SB 54-PROTECTIVE ORDERS FOR SEXUAL ASSAULT  8:37:27 AM MR. JASON HOOLEY, staff to Senator Dyson, introduced SB 54. Sexual assault in Alaska is three times the national average. SB 54 creates the availability of protective orders for victims. SB 54 involves only sexual assault that falls outside of domestic violence. Version \P changes the location of the provisions to be inserted with the current stalking provisions. There will be a section for domestic violence protective order in AS 18.66 and a section in AS 18.65 for stranger assaults. 8:39:25 AM SENATOR GENE THERRIAULT moved Version \P as the working document. Hearing no objections, the motion carried. 8:39:49 AM SENATOR HOLLIS FRENCH clarified Version \P adds sexual assault to the stalking law and does not make any other substantive changes. MR. HOOLEY agreed. SENATOR FRENCH asked whether sexual abuse of a minor was included in SB 54. MR. HOOLEY answered Section 10 gives the definition of sexual assault, which references another section that includes second, third, and fourth degree sexual assault and incest. 8:41:29 AM MS. ANNE CARPENETI, Department of Law (DOL), testified in support of SB 54. She suggested one change in Section 9, line 28, which would require the petitioner to research priors. She suggested adding the words "must, if known," to include that information. 8:43:46 AM SENATOR GRETCHEN GUESS asked Ms. Carpeneti whether Section 9 was needed. MS. CARPENETI aired Section 9 was not needed as it requires a victim to volunteer personal information. SENATOR FRENCH asked if there was a similar provision in the domestic violence statutes. MS. CARPENETI responded yes, which makes sense because of the relationship. SB 54 relates to stranger stalking. SENATOR FRENCH suggested striking the words, "or the respondent". 8:45:18 AM CHAIR SEEKINS commented there might be a pending civil or criminal action between the respondent and the petitioner. MS. CARPENETI suggested re-wording to say, "...pending action between the parties." CHAIR SEEKINS said when a petitioner knows of other criminal action for a similar offense against someone else, the court should be alerted. 8:46:50 AM SENATOR THERRIAULT asked Ms. Carpeneti whether the information would be entered into the court regardless. MS. CARPENETI responded yes, as admissible evidence. SENATOR THERRIAULT suggested Section 9 attempts to ensure full disclosure of any relationship between the two parties. 8:48:38 AM MS. CARPENETI expressed concern about requiring the petitioner to research information regarding the defendant. CHAIR SEEKINS agreed. He proposed on lines 28 and 31, add the word, "known" after "of." SENATOR GUESS agreed. She asked Ms. Carpeneti whether the petitioner would have to disclose any civil or criminal action that has nothing to do with the order. MS. CARPENETI advised the court would be interested in knowing. 8:51:12 AM CHAIR SEEKINS asserted it is important for the court to know when there is a history between the parties. SENATOR GUESS expressed concern that a person would have to disclose unnecessary personal information. 8:53:46 AM SENATOR FRENCH suggested there could be times when the information is relevant. He said it does not seem like a huge burden to require a party to disclose pending cases. 8:57:11 AM SENATOR FRENCH proposed Amendment 1. Section 9, line 29, after the word, "respondent" add the words, "if known." Hearing no objections, the motion carried. 8:58:03 AM MS. CARRIE ROBINSON, attorney, Alaska Network on Domestic Violence and Sexual Assault, testified in support of SB 54. MS. CARIN ROBINSON, Alaska Women's Lobby, testified in support of SB 54. 8:59:57 AM CHAIR SEEKINS closed public testimony. SENATOR CHARLIE HUGGINS moved CSSB 54(JUD) from committee with individual recommendations and accompanying fiscal notes. There being no objection, the motion carried.