Senate Standing Committee on Judiciary

Welcome everyone to the Judiciary Committee hearing this Tuesday morning, 9:45. We do have a two minute time limit on testimony both on Zoom and in person and but if you can hang around for questions afterwards, that'd be great because we often do have them.

If we have a catastrophic technical crash on the Zoom side, we'll try again on Friday at 10am, Friday at 10am. Hopefully that won't happen.

Okay, first up on the agenda today is HB 103. This changes the age for which individuals are eligible for life without parole sentences from 18 years of age or older to 21 years.

First up on 103, HB 103, Starship Forester for Office of the Public Defender in support. Next is Daniel Hugo for Department of the Prosecuting Attorney, City and County in opposition. Next is Frank Schultz, in opposition. Gregory Scasian - Sacian, sorry - on Zoom.

He's not present on Zoom, Chair.

Also in opposition. And we have Michael Older in support. That's everyone who signed up on HB 103. Does anyone else, anyone else wish to testify on HB 103? Seeing none, Members no one to ask questions of so we'll go and move on to HB 111.

This authorizes civil claims to be made against a person, business, business owner or person or business operator that profit profits from sexual exploitation or sex trafficking. First up on HB111 is Kelden Walton for the office of Prosecuting Attorney on Maui and I'm sorry, in Hawaii county in support, Amy Zhao in support for EMU Alliance.

Stephen Munkilt for the League of Women Voters. In support, Nadine Ortega for Tagnawa Mutual Aid. In support, Isis Usborne for Sex Worker Outreach Project Hawaii. In opposition, Frank Schultz in support. Dara Carlin in support and Alice in support. That's everyone who signed up on HB 111. Would anyone else like to testify in HB 111?

If not, we'll move on to the next Bill, HB 132. This amends the Department of the Attorney General's pilot project for state initiated expungement process of arrest records concerning promoting a detrimental drug on the third degree to include the possession of any Schedule 5 substance in any amount.

First up on 132 is Sonny Ganaden for the Office of Public Defender. Good morning.

Good morning. Sonny Gananden, Deputy Public Defender. Good morning Chair, Vice Chair. The Office of Public Defender had an opportunity to work with several other Members of government, including the Judiciary and the Office of the Attorney General to do several expungement clinics over the last summer. They were pretty successful.

We put the numbers that we had in our testimony. We processed 119 cases, worked with 80 individuals regarding prospective expungement, submitted 72. That's just the Waianae one. The Waimanala one we processed 42 individuals and submitted 41 of those individuals for expungement.

Not only did we do that, we had the opportunity to work with people and talk to them about what is the content of their criminal record, how to apply for jobs. This is important work. A lot of people have the opportunity to get their records cleared and move on with their lives.

We think that there's unnecessary administrative burdens, and this is an opportunity to clear them up. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Next up is Hawaii Correctional System Oversight Commission in support. Next is Carrie Ann Shirota for ACLU of Hawaii on Zoom.

Not present on Zoom Chair.

Also in support, Kat Brady testifying for Community Alliance on Prisons. Good morning.

Good morning Committee. Kat Brady testifying in strong support of this measure for Community Alliance on Prisons. So now Hawaii is part of a pilot project that's going to take six months with six other states.

And this is really important because having a criminal record just totally derails your life. So we really think this is an important, important Bill. Thank you for hearing.

Thank you. Next up is Colleen Roast Panick in support, Carla Allison in support, Frank Schultz in opposition - sorry.

That's everybody who signed up on HB 132. Does anyone else wish to testify on HB 132? Seeing none. Members, questions? For Mr. Gananen, maybe?

In your read of the Bill, what additional substances would be eligible for expungements under the Bill and schedule - all Schedule Five, but what does that include?

I'd have to re-refer.

Okay, no problem.

I can check in later in the day.

No, it's all right. And I had one other question. Approximately how many arrests for the additional substances are potentially eligible in Hawaii County? Do you know?

No.

Anybody have that information? How many people that would affect in Hawaii County? Yeah, sure. Come on up.

Phil Higdon from the Hawaii Criminal Justice Data Center. Not, not very many. Handful, maybe. I don't have the numbers off, but we ran them, so less than probably 20, I would say. But I can get you the exact number.

That's fine. Ballpark's fine.

And we're talking about codeine as well. I know that that is one is from the Schedule Four.

Schedule Four or Schedule Five?

Schedule Five. I'm sorry.

Okay, so codeine is the only one that you're specifically aware of that's Schedule Five.

That I'm specifically aware. I'll find out for you.

