Judiciary Committee- House

We're passing over that one again this afternoon stay right there represent Gazaway I just needed to call house bill thirteen eighty six sponsors not here we will pass over that one the next bill is house bill seventeen twenty one representative Gazaway a representative Clowney you're recognized members there is an amendment to house bill seventeen twenty one so we'll get those passed out and then if we get those to the committee then I'll recognize you to present. This. Sure to get on the other. Which one or a on twenty. Seventeen twenty one has a physical impact statement so you might want to look over that also. Right members you have the amendment to house bill seventeen twenty one. I represent Gazaway represent Clowney which one will be presenting the amendment. We shall present the amendment I recognized thank you madam chair members the amendment very simply makes one change that you'll see Page one line thirty five. And this was Mr at the request Mr Rosen swag who approached us with some issues about the bill and so we made this amendment to say this only applies to an offence occurring after the effective date of this act. if that if the period described in subsection B. this section has expired and that the point being is that we we don't have an ex post facto law situation where this is applying to offenses that occurred before we passed this bill if we pass this bill so we needed to make that clear and I think the amendment does that and then the second part of the amendment there was a question about the definition of state which was a point well taken by Mr Rosenzweig and so we specifically defined that to mean local law enforcement agency prosecuting attorney's office or other law enforcement agency with jurisdiction over the alleged offense which I think provides clarification I think you made a good point so that's what the amendment does and with the chair and committee's permission I'd make a motion to adopt the amendment. Members we have a motion to adopt the amendment is there any discussion all in favor of the motion please say aye. Any opposed motion carries the amendment has been adopted represent Clowney you're recognized to present the bill as adopt a seeming to thank you madam chair I know many of you on this committee have worked a lot with survivors of domestic violence and no how hard it can be to break free of our relationships where domestic violence occurs and in light of that this bill is at. Aiming to fix the problem which is the sexual imitations runs out in some of these cases before a before folks are ready before folks have have had the time to gather the relevant evidence and and to bring forward these cases so what this does if you look at the second page this extends the statute of limitations for a couple of categories of offenses the first category of offense is listed on page twenty two. sorry line twenty two on page two lines twenty two through twenty seven domestic battering in the first degree domestic battering in the second degree and aggravated assault on a family or household member this bill would extend the statute limitations there five years up beyond the current statute of limitations I wanna be clear that only happens in the presence of new evidence so the evidence that would be required is listed on lines seven through twenty one so if there's DNA that's discovered the state becomes aware of a recording the defendant confesses or three or more people also victimized by the defendant present their own evidence So it would extend the statute of limitations five years for those three offenses and it would extend the statute of limitations three years in the offenses listed on lines twenty eight through thirty two the other thing that it does is it add some training requirements for law enforcement officers add to have them sort of better versed in issues specific to domestic violence Jamie cook is good with all of the training requirements so I think that's about it just kind of on the basics of what the bill does would be happy to answer any questions. Members are there any questions. Seeing no questions we do have one individual who signed up to speak against the bill Mr Rosenzweig you're recognized come forward and speak against the bill. Jeff Rosenzweig Arkansas association of criminal defense lawyers and I appreciate the amendments have been made and they have they have been responsive to a number of the suggestions I made and I appreciate that I still think that there is a constitutional problem with the bill of based upon the case of starter versus California which held that a a staff excellent of limitations once expired cannot be cannot be revived of and that's what starter held that its exports it added violates the prohibition against ex post facto legislation to revive an expired statute of limitations in a criminal case of the of the fixed part of the problem by making it affected only going forward but the way it's currently written says it's expired but if new evidence comes in. then it then it can be revived that's the whole issue the work that's one of the issues that Stockinger dealt with and I think you may run into a problem. With a if the if in its current form now who may be for policy reasons whatever you decide as a good bill but be aware that there there still will be a stock or versus California problem if the bill is passed in its current for. Members any questions. Represent the Smith you're recognized for a question. Thank you madam chair on the home page three. When it talks about the training and standards of law enforcement have you had any push back from law enforcement on the twenty hours of training in domestic violence and twenty hours of training and child abuse. The answer manager you may answer yes just push a button thank you. I'm. That was a question for us and I Mr resins migraine yes yes we have talked it over with any cook yes and she is good with the twenty hours of additional training okay but it's totally forty. Right. What follow your I'm sorry I didn't hear you represented it it looks like it's broken down into two sections Domestic violence and then also Training and child abuse two separate twenty hour blocks is that the case or is it just a combined twenty and. Either one of you. Persist with are you referring to page three low page three through your line three and four and I just wanna make sure we talking forty hours total or windy so just to be clear that's not our language that's existing law that's forty hours total without the existing law. And I can represent a Smith that just in response to what I would say is when we talked with Mrs cook a lot of this training is already occurring so they didn't have any problem with this language about the training because I believe they're already doing most of this okay thank you. Representative Hudson you're recognized for a question. Thank you madam chair Mister is inside when you're talking about the issues that may arise based on prior precedents you said it could cause problems under this this line of cases could you elaborate on what those problems might be well. Turn your microphone on if you would please I'm sorry if I'm understanding your question correctly the the problem would arise if a prosecution is commence after the ordinary statute of limitations has expired let's say you have a three year statute what's a offenses committed next year twenty twenty two expires and twenty twenty five the issue would then come up or if someone tries to pursue something using this and say twenty twenty seven and it would have there were a motion to dismiss. Our would be brought match were on for violation of special invitations that's where the issue would be would be joined of I mean the part the purpose of the statute of limitations is after a certain period of time of what witnesses die with memories fade and it's important to get something. Into the system before or after now they're policy reasons why there's not a statute of limitations on certain things for instance on murder charges because they it's been decided there's a reason that too because there's a murder that they're wrong not be a statute and then the legislatures expanded in sexual cases started out with juveniles and then of moving on work but you're going to run into problems in here these are all these appear to be all domestic issues and so they're gonna be all tied in with possibly bitter divorces separations and all sorts of other things in and could in in the wrong hands be used as leverage in divorce cases that that type of thing but there's just the and at some point the whole purpose of the statute is. Things go is that. the case isn't going to show up again and here you have a statute that specifically allows it to come back even after it is supposedly. Dad expire and that's the problem. You're recognized for a follow up. Thank you I've missed a representative Gazaway and and I know that that that quite frankly heard snippets of this conversation beforehand and I wanted to hear sort of what the point counterpoint was and so I wondered if you could kind of share response to these concerns please sure what's there so there a couple things one is that I believe it's the legislature who has the power to set statutes of limitations I understand Mr Rosenzweig is made his argument but this is the body that makes policy and make decisions about statute of limitations even as he said the legislature at one time made the decision to extend the statute imitations on rape and make it unlimited same thing with sexual assault first degree second degree in says those are a policy decisions of the legislature has made to say and for those offenses there is no statute of limitations and so I certainly think that we can make a policy decision in this circumstance to say what the statute of limitations will be and how it will operate and I do want to make another distinction. For many cases that I think are analogous to this they're not identical but I think we can draw strong analogy is that the statue limitations can be extended when there issues a fraudulent concealment for instance and I don't think that domestic violence cases are dissimilar to that because in domestic abuse situations many times the victim and it's unlike lots of other cases it that we see in the criminal code at a theft case for instance isn't specific occurrence that either happened or it didn't the person took the property or they didn't and they're either guilty or they're not. There's not an element of control that we see in the domestic abuse cases and so for the same justifications that we extend the statute of limitations for fraudulent concealment I think a lot of those are present in domestic abuse cases because you have victims who are afraid to come forward because they're in a relationship and I've personally seen it many times when I was prosecutor it is mostly almost exclusively women who were involved in an abusive relationship they were we would bring a prosecution because law enforcement been involved sometimes there were photographs there is clear evidence that it happened because they were being controlled by their abuser because they were scared of their abuser and for a number of other reasons they would not cooperate or they would come forward and I have those cases where even after the fact when the statute of limitations had expired they would come back to the prosecutor's office. And they had gotten out of that relationship they broken free and now they wanted to try to hold that person accountable and we weren't able to do it and so this bill seeks to address that because it's a very specific kind of offense again we're talking about domestic abuse the last point that I want to make is is that it only applies in for very if on for very specific types of evidence or present one if there's DNA evidence that would be sufficient to charge the defendant to if there's a video recording photograph written or electronic communications that provide sufficient evidence to charge you know prosecutors love video we love photographs we it rarely happens but if that's there I'm talking about hard solid evidence DNA video photographs C. another thing prosecutors Love. If the defendant. Confessed to the offence. that would allow the statue limitations to be extended and then lastly are you know if you have three other people who are saying that you know the defendant did this to me to and we say we've seen that the the people who engage in this kind of conductivity don't just do it with one person they typically this is a life stop for them many of the people that I encountered over the years had more than one charge and so if there's other evidence that it didn't just happen to this person but it's happened to multiple people then that doesn't mean the person's going to be charged I think that's an important distinction it means that the statute of limitations can be extended for purposes of considering a charge. So that's the difference just because of the people come forward doesn't mean the person's going to be charged it means the state can consider charging that person in this instance because the statute of limitations has not yet expired. Under the law so I hope that addresses some of his points and isn't is an explanation for why I think this bill would be necessary. Can I answer just a slight I'm sorry well I just would would quickly like to add on to that any representative Gazaway K. great policy reasons but at an understanding of the law but I just did want to read the quote to holding from the starter case represented Hudson says a law enacted after expiration and the previously applicable limitations period violates the ex post facto clause when it is applied to revive the previously time barred prosecution but again the first part of that is a law enacted after expiration of a previously applicable imitations period this is not we're not an acting anything after a previously applicable imitations period that they're due to our moment today this won't apply to crimes that have been committed before today and that's obviously their limitations periods have not yet right now. Represents like you're recognized for a question thank you madam chair of represent Gazaway your represent colony of both of us commends your work on this this is definitely something the use of the represent clammy that you will represent survivors of had to deal with so several that did not survive and the Mr Rosenzweig to come up and defend Sullivan my judicial district when I was there but the the other one will follow up on law enforcement training twenty hours on each that's the you know they they get that they're basically cared me classes will be continuing education of the what they have to do now of the experience officers is up is that correct. So we're not adding any additional time to their training requirements the twenty and twenty as existing law all we're doing is is setting out specific things that need to be focused on in the training as part of those forty hours that there are any receiving to thank you follow up manager you're recognized for a follow up missed road ways on California case what was court that made that ruling. Thank you Sir US Supreme Court thank you Sir. No further Mr Rosenzweig thank you for your testimony today. Members I see no one else to and signed up to speak for against the bill. Representative Clowney representative Gazaway you're recognized close for your bill. Thank you madam chair colleagues I think that this is a very well reasoned bill again these are unique cases and when you've been involved with domestic abuse survivors. What you see is that they often times don't come forward when these offenses are occurring a lot of times my experience was it was a neighbor who called the police and that's how the conduct was found out you know there is a racket next door and the police get called when they show up but it wasn't going to be the victim who was going to come forward in these kinds of cases a lot of times not all the time but a lot of times it's after the fact that the victim comes forward and under the existing law many times there's not anything that law enforcement of the prosecuting attorney's office can do to help him because the statute of limitations will have expired this just says that the statue limitations can be extended if. If there is certain very hard incredible evidence like DNA videotapes photographs confessions and then other survivors from the same defendant if come forward and so I think it's very well reasoned bill I understand Mr Rosenzweig concerns but I think that we've address those with our amendment and with that and make a motion to pass appreciate a good vote and I appreciate that let me say before or close I appreciate the work of representative Clowney she's worked very hard on this bill along with senator Tucker they've done an excellent job there's also Senator Hester and senator Bledsoe in the Senate is a bipartisan bill with that I think will do a lot for domestic abuse victims in the state and with that I'd make a motion to pass appreciate a good vote thank you motion to do pass as amended represent Gazaway. As amended thank you. Members we have a motion to do pass as amended on the floor is there any discussion on the motion. All in favor of the motion please say aye. Any opposed say no the ayes have it motion is carried congratulations you've passed your bill now members let's turn to House Bill seventeen twenty four. Representative Gazaway represent Clowney you're recognized present your bill thank you madam chair this is a companion bill also dealing with domestic violence you know we all know that there is the violence can come in a lot of forms and physical violence is one of them but there are other forms of violence that can be just as damaging this bill aims to address some of those and keep some of the victims of those types of violence safe I in particular this bill allows for judges to issue orders and they would enjoin people from engaging in what we're calling with this law because course of control or disturbing the peace these are ways that abusers tend to is it just sort of as a summary isolate their victims I'm cutting them off from friends and family and not letting them leave the house really mental and emotional control we've seen this get worse over the course of the last year with the pandemic as folks are spending more more time alone and isolated from friends and family to begin with so the read the urgency of this bill we really felt as we were getting ready for the session and course of control is defined in this bill on page two lines fifteen down it means a pattern of behavior that in purpose or effect on reasonably interferes with the free will and personal liberty of a person And then. Page three says the court may enter an ex parte order enjoining a party from engaging in course of control and it lists out some things that are included but of course our language is not limited to only those things that a judge can specifically warned one party about there's also a bit in here and that may have caught some of you by surprise about animals lines twenty four down we're really just kind of trying to get out the ways that abusers try to maintain control over their victims and unfortunately we see that control of loved objects and things like animals is one way that they do that and so this is just an attempt to address that so again that's what the bill does not shall and we'd be happy to try to answer any questions I have not heard any opposition to this bill I don't know if you have Have to answer any questions. Members are there any questions. Seeing no questions we have no one who is signed up to speak for against the bill representative Clowney you're recognized closed bill close for the bill appreciate a good vote and make a motion to pass. Members we have a motion to do pass on the floor is there any discussion of the motion. Seeing no discussion all in favor please say aye. Any opposed say no the ayes have it motion carries congratulations you have passed your bill. Members were going to pass over Senate bill fifty nine will turn to next to Senate bill two eighty four senator garner you're recognized come to the table and present your bill. Members we do have a fiscal impact statement it should be on your desk in regard to Senate bill two eighty four senator garner you're recognized. Thank you madam chair members committee to a fourth by giving the ultimate punishment to those who hurt in sexual abuse the most innocent among us historically United States law has recognized the need to have capital punishment for the truly worse the worse as far as hurting children many states have laws on the books that allow capital rape punishment unfortunately Supreme Court in two thousand eighteen the NARAL five to four decision to side it was unconstitutional to allow capital punishment for rape. Here the facts of that case community versus Louisiana. Patrick o'neill Kennedy a man from Harvey Louisiana. Since the death at three being convicted of raping and sodomizing is eight year old stepdaughter. Right taking place in March nineteen ninety eight was on calmly brutal. It toward the victims canarium from a John open into a rainy opening. Your **** on the interior of such that it partially separated her from a cervix. Allowed her **** to protrude from her. Invasive surgery was required to repair these injuries is convicted in two thousand eight and sentenced to death on a losing a law that was passed in nineteen ninety five. Unfortunately spring court. Overruled that. In two thousand eight as you may remember there was highly contested presidential debate. Then. Senator Barack Obama. In center John McCain both create heavily criticised season. Senate Morley consciously is raw bipartisan effort to do it. To be blunt this is a terrible decision by the court and one that I'm directly taking on with this law I need a new makeup of the Supreme Court and the realities of this new court. We have a chance to challenge is rolling and once again restored as protection the most innocent among us what this bill does is crazy offense a capital right well this long bills just clean up language to add capital rape already into the code. The real meat of this bill can be found on page twenty three or spells out the offense. The main part is to have capital rape is if the criminal engages in sexual intercourse or deviate sexual activities with a person who is under the age of fourteen and calls are threatening call serious physical injury to the victim. We had Capri felony mark are excuse me. We add felony capital rate for those who are in front of a crime. We added to those who were by are still children rate we added those who use a deadly weapon during the rape and those who've been pre was convicted of similar type rapes the defendant is eighteen years old or older they've been given death or life without parole if they are under the age of eighteen they can face and life imprisonment with the possibility parole if thirty years that'll take any questions. Members are there any questions of senator garner. See no questions we do have a couple of individuals who have signed up to speak against the bill. I'm sorry representative Clowney. You're recognized thank you senator garner at. Can you just remind us what the statue limitations as for a. I don't know off top ahead ma'am sorry thank you. Members any other questions. We do have a couple of individuals who signed up to speak against the bill first we have Greg parish Mr Paris you'll come forward and identify yourself you'll be recognized to speak against. Thank you madam chair Greg parish with the Arkansas public defender commission. The one thing that senator garner and I agree on. The facts in the Kennedy case or atrocious. The horrible. As a father and a grandfather. When you read those facts you have to distinguish yourself. From the law and what you think might be justice. My wife and I get into a lot of fights about that because today I'm a lawyer. That took an oath like everyone else in this room. Thank you any case decided in two thousand eight. The expanded upon the coke decision from nineteen seventy seven the coke or decision in nineteen seventy seven from the United States Supreme Court. Senate Senate Amendment violation cruel and unusual punishment. To execute somebody. For a nine day death related crime. Kinnitty comes along in two thousand eight and it is directly on point with what we're talking about here. In a five four decision the United States Supreme Court reaffirmed Coker and says you cannot. Execute a person for the offense of rape. Right on point. Just the information that you that you may need of we just give you a background in nineteen eighty nine the university of Michigan law school beginning National Registry. Of exonerations that went from nineteen eighty nine until may of two thousand fifteen there were sixteen hundred exonerations. Seventy five percent of those had nothing to do with DNA. And of those sixteen hundred ninety one percent were male. Nine percent female. Sixty percent minority. Of the sixteen hundred exonerations twenty eight percent over four hundred of them involve sexual offenses. What was the reason why the reason being is the overwhelming. Problems with the perjury and false accusations. That's why they were exonerated. Now. With this in mind let me tell you under Arkansas law this may go to representative counties question under Arkansas code annotated five dash one dash one zero nine there is no statute of limitations for right. None. So let me give you this theory if this passes. My grandson your son your grandson your granddaughter your daughter. Fifteen years from now says. Back when I was thirteen. Let me tell you what happened to me in high school. Well that eighteen year old. You can be brought it has been brought. There is no statute of limitations in all right there does not have to be any corroboration whatsoever. It can be word against word. And so that person them for a crime that may have happened fifteen years earlier. Is now looking at life in prison without parole or the death penalty. In preparation of this we also got some records that are in furtherance of your financial impact statement but we went to the jail see a specifically asked how many cases were filed last year under this specific element of rape. If under fourteen. Proximally last year approximately. Thirty four cases were filed. We then. And let me say this. The facts in the Kennedy case. Any victim is horrible. Any crime is bad there's victim you have is the general public. But most of the cases we deal with do not have the facts of the Kennedy case. They just aren't there What we usually see as far as a minor can consent and they cannot recognize they cannot. But you have a sexual consent as much as that thirteen year old can do. Still illegal okay. It's not a legal consent but it's not by forcible compulsion. After we got those statistics that a wind then went to the department of health and I asked them I said can you tell me for last year alone how many children were born to mothers fourteen and under. I chose fourteen. Recognizing that conception could have happened when she was thirteen. They gave me figures for the last six years. Last year was forty six year average is thirty nine per year. I give you all this information because we as public defenders we catch these cases. I would I would venture to say if anyone of our loved ones in here was charged with a capital offense. Many of us would have to pull our money together to hire an attorney to do it right. To do it right because. Under Arkansas law for me to appoint somebody in a death penalty case I have to appoint two lawyers. And both of them have to be highly qualified in this area. And I like to use the example my son's an attorney for five years even if I could appointed I couldn't point is not qualified. Most of the attorneys in this state or not. Most of the ones that are. Aside the likes Mr Rosenzweig or public defenders and I would venture to say there's less than fifty attorneys in the state who are qualified by my standards by law to try capital murder case. That's been against two attorneys. At my expense. Your expense the state's expense thank you an investigator. They also get what's called a mitigation is to to explore the defendant's background from birth to present. They also get experts. And when I say when we do all this there's a reason because we all know with this defend against the death penalty we're gonna be answering to a federal habeas judge somewhere in the future. But backing up. We spend all this money what a death penalty case and and let me tell you the death penalty is always presumed by statute. Until it is waived. By the prosecutor. And it can be waived up until the case goes to the jury. So we have to prepare all that period of time. Know what the requirements are. If this bill passes my budget. Will be unbelievable. Well one PM we will be me coming back to your the governor asking for more money because I own a fair estimate of about thirty nine births last year on average I would think a medical people be mandatory reporters. And if thirty of those are two mothers under thirteen then I'll just call thirty new capital cases. Each requiring to lawyers. And remember not everyone of these girls. Four boys who are sexually molested at thirteen get pregnant so there's gonna be more than thirty cases. In my opinion. Now after we go through all these hurdles many of you ask me what's the calls to defend a capital murder case in October each week it depends there is no magic number every case is different. Of. You know interpreters psychologist psychiatrist fetal alcohol syndrome. The whole gambit because once we try this case if the death penalties imposed and it goes to the Arkansas Supreme Court for an appeal. After the appeal if it's affirmed it then goes what's called a rule thirty seven point five. That's a challenge for ineffective assistance of counsel meaning and yes you guessed appoint that lawyer. A rule by rule it comes back to the commission at our expense so we started again. Challenging the work of the trial lawyers. Again preparing for what's gonna have to be answered for at the federal habeas somewhere down the road. All I would say is if you're considering this. I'm I ask you to consider my budget because I will be back. Right now I have ten unassigned capital murder cases on my desk because I'm out of lawyers and I'm not a private lawyers because during the pandemic. It has been on believable. Maybe it's because the pandemic I don't know. But I don't have the staff in I don't have the attorneys and I will be honest with you I don't think Arkansas has the experienced attorneys in numbers. To try what I would think would be this many capital cases unless the prosecutors walked out of the blocks away the death penalty. That's all I have a be glad to take any questions. Members are there any questions. Seeing no questions thank you Mr perish for your testimony date Mr Rosenzweig you're recognized. This residence where you're recognized if you wish to testify against the bill. I just wanna base of Mr Parrish caught said about everything that I was going to say I just wanna emphasize one thing unlike the murder case where there is physical always physical coop rations there's a dead body person's been shot stabbed whatever in a rape case in Arkansas there is at no requirement for any physical corroboration after all and I'll just someone's word if the jury chooses to believe it and obviously the chances of abuse by a misunderstanding when a try a young child is. Persuaded. Coerced influence to make an allegation. There's no proof there's no need for any physical injury any court any corroboration of any sort at all unlike the situation in the in the Kennedy case to which the US Supreme Court said no it's unconstitutional there will be there just simply will be a number of abusive there always are mistaken and abusive prosecutions in a in in this area it is the area that has that is extremely controversial for a number of reasons and to make all these capital cases is just going to make the problem a whole lot worse. Members are there any questions. Seeing no questions thank you Mr Rosenzweig for being here today. We have no one else was signed up to speak for against the bill senator garner you're recognized to close for your bill. The manager one the gentleman up. Rake is a friend actually grew up next door to him and his family and Homer drove Arkansas he's a very good man and a better attorney and when you listen to attorney make sure you listen to what they don't say. We brought up all those situations were young people getting. Pregnant. The failed to mention that there's another element to this crime. Which is a threat or actual coals of serious physical or. We say did not see a gluttony of these kind of cases before the storm Court struck now they were reserved for the worst of the worst the case I described in Arkansas we had this on the books till nineteen seventy six all member restore Klay there being a collect any of these cases overwhelming the system. There are murders happened Arkansas every single day here we don't have a gluttony of capital murder cases were goes all the way the death penalty I can knowledge from the realities of this but I can also say that this will be used. In the most extreme cases. This will protect Arkansas. And there's only while I want to do this there's somebody out there right now who will do that to a little girl little boy I hope in the back of their head. Don't think that if I get call. I'm gonna have to meet my maker and had told me judgment for that. And we can do that in Arkansas I think that's a win across the board thank you manager. Member senator garner is close for his bill what are the wishes of the committee. We have a motion. Represent slides that a motion to do pass we have a motion to do pass on the floor is there any discussion on the motion. All in favor of the motion please say aye. Are all opposed say no. The nose haven't the bills failed the next bill will be calling the Senate bill five five five manager yes a procedural question sure do I need to make a motion to expunge it can be brought back it can be brought back just wanna make sure me up in the center I would suggest next week I'm going to be holding set a lot of Senate bills and be hearing them will have time to get to it so you can just bring it back to the membership. Members let's go to Senate bill. Five five five representative Gonzalez you're recognized to present Senate bill five fifty five. Yes maybe find today. You're recognized. Mon okay. Thank you madam chair committee This miss Linda Franklin is hereby cited president what I want to present this bill because of the affects that this will have on her and her husband What this bill does is it repeals a law that we passed just last year allowing of licensed handgun owners what people concealed carry license to possess the a gun in their personal vehicle on an employee the employer's parking lot the reason repeal and that is because we're taking that out of the concealed license law and applying that to anyone who is lawfully carrying a handgun they can have it in their vehicle and our employees Arkansas so that's why you see all the stricken language in this bill it also removes the requirement that the gun be stored inside of a lock box that is made for locking a gun so that's basically all this does and I kind of wanted to well I'll I'll just let her hold on just a second see if the committee has any questions if you represent okay and then we'll then we'll move to her. Members are there any questions of representative Collins you're recognized for a question the manager I was just curious so currently you have to have it in the lock box in the employee parking lot do you have to have in a lock box in the other context you have to have it in a lockbox in general or is this just something that is currently in current law you need to the employer parking lot it's in current law that you have to have it in a in a lock box it's for the stricken language so we are still requiring that it be hidden out of sight and in a locked vehicle. A quick follow up if I may you're recognized for follow up thank you I guess I'm wondering though it seems like this is dealing with that the parking lot but outside of the parking lot context you have to have in a lock box or do you not have to have it in the outside of the parking lot you do not have to currently currently the requirement for the lock boxes when you arrive at the parking lot before you exit your vehicle has to be stored inside of all a lock box designed for farm storage thank you. Representative flowers you have a question. Yes I'm sure they are recognized resent Gonzales hello if you heard from. Of agencies alike of department of corrections I'm I think I'm I think. That there is a prohibition from being bringing weapons on those parking lots on the part of their security yet the corrections officers yes well you're you're correct there is and we we amended that into this bill as well we excluded them and. Even the companies that they contract with to hire their prisoners and and let the work. Outside of a prison in private employment of those places are excluded from this as well. Follow up you're recognized for a follow up yeah I'm sorry I missed that it so are there any other exclusions or exemptions to this bill such as you've done for eighty C. and are there any entities who are opposed thank you. yes there is one other exclusion in here that I know of off the top of my head that If the business is connected to someone's house you operating your business out of your house then that is still excluded As far as entities banned oppose I think you'll probably hear from him if they are. I think there is some entities Flippo somebody there to speak against the representative had said you're recognized for a question. Thank you madam chair representative Gonzalez is going through and I know that there are certain instances in which at some with farm would notify the resident for a private home for example in the existing law and I don't see whether or not there's any similar notification to the employer by the employee that they are maintaining a firearm in the vehicle. You know that there is no notification. Required. Follow up I'm here you're recognized for a follow up it in the reason I'm asking this is eight would you agree that an employer might have and. Some degree of necessity to know whether or not they're firearms in their parking lot so if there are break ins in the parking lot or if there's an altercation in the parking lot that they know whether or not people are armed. Okay thank you. All members any other questions. Saying no representative Richardson you're recognized for a question thank you madam chair so with that it. I guess I'm I'm I'm wondering why we pulled a concealed out of you would think that would allow the question that it represented Hudson just ask about notification to the employer you know if you're a registered gun on a concealed Kerry of course are covered in that but you know what to be honest in my making sense to you yes so the reason we pull that out is because Arkansas doesn't require a license it's an option to carry a handgun so we're we're considered what constitutional carry states so I just thought why are we limiting this to only people who who have a license. Thank you. We have no other questions ms Franklin your who signed up to speak in favor the bill I recognize you please identify yourself for the rank you very much can you hear me I wasn't prepared to speak today. So just bear with me and this is a new element for me but I did want to tell our story so you would have a face with it back in August my husband's truck was at the union Pacific parking lot North Little Rock he is a conductor he goes all the way to Texas gets sleeps that takes a trying to Texas then comes back and he was on the parking lot left his vehicle locked up in he was and made this trip to Texas and this a police officer came to my door and his track head on with smoking had caught on fire in the parking lot if you Pacific Grove. In the course of that they searched his vehicle after they put the fire out found his firearm is a concealed Kerry he is a employee of seventeen years for the road when your wife retire because he did not have it the concealed Kerry lock box he was terminated. We've lost retirement I've lost retirement and he doesn't have a job. So we're up he's scheduled to go to arbitration hopefully his union guys have done a great job Justin's done a great job to come to our defense and hopefully this will help someone else it gets in the same position he travels through five counties we live in Arkadelphia travels to North Little Rock goes to five counties day or night sometimes in areas as road detours off the interstate different things up for his safety traveling he needed that farm in there so they sensually I disarmed and from the time he left our house one allowing him to have the farm. So anyway that that's kind of our story like I said he's lost his when your wife retire he's lost his or her retirement and I'm I would get railroad retirement as well we've lost that and then It's just I would just hope that would happen to someone else just because that one element was not satisfied we weren't as you know when the bill was passed we saw on the news nothing was mentioned about that element I guess we should have in a research to better whatever we got in a right publications Arkansans passes a law where you can have your firearm in the employer's parking lot you're covered but that one little element wasn't there so that's our situation that's why Justin's come to help us. Yes so. Members of if we pass as there is no guarantee that Mr Ragland will will get his job back in but there is one more step in the process and this this could potentially help it could you know show that the intent of the state legislatures is not for people to lose their jobs if they have a bit of a firearm in the vehicle that work so. Thank you more questions over what the opposition speech thank you miss Franklin for being here today we have next general sale Mr sale if you would like to come forward and speak in favor of the bill. S. thank you madam chair and thank you Committee A. zero seven the smart legislated or smart TD legislator directives state of Arkansas this is a little bit outside of my wheelhouse from my work on rail safety issues I'm not a a gun advocate but I'm here today to speak on a Mr Franklin's behalf a representative Mister Franklin investigative hearing and the little bit astonished to find out investigate hearing we brought up the law to the carrier the carrier. Not only refused to review the laws said to they didn't review the law but the for me that had to review the law they still to fire Mr Franklin regardless. Which at that point I brought up to the carrier that listen we are have sixty laws on the books regulating rail safety in the state of Arkansas you're subject to real safety and not only that you know section thirteen of the state constitution allows for regulations of rail so they should look at all all laws concerning all real employees and at that point I was informed by them by their representative that any company policy will supersede any law passed here at the the capital. this is something hopefully that if you decide to vote yes and rectify this when he goes to arbitration the arbitrator will see that the state decided to step in and try to correct this Mister Franklin also it'll hopefully avoid this potentially in the future for any other poisoning other business and I will I would like to state to that we tried to push this to the side and I try to work with the carrier and inform them what if they just would have posted signage properly they would have been in compliance with the law and ask them to please reinstate Mr Franklin and I would personally work with them to make sure that they would work along with with me and we would make sure they were legally restricting firearms on the property and also inform and educate offer memberships that they've done such. That they also refused to do so we're willing to work with them on any manner to try to avoid any situation like this in the future and it's unfortunate that we have to come here today to ask you to do that course thank you. Members are there any questions. Thank you Mr sale for being here today we have no one else who signed up to speak for against the bill representative Gonzalez you're recognized close for your bill. I'll just be closer much I'll move on I would appreciate it do pass on a good vote thank you. Members. Representive is close for his bill I have a motion to do pass on the floor is there any discussion of the motion. Seeing no discussion all in favor please say aye. All opposed say no the ayes have it congratulations you've passed your bill members the next bill up to Senate bill two eighteen representative very you're recognized come forward and present the bill. Thank German Dalby and colleagues and with the chairs permission I'd like bring my subject matter expert the major Lindsey Williams Division commander the Arkansas state police. Come on forward. Represent very you're recognized impugn thank you Mr chairman of this bill it as the subtitle a mention it's concerns non criminal background checks requests that are submitted to the Arkansas state police I am essentially what it does it use a live scan machine and that that machine captures fingerprints digitally and allows for the transmission of fingerprints immediately to the Arkansas state police and eventually to the the FBI but it replaces the traditional fingerprinting process that you're very familiar with and the challenges was fingerprinting these days of mailing them back it takes time to get the fingerprints and fingerprint cards a lot of times fingerprints are only as good as the individual that's doing the printing process so Arkansas state police they conduct a criminal background checks and a of for a multitude of different agencies so DHS department of health beverage control medical board and so forth that require of fingerprints some of the background checks will be process much faster with a lot lower error rate using the live scan machine and digital processing so with that being said I'll take any questions. Members are there any questions. Seeing no questions represents like you're recognized. Thank you madam chair of representative berry is the aphis is it the. Are there enough machines in the US state that so. We're the folks of got easy access to the needs of fingerprints taken yes I believe and I'll defer to major waves but we have a there's over a hundred machines all over the state of Arkansas they should have a pretty easy access to a major field in a fight yourself for the record you can yes ma'am Lindsey Williams I'm a major with Arkansas state police numbers possible for the regulatory division which includes like this and I the bureau represents like there there are a lot of machines around for example there's the education co ops around the state there's proximity forty machines that those DHS has about fifty three machines there's about seventy other miscellaneous machines apartment education has machine those are all used for background checks that are specific to those entities within their machines at sheriff's offices around the state in we've been in contact with the sheriff's association and while it'll take just a little bit of reprogramming because those machines right now are generally used to submit that criminal prance when someone is arrested they can be reprogrammed it no charge to those agencies for the machines that we supply about twenty for those around and expect that number to the the only grow so there's probably a year in excess of two hundred machines scattered around. Thank you major of those benefactor one of those machines that Newton County and yes you made a world of difference because the you're constantly going through eleven merge prints rejected back and forth back and forth and without a fix it was the clarity and then we'll see thank you Sir yes. Members are there any other questions. Seeing no other questions we have no one else who signed up to speak for against the bill representative bear you're recognized close for your bill thank you ma'am German in our so this live scan process in two thousand twenty there were huh about a hundred twenty thousand fingerprint cards that were submitted to the Arkansas state police so is very time consuming those numbers are are going to grow even more and you the technology is available these days an additional process will be allowed will allow employers and state employees be hired at a much faster rate the error rate is a lot less in other reduce quite a burden on the Arkansas state police and fingerprinting process so with that being said closed my bill thank you manager. Members representative berries close first bill what are the wishes of the committee. We have a motion to do pass is there any discussion on the motion to do pass all in favor of the motion please say aye. All opposed say