►
From YouTube: 3/23/2021 - Assembly Committee on Judiciary
Description
For agenda and additional meeting information: https://www.leg.state.nv.us/App/Calendar/A/
Videos of archived meetings are made available as a courtesy of the Nevada Legislature.
The videos are part of an ongoing effort to keep the public informed of and involved in the legislative process.
All videos are intended for personal use and are not intended for use in commercial ventures or political campaigns.
Closed Captioning is Auto-Generated and is not an official representation of what is being spoken.
D
E
F
G
H
I
A
Here
I
believe
assemblywoman
krasner
has
joined
us
as
well.
So
could
you
please
mark
her
as
present?
That
means
we
have
everybody
here
this
morning
we
do
have
a
quorum.
Thank
you,
members
for
being
here
as
close
to
eight
o'clock
as
possible
and
welcome
to
the
committee
welcome
to
those
who
are
joining
us
on
the
zoom
as
guests
and
welcome
to
those
who
may
be
watching
on
the
legislature's
website
or
on
the
youtube
channel
before
we
get
started
on
this
morning's
agenda.
Just
a
few
quick
housekeeping
matters
for
those
of
you
on
the
zoom.
A
Could
you
please
mute
if
you're,
not
speaking,
and
every
time
you
speak?
If
you
are
a
presenter
today,
could
you
make
sure
to
please
state
your
name,
especially
if
you
are
responding
to
a
question
that
helps
our
committee
secretaries
with
the
minutes?
We
do
expect
courtesy
and
respect
in
our
interactions
with
one
another.
A
We
don't
always
agree
on
policy,
that's
perfectly
acceptable,
but
we
need
to
make
sure
we're
being
respectful
of
each
other
of
the
legislative
process
and
and
of
most
importantly,
our
hard-working
staff
and
then
finally,
many
members
are
using
multiple
devices
to
access.
This
meeting
laptops,
desktops
extra
monitors,
iphone
iphones
ipads,
so
please
don't
see
it
as
a
sign
of
disrespect.
If
members
appear
to
be
looking
away
during
the
committee
meeting,
they
are
most
likely
accessing
exhibits
or
notes
on
the
bills.
A
With
that
behind
us
members,
we
have
two
bills
on
the
agenda.
Today
we
are
going
to
take
those
two
bills
in
order
as
listed
on
the
agenda
at
this
time,
I'm
going
to
open
the
hearing
on
assembly
bill
318
assembly
bill
318
revises
various
various
provisions
relating
to
estates
and
before
we
get
started
with
the
presentation
I'll.
Let
members
and
members
of
the
public
know
that
there
is
an
amendment
that
you
can
find
on
nellis
under
the
exhibit
tab,
and
I
believe,
that's
a
friendly
amendment
so
to
present
assembly
bill
318.
A
This
morning
we
have
our
own
assemblywoman
marzola,
and
I
know
she
has
some
guests
with
her
to
help
us
get
through
this
trust
and
estates
bill
so
assemblywoman.
If
you
want
to
go
ahead
and
get
started,
let
us
know
who
will
be
presenting
with
you.
We'll
give
you
a
chance
to
make
that
presentation.
Then
we'll
have
some
questions.
I'm
sure
so
welcome
to
the
assembly,
judiciary,
committee,
virtual
presentation
table
and
please
proceed.
F
Thank
you,
chair
and
members
of
the
committee
for
the
record.
I'm
assemblywoman
elaine
marzola,
representing
assembly
district
21
in
clark
county,
I'm
here
today
to
present
assembly
bill
318
for
your
consideration
with
me
today
are
the
co-chairs
of
the
legislative
committee,
probate
and
trust
section
of
the
nevada
state
bar
alan
freyr
and
mark
noble
both
gentlemen.
Are
experts
in
their
field.
Just
to
give
you
a
little
bit
of
the
background.
F
Nevada
is
at
the
forefront
of
the
estate
interest
to
the
extent.
This
is
because
the
legislature
has
consistently
enacted
cutting-edge
provisions
and
updates
the
bill
before
you
today
also
updates
our
law
as
a
result
of
the
collaborative
work
with
the
legislative
committee
of
the
probate
and
trust
section
for
the
state
bar
assembly
bill
318
primarily
amends
title,
12
wills
and
estates
of
the
sea
and
title
13,
guardianship,
conservatorship
and
trusts
of
the
nevada,
revised
statutes,
which
are
nevada's
laws
pertaining
to
the
administration
of
trust
and
estates.
F
A
Thank
you
so
much
assemblywoman
marzola,
welcome
to
the
committee,
mr
freer,
mr
noble,
would
one
of
you
which
one
of
you
would
like
to
start.
First
with
the
presentation
see
who
unmutes
first,
I
guess.
C
This
is
alan
freer.
I
I'm
unmuting
to
throw
mr
noble
under
the
bus
he's
going
to
start
the
presentation,
he'll
be
doing
a
presentation
of
sections
one
through
26
of
the
bill,
and
then
I
will
be
presenting
on
sections
27
through
44
and
then
addressing
the
friendly
amendment
that
we
circulated
last
evening
and
with
that
I'll
turn
it
over
to
mr
noble.
I
I
I
I
Of
the
nevada
revives
those
statutes
relate
to
the
medicine
initiative
in
nevada.
This
bill
is
intended
to
verify
the
laws
relating
to
trusted
estates.
Adopt
new
laws
related
to
the
forefront
of
the
trust
in
the
state
jurisdictions
in
the
united
states
and
nevada
is
currently
in
the
top
two
or
three.
It
also
will
streamline
the
probate
and
trust
administration
process
provide
efficiencies
while
including
safeguards
to
prevent
abuse,
and
the
laws
will
also
provide
additional
laws.
In
response
to
the
recent
and
ongoing
kelvin.
I
A
I
I
Essentially,
though,
sections
one
and
two
of
the
bill
amends
the
declaratory
relief
statutes
to
provide
relief
or
a
way
to
seek
relief
for
principal
or
agent
of
a
power
of
attorney
section
three
of
the
bill
provides
that
people
are
fiduciaries
that
become
in
temporary
possession
of
property
and
are
selling
it
will
be
exempted
from
the
real
property
disclosure
requirements
set
forth
in
the
nrs
section
15
to
build
men's
nomination
administrator
provisions
to
require
disclosure
of
certain
information
from
a
person's
nominating
personal
representatives
upon
written
requests
to
aid
in
the
investigation.
I
I
I
Some
personal
representatives
acting
they
act
alone,
sections
21
and
26
for
amend
the
attorney's
power
provisions
of
143
in
in
administrations
to
provide
that
they
continue,
acting
as
a
manager
of
a
limited
liability
company
general
partner
of
a
partnership
or
operator
of
unincorporated
business
and
one
other
provision
is
the
21
and
26
section.
22.
Excuse
me:
amends
the
x
parts,
a
provisions
of
143
to
accept
the
public
administrator's
office
from
posting,
a
separate
bond
when
obtaining
a
restraining
order
to
save
taxpayer
funds
in
acquiring
a
separate
bond
sections.
I
C
Thank
you,
chairman
yeager,
vice
chair
nguyen
and
other
members
of
the
committee
I'll
present
sections
27
to
44
of
the
bill
and
discuss
the
conceptual
amendment
provided
last
evening
in
line
with
the
four
objectives.
C
With
respect
to
the
objective
of
streamlined
administration,
the
streamlining
of
administration
continues
to
be
a
mandate
that
we
seek
to
follow
and
it
comports
with
the
general
directive
of
probate
and
trust
statutes
to
ensure
that
administration
is
speedy
and
efficient
with
the
least
cost
to
the
parties.
C
Examples
of
this
in
the
latter
half
of
the
bill
appear
in
section
27
that
permit
the
court
discretion
to
set
aside
an
estate
from
administration
where
you
have
a
will
that
pours
over
into
a
trust,
because
the
administration
of
those
assets
will
occur
in
the
trust,
as
opposed
to
a
more
costly
probate.
Proceeding.
C
Likewise,
changes
to
sections,
40
and
41
of
the
bill
regarding
notice
to
creditors
and
trust
proceedings
will
bring
that
procedure
in
line
with
the
state
procedure,
so
you
don't
have
differing
procedures
depending
on
whether
it's
a
probate
or
trust
proceeding
so
as
to
avoid
confusion
and
provide
uniformity
with
respect
to
clarifications
of
existing
law.
It's
important
that
we
allow
these
clarifications
as
and
I'll
echo
the
comments
of
the
prior
to
presenters.
That
nevada
is
a
top
jurisdiction
and
do
that.
