|
|
|
House
Judiciary Committee Reports Reports
provided by PA Legislative Services The
House Judiciary Committee met to consider two bills. HB
1543 Solobay - (PN 1948) Amends Title 18 (Crimes and Offenses) by adding a
criminal history record would be expunged when an individual who is the
subject of the information petitions for expungement of the information and
the individual has been free of arrest or prosecution following final release
from confinement or supervision for a certain time period, based on the
grading of the offense. This provision would not apply to certain
individuals, including those who have been convicted of an offense punishable
by imprisonment of more than two years or a violation relating to simple
assault. Expungement would be prohibited for an offense relating to indecent
exposure. - The bill was reported as amended by a vote of 26-2 with
Representatives Will Gabig (R-Cumberland) and Glen Grell (R-Cumberland)
voting in the negative. A06623
by Caltagirone, provides for the procedure in expungement and the affects of
expungement. The amendment was adopted by a vote of 26-2 with
Representatives Gabig and Grell voting in the negative. Chief
Counsel Bill Andring outlined the aspects of the amendment. He said it
provides for the records the State Police can retain when records are
expunged. He noted it also places requirements on a central repository and
adds that court dockets are no longer exempted from law. On the affect of
expungement, the amendment clarifies what a person would put on a job application
when asked if they have ever been convicted of a crime, he told the
committee. Lastly, the amendment says it is unlawful to discuss criminal
history record information that is subject to an expungement order, he
explained. Andring
said there are still some outstanding issues with the bill. He noted that the
Attorney General's office opposes this with regard to misdemeanors but the
District Attorneys Association supports it. He also stated there is an issue
related to whether this is constitutional. He explained that 24 states allow
for expungement. This bill may be challenged in court, he said, adding that
he doesn't know what the outcome will be. Rep.
Craig Dally (R-Northampton) asked if there would still be a "hit"
on the person's name if a background check is run them. Andring answered yes,
adding that the State Police would still hold information like fingerprints
but the check will state that the record has been expunged. The
House Judiciary Committee met to consider four bills. HB 2117 Lentz - (PN 3025) Amends Title 18 (Crimes and Offenses) adding language providing
it shall not be unlawful and no prior court approval shall be required for a
law enforcement officer, acting in the performance of his official duties to
intercept and record an oral communication or image or video while using an
electric or electronic incapacitation device under certain circumstances.
Also provides for a definition of "electric or electronic incapacitation
device". - The bill was unanimously reported as committed. Rep.
Kathy Manderino (D-Philadelphia) expressed concern with the current language
in the bill and whether it would authorize the law enforcement to "do
more than we think". Committee Counsel William Andring responded the
legislation is specific in that it only applies to the use of an electronic
incapacitation device. HB 2168 Williams, J - (PN 3099) Amends Title 18 (Crimes and Offenses) further
providing for false reports to law enforcement authorities by adding that if
the false report relates to the loss or theft of a firearm, the offense would
be graded as a misdemeanor of the first degree. - The bill was unanimously reported
as amended. A06407
by Harper, deletes the current language in the bill and inserts new language
providing that if a false report relates to the loss or theft of a firearm,
the offense would be graded one step higher; adds to the list of enumerated
offenses for which a person may not possess, use, manufacture, control, sell
or transfer firearms; and adds language to the application/record of sale
regarding whether the applicant is the actual buyer. The amendment was
unanimously adopted. Rep.
Harper explained the amendment is an attempt to heighten the penalties for
false reporting and to address the issue of "straw purchases" of
firearms. Minority Chairman Ron Marsico (R-Dauphin) said it his understanding
the law enforcement groups have no position on the legislation or the
amendment and he asked if anyone in the office wished to comment. There was
no response. Rep. Manderino said she would vote for the amendment and the
bill but the legislation is "getting those we already get" under
current law. She added she believes the legislation does not address the
issues that need to be addressed. HB 2362 DeLuca - (PN 3428) Amends Title 42 (Judiciary) further providing
for the disbursement of the proceeds from forfeited property by adding that
whenever a municipal policy agency was substantially involved in the seizure
of property ultimately forfeited by the court, the proceeds would be
distributed so as to allocate at least 25% to the municipal police agency.
This percentage may be increased by agreement. If more than one such agency
is so involved, the court would equitably determine what portion of the 25%
would be allocated to each agency. - The bill was passed over in order
to hold a hearing. Rep.
Glen Grell (R-Cumberland) told committee members it is his understanding the
district attorneys do disburse the proceeds and it is not really a problem so
there is no need for legislation. Rep.
Carl Mantz (R-Berks) said it is a problem in his county and he expressed
support for the legislation. Minority
Chairman Marsico said he has a lot of questions regarding the legislation and
recommended the committee conduct hearing on this bill. Rep.
Greg Vitali (D-Delaware) wanted to know if the Attorney General's office or
the District Attorneys Association has taken a position on the legislation.
Annemarie Kaiser, Director of Legislative Affairs for the Attorney General,
said her office has no formal opinion. She explained they are aware of what
happened in Chairman
Thomas Caltagirone (D-Berks) asked if it would hurt to have it in statute
regarding the disbursements. Kaiser responded that it is appropriate to have
further discussions. A
motion was made by Minority Chairman Marsico and seconded by Rep. Jewell
Williams (D-Philadelphia) to pass over the bill so the committee could
conduct a public hearing on it. The motion was unanimously adopted. Rep.
