CSSB 26(FIN) - DEADLY WEAPON OFFENSES BY JUVENILES Number 140 PATRICIA HAGGERTY, Administrative Assistant, Senator Dave Donley, introduced the bill. Senate Bill 26 treats minors who are over 14 as adults when they commit a second violent offense using a deadly weapon. The bill provides for an automatic waiver of juvenile jurisdiction and prosecution of minors 14 and over into adult court. SB 26 does not require any specified punishment or mandatory sentence. The sentence is at the discretion of the judge. A minor sentenced in adult court through this means will have the ability to petition the superior court to seal the record of all criminal proceedings, if provisions of the court are fulfilled, but a minor convicted in Sections 1 or 2 of this bill will never have the opportunity to have records sealed. MS. HAGGERTY stated there is a clear problem with juveniles bringing guns and weapons to schools and public places. School employees and the police are concerned that the juvenile process does not offer a deterrent to this dangerous behavior. Students can be expelled for one year for having a firearm on school property, but we are finding that they re-enroll in the same district, in another school. SB 26 will create a strong deterrent to the repeated use of deadly weapons by juveniles. SB 26 is supported by the National Education Association, the National Rifle Association, the Juneau Police Department, Fairbanks Police Department, Anchorage Police Department, the Public Safety Employees Association, and the Spenard Community Council. GREG MCDONALD, Secretary-Treasurer, Public Safety Employees Association (PSEA), stated that the people he represents are looking at this bill to help them with the growing problem of juvenile violent crime. While we recognize that this is a strong measure for the treatment of juveniles, we feel that the bill is being fair and that it (indisc.) the 14-year-old that is for the second crime involving weapons, and we feel strongly that we need to do something to deter this. This is for the second offense. These kids have been tried and convicted of their first offense under the juvenile system. Obviously it has failed if they are back again with a second crime involving a weapon, and it is limited to the felony charges. REPRESENTATIVE TOOHEY asked if she heard the testimony correctly that this will stay with them for the rest of their lives. Is that correct? MS. HAGGERTY answered that if the juvenile is convicted under Section 1 or 2, it will stay on their record. Number 240 MARGOT KNUTH, Assistant Attorney General, Criminal Division, Department of Law, stated that the Administration is opposed to this bill because of the 14- and 15-year-olds that would be automatically waived, treated as adults and left with convictions on their adult records. Last year, SB 54 went through the legislature, and in fact, took two years to do it, and it addressed the issue of juvenile waiver. There was, at one time, a provision for automatic waiver, for 14 years of age and older. Ultimately, what was passed was an automatic waiver for 16 years and older for unclassified felonies or class A felonies or arson. This bill has been before the legislature before and did not pass last session. An offense against a person could be either the class A misdemeanor of reckless endangerment. The fact that it is not limited to serious felony offense but can include even the most minor misdemeanor and the fact that it does bring in 14- and 15-year- olds, the Administration does not support the bill. MS. KNUTH also noted that she has spoken with the Juneau Police Department and the Anchorage Police Department, and they do not support the automatic waiver of 14- and 15-year-olds, and they, like the Administration, are concerned about juvenile violent crime, and they believe it should be responded to, as does the Administration, but automatic waiver that goes this far is something that people do not believe is appropriate at this time. The Administration does believe that we need to look wholesale at juvenile justice, that we have got a problem that has leaked to the forefront, and needs to be addressed. But instead of a patchwork approach where we look at joyriding, we look at offenses involving guns, and there is one other automatic waiver pending this session. Instead of doing it just one issue at a time, we believe that a group of people should get together and come up with a more uniform and more considered policy direction to go with for juvenile justice. CHAIRMAN PORTER said the first time he read this, he thought it was only narrowed to felonies. It requires a crime against a person committed with a deadly weapon, having been previously adjudicated, but would a misdemeanor be confined to that category? MS. KNUTH answered that all that is required is for it to be a crime committed against a person, and that a deadly weapon was used in the commission of the offense, not that that be an element of it, and therefore, for reckless endangerment. The crime is committed if the person recklessly engages in conduct which creates substantial risk of serious physical injury to another person, waiving a gun around would constitute the offense of reckless endangerment, and obviously is not a felony offense. ELMER LINDSTROM, Special Assistant, Office of the Commissioner, Department of Health and Social Services, stated that Margot has given the Administration's testimony, and we were very much involved in the debate on SB 54, the juvenile waiver bill last year, and we are consistently opposed to the automatic waiver provisions for children under 16. We feel comfortable with that position today, and therefore go on record as being opposed to this bill. REPRESENTATIVE TOOHEY said we do automatically waive 16-year-olds, but it is the 14- and 15-year-olds that we are objecting to. We do not just slap their hands and put them back out on the street do we? CHAIRMAN PORTER said, yes, just about. MR. LINDSTROM explained that there are existing provisions where a 14- or 15-year-old could be waived into adult court through existing procedures that have been on the books for a long time. He was not suggesting for one moment that there could not be a situation where that was appropriate. It is the automatic aspect of this bill that is troubling to the Department of Health and Social Services. REPRESENTATIVE GREEN asked how many 14- and 15-year-olds have actually been waived. MR. LINDSTROM asked his staff, Kathy Tibbles, to come forward and answer that. KATHY TIBBLES, Division of Family and Youth Services, Department of Health and Social Services, said they are not able to provide data about how many kids would fall under this particular provision. Our system will record prior adjudications, but for the major offense that the juvenile was adjudicated for at that time, perhaps burglary, or whatever, not whether it involved use of a deadly weapon. We have a new system we are working on and eventually we can answer that, but right now we cannot even tell how many juveniles would fall under this. We do not think there are very many, but we do not have the combination of the deadly weapons use along with the charge. REPRESENTATIVE GREEN asked, without referring to statistics, if she knew of any. MS. TIBBLES said she did not personally know of any. REPRESENTATIVE TOOHEY hoped somebody in this room had somewhat of an answer. Number 370 REPRESENTATIVE BUNDE said that being a longstanding proponent of peer evaluation, he wanted to invite the committee's attention to the letter from Nicolette Davis, a senior from Lathrop. She does not want concealed weapons allowed. She says that if you are held accountable for your behavior, maybe your behavior will change. "Out of the mouths of babes" might apply here. LEE ANN LUCAS, Special Assistant, Office of the Commissioner, Department of Public Safety, stated the department's position. They do share the concern with the Departments of Law and Health and Social Services. For automatic waiver of 14-and 15-year-olds, we feel provisions are present that were implemented through SB 54 last year, provides for waiving of those 14- and 15-year-olds on a case-by-case basis. Number 400 MS. HAGGERTY wanted to clarify, in response to the question earlier about sealing of records. A case sent to adult court under this bill would strictly be a case of a second offense of a minor 14 and over. In adult court, the judge would have discretion of the sentence or possible treatment, or waiver of all punishments, depending on the decision of the court in that case. All cases coming to court will not become a matter of public record, only those classified under Sections 1 and 2. MR. MACDONALD differed with the Department of Law. We also represent the Juneau Police Department. The police officers of the Juneau Police Department support this. REPRESENTATIVE BUNDE said the fiscal note is zero, so they must anticipate this to include a relatively small group of people. He felt the message to be worth the price. He then made a motion to move CSSB 26(FIN) out of committee with individual recommendations and attached fiscal notes. Hearing no objection, the bill moved.