C
We
have
discussions
national
discussions
about
nevada's
laws
compared
to
other
states
and
sometimes
in
those
discussions
they
point
out
some
areas
of
nevada
law
that
need
clarification,
so
examples
of
that
to
afford
uniformity
of
interpretation
appear
in
sections.
28
and
29
28
clarifies
statutory
fees
and
when
those
are
and
that
those
are
per
se
reasonable,
29
cert
provides
for
circumstances
when
an
independent
attorney
is
I
mean,
when
an
attorney
that
is
drafting
a
will,
isn't
considered
an
independent
attorney
for
purposes
of
the
statutory
undue
influence.
C
Section.
30
amends
the
nomination
of
guardianship,
statutes
and
I'll
take
a
minute
because
we're
into
guardianship
territory,
but
presently
there
are
multiple
laws
that
permit
nominations
of
guardians
and
various
documents
and
those
are
found
throughout
the
various
parts
of
the
code
by
bringing
those
references
into
nrs
159.0753.
C
Section
39
clarifies
provisions
and
the
decanting
statutes
as
to
when
a
trustee
has
authority
and
then
lastly,
in
that
kind
of
section
section,
42
of
the
bill
clarifies
circumstances
when
a
divorced
parent
may
represent
a
minor
child
in
trust
in
estate
proceedings
and
it
defaults
over
to
the
parent
that
has
custody
of
the
child
as
to
allowing
such
representation
with
respect
to
tax
law.
C
The
irs
recently
issued
a
revenue
ruling
that
permitted
trust
to
include
a
power
to
reimburse
the
set
lower
for
tax
payments
or
liabilities,
and
so
this
statute
incorporates
that
permitted
federal
tax
law
power
into
nevada
law
additional
protections.
C
You
know,
while
we
try
to
streamline
the
administrative
process,
there
needs
to
be
a
balance
and
providing
protections
to
curtail
abuse
and
protect
beneficiaries
and
creditors
at
the
estate.
In
that
line.
Section
35
is
one
example
of
protections
for
beneficiaries
where
it
requires
a
court
order
before
a
trustee
can
divide
or
combine
trusts
if
the
trust
instrument
doesn't
expressly
grant
that
power.
C
Lastly,
I
do
have
the
amendment
I'd
like
to
talk
about
the
the
conceptual
amendment
we
provided
last
evening.
It
fixes
a
couple
errors
that
were
encountered
when
drafting
the
bill
and
includes
three
provisions
that
were
omitted
from
the
first
printing.
Briefly,
the
amen.
Those
amendments
are
as
follows:
amendment
to
section
19
to
prove
to
provide
for
situations.
C
The
original
part
of
section
19
did
not
have
a
situation
where,
if
documents
weren't
requested
what
the
timing
was
to
turn
over
property
belonging
to
a
state,
so
that
adds
a
provision
where,
if
you
aren't
requesting
additional
documents,
you're
required
to
turn
it
over.
In
10
days,
the
amendment
to
section
31
clarified
language
to
avoid
unintended
tax
consequences,
and
so,
as
I
discussed
that's
in
line
with
the
with
the
revenue
ruling
from
the
irs,
so
we
needed
to
track
that
language.
C
Sections
41
and
39
make
changes
just
to
ensure
that
the
administration
process
occurs
and
includes
the
language
that
was
originally
intended
for
the
bill
section.
The
new
amendments
to
sections
48,
49
and
50
were
amendments
that
were
proposed,
but
not
included
in
the
original
draft.
Real
quickly,
section
48
amends
nrs
139
100
to
provide
similar
notice
provisions
on
initial
hearings
to
require
and
to
enable
the
public
administrator
to
receive
notice
of
those
probate.
C
Petitions
where
the
person
seeking
appointment
is
neither
the
spouse,
heir
or
a
nominee
of
the
spouse
or
heir,
and
that's
designed
to
curtail
potential
abuse.
Likewise,
the
amendment
to
create
a
new
section,
49
changes
a
shall
to
a
may
in
nrs
143
350
to
permit
the
probate
court
discretion
when
it
determines
whether
or
not
to
grant
independent
administration
of
the
states.
And.
Lastly,
the
amendment
to
create
a
new
section
50
adds
an
additional
provision
in
the
sale
of
property
during
independent
administration.
This
is
another
safeguard
statute.
C
When
a
when
an
administration
is
occurring
without
court
supervision
and
a
sale
is
less
than
90
of
the
appraised
value,
the
requirement
would
be
to
obtain
written
consent
from
all
of
the
interested
persons
and
if
such
consent
is
not
provided,
then
the
personal
representative
must
go
through
with
a
judicial
sale
as
opposed
to
an
independent
cell.
With
that
I'll
have
be
happy
to
seed
the
floor
and
answer
any
questions
regarding
the
bill.
A
Thank
you
so
much
mr
freyr,
mr
noble,
mr
noble.
We
had
some
difficulties
with
your
audio
at
portions
of
your
testimony,
but
I
wanted
to
let
committee
members
know
I
I
failed
to
mention
this,
but
for
committee
members,
members
of
the
public
there
is
an
exhibit
under
nellis.
That
is
an
executive
summary
from
the
probate
trust
section
of
the
state
bar
that
does
go
through
the
sections
of
the
bill
and
explain
what
they
do.
A
So,
if
you
were
unable
to
hear
some
of
the
audio
from
mr
noble
and
you're
interested
in
particular
sections,
I
wanted
to
reference
that
for
the
committee.
I
had
a
couple
of
questions
I'll
just
kind
of
start
out
the
gate
with,
and
I
think
mr
noble
the
first
one
is-
is
probably
for
you.
It's
in
section
three
of
the
bill,
which
is
on
page
seven
and
essentially
we're
adding,
I
guess
an
exception
to
subsection
one
about
the
need
to
complete
a
disclosure
form
and
my
question.
I
guess
in
the
new
language
that
we're
adding
there.
A
It
essentially
indicates
that
if
there
is
a
fiduciary
taking
temporary
possession
solely
to
facilitate
the
sale
of
the
property
that
they
don't
have
to
fill
out,
I
guess
the
we'll
call
it.
The
disclosure
form
regarding
residential
property-
and
my
question
was
just
is:
is
that
ex
exception
going
in
there,
because
this
person
just
wouldn't
have
personal
knowledge
adequately
to
be
able
to
fill
out
such
a
disclosure
form.
I
Yes,
it's
because
they
would
be
in
temporary
possession
of
the
property,
they
may
have.
Never
even
lived
in
the
property
or
never
stepped
foot
in
the
property
potentially
could
be
from
out
of
state
a
personal
representative
or
heirs,
and
it
puts
an
undue
burden
on
them
and
it
would
create
a
situation
where
they
would
have
to
spend.
Quite
a
bit
of,
I
would
think
money
on
due
diligence
in
order
to
properly
fill
out
a
disclosure
form
like
that.
A
Thank
you,
mr
noble.
That
certainly
makes
sense
and
was
in
line
with
what
I
anticipated
your
answer
would
be,
mr
freyr.
I
think
the
next
question
is
probably
for
you
and
it's
in
the
new
section
50.
That's
in
the
amendment
of
the
bill
and
I
notice
the
the
language
at
the
bottom.
A
There
indicates
that
if
the
sale
of
real
property
is
is
less
than
90
of
the
appraised
value,
essentially
all
interested
persons
have
to
consent
in
writing
and
must
otherwise
seek
confirmation
of
sale,
and
then
it
references,
nrs
148.060,
and
I
just
wondered
if
you
could
shed
a
little
bit
light
a
little
bit
of
light
on
what
confirmation
of
sale
under
that
statute
means
and
how
that
works
in
the
real
world.
C
One
of
those
is
the
sale
of
real
property,
and
so
section
subsection,
two
of
the
amendment
that
we're
going
to
have
and
I'm
going
to
pull
that
up
real
briefly
subsection
2
of
nrs
143
380
outlines
what
typically
is
required
in
a
normal
probate
sale
process
that
includes
publication
of
notice,
providing
notice
of
how
much
the
broker's
commissions
are
going
to
be
making.
You
know
finding
a
deal,
that's
over
90
percent
and
permitting
the
court
examination
of
the
contract
and
in
an
in
an
informal
probate,
proceeding.
C
That's
not
required,
because
you're
typically
dealing
with
family
members
that
get
along
and
there
aren't
issues
now.
The
one
protection
that
we
wanted
to
apply
is.
If
you
do
fall
under
that
ninety
percent
of
the
appraised
value,
then
you
need
to
get
all
of
the
family
members
involved
or
if
there
are
any
creditors
involved,
and
they
have
to
look
at
the
sale
and
approve
the
sale
price.