Grell said it would be helpful if the committee had information regarding the
previous disbursements. Kaiser said their office would be able to give a
general idea of the disbursements but not specific information. HB 1543 Solobay - (PN 1948) Amends Title 18 (Crimes and Offenses) by
adding a criminal history record would be expunged when an individual who is
the subject of the information petitions for expungement of the information
and the individual has been free of arrest or prosecution following final
release from confinement or supervision for a certain time period, based on
the grading of the offense. This provision would not apply to certain
individuals, including those who have been convicted of an offense punishable
by imprisonment of more than two years or a violation relating to simple
assault. Expungement would be prohibited for an offense relating to indecent
exposure. - The bill was passed over. Chairman
Caltagirone said an amendment is being drafted which will be circulated to
the committee members and considered at a future meeting. Jeff
Cox The House Judiciary Committee met
to consider two bills. HB 1543 Solobay - (PN 1948) Amends Title 18
(Crimes and Offenses) by adding a criminal history record would be expunged
when an individual who is the subject of the information petitions for expungement
of the information and the individual has been free of arrest or prosecution
following final release from confinement or supervision for a certain time
period, based on the grading of the offense. This provision would not apply
to certain individuals, including those who have been convicted of an offense
punishable by imprisonment of more than two years or a violation relating to
simple assault. Expungement would be prohibited for an offense relating to
indecent exposure. - The bill was amended and held over. A06082 by Marsico, stipulates that a Megan's Law
offense cannot be expunged. The amendment was unanimously adopted. Chairman Caltagirone's six
amendment package was described by Counsel Bill Andring as a set of changes designed
to fill various holes in the expungement statute. A06090 by Caltagirone, clarifies the effect of
expungement and stipulates any person who divulges expunged information is
guilty of a summary offense. The amendment was held over. Rep. Kate Harper (R-Montgomery)
questioned, "why not say what we mean," and wondered what happens
if an expungement is conducted incompletely. Andring explained that in
drafting the amendment, appropriate language was lifted directly from the
substance abuse act. He added it addresses more than just answering questions
on an application. Rep. Harper contended she does not think the amendment
addresses the problem of how a person should fill out a job application, and
suggested the intention of the amendment should be made more explicit.
Andring pointed out pertinent lines in the legislation he feels clearly
convey its intent. Annemarie Kaiser, Director of
Legislative Affairs for the Office of the Attorney General (AG), remarked the
AG's office shares the concerns of the District Attorneys, and is concerned
that the current law from which the amendment draws its language was written
in 1972 and is not that clear. Mary Jo Mullen, Executive Director
of the Pennsylvania District Attorneys Association, commented that although
the DAs support the bill, they would like an exception for hiring public
safety officials. She also stated the effect on federal applications is
unclear. Chairman Caltagirone decided to
hold over A06090 to further work on it with the AG's office and the DA
association. A06092 by Caltagirone, provides for the expungement of
court docket information. The amendment was held over. Concerned about
"criminalizing innocent people," Rep. John Pallone (D-Westmoreland)
stated that even information expunged tomorrow would have been available
today and yesterday. He asserted there is "no way" to completely
erase a person's history. Andring emphasized the intent of the legislation is
not to regulate knowledge, but to regulate the custodians of records, the
actual term for which in the legislation is "repository." He
clarified expungement would not apply to investigative information. Rep.
Pallone commented again that he believes expunged information will
nevertheless end up "everywhere." Mullen commented the DA's
Association believes the language of the amendment would restrict all court
documents, not just the docket. She stated the sealed files may be needed at
some future date. Andring remarked there is a provision that a court may keep
basic information on an expunged individual. Mullen remarked there may be a
need for clarification to limit only the restriction of court dockets rather
than other court documents. Rep. Gabig commented he is not sure the amendment
is a good idea without further clarification. Acknowledging the continuing
contention surrounding discussion of the amendments, Chairman Caltagirone
noted he had tried to compile them into a single omnibus amendment, but it resulted
in "chaos." Rep. Gabig stated the amendments "are more complex
than the bill," and asked whether the various organizations involved are
for or against them. Chairman Caltagirone elected to
postpone the meeting and continue working on refining the amendments,
possibly attempting to combine them again into an omnibus. The remaining four amendments were
passed over. A06093 A06095 A06224 A06225 Mike Howells, PA Legislative
Services The
House Judiciary Committee conducted a public hearing on legislation
providing law enforcement powers for sheriffs. HB 466 Dally - (PN 528) Amends Title 42 (Judiciary) further providing for powers and
duties of sheriffs and deputy sheriffs by stating that all sheriffs and
deputy sheriffs who have successfully completed the same type of training as
municipal police officers may exercise the same powers as municipal police
officers to make arrests, without warrants, for all crimes and offenses.
Also, the bill states that every sheriff and deputy sheriff would have the
powers, duties, responsibilities and immunities conferred on municipal police
officers generally and specifically under sections 8952 (relating to primary
municipal police jurisdiction) and 8953 (relating to Statewide municipal
police jurisdiction). Committee
members present included Chairman Thomas Caltagirone (D-Berks) and
Representatives Tom Creighton (R-Lancaster), Craig Dally (R-Northampton),
John Evans (R-Erie), Will Gabig (R-Cumberland), Glen Grell (R-Cumberland),
Deberah Kula (D-Fayette), Beverly Mackereth (R-York), Carl Mantz (R-Berks),
Bernie O'Neill (R-Bucks), Joseph Petrarca (D-Westmoreland), Tina Pickett
(R-Bradford), Sean Ramaley (D-Beaver), Don Walko (D-Allegheny), Jewell
Williams (D-Philadelphia), and John Pallone (D-Westmoreland). Rep. Curt
Sonney (R-Erie) was also in attendance. Rep.
Dally, prime sponsor of the House Bill 466, provided committee members with
an overview of the purpose of the legislation. He said the bill would give
sheriffs and deputy sheriffs the power to investigate crime and make arrests.
According to Rep. Dally, this is the same power given to municipal police
officers. He pointed out the legislation requires sheriffs and deputy
sheriffs to complete the same type of training as municipal police officers
before they can exercise this power. Rep. Dally told the committee, "Let
me make it clear what the bill will accomplish; it will make the sheriffs and
their deputies full partners in the fight against crime, a fight they have
traditionally been asked to fight." Rep. Dally then provided a brief
history of the role of sheriffs and recent state court decisions on the
authority of sheriffs and deputies. He cautioned, "If the General
Assembly does not speak on this issue, the courts will speak for us".
