HOUSE COMMITTEE ON JUDICIARY

 

 

May 20, 2003 Hearing Room 357

1:00 pm  Tape  199-201

 

MEMBERS PRESENT:            Rep. Max Williams, Chair

Rep. Robert Ackerman, Vice-Chair

Rep. Gordon Anderson, Vice-Chair

Rep. Jeff Barker

Rep. Bob Jenson

Rep. Jerry Krummel

Rep. Greg Macpherson

Rep. Floyd Prozanski

Rep. Lane Shetterly

 

STAFF PRESENT:                  Craig Prins, Counsel

Nancy Massee, Committee Assistant

 

MEASURE/ISSUES HEARD:        

                                                SB 564A Public Hearing

SB 617A Public Hearing

SB 342 Public Hearing

 

These minutes are in compliance with Senate and House Rules.  Only text enclosed in quotation marks reports a speaker’s exact words.  For complete contents, please refer to the tapes.

 

TAPE/#

Speaker

Comments

TAPE,  199, A

006

Chair Max Williams

Opens meeting at 1:25p.m.  Opens public hearing on SB 564A.

SB 564A PUBLIC HEARING

010

Sen. Jason Atkinson

Senate District 2. Supports SB 564A.  Introduces Corporal Jeff Geddings from Grants Pass Police Department. 

032

Jeff Geddings

Corporal, Grants Pass Department of Safety.  Testifies in support of SB 564A which creates crime of assaulting law enforcement animal, and submits testimony (EXHIBIT  A).

080

Rep. Prozanski

Asks why level 8 is promoted over level 6.

085

Geddings

Explains the degrees of assault and level of penalties.

091

Rep. Prozanski

Asks if Level 8 applies to anyone with a dog.

111

Craig Prins

Committee Counsel. Reads Section Three, Animal Abuse in the Second Degree, a B Misdemeanor, the statute explains injuries and different degrees of injuries to an animal.

124

Rep. Macpherson

Discusses protecting themselves in self defense.

184

Chair Williams

Closes public hearing on SB 564A. Opens public hearing on SB 617A.

SB 617A PUBLIC HEARING

190

Hardy Myers

Attorney General of Oregon.  Testifies in support of SB 617A which requires restitution in all cases in which victim suffers injury, loss or damage.  Most important factor proposed by SB 617A is that the financial condition of the offender is no longer a consideration of restitution to the victim.

336

Connie Gallagher

Department of Justice, Crime Victims Assistance Section. Testifies in support of SB 617A and submits testimony (EXHIBIT B). Explains why restitution is so important to victims.  Relates Colorado’s victim assistance policy for restitution.   

363

Arwen Bird

Executive Director, Survivors Advocating For an Effective System (SAFES). Testifies in support of SB 617A and submits testimony (EXHIBIT C).  Gives reasons why restitution should be paid.

TAPE 200, A

087

Steve Doell

Crime Victims United of Oregon.  Testifies in support of SB 617A. Relates experiences in working with crime victims and how restitution is not usually achieved. Discusses how accountability for actions has to be achieved.

110

Rep. Shetterly

Asks if restitution constitutes liens and are they enforceable. Discusses mandatory requirements of restitution.  Concern is with juvenile offenders and their ability to accomplish restitution and accountability.  Asks that there be discretion of the court.

130

Myers

Answers he believes they are.  Answers that there would be some cases that would be difficult with the mandatory requirements.  Comments that accountability is what the law is seeking.

170

Bird

Comments that restitution is part of rehabilitation of an offender.

180

Chair Williams

Refers to the A-2 amendments (EXHIBIT D) that address disabled persons. 

190

Myers

Replies that he does not recall the work group addressing individual factors, but that accountability was the work group’s main concern.

208

Fred Boss

Assistant Attorney General, Department of Justice.  Answers Rep. Shetterly that it depends on the basic nature of the debt whether it is dischargeable.

224

Rep. Shetterly

Comments that most would not be dischargeable.

230

Rep. Ackerman

Explains whether the judgment is dischargeable may depend on the finding of the court and the entry of the judgment.

250

Boss

Discusses Bankruptcy Court findings are not bound by the state court findings.

268

Gallagher

Refers to the minimal number of cases that would be related to a disabled offender.

289

Bird

Explains how disabilities still may allow a person to earn money.

295

Doell

Discusses how a person may become disabled because of the crime.

300

Helen Smith

Chief Deputy District Attorney, Multnomah County. Testifies in support of SB 617A and submits letter from District Attorney Michael Schrunk (EXHIBIT E). Describes victims’ dilemma when restitution is not received.  Explains that circumstances do change for offenders with judgments against them.