If
not,
then
you've
got
to
go
back
to
a
regular
probate
court
sale.
C
Proceeding
wherein
you'd
have
to
provide
publication,
which
then
brings
in
potential
bidders
and
bring
the
court
bring
the
sale
to
the
court
for
approval
during
a
hearing
process.
A
Thank
you,
mr
freyr,
and
if
I
could
just
sort
of
restate
that
to
make
sure
I
understand
it
so
essentially
this
is
kind
of
a
streamlined
procedure
when,
when
you're
not
going
through
the
formal
process,
but
if
it's
going
to
be
a
sale
less
than
90,
if
everyone
doesn't
agree
with
that,
then
it
would
have
to
go
through
that
more
formal
process
where
all
the
sort
of
bells
and
whistles
of
of
the
estate,
the
liquidation
of
the
estate
would
happen.
You're,
absolutely
correct.
A
J
I
I
did
share.
Thank
you.
I
just
have
a
couple
for
either
of
the
presenters,
your
your
presentation
and
the
bill
touches
on
some
issues
with
family
law
and
some
issues
with
guardianship,
and
I
just
want
to
make
sure
I
understand
the
process
that
that,
through
the
state
bar
the
different,
the
different
sections
of
the
bar
do
that
if
you've
come
in
support
of
this
bill,
that
means
that
all
of
the
different
sections
of
the
bar
have
have
vetted
the
bill.
C
Yeah
this
is
alan,
freer.
So
the
the
answer
is
yes,
so
the
state
bar
process,
when,
when
a
section,
gets
approval
to
present
a
state
bar
bill,
what
happens
is
in
july
or
august
of
2020?
C
The
sections
circulate
the
different
bills
bill
taxed
around
between
the
various
sections
of
the
state
bar
including
family
law
and
elder
law
sections.
They
then
have
a
comment
period
to
provide
any
potential
questions
or
concerns,
and
and
whereupon
at
that
point,
there's
a
determination
as
to
whether
or
not
sections
have
problems
with
the
bill.
With
respect
to
this
bill,
it
was
circulated.
C
No
other
sections
had
any
issues
with
it,
and
so
then,
when
we
went
to
the
state
bar,
we,
the
state
bar
unanimously
approved
the
the
text
you
see
before
you
in
the
bill
has
a
section
sponsored
bill.
Just
specifically
with
respect
to
the
family,
long
guardianship,
questions,
I
will
make
a
representation
that
the
the
section
the
change
in
the
guardianship
code
of
159
doesn't
alter,
provide
any
substantive
change
to
the
guardianship
laws.
C
What
it
does
is
simply
denote
where
the
other
sections
of
the
guardian,
where
nominations
of
guardianship
currently
exist
and
can
occur
under
nevada
law
just
so,
there
isn't
ever
an
issue
where
the
court
is
wondering
if
one
nomination
trumps
another
or
one
is
effective
or
not
effective.
It
just
references
that
all
the
various
nevada
law
nominations
of
guardianship
are
recognizable.
J
You
and
then
sure,
if
I
could
have
one
more
question.
J
So
my
my
other
question
has
to
do
with
something
I
noticed
in
section
19
and
frankly
I
I
don't
know
if
it's
in
other
sections,
it
just
didn't
catch
my
attention,
the
the
timeline
there's
a
reference
in
1971
sub
2
to
10
business
days,
and
I'm
I'm
just
wondering
why
the
term
why
it's
business
days
and
not
judicial
days
versus
calendar
days
and
if
that
might
make
things
more
confusing.
J
Because
I
I
don't
know
exactly
what
a
business
day
is,
but
I
know
what
a
judicial
day
is,
and
I
know
what
a
calendar
day
is
so
is
that
intentional?
To
use
the
term
business
days.
C
Alan
freyr,
on
behalf
of
the
probate
and
trust
section,
assemblywoman
coleman,
you
bring
up
a
good
point
that
was
just
a
drafting
choice.
There
wasn't
any
specific
intent
or
reasoning
for
that.
I
would
be
fine,
including
in
as
part
of
the
amendment,
just
changing
that
to
judicial
days
or
you
know,
10
judicial
days
or
14
calendar
days
would
be
similar.
Okay,.
K
Kasama,
sorry,
I
have
to
scroll
that
mouse
from
one
screen
to
the
other.
So
thank
you
chair.
Can
you
I'm
not
an
attorney,
and
I
know
we
have
plenty
of
attorneys
on
on
this
committee,
but
can
you
perhaps
give
a
30
000
foot
level
as
to
this
seems
like
a
lot
of
changes?
I
believe
there
were
changes
in
the
last
session
as
well.
What
what
were
the
biggest
problems
that
we
had
here
that
has
brought
about
all
these
changes.
C
Yeah
alan
freer
on
behalf
of
the
probate
press
section,
let's
start
with
a
little
humor
the
changes
in
this
this
this
sessions
bill
is
about
half
of
what
we've
normally
had
in
the
prior
four
or
five
sessions
that
I've
been
a
co-chair
of
the
committee.
I'm
sure
chairman
yeager
is
very
happy
that
we
have
a
shorter
bill
today,
but
from
the
30
000
foot
view,
this
session
was
different
really
because
of
of
two
issues.
C
The
most
important
meet
of
this
of
this
bill
occurs
in
sections
14
to
19,
and
that
really
was
when
the
pandemic
hit.
We
really
needed
to
shore
up
what
electronic
truss
and
wills
and
electronic
notaries,
because
that's
almost
more
important
is
allowing
this
remote
notarization
of
documents
during
the
pandemic
occur,
and
so
that
that
provides
those
sections
are
the
largest
chunk
or
or
meat
from
a
30
000
view
of
of
the
importance.
C
On
on
on
a
line
in
text
can
have
kind
of
a
cascading
or
domino
effect
on
whether
or
not
it
is
properly
administered
or
whether
or
not
tax
laws
allow
for
recognition
of
an
exemption
or
not,
and
so
most
of
the
other
changes
with
respect
to
that
are
are
kind
of
fine-tuning
changes
just
to
just
to
kind
of
keep.
We've
got
a
good
thing
going.
We've
got
a
good
system
of
laws
going
with
respect
to
professional
states
and,
and
those
fine
tunings
are
just
kind
of
to
keep
us
running.
You
know
at
optimal
efficiency.
K
C
Alan
freyr,
yes,
that's
that's
also
correct.
One
of
the
things
we're
cleaning
up
also
in
terms
of
a
big
chunk,
is
the
notification
provisions
to
the
public
administrator
in
line
with
some
of
the
administration
statutes.
C
Ever
since
we
adopted
the
code,
I
believe
in
1896
from
california,
you've
had
non-family
members
able
to
to
to
seek
appointment,
but
here
because
of
some
of
the
laws,
there
was
kind
of
a
little
mouse
hole
that
was
allowing
for
some
abuse
in
trying
to
find
distressed
properties
and
sell
those
without
the
family
members
really
knowing
full
well
what
was
going
on,
and
so
by
allowing
the
additional
notification
to
the
public
administrator.
A
And
if
we
could
maybe
stay
on
that
topic,
mr
freer,
if
you
had
mentioned
in
your
testimony
that
there
was
a
federal
tax
ruling
that
led
to
some
of
the
drafting
of
this,
and
if
we
could,
maybe
we
could
stay
at
this
30
000
foot
view
and
just
give
us
a
sense
of
what
what
that
federal
tax
issue
was
and
and
what
the
bill
does
to
address.
It.
C
Right
and
and
I'll
I
have
to
give
you
a
30,
000
foot
view,
because
I'm
a
trust
in
the
state
litigator
as
opposed
to
a
tax
attorney,
but
so
we're
talking
about
section
31.
and
in
in
section
31.
What
happened
is
the
irs
came
out
with
a
revenue
ruling
which,
which
essentially
is
a
a
question
where
the
irs
is
receiving
several
inquiries
about
hey?
If
we
give
a
trust
maker,
this
type
of
power
do
we
still
allow
it
to
be
outside
of
his
estate
and
so
what
we're
dealing
with
is
completed
gifts.
C
But
with
that
comes
additional,
what
are
called
retained
powers
and
the
irs
has
been
very
selective
on
which
powers
are
okay
for
that
trust
maker
to
take
and
which
powers
are
not
okay,
and
what
section
31
is
recognizes
is
the
irs
has
said
hey
if
you'll,
if
a
trustee
has
the
power
to
reimburse
taxes
that
the
set
lawyer
has
incurred.
A
H
H
It
amends
I'm
looking
at
the
executive,
the
exact
executive
summary,
and
it
says
it
amends
the
definition
of
independent
attorney
under
a
certificate
of
independent
review,
and
you
list
the
nrs
and-
and
it's
mostly
saying
that
the
drafting
attorney
I'm
going
to
assume
that's
the
attorney
that
drafted
either
the
will
or
the
trust
may
qualify
as
an
independent
attorney
so
long
as
he
or
she
is
not
a
transferee
or
served
as
the
attorney
for
a
transferee.
H
So
when
you
say
transferry,
does
that
mean
a
person
who
is
entitled
to
receive
or
the
person
who
is
moving
assets
within
the
trust
to
to
people
who
are
inheriting
or
have
a
a
a
stake
in
the
trust?
If
you
could
kind
of
just
clarify
that
for
me
and
is
this,
and
is
this
an
attempt
to
make
sure
that
that
attorney
is
not
drafting
a
trust
or
will
that
they
could
somehow
benefit
from.
I
I
do
you
want
me
to,
can
you
hear
me
yeah?
Okay,
essentially,
the
transferee
is
the
recipient
of
the
property,
so
the
attorney
could
not
be
the
attorney
for
the
recipient
of
the
property
and
they
are
able
to
provide
a
certificate
saying
that
the
person
making
the
changes
to
their
will
or
trust.
I
H
Thank
you.
This
is
chandra
summers,
armstrong
assembly,
district
6.
could
the
so
the
transferee
would
that
imply
that
they
are
the
only
person
who
could
be
receiving
a
benefit.
Could
they
be
transferring
to
other
people
like
they
or?
Is
that
a
different?
Is
that
an
administrator?
Is
that
a
whole
different
title.
I
The
transferee
would
be
the
recipient
of
the
property.
Only
is
my
understanding
and
alan
I'd.
Let
you
jump
in
here.
If
you
have
any
other
ideas,
the
attorneys
are
prohibited
by
professional
code
from
receiving
any
property
of
a
will
or
trust
they
draft,
so
the
attorney
could
not
be
ever
recipient
and,
of
course,
the
attorney
could
not
be
representing
the
recipient
in
this
process
of
providing
a
certificate
of
independent
review.
C
And-
and
this
is
alan
freer,
just
just
to
clarify
so
this
section
of
statutes-
what
nevada
has
enacted
is
a
statutory
presumption
of
undue
influence
where,
under
certain
circumstances,
if
a
will
is
drafted,
and
it
meets
these-
it's
presumed
void
because
of
kind
of
red
flags
in
the
drafting
process.
C
One
of
the
ways
around
that
statutory
presumption
is
to
have
an
attorney
who
is
completely
separated
out
and
and
independent
from
any
of
the
beneficiaries
who
are
receiving
gifts
under
that
will
or
trust,
to
be
able
to
advise
the
person
making
the
will
or
trust
and
ensure
you
know
kind
of
ask
questions
similar
to
you
know:
hey
you've
got
a
gift
going
to
this
particular
grandchild.
That's
much
larger
than
other
grandchildren.
C
Tell
me
about
that
gift.
Is
anybody
putting
pressure
on
you
to
make
that
gift
etc
and
after
they
are
able
to
certify
that
they?
They
provide
a
certificate
of
independent
review,
saying
essentially
that
they've
gone
through
all
of
the
provisions
to
do
the
best
they
can
possible
to
make
sure
that
that
really
is
what
the
person
making
the
will
or
trust
wanted,
without
interference
or
or
undue
influence
from
other
family
members,
caregivers,
etc,
and
so,
but
in
in
specific
answer
to
your
question
about
the
transferee.
C
A
A
I
think
we
had
one
that
was
over
a
couple
hundred
pages
at
one
point,
so
this
one
was
a
little
bit
more
manageable
and
so
we'll
ask
you
two
and
assemblywoman
marzola
to
just
sit
tight
for
a
moment,
we'll
take
some
testimony
on
the
bill
and
then
we'll
have
a
chance
to
do
some
wrap
up
after
we
do
that.
So
at
this
time,
I'm
going
to
open
it
up
for
testimony
in
support
of
assembly
bill
318.
A
A
D
Yes,
I
apologize
chair
to
testify
in
support
of
assembly
bill
318
press
star
9,
now
to
take
your
place
in
the
queue.
D
L
Hello,
this
is
robert
tellis,
the
clark
county
public
administrator,
my
last
name
is
spelled
t-e-l-l-e-s
again.
My
name
is
robert
telus
or
ortega,
I'm
the
clark
county
public
administrator,
and
I
am
grateful
to
the
the
probate
and
trust
section
of
the
nevada
state
bar
for
for
taking
up
a
lot
of
the
provisions
that
relate
to
my
office.
A
lot
of
these
provisions
are
created
in
an
effort
to
ensure
that
that
families
are
protected,
that
there
is
more
transparency
in
the
process.
L
Also,
there
are
certain
provisions
there
that
that
will
assist
our
office
in
doing
a
better
job
for
for
our
nevada
families.
So
again,
I
think
it's
very
important,
especially
talking
about
the
issues
related
to
the
independent
administration's
act.
There
have
been
certain
situations,
while
not
necessarily
unlawful
are
of
serious
concern.
L
I
think
to
to
nevada
families
that
will
be
addressed
by
this
legislation,
and
I
am
looking
forward
to
to
make
sure
that
we've
got
these
safeguards
in
place
in
our
laws
to
make
sure
that
that
these
types
of
things
in
independent
administrations
are
of
the
that
are
done
in
good
faith
and
then,
if
they
are
not,
there
are
mechanisms
for
for
ensuring
that
that
such
types
of
of
transactions
can
be
stopped.
And
again
I'm
very
grateful
to
the
trust
and
probate
section.
L
I'm
very
grateful
to
assemblywoman
marzola
for
taking
up
this
bill
and,
of
course,
I'm
very
grateful
to
the
nevada
legislature
for
for
your
consideration
as
well.
A
A
Thank
you
bps.
I
will
close
testimony
and
support.
I
will
now
open
testimony
in
opposition.
Is
there
anybody
on
the
zoom
who'd
like
to
testify
in
opposition?
If
so,
if
you
could
turn
the
camera
on
on
mute-
and
let
me
know:
okay,
I'm
not
seeing
any
activity
here
on
the
zoom
bps.
Could
we
go
to
the
phone
lines
to
see
if
there's
anybody
there
in
opposition.
A
D
A
F
Thank
you.
I
would
just
like
to
take
this
time
to
say
thank
you,
chair.
L
C
This
is
alan
freyr.
No
chairman
yeager,
I'm
just
happy
that
I
didn't
have
to
provide
a
definition
of
the
rule
against
perpetuities
this
session.
A
Thank
you
so
much
we
may
have
you
come
back
to
do
that
at
some
point
we'll
see.
I
know
the
committee
is
waiting
with
baited
breath
for
that
presentation.
I
want
to
thank
the
the
two
of
you
for
joining
us
here,
mr
free
or
mr
noble
and
committee.
Obviously
this
is
a
pretty
dense
bill.
So
if
you
do
have
additional
questions
after
looking
at
the
executive
summary
that
was
provided,
please
feel
free
to
reach
out
and
reach
out
or
reach
out
to
assemblywoman
marzola
as
well
and
mr
noble.
I
saw
that
you
unmuted.
I
A
Thank
you.
It's
no
problem.
We,
we
are
working
through
these
audio
and
technical
challenges.
As
best
we
can.
So
it's
happened
to
all
of
us
somewhere
along
the
way
and
again
appreciate
you
two
for
being
here
with
us
this
morning.
We
hope
you
have
a
great
rest
of
your
day
and
we
will
now
close
the
bill
hearing
on
assembly
bill
318
and
committee.
We're
going
to
move
right
along
to
our
second
bill
on
the
agenda,
which
is
assembly
bill
339.
I
will
now
open
the
hearing
on
that
bill.
A
Assembly
bill
339
makes
various
changes
relating
to
domestic
violence
committee
members,
members
of
the
public,
just
like
we
did
on
the
last
bill.
There
is
an
amendment
that
you
can
find
up
on
nellis
under
the
exhibit
tab.
That
makes
a
few
changes
to
the
original
bill
and
we
have
our
own
vice
chair,
win
here
with
us
to
present
assembly
bill
339.
A
G
M
Good
morning,
cherry
yeager
and
committee
members
for
the
record,
my
name
is
nicole
salcido
and
I
am
a
student
at
unr
and
intern
for
assembly
women
win.