Rep. Dally concluded, "By enacting House Bill 466, the General Assembly
not only expands the public policy we set for sheriffs under the Protection
from Abuse Act and the Uniform Firearms Act, we can restore the sheriffs to
their rightful place in law enforcement." Robert Merski , Sheriff of Erie County and President of the
Pennsylvania Sheriffs' Association, detailed the roots of why the powers and duties
of sheriffs has become a "legislative concern." In 2006, he noted,
the state Supreme Court ruled in Kopko v Miller that sheriffs
"are not 'investigative or law enforcement officers'" under the
Pennsylvania Wiretapping Act, which resulted in the Attorney General's office
removing all 72 deputy sheriffs serving on state Drug Task Forces. A more
recent case (Commonwealth v Dobbins) in which the Supreme Court
suppressed evidence found with a search warrant executed by deputy sheriffs
has further muddied the picture, he stated. Merski asserted that the facts
illustrate the need for law enforcement authority for deputy sheriffs. He
offered his support for HB 466, and cited poll data showing that
Pennsylvanians consider sheriffs and deputy sheriffs to be full members of the
law enforcement community. Beyond matters of law enforcement, Merski
cautioned the Supreme Court rulings have given rise to questions of whether
sheriffs or deputy sheriffs can respond to man-made or natural disasters. Rep.
Evans asked for anecdotal evidence of the adverse impact of the Kopko
decision on the operations of the sheriff's office. Merski said that in 1999,
they received a Federal block grant of $500,000 to provide four deputies to
serve as school resource officers and the Kopko decision has hampered
their ability to function in the schools when it came to investigating drugs
in schools or the sales of firearms. He also said there was a very successful
"weed and seed" program in the city of Rep.
Gabig expressed concern that if the bill is enacted an individual will not
know which county sheriffs have chosen to possess this authority and those
who have not. Merski responded that the legislation will clear up the powers
and duties of the sheriffs. He said all 67 will have the same powers and
duties. He added how active each sheriff will be will depend on the needs of
the communities within the county. Rep. Gabig then expressed concern with
language in the bill which provides the sheriffs and deputy sheriffs
"shall have and may exercise the same powers as municipal police
officers" could cause confusion because of the use of "shall"
and "may" in the same sentence. He added this language needs to be
clarified. Ray Gerringer, Sheriff of Montour County, stated, "the people of Rep.
Pickett observed that in the Kopko case, the judge was telling the
General Assembly "to do what we are doing today", which is to
consider legislation. Merski responded, "That is absolutely right."
He added in the Dobbins case, the court said sheriffs need statutory
authority. William
Andring, the committee's chief counsel, argued that the Kopko and Dobbins
court decisions were "not a drastic change". He said sheriffs in Andring
then expressed concern that there are no limitations on the police powers of
the sheriffs or the deputy. He said they could get a search warrant against anybody.
Andring pointed out there is civilian control of local law enforcement. He
also noted sheriffs are not required to receive training and there are no
civil service requirements for the hiring of their deputies. Merski responded
that the majority of sheriffs have had training and experience. He noted the
Attorney General and district attorneys are not required to have law
enforcement training. Andring ask if the association would support having
deputies fall under civil service. Merski said the association has not
discussed that issue. According to Andring, the legislation does not have a
local option and sheriffs would have police powers with counties having no
authority to opt out and the commissioners would have no veto power. Merski
responded the commissioners have control over the sheriff's budget. Andring
argued the legislation does not allow the commissioners to have oversight. Rep.
Williams said he served as the chief of the criminal division in the
sheriff's office in Lt. Colonel Frank Pawlowski, Deputy Commissioner of Operations for the
Pennsylvania State Police, testified that "this legislation gives sheriffs
additional police powers without truly recognizing the total needs of the
criminal justice community, which relies upon the services sheriffs provide
to the courts, the prisons, and the public as a whole." He also said,
"If the duties of sheriffs are to be increased, we must first make sure
that their current duties can still be met with the same quality and
dedication that exists today." Pawlowski argued that "there is
simply no need to create another category of law enforcement officer with
different training standards and overlapping jurisdiction." He noted
there are already approximately 1,100 police departments operating
independently in Rep.
Gabig asked if the court cases have limited the sheriffs and deputies in
participation in various criminal task forces. Pawlowski said the courts have
worked hard to define the sheriffs' authority but they have suggested the
General Assembly has the statutory authority to define their powers and
duties. Rep. Gabig noted the Attorney General has removed sheriffs' deputies
from Drug Task Forces because of the courts' decisions and he wanted to know
if the General Assembly should do anything. Pawlowski said the General
Assembly needs to clarify some of the powers because there is some confusion.
Rep. Gabig asked if the General Assembly gives general powers to sheriffs and
deputy sheriffs, does the State Police believes they should have to undergo
the same training, background investigations, psychological examinations, and
drug screening as other law enforcement officers. Pawlowski responded,
"Yes". Rep.
Kula asked who responds when a person reports a burglary. Pawlowski said if
there is a local police force, they would respond and if not, the State
Police would respond. Rep. Kula said when she served as a district justice
she would receive complaints from people regarding the response time of the
State Police to a reported crime. She said the legislation would help put a
police presence on the streets. Rep. Kula noted that the General Assembly has
been expanding the authority of various health professions because of their
training and expertise and the same should be done for sheriffs. She then
asked if the State Police is opposed to the legislation. Pawlowski responded
that they are opposed to the legislation because there are other ways to
address the problem. He expressed concern with the unintended consequences of
the bill. Robert Buehner, the Montour County District Attorney, asked the General Assembly to
define the powers and duties of the sheriffs. He noted that in George Wagner, former Montour county District Attorney and former member of the General
Assembly, provided committee members with an overview of how law enforcement
operates in the state of Andring
noted many at the hearing have focused on the lack of police. He said enacting
the legislation would not immediately put 2,300 more officers on the street.
Andring also said the legislation would lead to the establishment of a county
police department. Buehner agreed that "we are not going to fill the
streets with law enforcement officers." He also dismissed the argument
that this legislation would hinder the deputies in their other duties such as
providing security at courthouses. Buehner said he has found deputy sheriffs
to be "great multi-taskers" and right now if someone hits a judge
and a deputy does not witness it, the local police have to be called in.