no the ayes have it motion carries congradulations you have passed thank you madam German thank you colleagues members let's turn to House Bill fifteen twenty three representing Bentley you're recognized come to the table present your bill. Members are sent impacts us statement should be on your death. Thank you chairman in college for the bill into a represent of house bill fifteen twenty three today our first one said this is not a hate crime bill is a bill to ensure equal justice for all Arkansans this bill has three simple sections that why will go over briefly with you today the first is that this bill simply identifies various protections in criminal penalties that are currently found in Arkansas law regarding felonies involving violence look on page two of the bill more read a few of those Statues that are already in place and on line twelve we see that section six ten one fourteen prohibits discrimination against a student for race national origin or ethnic background by school board member administrator school employee on line nineteen C. section six eighteen five one four prohibits bullying and public school which includes billing for attributes including without limitation race color religion ancestry national origin social economic status economic status disability gender gender identity physical parents health condition or sexual orientation further we I have prohibits discrimination on the basis of race color national origin religion sex or area of teacher. Or a teacher education the teacher opportunity grant and lastly read section. Sixteen one twenty three one oh seven under the Arkansas Civil Rights Act of nineteen ninety three prohibits discrimination because of race religion national origin gender or the presence of any sensory mental or physical disability I'm I really appreciate this bill I like the fact with state of the things that we already have an state you know how many of my constituents come to me and say what you guys passed so many laws when I look at the ones that you already have in place see if we can fix those instead so I think that's what's really well stated in this bill is what we already have in place The second thing it does it creates the offense of committing a felony involving violence for the purpose of preventing a person from exercising his or own constitutional rights or read see that also increases the penalty for these offenses the third thing that it does requires the state to collect and report statistics regarding felonies involving violence committed for the purpose of preventing a person for exercising his or her constitutional rights colleagues is really this bill and not shall three simple things and I will take any questions from members of the happening. Members are there any questions. Seeing no questions we have Mr can yank who signed up to speak for the bill string you're recognized important speak for the bill. Thank you madam chair eleven can you hang on the director of government affairs at Arkansas family council and you know we support this bill I think a under to keep this short of courts already have tremendous away on enhancing penalties for really heinous crimes and so but at the Arkansas law doesn't address felonies committed for the purposes of preventing persons from exercising his or her constitutional right you can see that that's listed on the page for which this bill addresses this bill applies to everyone equally regardless of their identity characteristics or status so there's been a lot of talk about justice equally for all and believe this bill does that it should be fifteen twenty three does not force prosecutors to speculate about the criminals prejudice or bias double it is really really important it doesn't create or identify pertain to classes of people it is not extend greater protection to some groups of people instead of letters it promotes equal justice under law which I think we can all support and protects constitutional liberties and punishes violent crimes for every one. Members are there any questions thank you Mr yank your testimony thank you. We have Tony rose who signed up to speak in favor of the bill is road if you'd like to come forward. Then we have Mr Sukhu signed up to speak against the bill Mr sick you're recognized. But I am. Thank you madam chair and members of the committee ran these look at Arkansas state chamber of commerce I don't want to make a big point of this but I do want to clarify for the for the members of the committee that this is not in the anything that would substitute for Senate bill six twenty two which you'll be hearing about sooner shortly down the road of we are our support the state chamber of commerce in the business community across the state or in support of six twenty two and hope that there won't be any confusion with this bill it's not a substitute for six twenty two and is represented Bentley quite clear I think it's not a hate crimes bill so with that I would just say urge you to vote against the bill but we're not picking a fight about this let me put it that way. Members are there any questions. Thank you Mr spoke representative Crawford you're recognized for a question yes Mister six you're just against the bill because you just think it will lead to confusion that part of it and we we think that it might it might be in misconstrued as something that would be satisfactory in lieu of six twenty two. Which protects people from the consequences of of heinous crimes. Okay thank you thank you. Representative Hudson you're recognized for a question thank you madam chair investors that you may not know this a representative Bentley may and but it you know to curse me looking at the constitutional rights that are listed here that there are several they're not listed not think that you would probably agree with me that due process in the Fourteenth Amendment would be a constitutional right that we ought to be protecting people from exercising correct absolutely okay follows Medicare you're recognized for follow up representative Bentley wise the Fourteenth Amendment not included as one of the enumerated rights that we're protecting this bill. I don't have any. Members any other questions of Mister so that. Senate further questions thank you Mr set for being here we have no one else who signed up to speak for against the bill representing Bentley you're recognized close for your bill thank you chairman thank you colleagues I think that our constitution says it all they were here for equal justice for all and I believe that's what this bill does just emerge what we have for equal justice for all Arkansans I highly support the board bill appreciate a good vote thank you. Members representing Bentley is close for it for her bill what are the wishes of the committee we have a motion to do pass is there any discussion of the motion. All in favor of the motion please say aye. All opposed say no. The nose haven't the bill has failed. Members that concludes our agenda for today what your text messages you'll be getting what we're going to be handling on