326

Diane Rea

Chair, Oregon Board of Parole and Post-Prison Supervision and Chair, Sub-committee of Restitution Task Force. Testifies in support of SB 617A. Discusses the need for the courts to order restitution schedules.  

TAPE 199, B

070

Rep. Krummel

Discusses incarcerated individuals who are earning money and their ability to contribute toward restitution.

092

Smith

Discusses parental responsibility in restitution of juvenile offenders.

100

Susan Russell

Oregon Criminal Defense Lawyers Association (OCDLA).  Testifies in opposition to SB 617A. Describes the mentally ill being processed as criminals and the overwhelming impossibility of their supplying restitution. Supports the –A2 amendments which would allow disabled individuals waiver of restitution.

179

Rep. Ackerman

Comments on disabled defendant’s mitigation in criminal case which would not be available to him in a civil case involving the same wrong.

190

Rep. Shetterly

Compares criminal restitution judgment and civil restitution judgment as not on the same plane.

220

Chair Williams

Remarks that SB 617A will be heard tomorrow.  Closes public hearing on SB 617A.  Opens public hearing on SB 342.

SB 342 PUBLIC HEARING

230

Craig Prins

Committee Counsel.  Explains SB 342 which provides that for purposes of crime of possession of controlled substance person possesses controlled substance if person intentionally consumes controlled substance and certain other circumstances are present.

250

Brian DeLashmutt

Oregon Council of Police Associations (OCPA).  Testifies in support of SB 342.  Explains how students are using controlled substances in school.  States there are no diversion ways to address their problem.

319

Craig Durbin

Sergeant, Oregon State Police.  Testifies in support of SB 342 and submits testimony (EXHIBIT F). Describes the use of marijuana by students without diversion programs available in the schools. Relates statistics on substance abuse of students.

TAPE 200, B

008

Rep. Ackerman

Asks about programs where officers are trained to detect types of substance abuse.

012

Sgt. Durbin

Describes “driving under the influence” (DUI) impairment by alcohol or drugs.  Describes how officers are trained to look for different signs of substance impairment and the tests used to determine the substance.

029

Rep. Prozanski

Asks about early intervention and wonders what schools use now.

036

Sgt Durbin

Answers that in Yamhill County there was not much available.

045

DeLashmutt

Discusses the lack of substance abuse education in the school classrooms.

058

Rep. Prozanski

Asks if this bill is a tool to reach the substance abusers.

080

DeLashmutt

Responds that this bill is a tool to address substance abuse in the schools.

107

Sgt. Durbin

Discusses the need for schools to have mechanisms for dealing with substance abuse.

167

Rep. Prozanski

Asks about tests that would be applied to suspected drug users.

177

Sgt. Durbin

Explains the tests, evaluations, and procedures of suspected abusers.

250

Susan Russell

Oregon Criminal Defense Lawyers Association (OCDLA).  Testifies in opposition to SB 342. States that a treatment approach would be more appropriate than SB 342 actions. Explains consequences of the approach of SB 342 advocates.

290

David Fidanque

American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU).  Testifies in opposition to SB 342. Supports treatment programs for students who are using substances illegally. States funding is lacking to support these programs in schools.

300

Chair Williams

Asks for the rationale for a different standard between the provisions of the law of minors in possession and under the influence.

340

Russell

Replies about collateral consequences.

TAPE 201, A

014

Chair Williams

Asks what is the rationale to determine illegal substances.

025

Russell

Replies that it is the OCDLA position not to be engaged in the drugs and the intervention should be counseling or treatment.

030

Chair Williams

Asks if that is not the point of Minor in Possession (MIP) resources.

050

Rep. Shetterly

Questions the minor issue.

060

Fidanque

Discusses the language of SB 342 and its focus on marijuana use.  Comments that marijuana use is not as dangerous as other drugs and this bill will not do anything but make young people more resistant.

089

Chair Williams

Closes public hearing on SB 342. Adjourns meeting at 3:21 p.m.

 

 

EXHIBIT SUMMARY

 

A – SB 546A, written testimony, Jeff Geddings, 3 pp

B – SB 617A, written testimony, Connie Gallagher, 2 pp

C – SB 617A, written testimony, Arwen Bird, 2 pp

D – SB 617A-2 amendments, staff, 1 p

E – SB 617A, letter of Michael Schrunk submitted by Helen Smith, 1 p

F – SB 342, written testimony, Sgt. Craig Durbin, 2 pp