Today
I
will
be
helping
assembly
women
win
present
ab339
with
that
being
said,
let
me
begin
specialty.
Courts
are
problem-solving
court
strategies
designed
to
address
the
root
causes
of
criminal
activity
by
coordinating
efforts
of
the
judiciary,
prosecution,
defense,
attorneys,
law
enforcement
and
mnl
social
services,
slash
treatment
professionals.
They
are
rigorous,
requiring
frequent
drug
testing
and
court
appearances
along
with
tightly
structured,
regimens
of
treatment
and
recovery
services.
M
Specialty
courts
offer
an
alternative
to
incarceration.
The
goal
is
to
break
the
cycle
of
the
revolving
door
syndrome
and
support
participants
to
achieve
stability
by
promoting
responsibility,
accountability
and
teaching
participants
to
become
productive
citizens
which
in
returns
criminal
recidivism
and
provides
for
better
healthier
communities.
Specialty
courts
can
be
also
helpful
in
freeing
up
resources
of
the
lower
courts
where
many
of
these
cases
would
normally
be
tried.
M
Some
additional
benefits
of
implementing
specialty
courts
are
increasing
public
safety
reduction
and
criminal,
recidivism,
implementing
or
improvement
in
quality
of
life
for
participants
and
restored
positive
community
involvement,
while
most
specialty
courts
address
non-violent
crime.
Domestic
violence
courts
are
part
of
a
trend
in
the
emergence
of
emergence
of
courts
that
address
violent
crime.
The
first
domestic
violence
court
started
in
miami
florida
in
1992..
M
Currently
there
are
an
estimated
300
domestic
violence,
courts,
nationwide
domestic
violence,
courts,
create
procedures
to
promote
victim
safety,
use
and
collaborate
or
collaborate
with
community-based
organizations
and
ensure
accountability
for
domestic
violence
offenders.
I
will
now
turn
it
back
to
assembly
when
win.
Thank
you.
G
G
I've
participated
in
specialty
courts
from
the
time
I
was
a
brand
new
lawyer,
one
of
my
first
jobs,
in
fact
my
very
first
job
I
clerked
for
judge
jack
layman,
the
late
judge,
jack
layman
and
he
had
started
the
very
first
drug
court
in
the
state
of
nevada
and
only
the
second
in
our
nation.
So
nevada
has
a
long
history
of
establishing
and
working
specialty
courts.
There
are
so
many
specialty
courts
that
are
in
our
courts.
We
have
veterans,
treatment
courts,
we
have
mental
health
courts,
we
have
women
in
need,
courts.
G
We
have
juvenile
like
drug
courts,
we
have
there
are
so
many
and
when
you
start
to
learn
about
like
the
success
of
investment
in
these
programs,
you
see
that
they
cut
down
on
recidivism
rates.
They
help
with
actual
treatment
and
they
are
really
really
hard
to
get
through.
This
bill
creates
some
enabling
language.
Currently,
this
is
one
of
the
crimes.
Battery
domestic
violence.
The
misdemeanor
is
one
of
two
that
I
can
think
of
criminal
charges
where
you
cannot
get
a
reduction.
G
The
prosecutors
don't
have
discretion,
they
are
tied
to
a
very
specific
structure.
So
under
current
statute,
if
I
catch
my
husband
cheating
on
me
and
I
dump
a
drink
on
him,
I
will
be
charged
with
battery's
domestic
violence
that
is,
battery
domestic
violence
and,
under
those
current
circumstances
I
will
be
sentenced.
I
will
be
convicted.
I
will
lose
my
second
amendment
rights.
I
will
have
to
do
the
standard
six
months
of
counseling
one
time
per
week
for
26
weeks.
G
If
correspondingly,
someone
beats
up
their
spouse
and
they
are
injured
and
they
are
beaten
and
it
is
a
ongoing
problem
that
is
the
same
penalty
under
law
for
that
individual
as
well.
A
prosecutor
and
you'll
hear
from
them
during
support
testimony,
and
they
could
probably
answer
any
questions
you
might
have
about
their
like
role
in
this.
If
you're
charged
with
murder,
they
can
reduce,
they
can
take
into
consideration
all
of
the
circumstances
they
can
take
into
consideration
your
mental
health
history.
G
They
can
take
into
consideration
like
mitigating
circumstances
that
may
be
morally
mitigating,
but
under
the
law
or
not,
and
they
can
reduce
that
charge.
They
cannot
do
this.
In
this
circumstance,
we
have
established
specialty
courts
in
our
state
that
have
shown
that
they
have
been
successful.
They
use
best
practices,
they
use
evidence-based
practices,
they
really
reach
out
to
community
organizations
and
engage
in
a
more
holistic
approach
in
doing
this,
and
that
is
what
this
bill
allows.
G
It
allows
that
enabling
language,
currently
the
only
people
that
can
participate
in
a
specialty
court
when
charged
with
a
battery
domestic
violence,
misdemeanor,
are
veterans.
We
made
changes,
I
believe
in
2017
that
allowed
veterans
only
to
participate
in
a
veterans
treatment
program
which
is
another
one
of
our
specialty
courts.
Again.
G
This
is
enabling
language
it
gives
the
courts
yet
another
tool
if
they
want
to
establish
these
courts
to
provide
an
incentive,
that's
evidence-based,
that's,
financially
and
fiscally
responsible
for
our
communities
that
can
show
results,
so
that
kind
of
gives
that
there
are
some
substantial
amendments
that
were
emailed
out
to
committee
members.
Yesterday,
I
plan
I
can
answer
any
questions
about
that.
Essentially,
battery
domestic
violence
is
a
little
bit
more
complex.
G
I
had
taken
some
of
the
language
from
some
of
the
other
specialty
courts
as
far
as
how
they
are
formulated
and
how
they
exist.
But
there
is
some
crossover
and
there
is
some
other
issues
when
it
comes
to
the
ability
to
seal
those
records.
I
always
tell
my
clients,
when
I
come
into
contact
with
them
a
first
offense
battery
domestic
violence
is
a
misdemeanor.
A
second
offense
is
also
a
misdemeanor,
but
it's
enhanceable
and
a
third
offense
within
seven
years
is
a
felony.
G
It
does
carry
with
it
mandatory
one
to
six
years
in
prison.
So
there
is
like
these
enhancing
penalties
for
this
type
of
charge,
and
for
that
reason
an
automatic
ceiling
is
not
necessarily
accurate
because
we
do
want
to
be
able
to
have
that
case
open
to
a
certain
extent
for
a
period
of
time.
If
the
person
does
reset
it
like
does
you
know,
re-offend.
G
We
want
to
be
able
to
go
back
and
charge
them
with
this
second
offense,
if
it's
within
that
seven
years,
so
we've
added
some
conditional
dismissal
language,
and
this
is
similar
to
the
language
that's
used
in
the
veterans
treatment
program
as
well
as
our
dui
specialty
course.
With
that
I
can
go
through.
I
answer.
I'm
sure
people
have
other
questions
about
this.
So
at
this
time
I
will
just
open
it
up
for
questions.
A
Thank
you
so
much
vice
chair
wynn
and
thank
you,
miss
salcedo
for
your
remarks.
You
did
a
wonderful
job,
laying
the
groundwork
for
the
bill.
I
I
have
a
couple
of
questions,
but
I'm
going
to
go
to
other
members
first
and
I
think
assemblyman
wheeler
looks
very
eager
with
this
question.
So
assemblyman
please
go
ahead.
L
Thank
you,
mr
chairman.
My
fingers
were
broken.
I
couldn't
type
you
a
message,
but
madam
vice
chair
you,
you
made
a
comment
that
kind
of
got
to
me
that
the
penalties
would
be
the
same
for
dumping
a
drink
on
someone
as
for
actual
physical
violence.
There,
and
I'm
wondering
one
thing
I
don't
see
in
the
bill
is:
wouldn't
it
be.
G
I
can
tell
you
that
in
looking
at
this,
I
had
looked
at
this
from
a
couple
of
different
perspectives.
I
had
met
with
members
of
our
law
enforcement
because
I
thought
you
know.
Maybe
we
should
go
back
and
give
them
more
discretion
in
the
field
to
determine,
because
we
used
to
have
a
situation
where
we
trusted
police
officers
on
the
field
to
make
those
kind
of
determinations
like.
Is
this
a
bar
fight?
Is
this
like
a
battery
domestic
violence
like
what
what
can
I
do
in
this
situation
to
diffuse
this?
G
I
know
when
talking
with
them.
They
are
have
been
operating
under
this
model
for
probably
about
16
years.
I
believe-
and
so
these
are
some
of
the
more
dangerous
calls
that
they
go
out
to
so
sometimes
it
is
a
lot
easier
for
these
officers
to
just
arrest
the
primary
or
the
person
that
they
think
is
the
initial
suspect
just
to
defuse
the
situation.
So
then,
I
talked
to
our
prosecutors
across
the
state
and
said:
hey:
what
can
we
do?
What
kind
of
tools
can
we
give
you
to?
G
You
know
weed
out
the
good
cases
and
you
know
dismiss
old
cases
or
resolve
other
cases
as
you
see
fit,
and
so,
if
you
see
that
section,
what
also
authorizes
the
specialty
course
to
exist
is
the
fact
that
it
also
returns
discretion
back
to
prosecutors.
So
if
they
see
that
case
with
the
drink
being
dumped
on
someone's
head,
they
can
choose
now
to
dismiss
it.
They
can
choose
to
reduce
it
to
a
simple
battery
or
disorderly
conduct
or
any
one
of
those
kind
of
things.
G
L
L
Nope
but
I
was
looking
at
the
amendment
actually.
D
F
You,
mr
chair,
and
thank
you
vice
chair
for
bringing
this
legislation
and
putting
so
much
thought
into
it.
So
my
question
is
my
first
question:
what
would
it
take
to
actually
have
these
courts
established
so
that
prosecutors
and
such
you
know,
have
this
option.
G
You
know
a
part
of
you
know:
there
are
a
couple
of
ways
that
we
can
establish
specialty
courts,
there's
like
pre-prosecution
diversion
programs.
There
are
post-plea
type
programs
and
that's
what
this
would
be
like.
You
would
have
to
enter
a
guilty
or
no
low
please.
So
you
would
have
to
enter
a
plea
to
the
charge
of
battery
domestic
violence.
First
offense.
It
would
only
apply
to
a
first
offense
like
in
many
other
specialty
courts.
G
Part
of
me,
like
I,
wanted
to
make
it
enabling
language,
because
I
recognized
that
we
are
having
some
economic
shortcomings,
although
I
would
encourage
all
of
our
courts
to
do
this,
because
I
think
the
specialty
courts,
like
you
saw
during
the
presentation,
can
sometimes
save
us
for
every
dollar
invested
up
to
four
dollars
in
savings,
so
they
will
do
it
and
talking
to
some
of
these
judges,
some
of
the
more
urban
areas
have
like
courts
that
are
just
dedicated
to
handling
duis
or
handling
battery
domestic
violences,
and
so
we
do
have
dui
court
programs,
but
I
think
authorizing
these
languages.
G
G
This
gives
them
another
option
to
be
able
to
handle
these
cases
more
appropriately
than
just
arresting
and
giving
standard
conditions
to
all
people
across
the
board.
So
I
would
hope
that
they
would
do
this
again.
It
is
just
enabling
language
and
I
would
hope
that
people
would,
you
know,
take
up
the
cause
and
they
have
in
the
past.
We
started
off
with
just
drug
court
and
now
we
have
mental
health
court
and
we
have
you
know
wynn,
court,
which
is
women
in
need.
G
F
Thank
you,
and
that
was
my
second
question.
This
is
for
first
offense
misdemeanor
battery
domestic
violence
and-
and
I
I
appreciate
that-
and
I
agree
that
we
need
to
give
judicial
officers
and
the
courts
discretion
to
consider
the
circumstances.
Like
you
said,
was
it
just
a
drink
thrown
or
was
this
serious
injuries
and
and
whatnot
in
in
each
in
each
situation?
F
G
Yes,
I
can
go
ahead
and
do
that
hold
on
one.
Second,
I
have
all
these
screens,
yet
I
still
haven't
managed
to
manage
all
the
screens
one
second.
So
if
you
look
at
the
amended
language
and
that's
on
the
amendment,
that's
on
nellis,
you
will
see
that
in
section
four
I've
taken
out
the
part,
I'm
not
sure
why
that
was
in
there.
G
It
is
a
conviction
just
like
a
plea
of
guilty
so,
but
I
took
out
the
part
about
being
found
guilty
or
found
guilty
after,
like
essentially
a
trial.
G
I
also
wanted
to
put
in
there
that
there
was
argument
from
both
parties,
so
both
the
defense,
as
well
as
the
prosecutor,
have
the
opportunity
to
argue
for
why
this
would
be
appropriate
before
a
court
decides
to
suspend
this
the
proceedings
and
kind
of
put
a
pause
on
the
person's
plea
and
allows
them
to
complete
this
program.
G
G
I
will
tell
you
when
talking
with
some
of
the
victim
advocacy
groups,
I
am
contemplating-
and
I
am
looking
at
language
to
also
also
further
indicate
that
the
person
has
to
be
accepted
into
the
specialty
court
and
that
there's
a
process
for
how
that
specialty
court
is
established
and
what
kind
of
guidelines
that
they
would
need
under
there.
N
G
That's
compatible,
I'm
just
waiting
for
to
hear
from
legal
on
how
we
incorporate
some
of
that
additional
like
protection
language
in
there.
Additionally,
you
if
you've
been
previously
convicted
of
a
misdemeanor
battery
constituting
domestic
violence
or
you've
even
completed
a
program
in
the
past.
You
don't
get
to
keep
coming
back
to
this
program,
so
there
are
some
limitations
for
that.
G
Additionally,
in
subsection
b
you'll
see
the
defendant
has
entered
into
a
plea
agreement
with
a
prosecuting
attorney,
so
let's
say
you're
initially
charged
with
like
a
felony,
and
it's
plea
bargain
down
to
a
misdemeanor
first
offense
battery
domestic
violence.
You
can't
then
also
get
apply
for
a
specialty
court
to
get
that
dismissal
and
again,
if
you
were
convicted
at
trial,
which
I
think
is
just
clarifying
language
from
the
subsection
one
as
well.
A
H
Thank
you,
chair
yeager,
chandra
summers,
armstrong
assembly,
district,
6.,
thank
you,
assemblywoman,
win
for
this
bill
and
I
just
have
a
couple
of
little
questions.
So
you
spoke
about
working
with
community
groups
for
sort
of
like
a
restorative
justice
for
as
part
of
the
the
process
of
therapy.
If
you
please
have
you
spoken
with
any
of
our
local
community
groups
about
how
what
that
would
look
like?
Can
you
speak
to
any
of
the
groups
that
you've
spoken
to?
H
G
I
have
met
with
several
groups.
I
actually
started
working
on
this
when
that
anderson
decision
came
out
in
the
fall
of
2019.
I've
also
met
several
times
with
the
attorney
general's
office.
They
have
a
division
kind
of
that's
working
group
on,
like
all
things
related
to
battery
domestic
violence.
I
have
talked
with
liz
ortenberger,
who
actually,
I
think,
will
be
testifying
in
opposition,
because
she
wants
some
of
this
other
language
and
some
of
these
protections
that
are
already
existing
in
administrative
code
to
be
incorporated
and
like
I
had
tests
said
before.
G
I'm
not
opposed
to
that.
I
want
to
make
sure
that
we
can
do
it
under
the
legal
constructs
and
also
give
discretion
to
our
other
elected
leaders
like
we
have
judges
that
are
elected.
You
know
we
have
a
different
thing
as
far
as
the
restorative
justice.
It's
not
typically
done
in
a
battery
domestic
violence
setting.
It
was
something
that
I
had
looked
into,
but
I
understand
the
model
that
you're
trying
to
look
at,
and
this
is
kind
of
like
a
hybrid
model.
G
You
know
this
is
not
a
black
and
white
issue,
and
is
this
bill
going
to
fix
all
of
our
problems
about
regarding
domestic
violence
in
our
state?
Absolutely
not.
I
think
it
is
time
for
us
to
look
at
things
that
have
we've
been
doing
and
whether
or
not
they
work,
and
I
would
argue
that
they
don't,
and
so
I
think
we
need
to
look
at
what
we
have
been
doing
and
what
our
organizations
have
been
doing.
G
Safeness
is
a
perfect
example:
they
keep
their
own
data,
they
keep
their
own
stuff
like
we
don't
even
keep
that
data
as
a
state.
It's
hard
to
like
collect
like
information
about
like
racial
and
ethnic
and
like
gender.
You
know
inequities
and
arrests
and
like
treatment,
and
that
because
we
don't
keep
that
you
know
routinely,
so
we
rely
on
these
community
partners
for
their
data
for
their
information.
G
This
is
what
they
do,
so
you
know
I
really
have
been
working
with
them,
trying
to
figure
out
how
we
can
balance
some
of
those
judicial
issues,
because
it's
different
because
you're
in
a
criminal
court
you
know
as
well
as
protecting
like
due
process
rights.
