The Committee on Judiciary was called to order at 8:38 a.m., on Tuesday, May 18, 1999. Chairman Bernie Anderson presided in Room 3138 of the Legislative Building, Carson City, Nevada. Exhibit A is the Agenda. Exhibit B is the Guest List. All Exhibits are available and on file at the Research Library of the Legislative Counsel Bureau.

COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT:

Mr. Bernie Anderson, Chairman

Mr. Mark Manendo, Vice Chairman

Ms. Sharron Angle

Mr. Greg Brower

Ms. Barbara Buckley

Mr. John Carpenter

Mr. Jerry Claborn

Mr. Tom Collins

Mr. Don Gustavson

Mrs. Ellen Koivisto

Ms. Sheila Leslie

Ms. Kathy McClain

Mr. Dennis Nolan

Ms. Genie Ohrenschall

STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT:

Following roll call, Chairman Anderson thanked Assemblymen Brower and Manendo for their diligence in reading and reviewing the committee minutes for March 27 and April 2, 6, 14, 20, and 26

ASSEMBLYWOMAN ANGLE SECONDED THE MOTION.

THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.

Chairman Anderson asked a motion to introduce the following Bill Draft Request (BDR):

• BDR 11-1752 – Amends Assembly Bill No. 456 of 1999 Legislative Session (A.B. 688).

Chairman Anderson explained the BDR was a trailer bill. As per the Assembly and Senate Joint Standing Rules, Senator Raggio and Speaker Dini had granted it a waiver. The bill resolved a potential conflict identified by the Governor after A.B. 456 was signed on May 13, 1999. Originally, A.B. 456’s central language was directed towards revising the domestic relation requirements regarding determination of custody and rights of visitation of a parent who was convicted of the first-degree murder of another parent of the child. However, the bill now required clarifying information and additional language to be added to negate the conflict pointed out by the Governor.

ASSEMBLYWOMAN BUCKLEY SECONDED THE MOTION.

THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.

A work session commenced on bills previously considered.

Chairman Anderson informed the committee S.B. 273 was currently on the Chief Clerk’s desk, awaiting a technical amendment. An amendment had been drafted and would make a small, but substantive change to the bill.

Risa B. Lang, Committee Counsel, stated the original amendatory language initiated difficulties with some people. The new amendment changed the word "issue" to "order the issuance of."

Chairman Anderson stated the bill was technically not in the committee’s control; therefore, the committee had no need to vote on the change. He would be taking S.B. 273 off the Chief Clerk’s desk to be amended.

Chairman Anderson noted S.B. 61 had received a conflict notice while on the Chief Clerk’s desk. The bill conflicted with S.B. 439, which had been previously signed by the Governor. He would be taking S.B. 61 off the Chief Clerk’s desk to be amended.

Chairman Anderson stated S.B. 32 was currently on the Chief Clerk’s desk, with the bill awaiting action by Ways and Means. He pointed out Assemblyman Gustavson and Assemblywoman Angle had raised some questions about the bill, mainly concerning proxy voting. Chairman Anderson suggested Ms. Angle direct her questions to Ms. Buckley, who had heard testimony on the bill for three days. He noted everyone should have their concerns adequately addressed and be comfortable with the bill; in this way, it could be voted on without delay when it was finally referred out of Ways and Means.

Assemblyman Collins stated S.B. 451 was on general file and not on the Chief Clerk’s desk as Chairman Anderson had requested. Mr. Collins did not know if the bill placed on General File was a misprint. He referred to the proxy ballots. Homeowners received proxy ballots by mail, but the bill did not state how the ballots were to be returned and publicly counted.

Chairman Anderson answered Mr. Collins’ first concern. S.B. 451 was waiting for a decision by Ways and Means on whether the bill was exempt from the regular rules. He added there was the potential of a fiscal question relative to the operation of the Real Estate Division, with Ways and Means needing to make a determination of that.

Mr. Gustavson mentioned to Chairman Anderson that S.B. 451 was now on the Chief Clerk’s desk.