Andring then asked about the differing qualifications of deputies in the
counties. Buehner responded that civil service requirements would not work in
his county because of the lack of candidates. He noted sheriffs know their
jobs are too important to hire their buddies. Andring raised the issue of the
political activity that occurred in the Allegheny County Sheriff's office.
Buehner said the same could be said about district attorneys. He noted
district attorneys are required to run for office, belong to a political
party, and raise campaign contributions. Richard Sheetz, Jr., Executive Deputy Attorney General of the Attorney
General's Criminal Law Division, highlighted the "vital role" sheriffs play in
the criminal justice community, securing courthouses, serving processes,
transporting prisoners and performing other key functions. He stated it was
unfortunate to have to suspend sheriff involvement in the drug task forces as
a result of the Kopko v Miller ruling. Sheetz spoke about a larger
issue raised by the "separate and distinct" training of deputy
sheriffs as compared to municipal police officers, whose training is
adjudicated by the Municipal Police Officers Education and Training
Commission (MPOETC). This issue, he went on, is one of consistency, as there
are "certain basic core principles" that should be part of the
instruction of any law enforcement curriculum. Though he acknowledged
solutions may not be immediately forthcoming, Sheetz reminded members to keep
in mind the ultimate goal of all law enforcement professionals - protecting Rep.
Gabig noted the Pennsylvania State Police expressed concern regarding
training and certification and he wanted to know if the Attorney General's
office agreed someone should be trained the same as the State Police and
local enforcement before receiving the authority under the legislation.
Sheetz responded, "Yes, that is the theme in our comments." He
added the legislation needs to address qualifications, training, education,
certification and the need for a core curriculum. Andring
asked if they believed the Attorney General had the authority to deputize
deputy sheriffs when he decided to drop them from his drug task forces.
Sheetz responded that it was considered. Rep.
Grell wanted to know if prior to the Kopko decision the Attorney
General used deputy sheriffs for other task forces. Sheetz said because of
the Attorney General's limited authority they were used primarily for
enforcement of the drug laws. Rep. Grell then asked if the Attorney General's
office would support limiting the scope of the sheriffs' authority to serving
on drug task forces. Sheetz said he would have to discuss it with the
Attorney General. Rep.
Dally noted that when Attorney General Corbett testified before the
Appropriations Committee earlier this week he did not express support for
this legislation but believes the issue must be addressed statutorily. Sheetz
said that was correct. Devid Freed, District Attorney of Cumberland County and a member of
the Executive Committee of the Pennsylvania District Attorneys Association, reported that the Pennsylvania
District Attorneys Association voted on the issue of "full unfettered
law enforcement powers for sheriffs," the result of which was an
overwhelming majority of members opposing giving sheriffs full police powers.
He stated that even between counties in Noting
the argument regarding increase civil liability because of using deputy
sheriffs, Rep. Dally asked if Freed would agree that clearly defining their
powers would actually help decrease the civil liability. Freed said he would
agree. Rep.
Pickett noted in Freed's testimony that it said the Kopko decision
"clarified the duties of our sheriffs departments." Freed said he
did not believe Kopko clarified the duties because the court opinion
was more nuanced. He said it did clarify the current status. Rep. Pickett
asked if the association's survey of its members included a breakdown by
rural versus non-rural counties. Freed said eighth class counties were more
likely to support the legislation but some of the smaller counties were opposed
to it. He noted he has a "great relationship" with the sheriff in
his county but that is not necessarily the case in all of the counties. Freed
said the decision to oppose the legislation was made by the 43 of 67 district
attorneys who attended their 2007 midwinter meetings. Rep.
Gabig agreed "cross designation is a strong tool". He asked if as a
result of the court cases, the General Assembly needs to get back at least to
the status quo prior to the court decisions. Freed responded that the
"short answer is yes". Rep. Gabig said something needs to be done
and the association should provide some positive input. Freed responded that
he is unaware of any counterproposal by the association but they are willing
to work with the other groups in finding a solution. Andring
asked who pays for the deputy in Ellen Kramer Adler, Esq., Director, Legal Department, Amy Rosenberry, Executive Director, PA Chiefs of Police Association, stated her association strongly
opposes HB 466 for a variety of reasons. She particularly expressed concern
with the provision that would require the "same type of training"
and with the certification and screening of sheriffs, explaining that
municipal police officers undergo extensive screening that sheriffs are not
subject to. Rosenberry referred to a meeting between committee staff and
several stakeholders held before the legislation was introduced and expressed
her surprise and disappointment that the "numerous critical and very
valid problematic issues" that were discussed at this meeting were not
addressed by the legislation. Rep.
Dally asked to correct the record, noting that Rosenberry indicated the
meeting took place last August, before the legislation was introduced.
However, he stated, the legislation was introduced last February. Rosenberry
conceded she may have been incorrect with the date, but she affirmed the
meeting was held before the bill was introduced. Rep. Dally then asked if the
association could support the legislation if the language was changed to
require the same training instead of the same type. Rosenberry stated they
would be more willing, but noted the association has additional concerns.
Rep. Dally argued that a lot of the concerns raised about the legislation are
"red herrings" that can easily be dealt with through legislation or
the 911 system. Thomas Armstrong, Chief of Easttown Township Police and Vice
President of the PA Chiefs of Police Association, interjected that the
association has concerns regarding certification. Rep.
Pickett stated her support for the bill, arguing that the reality is the
opportunity to use manpower has been diminished due to the court decision. Sergeant David Ruberry, Deputy Sheriff, Northampton County, County
Representative, Deputy Sheriff's Association of PA, discussed the many essential
functions that deputy sheriffs provide and the danger they face in performing
those duties. He remarked on the "sheriff haters" that are seeking
to undermine sheriffs and take away their authority. Sgt. Ruberry urged the
committee to act on the legislation to restore and clarify the power and
authority of deputy sheriffs. He argued this issue is not about funding or
training; it is about power and authority. He remarked that the "whole
issue is that we are a holdover of common law" and are not statutorily
authorized. Sgt. Ruberry provided the members an overview of the training
that sheriffs receive, noting an incident where a man was unqualified to be
certified as a deputy sheriff however he was able to become a municipal
police officer. Rep.
