HB 11-CRIME: ASSAULT IN THE PRESENCE OF A CHILD  2:06:50 PM CHAIR VANCE announced that the final order of business would be SPONSOR SUBSTITUTE FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 11, "An Act establishing the crime of assault in the presence of a child." CHAIR VANCE opened invited testimony. 2:07:24 PM MICHAEL SHAFFER, Office of Victims' Rights, Legislative Agencies and Offices, gave invited testimony during the hearing on SSHB 11. He highlighted the importance of the proposed legislation because of the impact that witnessing violence has on children under the age of 16. He reported that when children witnesses violence, it directly affects their brain development, specifically the cerebral cortex. Even children as young as six months old can be affected by violence occurring around them. In addition to the physical impact, he acknowledged the emotional and psychological effects of observing violence. He discussed the importance of domestic violence intervention programs for people capable of committing violent crimes around children. He opined that the bill was long overdue, noting that the Municipality of Anchorage (MOA) had the crime "on the books" for over twenty years and consequently, it had been tested in terms of appellate law. He acknowledged that the bill wouldn't add much in the way of resources for law enforcement or prosecutors; nonetheless, it would help to better protect children across the state in situations where violence was being committed around them. 2:13:59 PM REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN inquired about the statistical impact of enacting the law in the MOA. MR. SHAFFER shared his understanding that a formal study had not been conducted on family violence prosecutions in Anchorage. He said the bill may not be a perfect solution; nonetheless, it's better than doing nothing, he said, given the crime's impact on small children. REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN inferred that the municipal law had impacted the justice system in the way of more prosecutions and convictions. He requested data or anecdotal evidence of changed behavior or a diminishment of violence in front of children. MR. SHAFFER anecdotally reported that the crime made offenders more mindful and conscious of the impact that an assault has on, not only the person that it was perpetrated against, but the children who witnessed it. He said many of the offenders who completed programs ceased to reoffend. REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN asked Mr. Skidmore to share his perspective. 2:18:08 PM JOHN SKIDMORE, Deputy Attorney General, Criminal Division, Department of Law (DOL), reminded the committee that Mr. Shaffer worked through the MOA to prosecute a crime that had been in the municipal code since 2000. He said he was unaware of research on the effect of the particular provision. 2:18:33 PM REPRESENTATIVE CARPENTER asked whether the proposed crime, assault in the presence of a child, could be used to prosecute an assault that occurred in a high school in front of younger children. MR. SKIDMORE answered yes, he believed that, theoretically, it could allow for that prosecution. He expounded on the impact of adverse childhood experiences (ACEs), adding that the inclusion of ACEs would be a policy call for the legislature. CHAIR VANCE noted that a forthcoming amendment would exclude juveniles from the bill. 2:21:20 PM REPRESENTATIVE CARPENTER sought to verify that assault in the presence of a child applied to fourth degree assault, which included the verbal threat or fear of physical injury without physical contact. He asked whether that was accurate. MR. SKIDMORE said case law indicated that when placing someone in fear, there must be fear of imminent injury. He shared, for example, that stating the words "I'm going to kick your butt" would not qualify as a fear assault. Alternatively, getting ready to hit someone without making contact would qualify as a fear assault. He confirmed that committing a fear assault in the presence of a child would qualify [under the new statute]. 2:24:41 PM REPRESENTATIVE ANDY JOSEPHSON, Alaska State Legislature, prime sponsor of SSHB 11, asked for verification that there was a world of juvenile justice that most Alaskans weren't aware of. MR. SKIDMORE answered yes. REPRESENTATIVE JOSEPHSON sought to confirm that assault in the fourth degree applied to juveniles. MR. SKIDMORE answered yes. REPRESENTATIVE JOSEPHSON confirmed that he and Chair Vance were looking for a way to exclude juveniles from the crime's applicability. He asked whether DOL had a preference as to whether the criminal code for juveniles should be separate from that of adults. MR. SKIDMORE said that was a difficult question to answer, indicating that the concept of criminalizing certain conduct for adults but not for children involved analyses of issues related to equal protection. He pointed out that, unlike adult criminal prosecutions, the goal of juvenile justice was to consider the best interest of the child. REPRESENTATIVE JOSEPHSON asked whether the committee should be concerned about a raft of new misdemeanor charges against children or whether the charges would be disposed of. MR. SKIDMORE answered no, he did not believe that there would be a raft of fourth degree assault charges filed against children. 2:30:28 PM REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN inquired about the department's criteria for making referral in a juvenile case. MR. SKIDMORE explained that law enforcement investigated juvenile cases in the same way as any other criminal conduct. Law enforcement agencies then refer the cases to the Division of Juvenile Justice (DJJ) for further evaluation. He directed the question to DJJ. REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN inquired about the process of charging a juvenile as an adult. MR. SKIDMORE stated that the process was dictated by statute. He reported that when children above the age of 16 commit a serious offense, such as an unclassified or class A felony, they can be automatically waivered [into adult court]. He recalled only two instances in which juveniles under the age of 16 were waved into adult court. 2:33:45 PM CHAIR VANCE opened public testimony on SSHB 11. After ascertaining that no one wished to testify, she closed public testimony and announced that the bill would be held over.