Chairman Anderson requested Exhibit C to be distributed to the committee members. Exhibit C was a letter sent to Assemblywoman Giunchigliani dated April 30, 1999, from Brenda Erdoes, Legislative Counsel, Legislative Counsel Bureau, which regarded voting by videoconference. Ms. Giunchigliani had requested the Legislative Counsel Bureau research the question.

Chairman Anderson recalled there was one occasion when Mr. Manendo and Mrs. Koivisto were in Las Vegas for legislative business and were videoconferenced to a committee meeting at the Legislature. Conversely, in 1997, Mr. Nolan, who had been in Kansas City for a private conference, had requested to be teleconferenced for a Judiciary meeting. Chairman Anderson had denied the request, pointing out Mr. Nolan had not been on committee business while in Kansas City. However, he had allowed Mr. Nolan to participate in a conference call with the Judiciary committee during the meeting in question.

Assemblyman Nolan stated the request for the resolution came about due to a need to clarify whether the joint standing rules regarding votes during session counted for committee hearings as well. The rules were ambiguous. The drafting of the resolution had been initiated during the current, 70^th session. There had been occasions where legislators from rural areas, as well as Clark County, had been ill and unable to attend committee hearings or floor sessions. Now, however, technology was available to videoconference from a legislator’s home. The question was: If a legislator could not be physically present for a committee vote, could the legislator be videoconferenced? The Legislative Counsel Bureau (LCB) had ruled each committee had the authority to decide whether to require all members to meet together "in one place," or to meet "in one group," with the use of audio-video equipment. This technology could be used to conduct meetings between the legislature and one or more remote locations.

Chairman Anderson agreed the decision was at the discretion of the chairman of the committee. He mentioned if a committee member made a decision to attend a conference, either for personal or professional reasons, they certainly had the right to do so. Of course, those committee members who endeavored to be at the committee meeting certainly had the right to vote at that meeting, too. Moreover, along the same reasoning, if a committee member was at another location for a legislative hearing, arrangements would be made to videoconference a Judiciary Committee hearing for the committee member.

Chairman Anderson noted, for the benefit of the freshman legislators on the committee, that the consideration of Senate amendments to Assembly bills was always a delicate situation. Usually, the chairman, vice chairman and a member of the opposing political party, along with the primary sponsor of the bill, made a decision on an amendment rather than the whole committee.

Chairman Anderson had the secretary distribute a summary of correctional population in the United States, as of 1996 (Exhibit D).

He informed the committee that there would be meetings scheduled for Thursday, May 20, 1999, and Friday, May 21, 1999. They most likely would encompass discussion on two Senate bills: S.B. 45 and S.B. 401. The former was the Attorney General’s High Tech Crime Bill, while the latter legislation increased the number of family court judges for the Eighth Judicial District, which was in Clark County.

Chairman Anderson began discussion on whether to concur or not to concur with the Senate on A.B. 53. The bill, sponsored by Assemblyman Carpenter, concerned unlawful death or bodily harm on school property (Senate Amendment 781). The amendment resolved conflicts with A.B. 221 and A.B. 262. The amendment made the circumstances under which a person was subject to greater penalty for certain prohibited acts at school property uniform throughout the bill. It also revised the language that created an alternative category A felony for a felony offense that resulted in death or substantial bodily harm and Section 3 deemed a murder committee under the same circumstances as first-degree murder. Section 4 qualified the aggravated factor for the death penalty. Section 5 stated the penalty for a juvenile who committed the same crime would be tried as an adult. The amendment also clarified the circumstances when child abuse constituted first degree murder.

Assemblyman Carpenter read the bill with the amendments and was comfortable with the changes. He noted certain language in the amendment was added as a result of concern by one of the justices from the Nevada Supreme Court.

Assemblywoman Buckley, referring to page 3, paragraph (d), said the amendment added a clause for first degree murder. Also, the language specified that not only should the act be committed on the property, but be committed by a person who intended to create a great risk of death or substantial bodily harm. She felt the bill was strengthened by the amendment.