Protecting
you
know
our
community
protecting
victims
and
how
we
can
do
that,
and
you
know
there
are
people
that
are
going
to
be
very
uncomfortable
with
some
of
the
provisions,
but
I'm
dedicated
to
trying
to
do
something.
G
I
think
that's
where
we
need
to
start
and,
as
you
know,
most
of
the
people
in
this
committee
know.
You
know
it
would
be
easy
to
say
hey
if
you're,
victimized
or
you're
a
victim
or
you're
a
survivor
just
leave
that
person.
But
sometimes
you
have
a
relationship
with
that
person.
You
have
children
in
common
with
them.
G
People
want
treatment
for
their
batterers,
they
want
a
holistic
approach.
They
want
their
kids
to
not
repeat
this
cycle
of
violence,
because
they,
you
know
either
just
did
their
time.
They
didn't
complete
a
class,
they
did
a
one-size-fits-all
model
and
they
maybe
needed
additional
counseling
and
treatment
because
they
have
a
more.
They
have
concurring
problems,
so
I
I
have
that
with
them.
I
will
continue
to
meet
with
them
to
try
to
get
this
language
correct.
H
Thank
you
chair.
Thank
you
chair,
I
hope,
have
a
follow-up
question
or
at
least
a
comment,
but
I
do
have
a
question
as
well
and
thank
you
assemblywoman
when,
for
it
acknowledging
that
this
there
can
not
be
a
one,
size
fits
all,
and
I
would
hope
that
you
would
be
able
to
that
that
when
this
court
is
set
up-
and
I'm
going
to
say
when,
because
I
I
I'm
I'm
hopeful
that
we
can
look
into
this-
that
we
can
also
work
diligently
in
including
treatment
programs
that
are
culturally
competent.
H
I
think
that
one
size
fits
all
does
not
work,
and
I
think
that
we
we
have
to
think
broadly
about
how
to
bring
people
in
to
sort
of
mend
these
relationships
and
families
if
they
so
choose
to
participate.
H
My
next
question
is
about
gun
rights,
so
we
had
talked
a
couple
weeks
ago
or
last
week
about
domestic
violence,
and
we
had
heard
from
the
courts.
You
mentioned
city
of
henderson.
H
How
would
this
affect
that?
I
remember
if
I'm
it's
been
several
days.
I've
slept
several
times
to
try
to
in
between,
and
I
can't
quite
remember
if
we
talked
about
that.
There
was
some
discussion
about
removing
guns
for
domestic
violence
and
I'm
not
sure
if
it
was
misdemeanor
or
gross
misdemeanor.
If
you
could
refresh
and
just
give
a
quick
overview
of
how
that
how
this
would
book
end
into
into
that
proposed
legislation.
G
If
you
are
charged
and
convicted
of
a
misdemeanor
first
offense
battery
domestic
violence,
offense
here
in
the
state
of
nevada,
and
it
it's
under
that
federal
definition,
you
can
no
longer
own
manufacture,
ship
possess
firearms
or
ammunition.
So
that
is
a
federal
prohibition.
G
We
have
a
state
prohibition
that
the
city
of
henderson's
bill
is
looking
to
also
incorporate
those
people
that
are
left
out
in,
like
in
this
example
like
the
dating
relationship.
So
that's
their
bill.
That's
this
bill!
So
that's
current
existing
law
when
I
had
reached
out
to
legal
during
the
drafting
of
this-
and
this
is
on
the
original
bill.
If,
if
so
couple
lots
of
things
have
to
happen,
one
you
have
to
plead
to
the
battery
domestic
violence.
G
The
court
has
to
hear
from
the
victim
has
to
hear
from
the
prosecutor
has
to
hear
from
the
defendant.
They
have
to
be
accepted
into
this
treatment
program
that
currently
doesn't
exist.
So
once
you
get
into
that
program-
and
you
complete
that
program
which
most
of
the
specialty
courses
are
somewhere
between
12
and
18
months,
and
then
you
complete
that
program,
you
would
get
a
dismissal
from
your
record
when
it
was
originally
written.
I
confirmed
that
you
would
have
a
full
restoration
of
all
of
your
constitutional
rights,
including
your
second
amendment
right.
G
G
G
So
as
soon
as
I
find
that
out,
I
will
let
you
know
whether
or
not
you
also
get
a
restoration
of
your
second
amendment
rights
under
this
new
scenario
or
whether
or
not
there's
a
delay
because
of
that
conditional
dismissal,
nature
of
this
type
of
charge.
J
Thank
you
sharon.
Thank
you
for
the
presentation
vice
chair,
so
I
have
a
couple
of
questions.
If
that's
okay,
my
first
one
just
has
to
do
with
the
arguments.
J
So,
for
instance,
in
the
amendment
in
section
four,
we're
allowing
for
arguments
from
the
party
from
the
parties
and-
and
I'm
just
wondering
is-
is
that
just
oral
arguments
at
hearing
is
that
a
set
motion
are
there?
Is
there
written
arguments
allowed?
J
What's
because
I
I
don't
know
the
process
for
criminal
court
and
just
kind
of
want
to
understand
that
more?
How
that's
going
to
happen.
G
This
is
kind
of
in
line
with
some
of
the
provisions
of
marcy's
law
that
give
a
victim
a
voice
at
sentencing,
or
it
like
crucial,
like
procedural,
like
dates
in
a
criminal
case,
so
this
kind
of
just
puts
that
into
statute
like
currently,
for
example,
if
I
have
a
client
that
pleads
guilty
to
a
battery
domestic
violence
and
prior
to
the
court
sentencing
them,
they
will
say,
are
there
any
you
know
witnesses
or
victims
or
victim
advocates
that
are
in
the
you
know,
in
the
courtroom
that
would
like
to
provide
testimony
prior
to
me,
making
my
sentencing
decision,
so
I
think
it's
just
giving
them
the
opportunity.
G
I've
seen
people
submit
things
in
writing.
I've
seen
people
submit
things
orally.
I've
seen
just
like
victims
come
in
and
testify,
and
they
can
testify.
However,
they
choose
to
in
most
of
our
courts.
They
are
assisted
with
a
victim
advocate
that
is
present
there
for
supportive.
You
know
supportive
reasons
as
well.
G
I've
had
people
with
family
members
come
up
and
testify.
You
know,
however,
they
choose
to
so.
This
is
just
kind
of
in
a
line
with
what
we
already
do,
but
it's
specifically
putting
it
in
statute
that
it's
something
that
can
be
considered,
especially
the
divide.
I
think
let
me
pull
up
the
amendment
sorry.
This
one
says
that
the
court
can
specifically
take
the
safety
of
the
victim
as
a
factor
in
determining
whether
or
not
to
assign
someone
to
this
program.
J
Okay,
thank
you
and
is
that
and
I'm
sorry
I
can't
find
it
now,
but
is
that
the
same?
If
if
someone
is
in
the
program
and
there's
a
question
about
whether
or
not
they
should
remain
in
the
program
because
of
not
complying,
that
type
of
thing,
is
that
also
or
is
that
just
oral
arguments
or
do
they
get
emotion,
written
motion
practice
as
well
or.
G
In
the
current
specialty
courts,
it's
a
little
unique.
You
do,
I
mean
typically,
the
way
they
work
right
now
is
there
is
a
defense
attorney
in
there
and
there
is
a
prosecutor
in
there,
but
there's
also
counselors
and
caseworkers
and
other
individuals
that
are
a
part
of
like
the
they
call
it
a
treatment
team.
So
it's
a
weird
hybrid,
like
criminal,
slash,
specialty
court
treatment
program
and
that-
and
I
I
would
align
that
with
this.
G
If
you
are
looking
to
be
terminated
from
a
program,
then
you
are
entitled
to
some
extra
due
process
like
provisions
where
you
know,
but
prior
to
your
termination
from
that
process,
you
would
be
entitled
to
those.
But
as
far
as
like
discipline
or
restorative
or
like
other
things,
the
the
specialty
courts
use
a
lot
of
different
things.
Sometimes
it's
adding
additional
drug
testing.
Sometimes
it's
adding
additional
counseling
requirements.
Sometimes
you'll
have
judges
that
have
people
write
like
you
know,
papers
on
like
why
they
have
things.
Sometimes
it's.
G
They
have
a
lot
of
like
flexibility
on
what
kind
of
treatment
and
what
kind
of
I
guess,
punitive
aspects
of
the
thing,
and
so
typically
victims
are
not
involved
in
that
treatment
process
and
but
I'm
not
sure
if
that's
lay
down
statute
specifically,
but
at
any
of
the
like
crucial
time
periods.
