SENATE BILL REPORT

ESB 6447

BYSenators Owen, Warnke, Barr, Moore, Nelson and Smith

Strengthening the custodial interference law.

Senate Committee on Law & Justice

Senate Hearing Date(s):February 3, 1988

Majority Report:  Do pass as amended.

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

Senate Staff:Lidia Mori (786-7418)

                  March 3, 1988

AS PASSED SENATE, FEBRUARY 15, 1988

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 includes 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.

Every person convicted of custodial interference in the second degree will be assessed a penalty of $100 in addition to any fine that may ordered by the court.  Unless there is conflict with other laws regarding the distribution of penalty assessments, the court will give the penalty assessment to the treasury of the county or municipality in which the offense occurred.

There is a complete defense to the charge of custodial interference in the first or second degree if the defendant shows, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the purpose of the interference was to protect the child, incompetent person or himself or herself from imminent physical harm and that the belief in that harm was reasonable.  In addition, the defendant must be able to show that the assistance of the police, sheriff's office or protective state agencies was sought prior to or within three hours of performing the acts which gave rise to the charge.  It must also be shown that the defendant 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.

Appropriation:    none

Revenue:    none

Fiscal Note:      requested February 2, 1988

Senate Committee - Testified: Senator Brad Owen; Lonnie Johns Brown, National Organization for Women, Washington Women United; Arnie Whedby, Evergreen Legal Services; Paul Garrett; Del Garrett; Dennis Kerr; Wil Smith; Allan Rudberg, United Fathers and Mothers of America; Paula Mills; Betty Turbey; William Henkel; Jerry Erickson; Robert Michik, Washington Coalition for Family Rights; Kevin Price, Dad's Against Discrimination; Samuel Porter, Robert Radcliffe, United Fathers and Mothers of America; David MacDonald, United Fathers of America

HOUSE AMENDMENT:

Custodial interference in the second degree includes 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 for a period of four hours or more through the actions of that person's relative who takes, entices, retains, detains, or conceals the person.