Chairman Anderson said he would concur with the amendment on behalf of the committee.

Chairman Anderson directed discussion to A.B. 166. The bill was sponsored by Assemblyman Hettrick, with three separate amendments. Chairman Anderson pointed out Mr. Hettrick was against the amendments to the bill. He recommended the committee not concur with the Senate.

Amendment 422 stated, "The permitee may not carry a concealed weapon into a public building, public airport or the baggage area on the property of a public school or college. Chairman Anderson stated Mr. Hettrick, as well as himself, had no problems with Amendment 422 per se, but it was redundant, the language already covered by state and federal statutes.

Amendment 856 required a sign to be posted on public buildings, stating concealed weapons were allowed in the building. Senator Titus had proposed the amendment, but Mr. Hettrick was not pleased with it.

Amendment 841 attempted to folded an entire Senate bill into A.B. 166. The amendment would require local police chiefs and sheriffs to be responsible for registering out-of-state carriers of concealed weapons in Nevada. Mr. Anderson stated he had been a co-sponsor of the original concealed weapons agreement and the amendment clearly violated it; carriers of concealed weapons would be held to a higher standard for the permit, which would be closely managed.

Assemblyman Gustavson queried Chairman Anderson if he knew what Mr. Hettrick’s position was concerning Amendment 841. Chairman Anderson responded Mr. Hettrick had been involved in Senator Jacobson’s 1995 concealed weapons bill (S.B. 299 of the 68^th Session) and had requested the Senate Committee on Judiciary not to include Amendment 841.

Chairman Anderson stated he would send the bill to conference committee with all three amendments. He noted it was not his intent to indefinitely postpone the bill. Chairman Anderson would recommend Assemblywoman Koivisto, Angle, and Ohrenschall as members of the first conference committee on A.B. 166 with Mrs. Koivisto designated as chairman.

Chairman Anderson opened the discussion on A.B. 467, a bill sponsored by Assemblymen Goldwater. The assemblyman from District 10 was to have met with the Chairman about the changes proposed in Senate amendment 818 to the bill, but had not done so. The bill required the Nevada Athletic Commission to keep certain information confidential; authorized the Commission to grant limited, restricted or conditional licenses; and authorized the Commission to take disciplinary actions against certain persons.

Assemblywoman Buckley stated the changes were acceptable to her and she had no concerns regarding the amendment.

Chairman Anderson stated he would concur in the Senate on A.B. 467.

Chairman Anderson initiated discussion on A.B. 469, another piece of legislation sponsored by Assemblyman Goldwater, the bill relating to trusts and spendthrift trusts. During discussion with the Chairman, Mr. Goldwater had noted he had no disagreements with Senate Amendment 742 to A.B. 469 and felt its language improved his bill.

Chairman Anderson state he would concur with the Senate on A.B. 469.

Chairman Anderson initiated discussion on A.B. 617. The bill was drafted on behalf of the Washoe County District Attorney’s Office. The bill was concerned nonpayment of child support. It deleted language that prohibited a defendant from claiming the affirmative defense for failure to pay child or spouse support under certain circumstances, including voluntary unemployment and an inability to pay due to excessive spending. The amendment provided that the defendant who asserted the affirmative defense was not considered unable to provide child support or spousal support ordered by the court if such circumstances existed. The amendment also modified the circumstances under which a person may be guilty of a category C felony for failure to pay court ordered support. Under the amendment the defendant must be a second or subsequent violator and the arrears must be over $5,000. The primary purpose of the amendment was to address the issue regarding the burden or proof, which was raised by defense attorneys. As drafted, the bill may have inappropriately placed the burden of proof upon the defendant. The amendment clarified that the procedure governing the burden of proof under A.B. 617 were the same procedures that must be followed for any other defense or prosecution.

