SB 187-HARASSMENT; SEX OFFENDERS & OFFENSES  1:52:24 PM CHAIR HOLLAND reconvened the meeting and announced the consideration of SENATE BILL NO. 187 "An Act relating to criminal law and procedure; relating to the crime of harassment; relating to the duty to register as a sex offender; amending the definition of 'sex offense'; relating to lifetime revocation of a teaching certificate for certain offenses; relating to the definition of 'domestic violence'; relating to multidisciplinary child protection teams; relating to arrest authority for pretrial services officers and probation officers; and providing for an effective date." [SB 187 was previously heard on 2/23/22, 2/25/22, and 3/4/2022.] CHAIR HOLLAND solicited questions from members. 1:52:54 PM SENATOR KIEHL said several provisions were unclear. He referred to Section 16 on page 12, lines 25-31. This section makes adjustments to House Bill 49 that the legislature considered several years ago, related to requirements for sex offender registry. He recalled that the Alaska Supreme Court raised some constitutional issues at the time. The legislature debated requiring sex offenders to register in Alaska even if their offense was not registerable in Alaska. He asked if there were any constitutional issues related to the Sex Offender Registry. 1:54:57 PM JOHN SKIDMORE, Deputy Attorney General, Office of the Attorney General, Criminal Division, Department of Law, Anchorage, Alaska, related the constitutional issue was ex post facto, which means adding an enhanced or added penalty that is passed after someone has committed a crime. The Alaska Supreme Court ruled that sex offender registration could, in part, be deemed as punitive. However, ex post facto does not apply because [federal law] requires sex offenders to register in the state where they committed the crime. When the sex offender moves to Alaska, the statutes clarify that the same registration requirements carry over. Thus, Alaska is not adding to their punishment. It would only be an ex post facto violation if the person were not required to register when convicted, and Alaska was trying to add to that requirement. MR. SKIDMORE envisioned someone might challenge this requirement, but the department believes that Section 16 will not present any constitutional issues. 1:56:53 PM SENATOR KIEHL asked if the person would be required to remain on the sex offender registry in the state where the conviction occurred after they moved to Alaska. MR. SKIDMORE said he was unsure whether the person would need to register since they would no longer be a resident of that state. He reiterated that the punitive aspect requiring registration on the Alaska Sex Offender Registry arises at the time of their conviction. He was unsure whether all states' courts would follow the Alaska Supreme Court's finding that registration is punitive. The distinction is that the registration requirement already existed before the person moved to Alaska. 1:57:50 PM SENATOR KIEHL stated he was not concerned about other states' court rulings. However, he was worried that someone would need to register for a sex offense that was not considered a sex offense in Alaska. He noted that if the person had done the deed in Alaska, they would not have to register. He related that the person would face a partially punitive element in Alaska by needing to register after the fact. He stated that concerns him from an ex post facto perspective. 1:58:42 PM SENATOR HUGHES asked Mr. Skidmore to weigh in on Senator Kiehl's concern. She was unsure whether he was speaking about the timing of the requirement or if states have different requirements for sex offenders. MR. SKIDMORE responded that Alaska law says that if a person is required to register in another state as a sex offender, the person will need to register in Alaska as a sex offender. He elaborated that this would apply, even if the crime that required the person to register in their state was not a crime requiring registering as a sex offender in Alaska. The rationale for Alaska's registration requirement was to avoid encouraging individuals to move to Alaska from any state to avoid registering as a sex offender. SENATOR HUGHES replied that she understood the issue. She agreed that some risk for court challenges exists but that the punitive aspect disappears if someone moves to Alaska to avoid registration. She surmised that sex offenders could be enticed to live in Alaska. She expressed concern that Alaska could be a magnet for those wanting to avoid a sex registry in other states. 2:01:12 PM CHAIR HOLLAND held SB 187 in committee.