SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE January 26, 1998 1:30 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT Senator Robin Taylor, Chairman Senator Drue Pearce, Vice-Chairman Senator Mike Miller MEMBERS ABSENT Senator Sean Parnell Senator Johnny Ellis COMMITTEE CALENDAR SB 242 - FORFEIT GOOD TIME OF SOME SEX OFFENDERS - MOVED SB 242 OUT OF COMMITTEE PREVIOUS SENATE COMMITTEE ACTION NO PREVIOUS SENATE COMMITTEE ACTION WITNESS REGISTER Senator Jerry Ward State Capitol Juneau, AK 99801-1182 Position Statement: Prime Sponsor of SB 242 Ms. Margo Knuth Assistant Attorney General, Department of Law PO Box 110300 Juneau, AK 99801-0300 Position Statement: Commented on SB 242 Mr. Blair McCune Public Defender 900 West 5th Ave. Anchorage, AK 99501 Position Statement: Commented on SB 242 Ms. Pam Karalunas Fairbanks Child Sexual Abuse Task Force PO Box 73893 Fairbanks, AK 99707 Position Statement: Supported SB 242 ACTION NARRATIVE TAPE 98-2, SIDE A Number 001 CHAIRMAN ROBIN TAYLOR called the Judiciary Committee meeting to order at 1:37 p.m. and noted the presence of SENATOR MILLER and SENATOR PEARCE. He stated SB 242 was up for discussion. SENATOR WARD, prime sponsor of SB 242, presented the bill. He said it is a simple bill that is explained in its title. The current state policy, which he wholeheartedly endorses, allows 'good time' for prisoners. He believes, however, if a prisoner fails to complete a mandatory court-ordered treatment program they should not be eligible for good time. This is the intent of the bill. He did not know until recently that these prisoners were even eligible for good time and his bill seeks to correct this. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR asked if an order is contained in a judge's sentence, how would the Department of Corrections (DOC) avoid complying with it. SENATOR WARD explained it is up to the Commissioner to comply with court orders and he thinks in most cases they try to follow through with them. If the judge orders completion of a program, he thinks the offender should go through with it for the protection of the public. He says we can't afford to do anything less. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR expressed concern that court orders are not being followed and that people at DOC are going to do whatever they feel like doing. He was also concerned this same thing may be happening in other areas also, like drug treatment programs. He said it sounds to him like the orders are already in place, they are simply not being complied with. SENATOR WARD agreed, saying he was attempting to get information regarding other types of court ordered treatment also. He saw this particular problem as paramount and had the bill drafted as soon as he became aware of it. He planned to continue gathering information on the other programs and would not mind incorporating them into this bill, if the committee desired. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR said there was other legislation pending regarding drug treatment programs and registering of sex offenders. He said when the original registration bill was passed its intent was all sex offenders be registered. It came out later that through some bureaucratic loophole it fell through the cracks at DOC, did not happen and had to come back to the legislature. SENATOR WARD said this is the reason this bill came about. He expressed frustration that the public might get a false sense of security if a convicted sex offender who failed to complete a court-ordered rehabilitation program was released. He believed this bill would be correcting an oversight. MR. BLAIR MCCUNE, deputy director of the public defender's office in Anchorage spoke next via teleconference. He brought to the committee's attention Alaska Statute 33.16.22, which he said does this already through the parole board. He said if a prisoner fails to complete court-ordered treatment the parole board can revoke their mandatory release parole. He explained mandatory release parole is known as "good time" and has been revoked by the parole board 30 different times in 1997. He said the revocation can only occur when the programs have been made available to the prisoners; if the programs are not made available, good time will not be revoked. He did say the treatment is expensive and possibly not made available to everyone. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR asked if he had actually been citing Alaska Statute 33.16.220(2) and Mr. McCune agreed he had been. MS. PAM KARALUNAS, characterizing herself as an expert on child sexual abuse, spoke from Fairbanks on behalf of the Fairbanks Child Sexual Abuse Task Force. She expressed strong support for the bill even after the previous testimony. She said this bill clarifies what should be happening and she has not seen it happening now. She recounted an example where an offender had been kicked out of a treatment program and had been released on good time against the advice of his therapist who was concerned enough to warn this person's former spouse. He was released with much opposition from the community and subsequently moved in a few blocks from his former spouse. She told of her frustration that nothing can be done about this and other similar cases she has witnessed. She stated even if this law is already in effect this bill would help. She believes sex offender release should be contingent on completing a rehabilitation program and she feared when sex offenders are let out of prison without one, they are let out to re-offend. MS. MARGO KNUTH, assistant Attorney General with the Department of Law (DOL), representing the Department of Corrections, spoke next. She expounded on the remarks made by Mr. McCune, saying the prisoners ordered by the court into programs are being examined and reviewed by the parole board. She informed the committee that there were 33 cases of prisoners failing to complete their court-ordered program last year. In 31 of those cases the parole board revoked the mandatory good time accrued for these prisoners and reinstated their full sentences. She added that in two cases the parole board concluded the revocation of good time was unnecessary. She said that discretion would be lost under this bill and those prisoners would also lose their good time. She explained this was the basis for the fiscal note. She distinguished between mandatory parole and discretionary parole and said there are no sex offenders being granted discretionary parole without having completed the treatment program. She explained mandatory parole was the law that presumed a prisoner would be released unless there was a basis for revocation. She said failing to comply with a court order would provide that basis. She said the intent of the legislation is appropriate but the impact would be fairly minimal. SENATOR PEARCE asked why the parole board failed to revoke good time in the other two cases. MS. KNUTH was not sure but offered that in some cases a program may not be effective for an individual due to language problems or other circumstances. SENATOR PEARCE questioned whether the revocation rate had been more than ninety per cent in previous years. Number 192 MS. KNUTH responded that it had. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR asked if the fiscal note assumed there were no sex offenders currently in probationary status. MS. KNUTH explained that such a person in probationary status would also be on parole and would be examined under the conditions of parole. She stated that with such a serious offense all sex offenders on probation would also be on parole. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR referred to the fiscal note, asking if the department was contemplating two revocations. MS. KNUTH said of the 33 offenders who did not complete their program, the parole board revoked 31 cases on their own. Under this law the other two would be revoked as the parole board would no longer maintain discretion over it. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR commented that the department must have already budgeted for the 31 individuals. MS. KNUTH agreed, saying the fiscal note reflects two more. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR marveled at the ability of the department to budget so exactly in advance. He asked if the parole board requires people to complete the program or to pass the program. MS. KNUTH said they must successfully complete the program. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR asked if the course could be completed by sitting in a room listening to someone talk for an allotted time or if change is assessed and action is required. He wondered how we could still have so much recidivism if this course is being completed. MS. KNUTH clarified that most people are not completing the program. She said some people reach the end of their sentence before they can and others simply will not participate. SENATOR PEARCE asked what the sentence for first degree sexual assault might be. MS. KNUTH replied it would be eight years for a first offense, fifteen years for a second. However, most people are convicted of a class A or B felony which carry approximately five and four years respectively. A large number of sex offenders in the state are being convicted of a class B felony and serving two to fours years, often not long enough to complete the program. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR asked if this passed would there be someone certifying they had completed the program or keeping them incarcerated for the full period of the original sentence. He asked if one of the two cases in which good time was not revoked was the case mentioned by Ms. Karalunas. MS. KNUTH answered she did not believe so and clarified that many judges recommend the program rather than order it, in which case that legislation would not apply. She stated a recommendation was not the same mandate as a court order. SENATOR PEARCE asked if it was recommended and not ordered would the parole board have the authority to revoke good time. MS. KNUTH replied no. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR expressed concern. He believes sometimes judges might submit recommendations rather than orders due to frustration that their orders may be disregarded by the correctional system. He emphasized the separation of the three branches of government and recalled his orders not being complied with in his years on the bench. He said a judge can impose his best sentence and hope for the best. He added he is somewhat satisfied at this point with the actions of the parole board. SENATOR PEARCE stated that the difficulty with sex offenders is that DOC has no hammer over the people who are incarcerated if the program has only been recommended. Unless judges actually order the completion of the program, neither the DOC nor the parole board have a hammer over the offender if they do not complete the program. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR asked if the program was recommended whether the department could require it or only offer it. MS. KNUTH replied it could only be offered and availability is subject to the resources available. She said a larger sex offender program might be helpful. SENATOR PEARCE inquired what form the treatment takes. MS. KNUTH said she did not have much information about it but could find out. SENATOR MILLER asked CHAIRMAN TAYLOR if the legislation passed he would foresee judges making more order rather than recommendations. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR replied absolutely yes. If a judge knew an order would have major impact on a sentence he would definitely do it. MS. KNUTH added that prosecutors would have a training session after the session to inform and educate them about any new laws and CHAIRMAN TAYLOR said the judicial branch would go through the same process. SENATOR WARD mentioned the idea that Florida is getting tough on sex offenders - if they do not complete their program they not only lose any good time accrued, they get an extra one third of their sentence added on to it. He was not suggesting that here, only bringing it to light. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR interjected that option is available to the court here also and SENATOR WARD agreed. SENATOR PEARCE asked if the chair intended to move the bill and CHAIRMAN TAYLOR affirmed that was intention if it pleased the committee. SENATOR PEARCE encouraged SENATOR WARD and MS. KNUTH to review the two cases in which good time was not revoked and see what happened there. She would like to see if the numbers of cases revoked was consistent over a number of years. She said she would not like to 'slam dunk' the parole board by removing their discretion. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR noted the bill will be heard in the finance committee due to the fiscal note. He asked if there was further testimony on the bill. SENATOR PEARCE moved the bill move out of committee with individual recommendations. Without objection, the bill was moved and CHAIRMAN TAYLOR adjourned the meeting at 2:15.