Assemblywoman Buckley had no concerns regarding the first amendment. She was concerned with the second amendment, however. It added the following language on page 3, line 31: "a person is guilty of a category C felony if it is a second or subsequent violation and has arrears for nonpayment of child support or spousal support ordered by a court, totaling $5,000 or more." She did not want the word "and" in the amendment. The Assembly Committee on Judiciary previously had the word "or" inserted into the language, as opposed to the Senate, whose version had included the word "and," instead. A defendant would be required to be a two-time looser and owe a substantial amount of money with the Senate version. The Assembly version on page 3, line 31, requires a person either to be a two-time loser or owe a lot of money.

Chairman Anderson stated he would send A.B. 617 to a conference committee, recommending Assemblyman Brower, Manendo, and Assemblywoman Leslie as members, with Mr. Brower appointed as chairman.

Chairman Anderson began the discussion to concur or not to concur with the Senate on A.B. 645. He noted that after the bill left the committee, Ms. Lang had noticed an opportunity to correct some inconsistencies. The amendment also clarified language concerning concealed firearms.

Chairman Anderson stated the bill was a reviser’s bill, needed by the Legislative Counsel Bureau to maintain consistency in the statutes. The committee would concur with the Senate on A.B. 645.

Chairman Anderson distributed copies of A.B. 267, sponsored by Assemblyman Perkins (Exhibit E). It was the final bill on which the committee needed to consider a motion of concur or not concur. The explanations of the amendments were in (Exhibit F). Mr. Perkins had requested the legislation because of the Iverson case, which took place in Primm, Nevada, a year ago. The committee had previously spent one entire day listening to testimony on the bill. It also had been discussed in two work sessions, as well. The Senate had elicited some concern from Mr. Perkins, who had not been pleased with the changes. Chairman Anderson stated he was uncomfortable with the bill. He

felt the full committee should have more time to consider the changes before making a decision.

Assemblywoman Buckley questioned what the Senate’s aims were towards being more consistent with Chapter 432B of NRS, as far as reinstating the definitions of "reasonable cause to believe" and "as soon as reasonably practical." She noted child abuse and elder abuse statutes were part of the language in the bill. She wished to know if the amendatory language suggested by the Senate changed existing law, or if the original language recommended by the Judiciary Committee changed existing law.

Ms. Lang responded the original bill reworded the child abuse and elder abuse laws to make the statutes consistent and to read similarly. Definitions were not need and were removed from the first reprint of the bill.

Chairman Anderson stated the committee did not have to make a decision on the bill immediately. There was time for it to be examined more thoroughly.

Assemblywoman McClain asked if the committee had removed the sections of the bill regarding children, and if so, had the Senate replace those sections. Chairman Anderson noted the Senate had, indeed, replaced those sections. Ms. McClain stated she could not support the Senate amendment.

The committee did not concur with the Senate. Chairman Anderson stated he would send A.B. 267 to a conference committee, and would recommend Assemblywoman McClain, Ohrenschall, and assemblyman Brower as members of the committee, with Mrs. McClain designated as the chairman.

Assemblyman Gustavson mentioned he did not have a problem with the minor amendment to his bill, A.B. 543, of which he as the main sponsor. Chairman Anderson stated the committee would concur with the Senate amendment.

Chairman Anderson informed the members that the committee had two amendments on the Assembly floor for that day’s floor session. He felt the committee was in excellent shape to have its business taken care of well ahead of the 120-day deadline. The committee had a few bills left on which to concur or not to concur with the Senate.

Assemblyman Carpenter asked if the committee had the remainder of the current week, as well as the following week, to concur or not to concur with the Senate. Chairman Anderson stated the committee had only the current week. The conference committee reports had to be completed by May 29, 1999. He recommended the conference committee chairman that they schedule their meeting with their counterparts from the Senate as soon as possible.

With no further business, the committee meeting was adjourned at 9:44 a.m.

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:

Ken Beaton,

Committee Secretary

APPROVED BY:

Assemblyman Bernie Anderson, Chairman

DATE: