CS FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 54(FIN) "An Act relating to bail review; relating to petitions for review by crime victims where the defendant has received a sentence below the sentencing range for the crime; relating to the qualifications of certain members of the Violent Crimes Compensation Board; relating to the introduction of the victim and the defendant or minor to the jury; amending Rule 27, Alaska Rules of Criminal Procedures, and Rule 21, Alaska Delinquency Rules; and providing for an effective date." This was the first hearing for this bill in the Senate Finance Committee. REPRESENTATIVE RALPH SAMUELS, co-sponsor of the bill, informed the Committee that the first part of this bill would address bail hearings. The fact that a defendant is currently entitled to a bail hearing every 24 hours creates problems for both district attorneys and for the crime victim who "have a Constitutional right to be a every proceeding that the defendant is at". The 24-hour bail scenario is a hardship for the victim who, when notified of the hearing, might be required to leave their job to attend a hearing which might not occur. This process could occur day after day with the end result being the bail not being changed. Representative Samuels stated that this bill would change the bail hearing timeframe to a 48-hour timeframe, and, in order to request a new bail hearing something pertaining to the case must have changed. That new information must be submitted "in writing for the Court's consideration". It must be new information that had not been considered at the prior bail hearing. The District Attorney would be provided a 48-hour timeframe in which to notify the victim, and there must be 48 hours between bail hearings. 10:39:24 AM Representative Samuels continued that the second part of the bill would clarify that the victim could "be introduced to the jury during the opening statement or during the jury selection process". Since the defendant is introduced to the jury, both he and co- sponsor Representative Bill Stoltze deem the introduction of the victim of the crime to be warranted. It would "put a face on what happened whether it be a crime against a person or a simple property crime." 10:39:59 AM Representative Samuels communicated that the third component of the bill would provide the victim "the right to petition a review of a sentence that falls below the set range". He referenced previously adopted legislation that specified a range of sentencing for specific crimes. While "a sentence that goes above the range would go to a jury trial", this bill would allow that "the victim of a crime could petition a review of the sentence ?.to the Court of Appeals" were "the aggregate amount of years between all the aggravators and mitigators in a sentence" to fall below the range. Representative Samuels stated that the bill would also expand State Statutes to allow a retired physician or attorney to qualify for the Violent Crimes Compensation Board. Representative Samuels concluded that these steps would assist in balancing the rights of the accused and those of the victim. Co-Chair Green observed that allowing a retired physician or attorney to serve on the Board would serve "to increase the eligibility" of Board members. REPRESENTATIVE BILL STOLTZE, the bill's co-sponsor, thanked the Committee for hearing this bill. 10:41:41 AM Co-Chair Green declared that, according to the volume of phone calls she has received in regards to this bill, it must be a "very good bill". Co-Chair Green asked whether does bill would "bar or impact a defendant's ability to file an expedited request". Representative Samuels responded that it would not. Under the current process, a Magistrate would set a defendant's initial bail. Typically, and particularly in cases involving "high emotions or alcohol, that bail would be set at a high level. The subsequent bail hearing, which is considered "the real bail hearing" would be before a Judge. Rather than allowing a bail hearing to be scheduled every day, as is currently the case, this bill would extend the amount of time between hearings and would require that a change in the information pertaining to the case be provided in writing to the Court. Co-Chair Wilken moved to report the bill from Committee with individual recommendations and accompanying fiscal notes. There being no objection, CS HB 54(FIN) was REPORTED from Committee with zero fiscal note #1 dated March 26, 2005 from the Department of Corrections; zero fiscal note #2 dated March 24, 2005 from the Alaska Court System; and zero fiscal note #3 dated March 29, 2005 from the Department of Law. 10:43:13 AM