MINUTES OF THE

 

      SENATE COMMITTEE ON JUDICIARY

 

      Sixty-seventh Session

      January 20, 1993

           

                                         

The Senate Committee on Judiciary was called to order by Chairman Mark A. James, at 1:30 p.m., on Wednesday, January 20, 1993, in Room 224 of the Legislative Building, Carson City, Nevada.  Exhibit A is the Meeting Agenda.  Exhibit B is the Attendance Roster.

 

 

COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT:

 

Senator Mark A. James, Chairman

Senator R. Hal Smith, Vice Chairman

Senator Lawrence E. Jacobsen

Senator Mike McGinness

Senator Raymond C. Shaffer

Senator Ernest E. Adler

 

COMMITTEE MEMBERS ABSENT:

 

Senator Dina Titus

 

STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT:

 

Dennis Neilander, Senior Research Analyst

Maddie Fischer, Primary Secretary

Marilyn Hofmann, Committee Secretary

Sherry Nesbitt, Committee Secretary

 

 

The secretary called the roll, and all committee members were present with the exception of Senator Titus, who was in Washington, D.C., attending the inauguration of President Clinton.  The chairman asked each member to briefly identify themselves and followed with an introduction of the staff which will be serving the committee.

 

Senator James indicated the first order of business would be the review and adoption of the committee rules, which are attached as Exhibit C.  He indicated the rules do not conflict with the Senate Standing Rules for Committees.

 

      SENATOR McGINNESS MOVED TO ADOPT THE COMMITTEE RULES.

 

      SENATOR SMITH SECONDED THE MOTION.

     

      THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.

 

 

      * * * * * *

 

Senate Committee on Judiciary

January 20, 1993

Page 2

 

Senator James stated the committee would meet each Monday, Wednesday and Friday, beginning promptly at 1:30 p.m.  He indicated if additional meetings became necessary because of the large number of bills to be heard, evening meetings would be scheduled.  The chairman said he would attempt to conclude Friday meetings by 3:30, in order to accommodate those who would be returning to Las Vegas.

 

Senator James stated that although he would attempt to be as accommodating as possible to those who appear before the committee, there would be occasions when he would have to limit testimony because of time constraints.  He suggested the senators may wish to direct additional questions to those who have testified outside the meeting.  The chairman also asked the committee members to extend every courtesy to the people who testify and asked that it be a "rule of the committee."

 

The chairman advised the committee regarding meetings in Las Vegas during the adjournment in February and indicated they would meet three times each week.  He said he is coordinating with Assemblyman Sader regarding bills of particular interest to the people of Las Vegas, which can be scheduled during that time.  Senator James indicated the only committee member who could not be present in Las Vegas was Senator Jacobsen, due to his seat on the Senate Committee on Finance.  He stated no action would be taken on bills heard in Las Vegas, until the committee was together in Carson City.

 

Senator James welcomed the members of the public in attendance, and asked that all guests remember to "sign in."  He indicated written testimony would be helpful and said copies should be provided for each member of the committee, as well as the committee secretary.

 

The chairman advised the committee members that minute books would be available in his office, and if any member desired to maintain a book, he or she should make a specific request to the committee secretary.

 

Senator James indicated he would select subcommittees to meet on subjects that are "particularly complex" or of peculiar interest.  He said he would appoint subcommittees on an ad hoc basis, and those subcommittees would report back to the committee as a whole.  The chairman said Dennis Neilander would prepare a floor statement for each bill passed from the committee to the floor of the Senate.  He indicated he would assign the bills evenly to committee members for presentation on General File. 

 

The chairman stated there will be joint hearings with the Assembly Committee on Judiciary on subjects upon which a large number of bills are drafted.

 

 

Senator James asked the committee members to advise him if they planned to change any vote between the time of committee action and action on the floor.  He said he would "assume that the members of this committee would vote consistently with their committee vote,"  unless he was advised otherwise.

 

The chairman indicated there were two bill draft requests (BDRs) ready for committee introduction. 

 

BDR 39-467:Confers powers of peace officers upon certain employees of mental hygiene and mental retardation division of the department of human resources. 

 

BDR 3-820:  Provides governmental immunity for torts arising out of uninvited use of unimproved public land.

 

 

      SENATOR ADLER MOVED TO ADOPT BDR 39-467 and BDR 3-820 FOR COMMITTEE INTRODUCTION.

 

      SENATOR McGINNESS SECONDED THE MOTION.

 

      THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.

 

      * * * * *

 

Senator James reminded the members of the press and the public attending the meeting, that "when we agree to committee introduction of a bill, that does not necessarily signify committee or any member's support of that bill," but is done as an accommodation. 

