HOUSE BILL REPORT

ESSB 5014

BYSenate Committee on Law & Justice (originally sponsored by Senators Pullen, Madsen, Hayner and Rasmussen)

Amending provisions regarding police dogs.

House Committe on Judiciary

Majority Report:  Do pass.  (17)

      Signed by Representatives Appelwick, Chair; Crane, Vice Chair; Padden, Ranking Republican Member; Belcher, Brough, Dellwo, Hargrove, Inslee, Locke, R. Meyers, Moyer, H. Myers, Patrick, Schmidt, Scott, D. Sommers and Tate.

House Staff:Bill Perry (786-7123)

AS PASSED HOUSE MARCH 31, 1989

BACKGROUND:

A variety of state laws cover the behavior of dogs in general and police dogs in particular.

Owners of dogs are generally liable for unprovoked injuries caused by their dogs on persons other than trespassers.  However, civil immunity is provided to a police dog handler for actions of the dog under certain circumstances.  The immunity is afforded if the dog is acting in the line of duty and if the handler is acting in accordance with the law enforcement agency's established standards.  A law enforcement "dog handler" is a police officer who has completed training in police dog handling provided by the state criminal justice training commission.

Wilfully killing or injuring a dog without justification and with the intent to deprive the owner of his or her dog, is a gross misdemeanor.  Wilfully harming a police dog that a handler is using in the line of duty is a class C felony.  Acting "wilfully" is the same as acting "knowingly" under the criminal code.

Dangerous dogs are required by state statute to be registered with local animal control authorities, and to be penned or muzzled and leashed at all times. A "dangerous" dog is one that has an official record of inflicting a severe injury on a person without provocation, or of killing a domestic animal, or one that has attacked persons or domestic animals after being identified to the owner as a potentially dangerous dog.  A "potentially dangerous dog" is one that has, without provocation, bitten, attacked, or approached or chased in a menacing fashion, a person or domestic animal.  Local jurisdictions are free to regulate potentially dangerous dogs. Police dogs are expressly exempted only from the portion of the state law that requires dangerous dogs to be registered.

SUMMARY:

A police dog handler using a dog in the line of duty and in good faith is immune from civil liability arising out of the dog's acts. The requirement that the use of the dog be in accordance with established agency standards is eliminated.

The state of mind element of the crime of harming a police dog is changed from "wilful" to "malicious."  Acting maliciously entails acting with evil intent to vex, annoy or injure.  The crime of harming a police dog is extended to situations in which the offender knew or should have known that the dog was a police dog whether or not the dog was actually engaged in police work at the time of the harm.

Police dogs are expressly exempted from all provisions of the state law on dangerous or potentially dangerous dogs.

Fiscal Note:      Not Requested.

House Committee ‑ Testified For:    Charlie Marsh, Washington Council of Police Officers; Jack MacDonald, Washington State Canine Handlers Association.

House Committee - Testified Against:      None Presented.

House Committee - Testimony For:    Police dogs are extremely valuable tools in solving crimes and apprehending offenders.  The dogs are often the targets of threats and attacks.

House Committee - Testimony Against:      None Presented.