Okay, I appreciate it. Other questions, Members? If not, let's go ahead and move on to the next bill. This is HB145. This authorizes the wide Criminal Justice Data center to transmit all expungement orders to the Judiciary to affect the purposes of Act 159 from 2023. First up on 145 is Phil Higdon, Administrator Y Criminal Justice Data Center.

I believe.

Morning, Chair, Vice Chair and Committee Members. My name is Phil Higdon, Administrator of the Hawaii Criminal Justice Data Center. The Department supports this bill. We've provided written testimony. We believe that the current draft of this bill has and House Draft 1 has addressed any concerns. I'll be happy to answer any questions. That you may have.

Okay, thank you. Thank you. Next up is Michelle Acosta for the Judiciary.

Good morning.

Good morning. Good morning. Chair, Vice Chair and Members of the Committee. Michelle Acosta here on behalf of Judiciary. We're a strong support of HB145, HD1. As Deputy Public Defender Gannon expressed. We are committed to to the expungement.

Had participated with Attorney Generalist's office as well as the volunteer attorneys from the Public Defender's office and the expungement clinics that occurred in recent months. We are prepared to receive the expungement orders from HCJDC. But we do request that these the amendments in HD1 be passed in order for us to move forward with the Act 159. Great.

Thank you. Next up is Sonny Ganaden for Public Defender.

Good morning again. Morning again, Deputy Public Defender. Of course, we are in support of this bill. We support the amendment as suggested by the Judiciary. We'd also like to show our appreciation for the judges that actually showed up to these clinics.

Ordinarily, you don't see judges out in the wild, but they came on a Saturday and spent their time to process these documents because that's how much they care about it. This is an administrative burden. It's unnecessary. It's time we clear it up. Thank you.

Thank you. Next up is Carrie Ann Schroader for the ACLU of Hawaii. Maybe on zoom.

Sorry, not present on Zoom.

Chair in support. Next, Kat Brady for Community alliance on Prisons. Morning again.

Good morning again, Committee. Thank you so much for hearing this bill. We're in strong support.

Okay, thank you. Next is Carl Allison in support and Frank Schultz in opposition. That's everybody who signed up for HB 145. Does anyone else wish to testify in HB 145 Members. Questions. I do have a question for Judiciary Judge Acosta. zero, I'm sorry I gave you, I gave you a pay raise. Sorry about that. I should know.

I've confirmed like the last, helped confirm like the last 40 judges, but I don't remember everybody. Anyway, my question can you describe in detail a little some more detail the steps the judiciary is taking to enable implementation of this bill to address the multiple case and multiple defendant situations?

I know we had a discussion about this when we heard the Senate Bill, but just want to see where you're, where we're at.

We have, we acknowledge the discussion we had when this bill came through on the Senate version. We are looking on a technological solution how that feasibility is to block a search for a defendant in a multi defendant case. That research is ongoing. We've had discussions and our IT Department Director is here as well.

If you wanted some technical, more technical details about that. But we have been researching that so it would address the multi defendant situation. However, we are not able to address the multi count.

So for example, if a defendant has a multi count, five charges and two charges are dismissed and eligible for expungement, those cases would not be addressed by this solution of blocking a party from, from being searched if they were multi defendant.

Okay, so, so with the current technology, you think you'll be able to block the one defendant off a multi defendant case number?

So we would not. It's, it's. The technology is not there yet. We've been researching it, so we believe that conceptually that can be done. I don't have an estimate right now how long that would take or how.

But then when you have a single defendant with multiple charges, you're saying that's a more difficult problem?

It would be a more difficult problem because that would require a major overhaul of our system. We had to do be careful as to how that may impact the functionality of our system and it's the case management system.

So we, so is that the goal is to make it so you can expunge them all or are you trying to just.

I think the desire is to be able to, to seal those cases where there are expungement orders of arrests. Again, I don't have, while we are doing the research, I, I don't have, unfortunately, the estimated time or the cost to meet that ultimate goal.

Okay, well that, that's, I would encourage you to figure out. I mean technically, technically I'm sure it's possible, but the question is how much it cost? How much does it, how much does it Cost and how long will it take and that sort of thing. So I guess I would encourage you to go ahead and.

And you know, if it ends up being a big dollar amount, then we'll have to decide what we're going to do. But please do move ahead and figure out what it would take. Okay, thank you. Numerous other questions. If not thank you. We're going to move on to the next bill which is HB369.