Mackereth asked Sgt. Ruberry if he would oppose changing the language to
require the "same training". Sgt. Ruberry stated he would not. Rep.
Mackereth commented on the need for clarification of the duties and training
of sheriffs. Sgt. Ruberry indicated they are constantly monitoring for
improvements. Doug Hill, Executive Director, Rep.
Dally noted his intent is simply to restore duties of sheriffs, not to create
regional forces. Dr. William Pettigrew, Jr., Member, Deputy Sheriff's Education and Training
Board,
provided an overview of the training sheriffs receive, which includes 760
hours of basic training. He noted that training for sheriffs is available at
a single location, whereas municipal police officers can receive training at
one of 20 different locations. He argued that the single location provides a
continuity of training for all deputy sheriffs, no matter where they are
employed. Dr. Pettigrew stated the Act 2 training program for sheriffs is
comprehensive law enforcement training, which includes physical conditioning
and continuing education. He urged enactment of HB 466 to reaffirm the
authority of deputy sheriffs to perform law enforcement duties, noting that
schools rely on deputy sheriffs as school resource officers. Rep.
Dally asked if it would be possible to incorporate all of the components of
Act 120 training for municipal police officers into the Act 2 training of
sheriffs. Dr. Pettigrew indicated that is feasible. He noted that there are
20 sites where municipal police officers can receive training whereas
sheriffs receive training at only one location, which ensures consistency in
the level of training they receive. Rep.
Pickett asked if both training courses could be merged into one. Dr.
Pettigrew stated he is not familiar with all the details of Act 120 training
curricula, but he did not see why such a merge would be a problem. He
indicated that could be a benefit for everyone. Steve Chronister, President of the York County Board of Commissioners, explained that his county has
developed an action plan to address crime and is looking to successes
elsewhere. A component of the county's law enforcement is the sheriff's
department, which will be used to form a criminal response unit. He urged the
committee to pass the legislation "so your Pennsylvania Counties can
receive the much needed help to drive crime out of Pennsylvania." He
concluded by remarking that he is not asking for increased funding. Rich Keuerleber, York County Sheriff, stated his support for the
legislation. He said the bill will help small and rural counties that have
only a few deputies and no nearby State Police barracks. Keuerleber urged the
committee to clarify arrest powers once and for all. Rep.
Dally thanked Chronister for his enlightened presentation and reiterated his
intent is not to create countywide forces. He then asked if York County is a
home rule county, to which he was told it is not. Harry Schneider, Legislative Chairman, Pennsylvania Sportsmen's
Association,
spoke briefly in support of the bill, noting that several sportsmen and gun
ownership associations also support the bill. He urged the members to correct
the "absurdity" that sheriffs aren't real law enforcement officers.
Written
testimony was submitted by the following: · Craig Webre, Sheriff and
President of the National Sheriffs' Association · Mark Koch, President, PA State
Lodge, Fraternal Order of Police · Bruce Edwards, President, PA
State Troopers Association · Andrew Hoover, Legislative
Assistant, ACLU of PA Jeff
Cox & Kimberly Collins, PA Legislative Services HARRISBURG - (12/11/07, 10:00
a.m., Room G-50, Irvis Office Building) The
House Judiciary Committee met to consider several bills.
Rep.
John Sabatina (D-Philadelphia), the sponsor of the bill, said it changes the
grading for this offense to a felony of the second degree. Rep.
Manderino asked why the offense is being moved from a first degree
misdemeanor to a second degree felony. Rep. Sabatina replied that it would
make possession of a firearm with an altered serial number the same as the
act of actually altering the number. Rep.
Gabig asked if this bill would include all guns, including rifles. Rep.
Sabatina replied that it doesn't include rifles or other long guns. Rod
Corey, minority caucus counsel, replied that this bill applies to all guns
based on the definition. Rep. Sabatina said his intent was to include
handguns but not long guns. Rep. Gabig said he would like to clarify this
issue with an amendment. Rep.
Dan Frankel (D-Allegheny) suggested that there is no good reason to file a
serial number off of a rifle. In his opinion, the penalty should be the same
for all guns. Rep. Gabig argued that the difference is that under state law
you can give shotguns away to someone but you can't give away handguns
without registering them. He said he would like to support this legislation
but he wants to clean up the language. HR 484 White, J - (PN 2753) Resolution directing the Joint State
Government Commission to study the Uniform Power of Attorney Act and
Pennsylvania's current power of attorney statute to determine whether any
amendments should be made to Pennsylvania's current statute. - The bill was
unanimously reported as committed. Rep.
Will Gabig (R-Cumberland) commented that this is a study of a study. He said
this should result in specific recommendations for the committee to consider.
Chairman Tom Caltagirone (D-Berks) replied that David Hostetter, Executive
Director, Joint State Government Commission supports the proposal. HB 323 Pyle - (PN 364) Amends Title 18 (Crimes and Offenses) further providing
for drug delivery resulting in death by changing the penalty for a person who
intentionally, knowingly or recklessly administers, dispenses, delivers,
gives, prescribes, sells or distributes any controlled substance or
counterfeit controlled substance to another person that results that person's
death to a felony of the first degree as opposed to murder in the third
degree. - The bill was reported as committed by a vote of 23-6 with
Representatives Lisa Bennington (D-Allegheny), Dan Frankel (D-Allegheny),
Harold James (D-Philadelphia), Deberah Kula (D-Fayette), Kathy Manderino
(D-Philadelphia) and Greg Vitali (D-Delaware) voting in the negative. Rep.
Jeff Pyle (R-Armstrong) said this bill is the result of the death of a girl
in western Pennsylvania from taking ecstasy. He said the prosecutor in that
case could not show malice in trying to go after the dealer who dealt her the
drugs. He explained that this bill would not require a show of malice, and he
added that it makes the offense a first degree felony instead of murder in
the third degree. Rep.
Greg Vitali (R-Delaware) asked what drugs this bill refers to. Rep. Pyle
replied that it doesn't matter if the dealing of the drug results in the
death of the user. Rep. Vitali commented that the legislature passes laws
that affect one or two cases but in fact this would affect all 12 million people
in Pennsylvania. He suggested that this could result in injustice if a
college student gives a drug to a friend who dies from using it because that
student would have a mandatory five-year sentence. He remarked that he wants
judges to look into the facts and circumstances in each case so they can
provide justice. Rep.
Daylin Leach (R-Montgomery) commented that his problem with this legislation
is the definition of the underlying offense. He said this is a strict
liability offense and there are not many of them in Pennsylvania law. He
expressed concern if a drug dealer is charged under this when someone takes
drugs to commit suicide. This can result in unjust responses, he opined,
adding that he believes there is a way to address this without mandatory
sentences. Rep.
Pyle remarked that dealing drugs is already illegal and those doing it should
be punished. He said the point of this legislation is to penalize someone who
deals a Schedule 1 narcotic for profit when they know the drug is lethal.
Rep. Leach suggested that the language of the bill should be worked on to
make it more even across the board because he is concerned about punishing
people for things they have no control over. Minority
Chairman Ron Marsico (R-Dauphin) offered that this is not one isolated case,
commenting that heroin deaths are occurring all across the state. He
suggested that the state should get tougher on people who poison children and
it results in death. HB 1017 Scavello - (PN 1186) Amends Title 45 (Legal Notices) by adding
that a government unit may authorize publication in a community paper of mass
dissemination in substitution of publication in a newspaper. The bill
provides a definition of "community paper of mass dissemination." -
The bill was passed over. Minority
Chairman Marsico asked for an informational meeting on the bill and Chairman
Caltagirone agreed to hold one in the near future. HB 1090 Nailor - (PN 1322) Amends Title 53 (Municipalities Generally) by
adding that the powers and duties of Municipal Police Officers' Education and
Training Commission include the authority to grant waivers of mandatory basic
training to Federal law enforcement officers who have successfully completed
previous equivalent training or who have acceptable full-time police
experience, or both. - The bill was unanimously reported as committed.
Rep.
Jerry Nailor (R-Cumberland), the sponsor of the bill, explained that this
issue was brought to his attention by a constituent who worked for the FBI
and found out that they don't qualify for a waiver for mandatory municipal
police basic training. Rep. Harold James (D-Philadelphia) asked what the FBI
agent will be doing. Rep. Nailor replied that he wants to work in local law
enforcement but he would have to go through basic training even though he has
federal law enforcement training. HB 1274 Creighton - (PN 1589) Amends the PA Board of Probation and Parole
Law further providing for release on parole by adding that the Pardon Board
has to give an expedited review in every case where the inmate being
considered has a serious or terminal illness, is receiving treatment or
hospice care and presents a minimal risk of re-offending. This would not,
however, create a presumption for parole. The bill further provides that
government agencies would be required to assist the Department of Corrections
in developing a plan to house and treat any inmate suffering from a serious
or terminal illness. - The bill was unanimously reported as committed.
Rep.
Gabig commented that this sounds a lot like HB 7, which the committee already
reported out. He expressed concern that unlike that bill, this bill does not
address just nonviolent offenders. He said he will work on an amendment to
offer on the House floor to address this issue. Bill Andring, Counsel to the
committee, explained that to participate in an expedited parole process the
prisoner must be eligible for parole, which many murderers would not be. HB 1851 Ramaley - (PN 2546) Amends Title 75 (Vehicles) defining the
offense of aggravated assault by vehicle as a person recklessly or with gross
negligence causing serious bodily injury to another person while engaged in
the violation of any law of PA or municipal ordinance applying to the
operation or use of a vehicle or to the regulation of traffic, except section
3802 (relating to driving under the influence of alcohol or controlled
substance) when the violation under that section is the cause of the serious
bodily injury. Such an offense would be a felony of the third degree. - The
bill was unanimously reported as committed with the request to re-refer to
Transportation. HB 1854 Sabatina - (PN 2523) Amends Title 23 (Domestic Relations) further
providing for division of entireties property by adding that property would
be divided equally between the parties after: (1) Payment of the expenses of
sale; and (2) Allowance of credit and imposition of charges between the
parties because of use and occupancy of the property, taxes, rents or other
amounts paid, services rendered, liabilities incurred or benefits derived. -
The bill was discussed and held. Rep.
James asked what happens if someone owns a home for 20 years and gets married
for one year and then gets divorced. Andring replied that this legislation
would not apply in that case. Rep.
Sabatina, the sponsor of the bill, told the committee that the impetus for
this bill is that a husband left his wife for someone else and then the wife
paid the mortgage and upkeep on the house. However, 15 years later the husband
came back and asked for half the proceeds when the house was sold, he
explained. He said this bill lets judges consider certain factors in
determining actual value spouses are permitted. Rep.
Bennington stated that under current law property can be equitably divided
when people divorce. Andring stated the bill allows for a more just
distribution of assets. Rep.
Glen Grell (R-Cumberland) asked if the Pennsylvania Bar Association has an
opinion on the legislation. He said he would like to table the bill so the
committee can get more information on the proposal. Chairman Caltagirone
agreed to hold the bill to get further input. He said the committee will take
up the bill again in January. HB 1976 Marsico - (PN 2758) Amends Title 42 (Judiciary) by increasing the
number of judges in the courts of common pleas for the following judicial
districts: twelfth from 8 to 10, nineteenth from 14 to 16, thirty-first from
10 to 11, thirty-eighth from 21 to 23, thirty-ninth from 4 to 5 and
fifty-first from 3 to 4. - The bill was unanimously reported as amended.
A05031
by Gabig, adds a judge in Cumberland County. The amendment was adopted
unanimously. A05102
by Caltagirone, adds a judge in Lackawanna County. The amendment was adopted
unanimously. A05123
by Caltagirone, adds a judge in Carbon County. The amendment was adopted
unanimously. Rep.
