HB 127: PRESUMPTIVE TERMS FOR FIREARMS POSSESSION Number 366 REPRESENTATIVE PETE KOTT, PRIME SPONSOR of HB 127, said the bill was intended to send a clear message that the state would deal harshly with people who carried firearms while committing serious crimes. He noted that HB 127 would impose presumptive terms of imprisonment on first-time felony offenders who possessed a firearm while committing a class B or C felony. He added that the bill would also impose a mandatory minimum sentence of 30 days for those who possessed a firearm during the commission of a fourth-degree assault. REPRESENTATIVE KOTT noted that the Alaska Peace Officers' Association supported HB 127, as did Crimestrike, a national organization devoted to reducing crime. He stated that the DPS supported the concept of the bill, and had indicated there was no expected fiscal impact associated with HB 127. He mentioned that the DOC had submitted a very large fiscal note, but expressed his opinion that it was based on a great deal of speculation. REPRESENTATIVE KOTT commented that while working on HB 127, he had discovered that the state had a very poor information management system for reporting and tracking crimes, in his opinion. Number 430 REPRESENTATIVE JAMES stated that if the DOC fiscal note was correct, then the state was in serious trouble and should have implemented HB 127's provisions long ago. Number 438 REPRESENTATIVE KOTT noted that if the fiscal note was even close to being correct, he would have serious problems in working to advance HB 127. CHAIRMAN PORTER believed the fiscal note did not reflect people who were "slipping through the cracks" of the state's judicial system. Rather, he said that the fiscal note simply reflected longer sentences for people who had already been convicted. Number 454 REPRESENTATIVE KOTT confirmed that the Chairman's comments were correct, to a large degree. He questioned the methodology used in calculating the DOC fiscal note. Number 474 MS. KNUTH stated that Alaska had one of the best information tracking systems on crimes in the nation. However, she said that what Alaska tracked was very different from the information that was needed for a fiscal note like the one prepared by the DOC. She noted that Alaska was extremely good at tracking prosecutions and convictions, but said that offenses were tracked, not conduct, including whether or not a weapon was used in an offense. MS. KNUTH expressed the DOL's concerns with HB 127. She said that the bill would create a presumptive sentence of one year for class C felonies and two years for class B felonies, if a person possessed a firearm and that possession was not an element of the offense. She said that anytime possession of a firearm was an element of the offense, there was a rule of law that said a person would not be doubly penalized. Therefore, she noted that HB 127 would not affect the offender's sentence in any present misconduct with weapons' offenses. MS. KNUTH commented that burglary had already been elevated one degree, if the target of the burglary was a commercial establishment, or the perpetrator was in possession of a weapon. She commented further that possession of a weapon during any drug offense was already a separate crime. She added that it was already a higher-class felony offense if a person escaped from incarceration with a gun. She noted that there were many weapons' offenses that HB 127 would not affect. Number 525 MS. KNUTH stated that HB 127 likely would affect about half of all assault cases and drug offenses in which a gun was used on the drug charge sentence, but not on the second charge that was made for the weapons offense of using a weapon during a drug offense. She was concerned that by setting a presumptive sentence, the state was tying judges' hands to some degree. She commented that in cases where a weapon was an active part of an offense, the state was already getting much higher sentences than those proposed in HB 127. She noted that the bill would create "ceilings" that currently did not exist. MS. KNUTH cited a recent case that she had prosecuted, which would have been negatively affected if the provisions of HB 127 had been law. She commented that generally, the legislature had tried to respond to the use of weapons by making it an aggravator in existing presumptive sentences and by having a long list of separate weapons' crimes. She predicted that the approach taken in HB 127 would have some strange effects, some of which were most likely unintentional. MS. KNUTH suggested that the committee study the bill carefully before taking any action on it. She noted that the Sentencing Commission, in its thorough analysis of the criminal justice system, had not recommended the approach taken in HB 127. She commented that HB 127 would increase sentences in cases where a weapon was not a major part of the offense. However, in cases where a weapon was a major part of the offense, sentences would be decreased, she said. Number 578 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN asked if the legislature could pass presumptive sentences that took effect only if another presumptive sentence did not. Number 585 MS. KNUTH did not believe that could occur. She noted that the point of presumptive sentences was to use them generally. Number 603 REPRESENTATIVE NORDLUND asked Ms. Knuth if the possession of a firearm during the commission of a crime was now an aggravator. MS. KNUTH replied in the affirmative. She said that it gave flexibility to a judge in handing down a sentence. Number 628 REPRESENTATIVE NORDLUND commented that Representative Kott's intentions were probably good, but said that the effect of HB 127 might be counterproductive to what Representative Kott had set out to accomplish. He asked Representative Kott what had prompted his introduction of HB 127. Number 636 REPRESENTATIVE KOTT replied that he had sponsored the bill because of concerns raised by police officers. He suggested that the committee lay HB 127 aside, and instead look into recommendations made by the Sentencing Commission. CHAIRMAN PORTER stated that he would accept Representative Kott's comment as a MOTION to lay HB 127 on the table, pending further discussion of the Sentencing Commission's recommendations. There being no objection, IT WAS SO ORDERED. The Chairman announced that the committee would take up HB 86 next. He called a brief "at ease" while Representative Bunde was being notified.