of the sponsor."
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI urged the committee to clarify its intent
because this provision would be litigated and the court would
look to these committee hearings for the legislative intent.
SENATOR MICCICHE observed that both Sections 1 and 2 use the
term may so the court is not required to grant credit. It would
be on a case-by-case basis.
MS. MEADE agreed that it does allow the court some discretion,
but it would it would be unusual for a judge to deny credit for
some non-statutory reason.
VICE CHAIR COGHILL questioned whether it would add clarity to
add "only" on page 1, line 10, following "monitoring."
2:36:16 PM
DENNIS JOHNSON, Program Director, Alaska Pretrial Services
(APS), Anchorage, Alaska, stated that APS administers the Alaska
24/7 Sobriety program in the third judicial district. They have
two offices with testing facilities in the Anchorage area and
are expanding to Palmer. APS provides pretrial electronic
monitoring, which is what HB 15 and SB 82 are directly related
to. He reported that APS currently has about 126 active 24/7
participants and about 162 offenders under active electronic
monitor. They provide daily supervision for people who live and
work from the North Slope and Barrow through Kodiak and down to
Juneau. He opined that both HB 15 and SB 82 provide a cost
effective way to monitor and give credit to offenders who are
working toward sobriety and court compliance.
Addressing an earlier question about range, he said it varies
depending on the severity of the alleged offense. He believes
that Alaska Pretrial is more strict that other professional
vendors. He said the bill is a cost-effective tool to help
people who are trying to change their behavior for the better.
SENATOR MICCICHE asked if his company offers both proximity and
alcohol monitoring.
MR. JOHNSON answered yes; Alaska Pretrial Services uses active
GPS with two way communication. He described geo-fencing on an
unclassified felon who is confined to his house. If he steps
outside his residence, APS receives an immediate alarm and a
case officer responds and notifies law enforcement. This system
was developed for community safety, victim safety, and
compliance; exclusion zones can be established around a victim's
residence, school or place of work and range from 10 feet to
five miles.
VICE CHAIR COGHILL asked the sponsor if the intent is that a
person would lose all credit if they violated the conditions of
bail.
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON replied it would be up to the court. She
added "If I was in charge I'd make them lose it all because I
think that's a bigger incentive."
Responding to an earlier question, she explained that "private
residence" was changed to "residence" to include halfway houses.
2:46:38 PM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI commented that Section 2 will be litigated
and then directed attention to page 2, line 12. That line talks
about the court imposing restrictions on a person's freedom of
movement and behavior. He asked if the court always imposes
restrictions on both freedom of movement and behavior.
MS. MEADE confirmed that there would be restrictions on freedom
of movement if the electronic monitoring had a GPS component.
She guessed that a standard bail condition of commit no crimes
would be interpreted as a restriction on behavior.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI suggested the Department of Law (DOL) look
and consider whether or not to replace the final "and" with "or"
on page 1, line 12.
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON said she didn't ask about that
specifically, but Department of Law did have a lot of input.
2:48:45 PM
VICE CHAIR COGHILL said his preference is for the bill to
clearly say that a person would lose all credit for a violation
of a bail condition. He held HB 15 in committee for further
consideration.
HB 75-MARIJUANA REG;CLUBS;MUNIS;LOCAL OPT ELECT
2:49:58 PM
VICE CHAIR COGHILL announced the consideration of HB 75. "An Act
relating to the registration of marijuana establishments by
municipalities; relating to the definition of 'marijuana';
clarifying standards for personal use of marijuana by persons 21
years of age or older; prohibiting the public consumption of
marijuana; authorizing the registration of marijuana clubs;
relating to established villages and to local option elections
regarding the operation of marijuana establishments; and
providing for an effective date."
2:50:33 PM
REPRESENTATIVE CATHY TILTON, sponsor of HB 75, described HB 75
as a guidebook for municipalities as they put ordinances
together [to regulate marijuana clubs]. She deferred to her
staff to discuss the substantive parts of the bill.
HEATH HILYARD, Staff, Representative Cathy Tilton, said he would
speak to the comprehensive Senate Judiciary committee substitute
on Friday and today he would describe the policy components.
· Page 2, line 21, has a household limit of 24 marijuana
plants.
· It clarifies what aiding and supporting any activities for
personal use of marijuana constitutes.
· It provides that established villages may hold local
elections to opt out of commercial marijuana activities.
· Several sections clarify that municipalities may use their
own ordinances in some of the decision making situations if
they have a version of the Administrative Procedures Act
similar to AS 44.62.
· Page 6, lines 2-3, stipulates that municipalities that
currently have the power to establish civil and criminal
penalties related to alcohol also have the power to
establish civil and criminal penalties for marijuana
violations of commercial establishments only with regard to
time, place, and manner. This is consistent with Title 4.
· It provides the local option for established villages that
is modified based on Title 4 as it currently exists.
· It includes the establishment of marijuana clubs at the
request of several municipalities.
· A provision on page 10, line 20, allows the supreme court
to establish a bail schedule that does not require a court
appearance.
· Page 11 provides important definitions. In particular the
term "manufacture" has the meaning given in AS 11.71.900,
which stipulates that grow for personal use is not
considered manufacture. The definition of "marijuana club"
stipulates that it is not considered a public place, and
public place is given a definition.
VICE CHAIR COGHILL shared that he was not a fan of marijuana
clubs because of the question of determining inebriation.
MR. HILYARD responded that marijuana club is loosely based on
what a bottle club in under Title 4. He said this was in
response to request from municipalities, but it's a policy call
for this committee.
2:58:14 PM
VICE CHAIR COGHILL held HB 75 in committee for further
consideration.
2:58:53 PM
There being no further business to come before the committee,
Vice Chair Coghill adjourned the Senate Judiciary Standing
Committee meeting at 2:58 p.m.