Legislature(2009 - 2010)HOUSE FINANCE 519

04/13/2010 08:15 AM House FINANCE

Download Mp3. <- Right click and save file as

Audio Topic
08:18:57 AM Start
08:19:22 AM SB222
09:20:00 AM Adjourn
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
--Recessed from 4/12, to 8:15 am Today--
Moved Out of Committee
+ Bills Previously Heard/Scheduled TELECONFERENCED
SENATE BILL NO. 222                                                                                                             
     "An  Act   relating  to   the  crimes   of  harassment,                                                                    
     possession  of child  pornography, and  distribution of                                                                    
     indecent material  to a  minor; relating  to suspending                                                                    
     imposition of  sentence and conditions of  probation or                                                                    
     parole   for   certain   sex  offenses;   relating   to                                                                    
     aggravating   factors   in  sentencing;   relating   to                                                                    
     registration  as a  sex  offender  or child  kidnapper;                                                                    
     amending Rule  16, Alaska Rules of  Criminal Procedure;                                                                    
     and providing for an effective date."                                                                                      
8:19:22 AM                                                                                                                    
SUE MACLEAN, DIRECTOR, CRIMINAL  DIVISION, DEPARTMENT OF LAW                                                                    
explained the changes to the  proposed legislation since the                                                                    
last  hearing.  Section   4,  Page  3  creates   a  Class  A                                                                    
misdemeanor  crime of  harassment.  Section 17,  Page 8  now                                                                    
adds to  the definition  of sex offender  "a person  who has                                                                    
been convicted two or more  times of the Class A misdemeanor                                                                    
crime  of  harassment  which involves  touching  a  person's                                                                    
genitals, buttocks,  or female breast." Section  17 has been                                                                    
modified  to state  that  out of  state  sex offenders  must                                                                    
register  if  the  crime  that they  were  convicted  of  is                                                                    
similar to a sex offense in Alaska.                                                                                             
Ms.  Maclean continued  with  Section 6,  Page  4 where  the                                                                    
definition  "child pornography  including anime  characters"                                                                    
has  been removed.  She  continued with  Section  8, Page  5                                                                    
where the  companion definition "appears to  depict a child"                                                                    
has been removed.                                                                                                               
8:23:13 AM                                                                                                                    
Representative Gara asked  about Section 6 and  the crime of                                                                    
creating  a  depiction  of  an  actual  child.  Ms.  MacLean                                                                    
provided an  example of  the use of  Photoshop to  place the                                                                    
face of a child onto  a depiction of the prohibited conduct.                                                                    
The United  States Supreme  Court heard  a similar  case and                                                                    
held that  the harm  was to the  child whose  photograph was                                                                    
Ms. Maclean continued with Section  18, Page 9, Line 1 which                                                                    
is a new  section added in response to  previous hearings in                                                                    
which  the  other body  concluded  that  the state  receives                                                                    
inadequate  statistics.   This  section  requires   all  law                                                                    
enforcement  agencies   to  report   sex  offenses   to  the                                                                    
Department of Public  Safety (DPS). This new  section adds a                                                                    
requirement stating that if law  enforcement fails to report                                                                    
data regarding  sex offenses, grants  will be  withheld. She                                                                    
concluded with Section  19, Page 9, Lines  24-26 which gives                                                                    
subpoena power  to the Attorney  General in  cases involving                                                                    
exploitation of  children where  the internet  is concerned.                                                                    
The section has been narrowed  stating that subpoenas can be                                                                    
issued for the account  holder's name, address, and physical                                                                    
location associated with the account.                                                                                           
8:26:39 AM                                                                                                                    
Representative  Gara   discussed  crime   involving  contact                                                                    
through  clothing.  He  noted that  the  action  is  already                                                                    
defined as  a crime in a  separate part of the  statute. Ms.                                                                    
MacLean  explained that  the section  refers  to a  fleeting                                                                    
contact  without   consent;  the  crime  is   classified  as                                                                    
harassment.  This section  raises  the crime  to  a Class  A                                                                    
misdemeanor   level.   Representative   Gara   expressed   a                                                                    
lingering concern  that the mentioned  crime would  never be                                                                    
prosecuted as a "fleeting" touch.                                                                                               
Ms.  MacLean ascertained  that she  may  have minimized  the                                                                    
crime  in her  explanation.  She explained  a  case where  a                                                                    