It's relating to campaign contributions and amend Section 11364 to provide that an excess contribution of more than $100 in cash aggregate from a single person during election period to a candidate, candidate Committee or Non Candidate Committee shall ste the Hawaii Election Campaign Fund.

If not return the TRE within 30 days which by the way is the same rule for all other contributions. First up is Kristen Izumi Natal Executive Director for Campaign Spending Commission. Good morning.

Morning. Morning. Morning. Chair, Vice Chair, Members. This is a Kristen Izumi native Director Campaign Spending Commission. This is a campaign spending Commission bill. Written testimony in support.

As Chair Rhodes has informed you, it is really a housekeeping measure as a result of last session where there was a prohibition of how much cash can be accepted within a election period.

So this bill is merely requiring that any excess contribution that is not returned to the contributor within 30 days that it issues to the Hawaii Election Campaign Fund because it just doesn't make sense that a Committee can keep that excess amount. I'm available if you have any questions but thank you.

Thank you very much. Next up is Bep Shapiro for League of Women Voters. In support, Master Shelby Pikachu Billionaire for Ohana Unity Party and Kingdom of the Hawaiian Islands. On Zoom maybe.

Not present on Zoom, Chair.

In support, Frank Schultz in opposition. And that's everybody who signed up on HB 369. Would anyone else like to testify in HB 369? Seeing non Members questions? I don't have any either. Let's go ahead and move on to the next bill which is HB 408.

It extends the deadline to register to vote by mail from 30 to 10 days prior to a primary or General election. Repeals absolute language regarding permanent absentee ballots. First up on 408 is Scott Nago, Office of Elections. Good morning.

Chair, Vice Chair, Members of the Committee. Thank you for the opportunity to testify and support. This is a housekeeping measure that so we already have a 10 day deadline but there's parts of the statute where it still refers to a 30 day deadline and this just makes it consistent not be available to answer any questions. Thank you.

Thank you. Next up is Bronson Silver for the Democratic Party of Hawaii and support Amy Monk in support Marsha Kimball in support Jody Robinson and support Michael Older and support Frank Schultz and support. That's everybody who signed up on HB 408. Would anyone else like to testify in HB 408? Seeing none.

Members questions, let's go ahead and move on to the next Bill, HB 1001. This makes General Fund appropriations for fiscals 25-26 and 26-27 to Fund the establish a settlement of claims related to the Maui wildfires. Establishes the Maui Wildfire Settlement Trust Fund to be administered by the Attorney General.

First up on 1001 is Randall Nishiyama, Deputy Attorney General. zero, you're here. Good morning.

Morning. Ian Robertson, Deputy Attorney General here for Randall Nishiyama. To summarize, we've submitted testimony in support of this bill and suggesting appropriation amounts for the for the blanks. Thank you.

Thank you. Next we have Alice Lee, Chair of the Maui County Council in support. Tom Yamachika for Tax foundation of Hawaii on Zoom. Good morning.

Morning. Chair, Vice Chair, Members of the Committee, Tom Yamachika from Tax Foundation. We will stand on a written testimony and be available for questions.

Thank you very much. Next is Shelby Picachu, Billionaire for Ohana Unity Party and Kingdom of the Hawaiian Islands. Also possibly on Zoom.

Not present on Zoom, Chair.

He is in support as well. That's everybody who signed up on HB1001. Does anyone else wish to testify on HB1001? See now Members questions. Okay, let's move on to HB 1175. Removes language specifying that an appeal from the Tax Appeal Court be filed with the Tax Appeal Court.

Allows an appeal from the Tax Appeal Court to be filed within 30 days of entry of a final judgment. First up on 1175 is Tom Yamachika again for Tax foundation of Hawaii. Morning again.

Morning, Chair, Vice Chairman of the Committee, Tom Yamachika for Tax Foundation of Hawaii. This bill seeks to resolve a procedural trap that was occasioned as a result of differences in the statute allowing appeals from a tax appeal court as opposed to any other circuit court.

And because of this difference, there was actually a case in which a litigant appealed from the wrong order. And this is a former Supreme Court Justice. So, you know, somebody not inexperienced at this.

So this bill would allow an appeal for from either the final judgment or from the the order recognized in Alfred Versus City and County Honolulu. And it would solve the Procedural trap. I'd be happy to answer any questions. Thank you very much.

Thank you. Next up we have Frank Schultz in support. And that's it. Does anyone else wish to testify in HB 1175? See none numbers questions. If not, let's go ahead and move on to the next bill, HB386. This conforms fentanyl to the possession offenses offense thresholds for methamphetamine, heroin, morphine and cocaine.

