SENATE BILL REPORT

 

 

                                    SB 5088

 

 

BYSenators Owen, Warnke, Nelson, Barr and Moore

 

 

Including court conferred visitation rights under protection of custodial interference statute.

 

 

Senate Committee on Judiciary

 

      Senate Hearing Date(s):February 3, 1987; February 4, 1987

 

Majority Report:  That Substitute Senate Bill No. 5088 be substituted therefor, and the substitute bill do pass.

      Signed by Senators Talmadge, Chairman; Halsan, Vice Chairman; Bottiger, McCaslin, Moore, Nelson, Newhouse.

 

      Senate Staff:Lidia Mori (786-7461)

                  February 4, 1987

 

 

            AS REPORTED BY COMMITTEE ON JUDICIARY, FEBRUARY 4, 1987

 

BACKGROUND:

 

The requirements of the crime of custodial interference in the second degree are met when a relative of a person takes, entices, retains, detains or conceals that person with the intent to deny access to such person by a parent, guardian, institution, agency or other person who has a lawful right to physical custody.

 

SUMMARY:

 

Custodial interference in the second degree is expanded to include situations in which a parent, guardian, institution, agency or other person has court conferred visitation rights with another person but is intentionally denied access to the person through the actions of that person's relative who takes, entices, retains, detains or conceals the person.

 

 

EFFECT OF PROPOSED SUBSTITUTE:

 

RCW 9A.40.080 provides a complete defense to the charges of custodial interference in the first and second degree.  In order to meet the requirements of that defense, the defendant must be able to establish, by a preponderance of the evidence, that he or she reasonably believed that the child, incompetent person or himself or herself were in imminent physical danger.  In addition, the defendant must be able to establish that he or she sought the assistance of the police, sheriff's office or protective state agencies prior to or within three hours of performing the acts which gave rise to the charges.

 

The defendant must also be able to show that he or she did not change addresses or leave the jurisdiction where the acts occurred and reported his or her name, address and phone number to the police or sheriff's department with the name and address of the child or incompetent person.

 

Fiscal Note:      requested

 

Senate Committee - Testified: Senator Owen; Mike Redman, Washington State Association of Prosecuting Attorneys; Jean Irlbeck, DSHS Revenue; Cindy Musson, Spokane Coalition for Family Rights; Don Smith; Allan Rudberg, United Fathers of America; Bill Jessernig