CS FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 159(JUD) An Act allowing a person under age 21 to be arrested by a peace officer without a warrant for illegal possession, consumption, or control of alcohol; relating to the offenses of driving while intoxicated and failure to submit to a chemical test of breath or blood; and providing for an effective date. Co-chairman Halford directed that CSHB 159 (Jud) be brought on for discussion. He noted that the bill was held from a previous meeting for development of a fiscal note showing potential revenues from increased fines as well as a new note from the Dept. of Corrections evidencing reduced costs in the initial year of implementation. The Co-chairman referenced information indicating that while fines might total $760.0, 80% to 90% will be uncollectible for lack of financial resources on the part of defendants. That reduces possible revenue to $114.0. The new note for the Dept. of Corrections reduces costs to $540.0 for the first year. That cost is based on the same number of convictions used in estimating revenues. Senator Sharp remarked that although $114.0 in revenue is anticipated, and the fiscal note for the Dept. of Corrections has been cut in half, costs associated with the bill total approximately $1.2 million and will result in incarceration of an additional 300 people. He then voiced reluctance to pass the bill until day-fine legislation is brought in line. Senator Phillips suggested that a lien for the unpaid fine be placed against other property if the defendant's automobile is not of sufficient value. Co-chairman Halford asked that legislative staff and representatives of impacted departments come before committee. JERRY SHRINER, Special Assistant, Dept. of Corrections; JUANITA HENSLEY, Chief, Driver Services, Division of Motor Vehicles, Dept. of Public Safety; and DANIELLA LOPER, aide to Representative Porter, came forward. Senator Phillips suggested that defendants covered by the proposed bill traditionally drive junker cars with little worth. They cannot afford to pay their fines, and it costs too much to put them in jail. He then suggested that other property be seized. Juanita Hensley concurred in frustration associated with definitive action against drunk drivers. Experience over the past 15 years evidences that the majority of the defendants are third, fourth, and subsequent offenders who do not own their own cars. They drive automobiles of little value or borrow from friends. In applying its motor vehicle forfeiture law, the City of Anchorage found that many confiscated vehicles do not pass emission control inspection. The city then has to pay to have the vehicles destroyed. Mrs. Hensley deferred comment on seizure of other property to the Dept. of Law. Mr. Shriner commented on information from the court system indicating little ability to collect fines or the cost of care from third and subsequent offenders. Senator Phillips reiterated need to seize something of value from defendants. Ms. Loper stressed that the proposed bill would commence evaluation of alcohol screening. That has never been done before. It is intended to provide evaluation regarding how to combat fourth and fifth repeat offenders. Suspended jail time will also be imposed upon the convicted felon in the hope that it will be a deterrent. The bill also authorizes the Court System to utilize rehabilitative measures such as drug therapy, etc. Discussion of application of subsection (q) followed between Senator Rieger and Ms. Loper. Ms. Loper explained that the fine would be equal across the board, regardless of whether the defendant is indigent or wealthy. Mrs. Hensley concurred that the Court System assesses a fine for everyone. However, it also determines whether a person can pay the fine. If found to be indigent, the defendant does not pay. A finding of indigency is a separate proceeding. Language in the proposed bill says that the court may not suspend imposition of sentence on these defendants. It must assess the $5,000 fine and impose jail time. Senator Rieger next directed attention to page 1 of the bill and attested to ongoing discussion of the difference between "reasonable" and "probable" cause. He then attested to a greater level of comfort with "probable cause" and MOVED to substitute "probable" for "reasonable" at page 1, line 8. No objection having been raised, the AMENDMENT was ADOPTED. Senator Zharoff voiced concern that abuse could result from provisions allowing for arrest without a warrant for alcohol related crimes. Co-chairman Halford remarked that the standard of probable cause is the standard for initiating action by a police officer for all crimes. Referencing language at page 1, line 11, Senator Zharoff raised a question concerning addition of "or an ordinance with similar elements." Ms. Loper explained that the language was added "so that municipalities may be able to use this law." Juanita Hensley added that AS 04.16.050 relates to possession, control, and consumption of alcohol by persons under twenty-one. It does not relate to sale of alcohol. Discussion of warrant arrest followed between Senator Rieger and Ms. Loper. Senator Rieger asked if warrantless arrest also allows for search. Ms. Loper responded negatively. The Senator stressed that the bill should not provide a loophole for warrantless searches. Senator Rieger MOVED for passage of SCS CSHB 159 (Fin) with individual recommendations. Senator Zharoff OBJECTED. Co- chairman Halford acknowledged a bare quorum of four members in attendance and objection to passage. He then directed that the bill be held in committee for full attendance. RECESS The meeting was recessed at 1:25 p.m., subject to recall by the chair, for possible continued discussion later in the day.