John Pallone (D-Westmoreland) asked if the county commissioners support the
additional judges and the cost associated with them. Minority Chairman
Marsico said yes, adding that it is a requirement to get support of the
county commissioners before adding new judges. SB 861 Greenleaf - (PN 1467) Amends Title 42 (Judiciary and Judicial
Procedure) further providing for the number of judges in the courts of common
pleas by increasing the number of judges on the Court of Common Pleas for
judicial district 12 from eight to ten judges, judicial district 38 from 21
to 23 judges, judicial district 39 from four to five, judicial district 45
from eight to nine judges, and judicial district 51 from three to four
judges. (Prior Printer N - The bill was unanimously reported as amended.
A04084 by
Caltagirone, adds a judge in Carbon County. The amendment was adopted
unanimously. A05032
by Gabig, adds a judge in Cumberland County. The amendment was adopted
unanimously. Nate
Collins, PA Legislative Services HARRISBURG - (11/20/07, 10:00 a.m., Room 140 Main
Capitol) The House Judiciary Committee met to consider
four bills relating to gun violence. Governor Ed
Rendell testified for about 40 minutes before the
committee on the need for legislation that will counter statewide gun
violence that has gotten worse in just the last six weeks, with six police
officers shot and one killed in Philadelphia. Citing Pennsylvania's
"strong heritage" of hunting and gun ownership, Governor Rendell
insisted that nevertheless, more needs to be done to deter and punish gun
crime. He remarked the "real test" of how much legislators and
government officials care about protecting law enforcement officers comes
when they are given the opportunity to "do what is right" by
passing laws that stop straw purchasers and the distribution of illegal
handguns. Further, he asserted a law creating a mandatory minimum sentence of
twenty years for anyone who fires a gun at a police officer must be approved.
The Governor opined on the statewide pervasiveness of
gun violence, noting sixty-five of the 158 gun homicides committed in PA in 2006
took place outside of Philadelphia. Evidenced by sharply growing prison
populations and the fourth highest number of inmates on death row in the
country, he contended the problem is not that current laws are being weakly
enforced, but rather that "we do not have the laws we need to
meaningfully and adequately target straw purchasers and illegal
handguns." Reporting strong public support for laws targeting
illegal handguns and straw purchases, Governor Rendell referred to a Greenberg Quinlan poll
released several days ago that shows 96% of Pennsylvanians favor the
reporting of lost and stolen guns, while 70% support limiting handgun
purchases to one per month. He concluded Pennsylvanians do not want to
"live in fear," and asserted, "The people of Pennsylvania have
it made very clear they want us to listen to them and not to the special
interests." HB 18 Evans, D - (PN 43) Amends Titles 18
(Crimes & Offenses) & 53 (Municipalities) further providing for
limitation on the regulation of firearms and ammunition for limitation on
municipal powers by stating that counties, municipalities, townships and
cities of the first class (Philadelphia) may adopt certain ordinances
regulating the lawful ownership, possession, transfer or transportation of
firearms, ammunition or ammunition components when carried or transported for
purposes not prohibited by the laws of PA. - The bill failed by a vote of 10-19,
with Representatives Deborah Kula (D-Fayette), John Pallone (D-Westmoreland),
Joe Petrarca (D- Westmoreland), Sean Ramaley (D-Beaver), Don Walko
(D-Allegheny), Jesse White (D-Washington), Minority Chairman Ron Marsico
(R-Dauphin), Thomas Creighton (R-Lancaster), Craig Dally (R-Northampton),
John Evans (R-Erie), Will Gabig (R-Cumberland), Glen Grell (R-Cumberland),
Kate Harper (R- Montgomery), Beverly Mackereth (R-York), Carl Mantz
(R-Berks), Bernie O'Neill (R-Bucks), Tina Pickett (R-Bradford), Todd Rock
(R-Franklin), and Katie True (R-Lancaster) voting in the negative. Rep. Grell asked if any municipality could enact the
ordinances enumerated in the bill, and was curious if Philadelphia satisfied
its requirement to pass a referendum as required by the bill in 2005. Counsel
Bill Andring explained municipalities could enact any of the enumerated
ordinances after a referendum is approved, and confirmed Philadelphia
satisfied that requirement in 2005. HB 22 Myers - (PN 47) Amends Title 18
(Crimes) by adding that no person may purchase more than one handgun in PA
within any 30-day period. Also, no person may sell or cause to be sold to a
person in PA more than one handgun within any 30-day period. A person that
violates this section commits a summary offense and would pay a fine of $300.
The bill establishes the Violence Prevention Fund. Money in the fund is
appropriated to the Pennsylvania Commission on Crime and Delinquency solely
for purposes of violence prevention and youth violence prevention, including
youth education and activities designed to prevent violence and grants to law
enforcement agencies for equipment and training designed to prevent
gun-related injuries. In addition to any other duty prescribed by this
section, a seller of a handgun would request the Pennsylvania State Police to
conduct a handgun purchase history check to investigate whether the
prospective handgun purchaser is in compliance. - The bill failed
by a vote of 12-17, with Representatives Kula, Pallone,
Petrarca, Ramaley, Walko, White, Minority Chairman Marsico, Creighton, Dally,
J. Evans, Gabig, Grell, Mackereth, Mantz, Pickett, Rock, and True voting in
the negative. Rep. Harold James (D-Philadelphia) asked if the failed
bills could be brought up again for consideration at a later time. Chairman
Caltagirone informed him the bills could be brought up again after a
successful reconsideration motion. HB 29 Williams, J - (PN 54) Amends Title 18
(Crimes) providing for registry for lost or stolen firearms and for failure
to report lost or stolen firearms. The Pennsylvania State Police would
maintain a registry of all firearms reported lost or stolen in PA. The
registry would contain the manufacturer, model, caliber, serial number and
any other identifying information concerning any firearm reported lost or
stolen, as well as the name of the lawful owner of the firearm. If a firearm
is reported stolen to a local law enforcement agency, that agency would
collect the required information and would submit it to the Pennsylvania
State Police within 24 hours. A person who is the owner of a firearm that is
lost or stolen and who fails, within 24 hours after the loss or theft is
discovered, to report the loss or theft to an appropriate local law
enforcement official commits a summary offense, punishable by a fine of up to
$500. A person who is found to intentionally fail to report a loss or theft
commits a misdemeanor of the first degree for a first offense and a felony of
the third degree for any subsequent offense. Also, the court may enter an
order prohibiting a person convicted for a violation of this section from the
purchase or any other method of acquiring a firearm for a period of six
months. - The bill was tabled by a vote of 17-12, with
Representatives True, Rock, Mantz, Grell, Kula, Petrarca, Minority Chairman
Marsico, Pickett, Mackereth, Creighton, Dally and J. Evans voting against the
motion. Noting HB 29 originally failed in at a Judiciary
committee meeting in June, Rep. Gabig asked how many times a bill could be
brought up for consideration. Chairman Thomas Caltagirone (D-Berks) informed
members that a motion to reconsider the bill was granted later on at that
meeting, with the bill being subsequently passed over until now. Rep. Greg Vitali (D-Delaware), referring to page 2,
lines 22-29 of the bill, asked for clarification of failure versus
intentional failure to report a lost weapon. Andring explained felonies and
misdemeanors require "proof of culpability," whereas a summary
offense does not. Intentional failure in this case, Andring went on, is rated
a first degree misdemeanor for the first offense and a third degree felony
for subsequent offenses. Ignorance of the law would be unintentional failure,
Rep. Vitali surmised, which is just a summary offense. Rep O'Neill remarked that in June he was "on the
bubble" with regard to the bill, and was assured that before
reconsidering it, efforts would be made to "improve" its language.