First up on 386 is Mike Lambert for Department of Law Enforcement. In support, Keljan Walchin, prosecuting attorney for Hawaii County. In support, Daniel Hugo for prosecuting attorney in Sinning County. Also in support, Jerome Pocaro for Honolulu Police Department. On Zoom.

Maybe not present on Zoom. Chair.

In support Shelby Kachu, billionaire for Ohana Unity Party and Kingdom of the Hawaiian Islands. Possibly on Zoom.

Also not present on Zoom.

He's in support. Frank Schultz also in support. That's everybody who signed up on HB 386 to send an Altuish to testify in HB 386. Signal Members questions. Okay, moving on. HB 134. This requires the Chief Election Officer to provide a system for the electronic filing of nomination papers. First up on 134 is Scott Nago for office.

Okay, thank you. Bronson Silva and support Brent. Brett Colbus on Zoom. Yes, go ahead. Morning.

Good morning Chair Rhodes Committee Members, my name is Brett colbus. I'm a 26 year Navy veteran. I live in Eva Beach. I oppose HB 134.

While I understand the intent to modernize the nomination process, I have serious concerns about the security and integrity of an electronic filing system as well as the verification of the required signatures of properly registered voters qualified to vote for the for the candidates.

We already have a partial electronic filing system candidates may use to generate the nomination paperwork to print for collecting signatures. While our current system, though not perfect, it does provide a tangible and verifiable record of candidate nominations.

Furthermore, the appropriation of funds for this system seems unwise given the current economic climate and other pressing needs of our state. I urge the Committee to vote against HB134. Mahalo for your time and consideration.

Thanks very much. Next up is Shelby Pikachu Billionaire for Ohana Unity Party and Kingdom of the Hawaiian Islands. Maybe on Zoom.

Not present on Zoom, Chair.

In support Alice Abalanida in support. Frank Schultz in support. And that's everybody who signed up to testify in HB 134.

Anyone else wish to testify in HB 134 seeing none Members, questions. I have a question for Mr. Nago. I think your testimony said that you would like to charge an extra fee. For.

Filing in this manner. So this would be the, the fee that would be used because would be assessed for credit card charges. The reason why we're asking that it be in the law is because our law specifically says that the filing fee is $250 or $25 discounted filing fee.

Absent of something that clarifies this, we don't know if we could charge that fee to pass that fee on to the candidate. So why do we want to pass the fee on? Because then we would have to eat the cost or it would have to come out of the $250 filing fee.

So we don't have this situation in any other. There's nothing else that's filed electronically where we take money that gets a fee charge to it.

There's a fee charge but the fee isn't specifically set out in statute like the candidate filing fee is.

Oh, so you can adjust it?

Yes.

Okay. I mean because to me it seems like it would be important if you're going to go this route that it should just be the same as filing any other way because otherwise people will probably try to skip the fee and come in anyway. Which I think probably costs. I mean it's not a.

I think. It'S for convenience purposes. It just depends on if the vote. If a candidate wants to come in and not pay the fee or pay the fee. It's the same with real property tax. You can go online and charge. Or your automotive registration.

You can charge it, pay the convenience fee or you can mail in a check.

I was thinking of it the other way around. So when, when candidate Carl Rhodes comes into your office and spends. I don't know, it usually takes a while. Isn't. Doesn't that take, isn't that actually use more of your resources than having to having it all electronic?

No, it depends on the system we have because we would still have to verify the signatures. It's just. Would we have to do it while the candidate's waiting or would we do it when the. Before the candidate, I mean when the candidate's not there.

Okay. All right, fair enough. Other questions, Members? If not, thank you very much. Someone has any objections, we'll go ahead and move into decision making. Hearing None. Let's go back to HB103. This changes the age for which individuals are eligible for life without parole. Sentences from 18 years or older to 21 years. Or older.

The recommendation here is to pass with some amendments. You'll discover at the end that they're quite similar to what we passed out with the. The SB. We'll create a new statute to Chapter 706 to state that no one under the age of 21 can be sentenced to a term of life without parole.

And this prohibition will apply to all sentencing laws, not just specific ones mentioned here. Will delete sections 23 and 4 of the Bill that propose amendments to those specific sentencing statutes Will define emerging adult defendant as a person convicted of a crime who is over 18 but less than 21.

And in the Committee report I'd like to state that the Bill is not intended to prohibit the sentencing of defendants to life imprisonment with. With. With the pop. Excuse me. Not intended to prohibit the sentencing of defendants to life with the possibility of parole or potentially lengthy minimum term of imprisonment.