person approached a  male in a bar and  grabbed his genitals                                                                    
without permission. The  ligation was that the  act does not                                                                    
comprise  sexual  assault  in  the  second  degree,  but  is                                                                    
instead classified as harassment.                                                                                               
Representative Gara surmised that  touch through clothing is                                                                    
a crime,  but as  classified would be  punished with  a four                                                                    
year  minimum sentence.  Ms. MacLean  repeated that  the law                                                                    
reads "directly or through clothing."   The common thread is                                                                    
the  lack of  consent. Representative  Gara opined  that the                                                                    
punishment is greater than the crime.                                                                                           
8:29:46 AM                                                                                                                    
Representative  Foster  inquired  about Page  9,  Lines  5-8                                                                    
regarding  the  reporting  requirement  and  withholding  of                                                                    
grant  funds. He  asked if  a sex  crime is  committed in  a                                                                    
village would  the Village Public  Safety Officer  (VPSO) or                                                                    
state   trooper  take   responsibility  for   the  reporting                                                                    
requirement. Ms. MacLean replied  that nearly all sex crimes                                                                    
are  felonies  ultimately  handled   by  the  troopers.  She                                                                    
assumed that the trooper would create the report for DPS.                                                                       
Representative  Fairclough  asked   if  "extreme  youth"  as                                                                    
stated on Page 7, Section  15 is defined outside of statute.                                                                    
Ms.  MacLean   believed  that  extreme  youth   referred  to                                                                    
children under the age of 5.                                                                                                    
Representative Fairclough  referred to Page 2,  and shared a                                                                    
story  about a  case where  a sex  offender was  exempt from                                                                    
reporting  requirements  while  travelling.  She  understood                                                                    
that the mandate to report does  not exist if a sex offender                                                                    
is  traveling. Ms.  MacLean deflected  the question  to DPS.                                                                    
She thought that a lengthy  change of physical location must                                                                    
require that a sex offender register.                                                                                           
Representative  Fairclough stated  that  the requirement  or                                                                    
limitations on days are not  included in the bill. She noted                                                                    
that the  sex offender makes  the decision to report  a move                                                                    
or lengthy vacation.                                                                                                            
8:34:36 AM                                                                                                                    
KATHRYN    MONFREDA,    CHIEF,    CRIMINAL    RECORDS    AND                                                                    
IDENTIFICATION,   DEPARTMENT    OF   PUBLIC    SAFETY   (via                                                                    
teleconference)  commented  that  registration  requirements                                                                    
state that the  sex offender must register  if residency was                                                                    
changed for  30 consecutive  days or  when it  is determined                                                                    
that  the  sex  offender  intends   to  remain  in  the  new                                                                    
Representative  Fairclough  asked  about DPS  prosecuting  a                                                                    
regulation that is not state  statute. Ms. Monfreda recalled                                                                    
that  the case  mentioned  a vacationing  sex offender.  She                                                                    
stated  that   the  law  does   not  specify   exactly  when                                                                    
notification should occur during vacation.                                                                                      
Representative  Fairclough  stated   that  she  was  seeking                                                                    
feedback  from the  committee.  Vice-Chair Thomas  suggested                                                                    
that Representative Fairclough work with DPS on the issue.                                                                      
8:36:57 AM                                                                                                                    
Vice-Chair Thomas opened public testimony.                                                                                      
QUINLAN  STEINER,  PUBLIC  DEFENDER  AGENCY,  DEPARTMENT  OF                                                                    
ADMINISTRATION  referred to  Page 10,  Line 18.  The section                                                                    
amended  the court  rules prohibiting  courts from  ordering                                                                    
copies of  evidence in child  pornography cases.  The change                                                                    
results in  the requirement that the  law enforcement agency                                                                    
reviews  the material.  The anticipated  problem comes  when                                                                    
the  material  requires review  by  a  forensic expert.  The                                                                    
state would fly  the expert to Alaska creating  a cost issue                                                                    
of approximately  $20,000-$30,000 per case. The  fiscal note                                                                    
has been changed to indeterminate from zero.                                                                                    
Representative Kelly  asked for the recommendation  from Mr.                                                                    
Steiner  regarding  a solution  to  the  great expense.  Mr.                                                                    
Steiner  remarked  that without  change  to  the statute  as                                                                    
written, there could be no solution.                                                                                            
8:41:19 AM                                                                                                                    
Representative  Gara  asked  if the  issue  included  having                                                                    
copies sent  to DPS. Mr.  Steiner informed that  the statute                                                                    
prohibits the  court from ordering  a copy that  is normally                                                                    
sent  out  of  state.  A   court  order  and  agreement  are                                                                    
typically  formed  regarding the  copying  of  this type  of                                                                    
material.  Representative Gara  understood that  one concern                                                                    
regarded selling  of the material.  Mr. Steiner  stated that                                                                    
he was  unaware of  any instances  where a  defense attorney                                                                    
lost   control  of   the   discovery.  Representative   Gara                                                                    
speculated that  that the victim  was further  victimized by                                                                    
the copying of the material.                                                                                                    
8:42:37 AM                                                                                                                    
Representative  Kelly expressed  concern about  both justice                                                                    
and dollars.                                                                                                                    
Representative  Fairclough   commented  that   children  can                                                                    
experience  re-victimization knowing  that  the material  is                                                                    
viewed by others.                                                                                                               
Mr. Steiner  expressed concern  about Page  10, Line  31 and                                                                    
the  legislative statement  concerning  the culpable  mental                                                                    
state of failing  to register as a sex offender.  There is a                                                                    
requirement to  register but  the mens  rea that  relates to                                                                    
that moment is eliminated.                                                                                                      
8:45:21 AM                                                                                                                    
Representative Gara asked about  Section 19 and the Attorney                                                                    
General's permission  to obtain  a subpoena without  a court                                                                    
order.  He asked  about other  circumstances that  endow the                                                                    
Attorney  General with  similar power.  Mr. Steiner  replied                                                                    
that  he was  unaware  of other  circumstances endowing  the                                                                    
Attorney General with such  power. Representative Gara asked                                                                    
about  any policy  concerns regarding  the  fairness of  the                                                                    
decision. Mr. Steiner  responded that he had  no position on                                                                    
policy  but expressed  concern that  the subpoena  is issued                                                                    
correctly.  He  stated  that there  is  a  reasonable  cause                                                                    
requirement  for  issuing  the  subpoena,  which  ultimately                                                                    
leads to a warrant.                                                                                                             
Representative  Gara clarified  that  the  warrant would  be                                                                    
accepted after the evidence was obtained.                                                                                       
8:47:31 AM                                                                                                                    
Mr. Steiner commented  on Page 7, Line  27-29, which creates                                                                    
an  aggravator  for  crimes   concerning  dating  or  sexual                                                                    
relationships.   Dating    relationship   might    lead   to                                                                    
litigation, as it is undefined.  Dating might mean different                                                                    
things  in different  communities, which  he expected  would                                                                    
engender a fair amount of litigation.                                                                                           
8:49:02 AM                                                                                                                    
Ms.  MacLean  remarked  that one  concern  about  the  first                                                                    
version of bill applied to  exploitation of children and has                                                                    
since  been changed  to include  the phrase  "or defined  as                                                                    
child  pornography under  federal law."  She explained  that                                                                    
the state  does not prosecute  cases under federal  law. She                                                                    
supposed that  difficulty might occur if  federal law varied                                                                    
from state law  in the definition of  child pornography. The                                                                    
state  can only  prosecute child  pornography as  defined by                                                                    
our law. She  did not expect a great increase  in the number                                                                    
of cases posed  by the change in statute. She  pointed out a                                                                    
rule  change at  the end  of bill.  This rule  change tracks                                                                    
federal  law,   which  notes  that  the   copying  of  child                                                                    
pornography  can  lead  to re-victimization,  but  the  main                                                                    
issue  is  redistribution  of   the  material.  The  concern                                                                    
regards the  offering of materials to  the defense attorney.                                                                    
