HOUSE BILL NO. 127 "An Act increasing the minimum term of imprisonment for assaults in the fourth degree committed against a peace officer, fire fighter, correctional officer, emergency medical technician, paramedic, ambulance attendant, or other emergency responders." Representative Pete Kelly, sponsor of HB 127, was invited to join the committee. He stated the bill was created due to increasing violence to police during the execution of their duties. It sends a clear message to those who would assault a police officer that engaging in a fight with a police officer is a bad idea. The sentence was extended to include emergency responders, correctional nurses, firefighters and any other emergency personnel. Due to technical flaws in sentencing it was found that judges were prevented from using aggravated factors on felony assaults against police officers. Fourth degree assault now includes threatening speech and the sixty day sentence arrived at was the same formula used in felony assault when there are aggravating factors. He referred to the fiscal note from the Department of Law, 2/9/96. Co-chairman Halford cited the fiscal note from the Department of Law, zero; $21.4 from Department of Corrections; the rest are all zero. Senator Donley asked for an explanation on repealers. Representative Kelly advised that it refers to felonious assault and presumptive sentencing. Later there are aggravators. If presumptive sentencing is used regarding a police officer the aggravator can not be used. As the law was written the presumptive sentence was less for a police officer than for a normal citizen. That section was repealed in the presumptive sentencing and felonious C&B assaults and just allowed the judge to use the aggravator. As long as it was in presumptive sentencing the judge's hands were tied. Because of case law it was double jeopardy. A specific provision was repealed to include peace officers and correctional officers. Senator Donley referred to the definition of "peace officer" under Title 12 and who all was included. Mr. Dean Guaneli was invited to join the committee. He explained the law enforcement community is concerned and feels the current thirty-day sentence is not adequate to address the matter and deter people from assaulting police officers. Representative Kelly advised that Col. Godfrey from the Alaska State Troopers was not available to testify today but referred to the fact that there has been a jump from 66 assaults in 1994 to 91 assaults in 1995 - 1996. This is viewed not as a spite but a trend. Senator Frank asked if this was because judges were giving minimum sentences when a police officer is assaulted. Representative Kelly advised that judges have the option to sentence up to one year. Mr. Guaneli noted that in general when the legislature imposes a minimum sentence the judges ordinarily give that sentence unless there are particular aggravating factors. The ultimate jail time tends to focus around the mandatory minimum set forth by the legislature. It is felt by judges that it is foreseeable police officers may be assaulted and that is why they choose the minimum sentence unless a specific direction otherwise. Senator Frank asked the definition of assault. Mr. Guaneli informed the committee that assault can simply be the infliction of some level of pain, a punch in the nose, a shove, just about anything can rise to the level of a misdemeanor assault. Senator Frank commented on not leaving discretion to the judges to look at the situation. Representative Kelly reflected on a conversation with former police chief from Fairbanks in that there is an escalating level of violence against them and they feel that they would like the thirty-day sentence raised. The message must be clearly sent that this is a police officer and it is hands off. This must extend to all people who are in the execution of their duties on the front lines of law enforcement. Senator Frank stated he felt the situation was very serious. Mr. Guaneli felt that a conversation between the police chief association or the Department of Public Safety and the Chief Justice or perhaps at the next judges training session or their annual conference someone could come before them and express the concern that these are serious matters. Judges feel there is a wide range of assaults and they try to base their sentences on the facts; from the officers stand point they see largely the minimum sentence being imposed. Senator Donley and Senator Frank referred to the sentencing commission. Senator Donley asked what the elements were for AS 11.41.230. Mr. Guaneli answered where by words or other conduct one is placed in fear of imminent physical injury. This subsection is not usually charged in connection with police officers. A blow has to be landed. Representative Kelly and Senator Donley further discussed that all three classes of assault are lumped together under the existing law. Senator Zharoff asked the difference between "correctional employee" and "officer". Representative Kelly advised that a police officer is trained in closer contact with felons and murderers. A correctional employee such as kitchen help, nurse, etc. is not. Therefore the intent of the bill was to include protection for correctional employees who came in contact with the prisoners. Senator Frank posed a hypothetical case on a civilian assault. Mr. Guaneli informed that there is no minimum for assault on ordinary citizens. Senator Donley MOVED SCS CSHB 127 with individual recommendations and the accompanying fiscal note of the Department of Corrections in the amount of $21.4. Without objections the bill was REPORTED OUT with individual recommendations and the fiscal note.