 

Senator Adler stated that members of Mothers Against Drunk Drivers met independently with the chairman and several members of the committee, regarding their concerns with Nevada Revised Statute (NRS) 48.3792, providing for administration of the "305 Program," which was passed during the 1991 session.  He said the program, which provides for an alternative to incarceration for an alcohol offender, has "been working extremely well in a lot of ways."  He said the offender would wear an ankle bracelet to indicate his whereabouts, and be under "intense supervision."  In addition, the offender must blow into a Breathalyzer four times each day and cannot drive an automobile.  However, one matter that has come up in discussions with the director of the Department of Parole and Probation, and Nancy Tiffany, who is in charge of the program, is the language regarding placement of individuals into the program.  Specifically, there is a phrase which normally appears in a typical parole and probation statute which states:  "The department may exclude somebody from the program who is a threat to public safety."  Senator Adler said that language does not appear in the legislation passed in 1991.  He said this has the effect of allowing placement of someone in the program, "even though they are a threat to public safety."  The senator indicated he has requested a bill draft to add the language. 

 

Senator James indicated he would accept a motion to have a committee BDR prepared to handle the addition of the language set forth by Senator Adler. 

 

      SENATOR SHAFFER MOVED TO REQUEST A COMMITTEE BDR BE DRAFTED TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL LANGUAGE TO NRS 48.3792.

 

      SENATOR SMITH SECONDED THE MOTION.

 

      THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.

 

Senator James asked for public comment regarding any issues discussed by the committee during the first portion of the meeting, but there was none.

 

Dennis Neilander, Senior Research Analyst, Research Division, Legislative Counsel Bureau, presented the Issue Brief, which is attached as Exhibit D to the committee for review.  He stated the brief was divided into four areas, a summary of topics, discussion of measures considered in the last session by the Senate Committee on Judiciary, a summary of issues likely to be considered during this session, and a summary of priority issues in other states, in the judiciary area. 

 

Mr. Neilander indicated there were 241 bills heard by the Senate Committee on Judiciary in the last session.  He said he did not believe the number of bills would be less this session, although the meeting schedule only provided for three days each week.  As was set forth by Senator James, he indicated "there will be a very heavy load."  He reminded the committee that the bills heard last session by the committee dealt with courts, judicial procedures, criminal justice, gaming and corporations.  He pointed out that any bills having to do with the Supreme Court must be done by constitutional amendment.  He indicated that during the last session, the threshold for municipal and justice court cases in controversy was raised from $2,500 to $5,000. 

 

Senator James asked Mr. Neilander what was provided in the Nevada Constitution regarding whether or not a person must be an attorney to serve as a justice or judge.  Mr. Neilander stated the Supreme Court and the district court judges must be attorneys licensed to practice in Nevada, but the justice and municipal courts do not have such requirements.

 

 

SENATE JOINT RESOLUTION 13

of the 65th Session:    Proposes to amend Nevada constitution to clarify and extend jurisdiction of district courts to issue certain extraordinary writs.

 

 

ASSEMBLY BILL 227

of the 66th Session:    Makes various changes relating to post-conviction relief.

 

Mr. Neilander reviewed the discussion in the brief regarding two measures from the 1991 session dealing with the court system, one which would have established an intermediate court of appeals, and one which would provide for the election of the Chief Justice by the state's Supreme Court Justices.  These measures, which were rejected by the voters, are discussed on Exhibit D, page 4.   He indicated S.J.R. 13 of the 65th Session, which amended the Nevada Constitution regarding habeas corpus, was approved.  A companion measure, A.B. 227 of the 66th Session, was contingent upon the voter approval of SJR 13 of the 65th Session, and repealed most of Chapter 177 of NRS, dealing with post-conviction relief, and amended Chapter 34 of NRS.  Mr. Neilander indicated the final result was to create only one avenue to challenge the constitutionality of an incarceration.  He followed by saying the issue may arise in the 1993 Session, since the bill just became effective in January of this year.

 

ASSEMBLY JOINT RESOLUTION 21

of the 66th Session:    Proposes to amend Nevada constitution to extend jurisdiction of commission on judicial discipline.

 

ASSEMBLY JOINT RESOLUTION 22

of the 66th Session:    Proposes to amend Nevada constitution to allow increase in salary of justice of supreme court and district judge during term.

 

Mr. Neilander stated the committee would definitely hear two proposed constitutional amendments, A.J.R. 21 of the 66th Session and A.J.R. 22 of the 66th Session, since they were both adopted in the 1991 Session.

 

Mr. Neilander turned to subject of domestic relations.  He said the major legislation in the last session was the creation of the family court, the clarification of the relationship between the judicial branch and the welfare division's hearing officers regarding the modification of child support awards, and the bill requiring the Nevada State Bar Association to review the child support formula and

 

statutes every four years.  This legislation is more fully set forth on Exhibit D, page 5.

 

Mr. Neilander referred to page 6 of Exhibit D, concerning alternate methods of resolving disputes.  He stated there were a few measures in 1991 that resulted from an interim study, i.e., legislation requiring mandatory arbitration in certain cases, and the creation of "neighborhood justice centers."  Mr. Neilander indicated a BDR has been prepared to amend the neighborhood justice center program.

 

Mr. Neilander turned to the section on criminal justice, but did not discuss the section in detail.   However, he did indicate that from June, 1991 through June, 1999, the prison population in Nevada is expected to double.  He then referred to a publication set forth on page 8, subsection (4) of the brief, and suggested the committee members may want to review that report.

 

SENATE BILL 535 of the

66th Session:           Limits to resort hotels issuance of certain nonrestricted gaming licenses in certain counties.

 

Mr. Neilander referred to the next section of the brief, dealing with gaming.  He indicated there was a "significant amount of information which explains the gaming laws in Nevada."  He suggested the committee review that section on their own.  He stated the measures which were considered by the committee during the last session are listed on page 12 of the brief.  He said the most controversial bill was S.B. 535 of the 66th Session.  He said this bill limits the issuance of nonrestricted gaming licenses to resort hotels only, in counties whose population exceeds 100,000.

 

ASSEMBLY BILL 655

of the 66th Session:    Revises law governing corporations and similar organizations.

           

Mr. Neilander indicated the next section in the brief regarded corporations.  He pointed to the extensive background information relating to corporate laws in Nevada.  Mr. Neilander indicated the principal piece of legislation developed in 1991 was A.B. 655 of the 66th Session, which essentially "rewrote the corporate code."  He said it was based upon a study commissioned by the Secretary of State.  He indicated the legislation amended the standard of conduct expected of directors and officers, enacted a business combination statute, consolidated all "non-profits" in one chapter, and provided for the organization of a "limited liability company." 

 

 

 

Mr. Neilander referred to the section IV of the brief, "Selected Issues for the 1991 Legislature."  He said the basis of the list is the bill draft requests which have been received.  He reminded the committee that some of the bills on the BDR list "may never be introduced."  Mr. Neilander referred to the interim study regarding child and family services and indicated the prime issue was adoption, specifically allowing adoptive and birth parents to agree to waive confidentiality requirements, and by mutual consent share identifying information.  He pointed out page 17 of the brief, regarding child support, and in particular the paragraph regarding "percentage of income approach."  Mr. Neilander said this issue was presented in two pieces of legislation during the last session, neither of which passed in the Senate.

 

Senator James asked if there were two issues:  "The question of whether you adopt an income shares approach...and if there is a fixed income ... using gross income as we have now, or net income as has been proposed."  Mr. Neilander said "income vs. gross" becomes a bit "dicey," because some states define net income the same way other states define gross income.  He said the Nevada State Bar Association has done a study, which has been provided to each member of the committee, in which they make some recommendations in this regard.

 

Mr. Neilander moved to the section regarding courts and criminal procedure, beginning on page 18 of the brief, and pointed out the various subjects which have been covered in bill draft requests.  In the area of crimes and punishment, set forth in section C, page 19, he indicated the major subject would be "stalking laws."  Mr. Neilander said there were currently 29 states which had enacted stalking laws.  He also referred to the section on sexual harassment and indicated there would be bills regarding this matter. 

 

Mr. Neilander turned to the section regarding corrections, and briefly discussed the areas of "alternatives to incarceration," "costs of incarceration," and "parole and probation,"  all of which will be addressed by legislation this session.  He added the report which was done by the Governor's Blue Ribbon Executive Legislative Panel in 1990, criticized Nevada's parole system, and "essentially was arguing we did not effectively use parole and probation...."

 

The last subject in this section, gaming, was addressed by Mr. Neilander.  He indicated the "expansion of gaming has been a hot issue in almost every state."  He stated a study of gaming in Nevada was done during the last interim, and the impact of legalized gambling in other states was looked at in depth.  Mr. Neilander said the report of the interim study would be released within the next week.  He specifically pointed to the area of foreign gaming, and said there was a recommendation to strengthen the existing foreign gaming act, "which would allow Nevada's Gaming Control Board to hold Nevada gaming licensees accountable for certain activities in other states."  Mr. Neilander spoke to the issue of Indian gaming, and indicated there were a "number of deficiencies in the federal law," and there is "a lot of litigation coming down...."  He said he expects the legislature will be "following this matter closely this session."

 

Senator James asked Mr. Neilander to provide each member of the committee with a copy of the gaming study when it becomes available.

 

Section V of the brief addresses judiciary issues in other states, and Mr. Neilander said it was taken from the National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL) priority issues survey.  He pointed out the most vital issues were prison overcrowding, alternatives to incarceration, sentence enhancements and guidelines.  He indicated the approach set forth in the section on sentencing guidelines was rejected in Nevada in 1986, when there was a study on whether or not to incorporate sentencing guidelines. 

 

Mr. Neilander said the final issue of importance would be judicial selection, i.e., whether or not to select judges on a merit system rather than by election.  Senator James stated a bill had been introduced in this regard, which would require a constitutional amendment. 

 

Senator Smith commended Mr. Neilander for presenting "an extremely valuable report."  Senator James echoed this statement, and indicated it contained very important information.  He thanked Mr. Neilander for his presentation.

 

There being no further questions or comments by members of the committee, Senator James adjourned the meeting. 

 

                  RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:

 

 

 

                                           

                  Marilyn Hofmann,

                  Committee Secretary

 

 

 

APPROVED BY:

 

 

 

 

                                

Senator Mark A. James, Chairman

DATE:                           

??

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Senate Committee on Judiciary

January 20, 1993

Page 1