The DOL would  provide that the material is viewed  at a law                                                                    
enforcement agency and the DOL must be present.                                                                                 
8:52:42 AM                                                                                                                    
JEFFREY   MITTMAN,   EXECUTIVE  DIRECTOR,   AMERICAN   CIVIL                                                                    
LIBERTIES  UNION OF  ALASKA  (via teleconference)  addressed                                                                    
concerns on  Page 4,  Line 2-17, Section  6 and  7 regarding                                                                    
the  crime  of  possession  of  child  pornography.  If  the                                                                    
section  is compared  to Page  5, Section  12 which  defines                                                                    
"harmful to  minor" takes away  first amendment  concerns in                                                                    
the section.  The Supreme Court found  that obscene material                                                                    
lies outside the ambit of  the first amendment. The standard                                                                    
is  that the  material  has no  artistic  value and  offends                                                                    
committee interests. He provided  an example. He recommended                                                                    
that  additional  language  be  added  clarifying  that  the                                                                    
section applies to obscene material.                                                                                            
Mr. Mittman continued  with Page 9, Line 14,  Section 19 and                                                                    
subpoena power,  which is generally used  for administrative                                                                    
matters to obtain records. He  pointed out that the power is                                                                    
generally not used for  criminal investigations. He provided                                                                    
written examples  to the committee  with the  United State's                                                                    
Department of Justice reviewing  these powers at the federal                                                                    
level and finding that they  were abused. The American Civil                                                                    
Liberties  Union (ACLU)  has not  heard testimony  regarding                                                                    
reasons  the judge  is unable  to review  the subpoenas.  He                                                                    
provided  an example  of an  affidavit. He  recommended that                                                                    
the  bill  be  amended  to   include  an  annual  review  to                                                                    
determine how the power is used.                                                                                                
Mr.  Mittman   continued  with  Page  10,   Section  20.  He                                                                    
explained that  the court in  Washington made it  clear that                                                                    
the defense council  is responsible for any  copies made. He                                                                    
advised  that the  bill  state the  court  shall order  that                                                                    
defense council is responsible for  the copies. He concluded                                                                    
with  concerns on  Section 21  and the  elimination of  "any                                                                    
mental  state  whatsoever."  He  opined  that  use  of  "the                                                                    
criminally    negligent   mental    state"    is   a    more                                                                    
constitutionally appropriate standard than simple knowing.                                                                      
8:58:48 AM                                                                                                                    
Ms.  Maclean discussed  the court  ordering  the defense  to                                                                    
have copies of  the actual images of  child pornography. She                                                                    
provided an example in  which defense attorneys accidentally                                                                    
left  behind  huge  posters  of  the  victim's  naked  body,                                                                    
without  any  intention  to  offend.   The  section  is  not                                                                    
designed to gain an advantage,  but instead to deal with the                                                                    
fact  that  giving  child   pornography  to  another  person                                                                    
constitutes redistribution.                                                                                                     
9:00:37 AM                                                                                                                    
Representative Doogan  asked if the provision  prevails will                                                                    
the department  support the funding  to accomplish  the task                                                                    
of allowing  experts to  analyze the  material. He  asked if                                                                    
the  department supports  legislative request  to cover  the                                                                    
Ms. MacLean  informed that the  law reference  was included,                                                                    
which  adds more  cases to  the agencies  caseload regarding                                                                    
child  pornography. She  realized that  the public  defender                                                                    
agency is funded to supply experts when needed.                                                                                 
Representative  Doogan stressed  that  he  simply wanted  to                                                                    
know  whether the  department supports  the  cost of  either                                                                    
analyzing the material or sending  it away for analysis. Ms.                                                                    
MacLean  responded  that  if  public  defenders  require  an                                                                    
expert DOL  will not argue the  point. The DOL will  not pay                                                                    
for the public defender's experts.                                                                                              
Representative Doogan  asked the department's  position with                                                                    
future  finance  committees  when  added  costs  for  expert                                                                    
reviews come  before the legislature. Ms.  MacLean responded                                                                    
