SENATE BILL REPORT

 

 

                                    SB 6153

 

 

BYSenators Halsan and Pullen

 

 

Revising provisions relating to police dogs.

 

 

Senate Committee on Law and Justice

 

      Senate Hearing Date(s):January 26, 1988; January 28, 1988

 

Majority Report:  Do pass as amended.

      Signed by Senators Pullen, Chairman; McCaslin, Vice Chairman; Halsan, Hayner, Madsen, Nelson, Newhouse, Niemi, Talmadge.

 

      Senate Staff:Jon Carlson (786-7459)

                  January 28, 1988

 

 

          AS REPORTED BY COMMITTEE ON LAW & JUSTICE, JANUARY 28, 1988

 

BACKGROUND:

 

A "dog handler" is a law enforcement officer who has successfully completed training through the Washington state criminal justice training commission in police dog handling. Current law provides civil immunity for a dog handler using a police dog in the line of duty in accordance with standards established by the law enforcement agency for which the dog handler works.  However, there is no provision which affords the dog handler immunity from criminal liability.

 

Harming a police dog is a Class C felony under present law. There is concern that the statute does not address the situation where a person injures or kills a police dog that is not actually involved in police work at the time of the injury.

 

SUMMARY:

 

A dog handler who uses a police dog in the line of duty in accordance with standards established by the law enforcement agency for which he or she works is immune from criminal liability.

 

A person is guilty of harming a police dog if the person wilfully injures or kills any dog that the person knows or has reason to know is a police dog whether or not the dog is actually engaged in police work at the time of injury or death.

 

It is clarified that police dogs are exempted from the registration procedures under the state's dangerous dog statute.

 

 

SUMMARY OF PROPOSED COMMITTEE AMENDMENT:

 

A person is guilty of harming a police dog if the person maliciously injures or kills any dog that the person knows or has reason to know is a police dog whether or not the dog is actually engaged in police work at the time of injury or death.

 

Appropriation:    none

 

Revenue:    none

 

Fiscal Note:      none requested

 

Senate Committee - Testified: John McDonald, Pierce County Sheriff; John McCroskey, Lewis County Sheriff Department