Imprisonment for defendants between the ages of 18 and 21. Questions or concerns? Seeing none.

Vice Chair Gabbard on HB103. The recommendations to pass with amendments. Chair Rhodes. Vice Chair Wood. Size. Senator Chang. Aye. Senator sanbona Ventura. Senator Awa. No. Any measure passes.

Thank you. Next up is HB111. This authorizes civil claims to be made against a person, business, business owner or business operator that profits from sexual exploit or civil sex trafficking. We're not quite. Not quite ready to make a recommendation on this one. There's still some questions that I think need to be answered.

So we're going to Defer this until March 18th, which is a week from today at 10am in this room. 016. Okay, moving on to HB132.

This amends the Department of the Attorney General's pilot project for a state initiated expungement process of arrest records concerning promoting a dangerous drug in the third degree to include the possession of any Schedule 5 substance in any amount. And this does just apply to Hawaii county at the moment. Excuse me. This one.

I suggest that we pass unamended questions or concerns. If not.

Vice Chair on HB132HD1 recommendations to pass unamended of the Members present any nos or reservations hearing none of the measures adopted.

Thank you. Next up is HB 145 authorized at the White Criminal Justice Data center to transmit all expungement orders to the judiciary to affect the purposes of Act 159 session all of 2023. The recommendation here is to pass unamended amended.

But I'd like to put in some Committee report language saying that it's Our understanding that the judiciary is attempting to solve the problems where the. The scenarios where there are multiple defendants or multiple charges and not all of them are expunged. So highlighting the conversation we had in testimony, questions or concerns, if not Senator.

Gabbard recommendation in HB145HD1s to pass. Unamended. Any no votes or reservations hearing? None. The measure passed.

Thank you. Next up is HB369. This amends Section 311364 to provide an excess contribution of more than $100 in cash in the aggregate to the state after 30 days. Recommendation here is to pass as is. Questions or concerns, if not.

Vice Chair recommendation on HB369 pass as is. Any no votes or reservations? No. Only one. No vote for Senator Awa. The measures adopted.

Thank you. Next up is HB 408. This extends the deadline to registered vote by mail from 30 to 10 days prior to primary General, which conforms it with that same practice and other parts of the statute. Recommendations to pass as is, questions or.

Concerns, if not Senator Gabbard Recommendation on HP408 passed. Unamended. Any no votes or reservations? No. 1. No vote for Senator while the measures adopted.

Thank you. Next up is HP 1001. This makes General appropriations for fiscal 25, 26, 26, 27 to fund the settlement of claims related to Maui wildfires and establishes the Maui Wildfires Settlement Trust Fund. Recommendation is to pass with some amendments. Will change the preamble to reflect the Supreme Court's decision in the matter of petition for coordination in Maui fire cases.

And there are some SMA, some technical amendments as well. Questions or concerns? Comment? Sorry? Comment? zero, yes, please go ahead.

I'm sorry. I misunderstood. Thanks, sir. Churros. As you know, in the Senate, we've been able to put our party differences aside to work on other people's problems to a degree.

Ordinarily, I'd vote yes for this Bill, but what I found out about House leadership this past week behind closed doors makes me uncomfortable with putting my name on anything that they put out. So this will be a no.

Okay? Okay. Thank you.

Other questions or concerns if Not Vice. Chair, HB1001 HT1 recommendations to pass with amendments and notes or reservations.

No.

The measure passes.

Thank you. Next up is HB 1175. Removes the language specifying that an appeal from the Tax Appeal Court be filed with the Tax Appeal Court. Allows an appeal from the Tax Appeal Court to be filed within 30 days of entry of a final judgment. Recognition.

Recommendations to pass as is questions or concerns if not Senator Gabard on HB.

1175 recommendations to pass unamended any no votes or reservations hearing none the measure.

Passes thank you next up is HB386 this conforms fentanyl to the possession offenses thresholds for methamphetamine, heroin, morphine and cocaine Recommendation is to pass as is questions or concerns seeing None Senator Gabard HB386.

Recommendations to pass as is any no votes or reservations no no vote for Senator Awa the measure passes thanks Next.

Up is HB 134 this requires the Chief Election Officer provide a system for the electronic filing of nomination papers Recommendation here is to pass with amendments to make it clear that we that the electronic filing would incur no additional charge Questions or concerns if not Senator Gabbard.

Recommendations to pass HD 134 HD 1 with amendments any no votes or reservations no no vote for Senator wa the.

Measures adopted thank you very much thanks everyone for being here that concludes our business we're adjourning.