that DOL  will review  the fiscal  notes presented  and note                                                                    
whether the  proposed spending comports with  statistics. If                                                                    
the request comports, DOL will be supportive.                                                                                   
9:04:54 AM                                                                                                                    
Vice-Chair  Thomas  clarified  that  the  public  defender's                                                                    
budget is  not under DOL,  but instead under  the Department                                                                    
of  Administration (DOA)  for a  supplemental budget  in the                                                                    
event of cost increases.                                                                                                        
Representative Salmon expressed  concerns regarding Sections                                                                    
6, 7,  and 8 regarding  possession of material. He  asked to                                                                    
know  the definition  of possession.  Ms. Maclean  responded                                                                    
that the law  adds accessing a computer with  intent to view                                                                    
child pornography.  The state must therefore  prove that the                                                                    
viewing was more than accidental.                                                                                               
Representative Salmon  asked if the  material was sent  to a                                                                    
person via the  computer would it be  defined as possession.                                                                    
Ms. Maclean  responded that possession  is the  knowing that                                                                    
the material is on the computer.                                                                                                
Representative Salmon clarified that  a person must open the                                                                    
email message and view the material.                                                                                            
9:07:22 AM                                                                                                                    
Representative Joule recalled  certain computer systems that                                                                    
require  a  message to  be  viewed  prior to  deletion.  Ms.                                                                    
Maclean  explained the  difference with  possession involves                                                                    
downloading and  keeping the material or  simply downloading                                                                    
Representative  Salmon  described   potential  scenarios  in                                                                    
which  a person  may open  a  message on  a handheld  mobile                                                                    
phone  to  quiet  the  phone  in  public  without  carefully                                                                    
viewing the  message. Ms. MacLean  recalled a court  case in                                                                    
which   a  person   viewed   a   site  without   downloading                                                                    
information. She  elucidated that repeated access  to a site                                                                    
proves the intent to view.                                                                                                      
9:09:33 AM                                                                                                                    
Representative  Fairclough pointed  out Section  3, Page  2,                                                                    
regarding  the   language  barrier  issue  for   failure  to                                                                    
register as a sexual offender.                                                                                                  
Ms.  Maclean   stated  that  several  state   agencies  have                                                                    
subpoena  power.  The Attorney  General  would  not issue  a                                                                    
subpoena  for any  cause other  than the  items listed.  The                                                                    
purpose  is to  deduce the  computer's owner.  She explained                                                                    
that  the   Commissioners  of   Labor,  Health   and  Social                                                                    
Services,  and Revenue  have  subpoena  power. The  Attorney                                                                    
General  has subpoena  power for  unfair trade  practices or                                                                    
consumer protection and the  Alaska Police Standards Council                                                                    
also  has  subpoena power.  Failure  to  register as  a  sex                                                                    
offender has a knowing  mental state that involves realizing                                                                    
that registration is mandatory.  The state must disprove the                                                                    
reasons  that  the person  did  not  register, which  is  an                                                                    
impossible burden.                                                                                                              
9:13:17 AM                                                                                                                    
Representative   Foster  revisited   Page  10,   Section  20                                                                    
regarding  the  duplication  of  material.  He  noticed  the                                                                    
restriction  on the  availability  of  certain material.  He                                                                    
asked if the section restricts the defendant's attorney.                                                                        
Ms.  Maclean  informed that  the  section  applies to  court                                                                    
procedures  where a  defense attorney  and defendant  are in                                                                    
place when the rules come into play.                                                                                            
Representative Foster  asked if  the section applies  to all                                                                    
involved  in the  trial. Ms.  Maclean  expounded that  DOL's                                                                    
preference is  to view the  evidence at the  police station,                                                                    
but otherwise no person can duplicate the material.                                                                             
Representative   Foster  understood   that  the   danger  of                                                                    
duplication  includes  the  possibility of  multiple  copies                                                                    
