SF 254 – Consent agreements in domestic abuse and sexual assault cases
SF 285 – Beekeeping and criminal penalties
SSB 1012 – Possession of five grams or less of marijuana
SSB 1018 – Adult guardianships and conservatorships
SSB 1061 – Personal degradation of a dependent adult
SSB 1067 – Reimbursement of witness mileage
SSB 1069 – Qualifications to practice law in Iowa
SSB 1091 – Minor guardianships
SSB 1106 – Municipal tort liability and contracted emergency services
COMMITTEE ACTION:
SF 254 – Consent agreements in domestic abuse and sexual assault cases
SF 254 authorizes a court to issue consent agreements for domestic abuse and sexual assault civil protective orders without a finding of domestic abuse or sexual assault. Iowa law has processes that allow those who have been victims of domestic abuse or sexual assault to obtain a civil protective order if the person proves by a preponderance of the evidence that they were a victim of domestic abuse or sexual assault. The civil protective order commands the individual who committed the abuse or assault to keep away from the victim/petitioner, and the order can contain other requirements that the perpetrator must also fulfill. The law currently requires there be a finding of domestic abuse or sexual assault. This bill provides that consent agreements can be issued in domestic abuse and sexual assault protective order cases without a finding of domestic abuse or sexual assault. It is believed that this will do away with the necessity for hearings in a number of cases, thus avoiding the necessity of extremely difficult situations where the victim and perpetrator are both present.
[2/27: short form (Absent: Hogg, R. Taylor)]
SF 258 – Sexual misconduct by a peace officer
SF 258 makes it a crime for a peace officer to have sexual relations with an individual, including a juvenile, who is in the peace officer’s custody. Current law makes it a crime for a peace officer to have sexual relations with someone who has been placed in a juvenile detention facility, jail or prison, or under the supervision of community based corrections. However, there is no law that prohibits sexual relations with a detained person who has not yet been taken to a facility. The bill makes it a “D” felony, which is punishable by up to five years in prison and a fine.
[2/25: short form (Absent: Hogg, Sweeney, Whiting)]
SF 285 – Beekeeping and criminal penalties
SF 285 clarifies the law relating to criminal penalties for knowingly harming the beekeeping industry in Iowa. No new crime is created in the bill. However, the bill puts the offenses into separate paragraphs to ensure the prohibited behavior is clearly identified and penalized.
[2/25: short form (Absent: Hogg, Sweeney, Whiting)]
SSB 1012 – Possession of five grams or less of marijuana
SSB 1012 reduces the penalty for a first offense possession of marijuana from a serious misdemeanor to a simple misdemeanor if the amount of marijuana is five grams or less. Currently, first possession of marijuana is a serious misdemeanor with a potential penalty of up to six months in jail and/or a fine of up to $1,000. A simple misdemeanor is punishable by up to 30 days in jail and/or a fine of $65 to $625. The penalty for a second or subsequent conviction for possession of marijuana will not change.
[2/25: short form (Absent: Hogg, Sweeney, Whiting)]
SSB 1018 – Adult guardianships and conservatorships
SSB 1018 proposes changes to Iowa’s adult guardianship and conservatorship laws, based on recommendations from the Judicial Branch Guardianship and Conservatorship Task Force that met over a two-year period. More than 70 Iowans from multiple stakeholder groups participated. The bill:
- Requires criminal background checks for proposed guardians and conservators, as well as checks of the dependent adult abuse, sex offender and child abuse registries.
- Requires a conservator surety bond or a similar alternative to protect a person’s assets.
- Requires stronger requirements for court monitoring of guardians and conservators to ensure they perform their duties and that those under guardianship receive needed care and protection.
- Requires a hearing on the proposed guardianship or conservatorship and that a record of the hearing be made.
- Authorizes a “court visitor” to provide the court with information on whether a conservatorship or guardianship is appropriate.
- Requires the court to consider less drastic alternatives that might be appropriate, and requires the court to consider limited guardianships or conservatorships.
[2/27: short form (Absent: Hogg, R. Taylor)]
SSB 1061 – Personal degradation of a dependent adult
SSB 1062 adds a new category, Personal Degradation, to the definition of dependent adult abuse in Chapter 235B. There is currently a definition of dependent adult abuse that includes Personal Degradation in Chapter 235E, relating to caretakers who are staff members of a facility or program that provides care, protection or services to a dependent adult.
SSB 1062 would apply to a caretaker with responsibility for protecting, caring for or custody of a dependent adult as a result of assuming the responsibility voluntarily, by contract, through employment or by court order. Thus, a person who fits that definition of caretaker could commit personal degradation of a dependent adult under this bill. Personal degradation is defined as a “willful act or statement by a caretaker intended to shame, degrade, humiliate or otherwise harm the personal dignity of a dependent adult, or where the caretaker knew or reasonably should have known the act or statement would cause shame, degradation, humiliation, or harm to the personal dignity of a reasonable person.”
This includes taking, transmitting or displaying an electronic image of a dependent adult by a caretaker, where the caretaker’s actions constitute a willful act or statement intended to shame, degrade, humiliate or otherwise harm the personal dignity of the dependent adult, or the caretaker knew or should have known the act would cause shame, degradation, humiliation or harm to the personal dignity of a reasonable person.
Personal degradation does not include taking, transmitting or displaying an electronic image of a dependent adult for reports to law enforcement, the Department of Human Services or another regulatory agency.
[2/27: short form (Absent: Hogg, R. Taylor)]
SSB 1067 – Reimbursement of witness mileage
SSB 1067 is a Judicial Branch proposal that will allow the Supreme Court to set maximum mileage reimbursement fees for out-of-state witnesses who travel to Iowa to testify in court proceedings. Currently, the law allows out-of-state witnesses to be reimbursed at a rate of 10 cents per mile, which is much less than the 45 cents per mile that in-state witnesses receive. This bill will ensure parity for in-state and out-of-state mileage reimbursement for witnesses.
[2/27: short form (Absent: Hogg, R. Taylor)]
SSB 1069 – Qualifications to practice law in Iowa
SSB 1069 is a Judicial Branch proposal that eliminates provisions in the Iowa code that limit attorney admissions to applicants who are residents of Iowa. The U.S. Supreme Court says this requirement is unconstitutional. The bill also authorizes an attorney who has been admitted to practice law in a territory of the U.S. to be admitted to practice law in Iowa without an examination. Thus, an attorney from a U.S. territory would be treated just like an attorney from another other state or the District of Columbia. The bill also says an out-of-state attorney from the District of Columbia or a U.S. territory may apply to appear pro hac vice (“for this event”) in an Iowa case with a local attorney. The local attorney does not need to be a resident of Iowa, but must be admitted to practice law in Iowa.
[2/25: short form (Absent: Hogg, Sweeney, Whiting)]
SSB 1091 – Minor guardianships
SSB 1091 incorporates recommendations from the Judicial Branch Guardianship and Conservatorship Task Force. The bill relates to minor guardianships and aims to ensure that children under guardianship receive needed care and protection and that the rights of parents are respected. The bill:
- Transfers jurisdiction of all minor guardianships to juvenile court from the probate court. The Judicial Branch has a one child/one judge policy in juvenile court, which will provide expertise and understanding of juvenile matters. That does not happen in probate court as judges are regularly covering many types of cases (criminal, civil and probate).
- Requires background checks for proposed guardians.
- Strengthens the reporting requirements for guardians of minors.
- Sets out criteria for establishing juvenile guardianships with parental consent and without parental consent.
[2/27: short form (Absent: Hogg, R. Taylor)]
SSB 1106 – Municipal tort liability and contracted emergency services
SSB 1106 extends immunity from tort liability that is currently granted to municipalities for claims based upon or arising out of an act or omission in connection with emergency response services, to nonprofit corporations providing the same services pursuant to a written contract with a city, county, township or benefitted fire district.
[2/25: short form (Absent: Hogg, Sweeney, Whiting)]
SSB 1159 – Juror pool lists
SSB 1159 is a Judicial Branch proposal based on a recommendation from the Court’s Committee on Jury Selection. In some counties, Iowa juries do not reflect the makeup of the population. To expand juror lists to be more diverse and meet the Constitutional requirement of an impartial jury, the Task Force recommends the office of the State Court Administrator incorporate an Iowa Department of Revenue source list as part of the master jury list. Currently, jury lists are comprised of information from the Department of Transportation driver’s license and ID holder records, as well as voter registration lists.
The bill provides that the director of the Department of Revenue may provide the names, social security numbers, and addresses of taxpayers and their spouses to the State Court Administrator to be used to prepare jury lists. In addition, the bill limits public access to juror information to the year of birth, the resident city and the zip code. Specific address information, phone numbers and birthdate of prospective jurors will be confidential, only disclosed upon court order.
[2/25: short form (No: R. Taylor; Absent: Hogg, Sweeney, Whiting)]