He stated nothing has been done to improve the bill, and since the committee
is voting on the same language it did in June, he notified the committee he
would be voting negatively. Rep. Kathy Manderino (D-Philadelphia) commented
she would be prepared to vote for Amendment A01932, which had been previously
filed but not offered for consideration. Rep. James suggested the possibility
of an oral amendment, but Chairman Caltagirone informed members that such
action would get the committee "into trouble." Rep. Jewell Williams
(D-Philadelphia), prime sponsor of the bill, moved to table it in order to
work on improving its language. Minority Chairman Marsico stated the bill has
been around for months, during which time it could have been changed, and
opposed the motion. Rep. Manderino inquired if the prime sponsor could simply
decide not to have the bill considered. Chairman Caltagirone confirmed that
could have been possible had Rep. Williams' motion to table not been made. HB 2060 O'Brien, D - (PN 2865) Amends Titles
18 (Crimes & Offenses) and 42 (Judiciary & Judicial Procedure)
further providing for sentence for murder and murder of unborn child by
adding murder of a law enforcement officer to the list of offenses requiring
mandatory sentences; establishing the offenses of criminal homicide of law
enforcement officer and for the offense of assault of law enforcement
officer; imposing penalties; and prescribing sentences for offenses committed
against law enforcement officer. - The bill was reported as committed by a vote of
27-2, with Representatives Vitali and James voting in the
negative. Rep. Vitali voiced concern over sections of the bill
that relate to minimum mandatory sentencing, because the clauses take away
the ability of a judge to examine the individual merits of any particular
case. Cognizant of the fact that the bill would be reported out of the
committee, Rep. Vitali nevertheless cautioned members to "be aware"
of the issue. "Breaking out of her mold" of voting against
minimum mandatory sentencing, Rep. Manderino volunteered that she would vote
for HB 2060, and commented it is sad that the committee had the opportunity
to act previously and did not. Rep. Grell questioned what grade an incident such as a
bar fight resulting in the injury of a responding law enforcement officer
would get both currently and upon passage of the bill. Andring reported
assault of a police officer is a second-degree felony and would remain so
under the new law. He explained the minimum mandatory sentence is in cases of
attempted "serious bodily injury" of an officer. Referring to HR 12, a resolution passed in October
which directed the PA Commission on Sentencing to conduct a study on the use
and impact of mandatory minimum sentences, Rep. James suggested waiting until
the commission's report comes back before acting on HB 2060. Several members of the committee gave statements
regarding the outcome of the meeting. Minority Chairman Marsico explained he did not support
the bills because he believes the conclusions of various criminologists who
have expressed the need for a comprehensive approach to combating gun
violence, rather than "feel good" legislation. He emphasized the need
to focus on putting more police on the streets, and chastised the Governor
and his administration for not making public safety a priority. He cited the
twelve recommendations drafted by the Commission to Address Gun Violence,
none of which included any language regarding a limit on handgun purchases,
and questioned why that has become a priority. He recommended that House
Republicans focus on the "judicial use of law enforcement
professionals" rather than "punishing law abiding citizens." Rep. Daylin Leach (D-Montgomery) remarked the Second
Amendment does not prohibit the restriction of guns, and asserted the First
Amendment is "much less ambiguous." Speaking as a constitutional
lawyer, he explained the courts have no absolutes when it comes to constitutional
rights, and instead employ what is known as a "balancing test." In
the case of gun sales, Rep. Leach opined the impingement on the rights of gun
owners is de minimis when balanced against the safety it would bring. He
concluded the issue is "not even a close question,
constitutionally." Rep. Dan Frankel (D-Allegheny) stated he believes the
Governor is not putting on a "dog and pony show," and asserted the
bills that were considered have been enacted in other states and not taken up
as unconstitutional. Rep. Pallone commended the Governor on his
"courage" testifying before the committee in light of the sensitive
issue of gun violence. He emphasized that while members "may have
disagreed today," they are all dedicated to making Pennsylvania as safe
as possible. Rep. James noted that on March 17 of 2005, he, Rep.
Williams and Rep. Ron Waters (D-Philadelphia) asked Governor Rendell to
declare a state of emergency in Philadelphia to free up funds to counter the
problem of gun violence. Two years later, the death toll from shootings
continues to rise. He suggested a year-long trial period of the legislation
in Philadelphia to see if it helps curb the situation. Rep. Mackereth observed she can't see how putting
restrictions on law- abiding citizens helps stop gun violence. She remarked
funding for counties has decreased, while the ability for agencies to provide
assistance in a systemic manner "is not there." She recommended a
shift in focus towards "proven tactics." Rep. Bryan Lentz (D-Delaware), speaking as |