seen by others leading to  re-victimization. He asked if the                                                                    
material  was sent  away for  expert analysis,  would others                                                                    
view  the material.  Ms. MacLean  believed that  the section                                                                    
tracks federal  law, which decrees that  the distribution of                                                                    
the child pornography must stop.                                                                                                
9:16:29 AM                                                                                                                    
Representative  Fairclough  discussed   the  addition  of  a                                                                    
clause  describing  art.  Ms.  MacLean  explained  that  the                                                                    
section "harmful  to minors" was  added with respect  to the                                                                    
crime  of  distribution  of  pornography  to  children.  The                                                                    
section   initially  stated   "electronic  distribution   of                                                                    
pornography  to children,"  but is  changed in  the bill  to                                                                    
"any distribution  of pornography to children."  Because the                                                                    
section  encompasses   pornography  not  limited   to  child                                                                    
pornography, the  state must define the  type of pornography                                                                    
specified. The  definition is found in  the section "harmful                                                                    
to  minors." Section  6 refers  to the  definition of  child                                                                    
pornography. This  describes the  conduct regarded  as child                                                                    
pornography. She read the statute.                                                                                              
Representative Fairclough directed  attention to Section 19,                                                                    
which insists on  an annual review to  allow the legislature                                                                    
information  about  the use  of  the  subpoena power.  Doubt                                                                    
about  the process  comes  to the  court in  the  form of  a                                                                    
motion to suppress evidence. If  there is a problem with the                                                                    
use of the subpoena power, that will be revealed.                                                                               
9:20:00 AM                                                                                                                    
Vice-Chair Thomas closed public testimony.                                                                                      
Co-Chair Hawker spoke to the  fiscal notes. He mentioned one                                                                    
indeterminate  note from  the  public  defender agency,  one                                                                    
indeterminate note from the public  advocacy agency, and one                                                                    
position  identified  by DPS  for  a  total of  $123.500  in                                                                    
additional expenses related to  record keeping. He mentioned                                                                    
the Department of Corrections (DOC)  and the fiscal note for                                                                    
$200 thousand  per year to  incarcerate those  found guilty.                                                                    
He  mentioned zero  fiscal notes  from DOL  and zero  fiscal                                                                    
notes from the Court System.                                                                                                    
Representative   Fairclough   informed  about   a   national                                                                    
reporting system that she opined would be helpful.                                                                              
Representative Fairclough MOVED to  report CSSB 222(JUD) out                                                                    
of  Committee   with  individual  recommendations   and  the                                                                    
accompanying fiscal notes.                                                                                                      
CSSB  222(JUD) was  REPORTED  out of  Committee  with a  "do                                                                    
pass" recommendation  and with two new  indeterminate fiscal                                                                    
notes  by   Department  of  Administration   and  previously                                                                    
published  fiscal notes:  FN2 (COR),  FN4 (LAW),  FN5 (CRT),                                                                    
and FN7 (DPS).                                                                                                                  

Document Name Date/Time Subjects
HB 410 comparison to CSSB_300.doc HFIN 4/13/2010 8:15:00 AM
HB 410
SB 300
HCR 21 changes (for Finance).pdf HFIN 4/13/2010 8:15:00 AM
HB 426 CrimeLab Leg Brief 021810.pdf HFIN 4/13/2010 8:15:00 AM
HB 426 Sponsor Statement.docx HFIN 4/13/2010 8:15:00 AM
HB 426
HB426-REV-TRS-04-13-10 Crime Lab.pdf HFIN 4/13/2010 8:15:00 AM
HB 426
HCR 21 sponsor statement final _for FIN.pdf HFIN 4/13/2010 8:15:00 AM
HCR 21 Briefing Paper Economic Development in State Government.pdf HFIN 4/13/2010 8:15:00 AM
HCR 21 - Letters of Support.PDF HFIN 4/13/2010 8:15:00 AM
HCR 21 Economic Development Commission Powerpoint for Finance -B&W.pdf HFIN 4/13/2010 8:15:00 AM
HCR 21
HCR 21 - Alaska Forward Project Executive Summary.pdf HFIN 4/13/2010 8:15:00 AM
CS HCR21(L&C)-LEG-COU-4-12-10.pdf HFIN 4/13/2010 8:15:00 AM
HCR 21
SB 217 Vets Bonds Sponsor Statement[1].pdf HFIN 4/13/2010 8:15:00 AM
SB 217
SB 217 AHFC Vets Loan Activity[1].pdf HFIN 4/13/2010 8:15:00 AM
SB 217
SB217 AHFC Vets Sec Analysis[2].pdf HFIN 4/13/2010 8:15:00 AM
SB 217
Bond Estimates.pdf HFIN 4/13/2010 8:15:00 AM
AHFC Building Issue Brief.pdf HFIN 4/13/2010 8:15:00 AM
SB 300 amendment (companion to Hb410).doc HFIN 4/13/2010 8:15:00 AM
HB 410
SB 300
SB300SupplementalBackup[1].pdf HFIN 4/13/2010 8:15:00 AM
SB 300
SB300SectionalAnalysis[1].pdf HFIN 4/13/2010 8:15:00 AM
SB 300
2010 SB 247 sponsor statement.doc HFIN 4/13/2010 8:15:00 AM
SB 247
CSSB247(L&C) Audit Summary[1].pdf HFIN 4/13/2010 8:15:00 AM
SB 247
CSSB247(L&C) Audit[1].pdf HFIN 4/13/2010 8:15:00 AM
SB 247
2010 SB 248 sponsor statement.doc HFIN 4/13/2010 8:15:00 AM
SB 248
CSSB248 (L&C) Audit Summary[1].pdf HFIN 4/13/2010 8:15:00 AM
SB 248
CSSB248 (L&C) Audit[1].pdf HFIN 4/13/2010 8:15:00 AM
SB 248
HB426-REV-TRS-04-13-10 Crime Lab.pdf HFIN 4/13/2010 8:15:00 AM
HB 426
HB 426 Sectional.docx HFIN 4/13/2010 8:15:00 AM
HB 426
HB 426 Sponsor Statement.docx HFIN 4/13/2010 8:15:00 AM
HB 426
2-17-2010_MOU_AIDEA_AEA[1].pdf HFIN 4/13/2010 8:15:00 AM
SB 301
SB 301 GOV Transmittal Letter.pdf HFIN 4/13/2010 8:15:00 AM
SB 301
Sectional Analysis for HB 411 and SB 301[1].pdf HFIN 4/13/2010 8:15:00 AM
HB 411
SB 301
SB 301 Amendment #1 Thomas and Legal Opinion.pdf HFIN 4/13/2010 8:15:00 AM
SB 301