I
would
imagine
people
would
be.
J
There,
okay,
thank
you
yeah,
it's
a
whole
different,
it's
a
whole
different
animal
for
me,
and
and
so
I
appreciate
that
information
and
then
okay
and
then
I
also
just
wanted
to
touch
on
some
issues.
You
and
I
have
just
discussed
over
the
weekend,
and
I
appreciate
you
taking
the
time
to
do
that
and
I'm
sorry.
We
haven't
been
able
to
reconnect
on
this,
but
I
I
guess
I
have
a
statement
more
than
a
question.
J
I
just
want
to
make
sure
that
we're
covering
and
then
considering
child
custody
issues,
because
you
know
the
state
of
nevada
has
said
that
when
you're
dealing
with
child
custody,
the
best
interest
of
the
child
is
the
overriding
factor,
and
I
do
have
concerns
that,
if
we're
stealing
records,
if
we're
doing
dismissing
cases,
what
we're
we're,
making
it
more
difficult
for
the
family
court
and
the
judges
there
to
know
if
there
have
been
convictions
for
domestic
or
or
what's
going,
the
history
with
domestic
violence,
because
it
is
such
a
big
issue
in
in
the
family
law
cases
and
is
a
specific
you
know.
J
Domestic
violence
is
a
specific
factor
when
it
comes
to
custody
issues.
In
making
a
custody
determination
and
while
the
the
civil
judge,
the
family
court
judge,
doesn't
use
such
a
high
standard
case,
it's
certainly
when
that
criminal
case
is
open
for
the
judge
to
know
what
happened.
J
It
certainly
makes
the
process
less
time
consuming
and
and
frankly,.
J
Say
you
know
easier
for
the
litigants
to
protect
the
child
and
the
party
who
may
have
been
the
victim,
so
I
just
want
to
make
sure
we
continue
to
look
at
that
and
see
if
there's
some
way
to
to
carve
that
out,
do
something
to
make
sure
that
issue's
still
considered.
G
Thank
you
for
your
comment
and,
and
we
did
discuss
this-
I
have
been
in
communication.
They
reached
out
late
yesterday
afternoon
to
kind
of
work
on
some
potential
language
that
would
facilitate
some
of
the
clarity
issues
in
the
family
court.
G
Like
I
said,
we
do
have
a
provision
there
to
conditionally
dismiss
the
case
if
you're,
successful
and-
and
there
is
a
balance,
you
know
part
part
of
the
balance
is.
If
someone
successfully
completes
such
an
intense
program
like
these
specialty
courts
are,
there
should
be
some
benefit
at
the
end
of
that
you
know
journey
or
process
for
them,
and
so
I'm
a
true
believer
in
the
specialty
courts
and
the
power
of
rehabilitation
in
that
area,
and
I
would
love
to
see
that
incorporated
here.
G
I
recognize
that
there
is
some
other
issues
and
how
these
statutes
relate
to
our
current
existing
family
court
determinations,
and
so
I
think
there
are
ways
to
make
those
records
sealed.
You
know,
like
I
said,
they're
conditionally.
They
would
be
conditionally,
dismissed
and
retained
by
the
law
enforcement
agencies
just
for
enhancement
purposes,
and
things
like
that.
So
I
think
there
is
a
way
to
incorporate
that.
So
family
court
judges
also
have
access
to
that
within
a
certain
time
period.
You
know
and
obviously
the
individuals
would
be
able
to
say
hey.
G
L
L
G
Usually
they
are
somewhat
individualized
to
like
there's
a
general
kind
of
like
program
on
how
a
specialty
court
and
they're
typically
done
in
phases
like
phase
one
phase,
two
phase,
three
phase,
four
with
more
intensive
programming
and
counseling
and
therapy
and
drug
testing
is
up
in
the
front
part
of
that
and
it
like
corresponds
out
there.
G
So
if
there
are
terms
and
conditions
so,
for
example,
on
the
consent,
I
think
you're
in
section
four
is
what
you
said:
section
four
sub:
two:
okay,
are
you
on
the
amended
language
or
are
you
on
the
old
one.
L
G
Don't
realize
how
invaluable
okay,
so
four
subsection
two
the
court
may
impose
sanctions
against
the
defendant
for
a
violation
that
section
right
there.
L
G
Typically,
what
happens
is
if
you
violate
the
terms
of
your
conditions,
and
you
pick
up
a
new
charge,
you're
going
to
be
terminated
from
the
program
and
in
this
case,
instead
of
having
your
dismissal
at
the
end
of
the
program,
you've
already
entered
a
guilty
plea
to
the
charge,
so
you
will
already
be
adjudicated
guilty
of
that
charge
and
then
you
could
be
a
sentenced
accordingly.
So
on
a
misdemeanor
battery
domestic
violence,
if
you,
you
would
enter
a
plea,
you
plead
guilty.
The
court.
G
Would,
you
know,
do
this
assessment
send
you
over
to
a
specialty
court?
Let's
say
during
the
specialty
court
you
commit
a
new
crime
or
you're
terminated
from
the
specialty
court,
so
you
don't
even
have
to
like
commit
a
new
crime.
If
you
are
just
in
violation,
let's
say
you
are
not
leaving
your
analysis
and
they
can't
test
you
or
you're,
not
showing
up
for
counseling,
and
they
decide
hey
you're,
not
taking
this
program
seriously.
We
are
going
to
terminate
you
from
the
program.
You
will
go
back.
G
You've
already
entered
your
guilty
plea,
and
so
the
court
will
then
adjudicate
you
guilty
of
that
battery
domestic
violence.
Misdemeanor
charge
and
then
they
can
sentence
you
up
to
six
months
in
jail
on
that
charge.
So,
typically,
when
you
enter
into
a
specialty
court,
you
would
have
like
a
six-month
suspended
sentence
hanging
over
your
head
and
if
you
do
not
complete
the
program
either,
you
are
terminated
because
you
violated
the
terms
and
conditions
of
that.
Like
you
know
thing
or
you,
you
know
you
went
back
and
you
beat
it.
G
You
beat
up
your
spouse
and
even
if
you
don't
have
a
conviction
for
it,
if
they
can
still
terminate
you
from
the
program,
they
can
send
you
back
and
then
you
just
have
your
time
imposed.
So
there's
still
that
punitive.
You
still
have
the
conviction.
You
still
have
like
the
ability
to
solve
the
ability
to
like
sentence.
You
based
on
your
previous
plea.
Does
that
make
sense?
Mr
assemblywoman
christmas.
L
Yes,
thank
you
for
your
answer
and
follow-up
question
chairman
yeager,
so
I
appreciate
that
answer
because
it
goes
directly
to
my
next
question.
In
section
4,
sub
2a
after
somebody
violates
a
term
or
condition
perhaps
beating
up
their
spouse,
battering
their
spouse.
Again,
the
court
may
impose
sanctions,
but
the
person
is
allowed
to
remain
in
the
program.
Why
would
we
allow
them
to
remain
in
the
program
if
they
reoffend
or
go
back
and
re-batter
their
spouse?.
G
Terms
and
conditions
can
be
a
lot
of
different
things.
So
as
far
as
a
treatment
program
like
a
term
and
condition,
would
be
like
you
were
ordered
to
go
to
counseling
on
monday,
wednesday
and
friday,
and
on
wednesday
you
showed
up
five
minutes
late
and
the
counseling
agency
is
like,
if
you're
late,
you're,
you're
absent,
and
so
you
weren't
able
to
attend
that
counseling
session
on
the
wednesday.
Let's
say
you
had
car
problems,
let's
say
you
had
a
bus
and
you
couldn't
make
it
to
the
counseling
agency.
G
Let's
say
you
had
any
one
of
those
things.
That
is
maybe
something
that
you
don't
terminate
someone
for,
but
that's
a
term
and
a
condition,
and
so
there
may
the
court
may
want
to
impose
a
penalty.
Sometimes
that
penalty
could
be
like
hey.
You
didn't
show
up
there.
I
want
you
to
do
some
additional
counseling
and
that's
your
penalty.
Sometimes
your
penalty
could
be
hey.
You
know
I'm
going
to
give
you
one
chance.
This
is
very
important.
You
have
to
take
this
seriously.
G
There
can
be
any
excuses
for
why
you
don't
show
up
for
your
counseling,
so
the
terms
and
conditions
can
be
lots
of
different
things.
If
you
leave
a
urinalysis,
let's
say
as
a
condition
of
your
specialty
court
treatment.
You
have
to
leave
random
uas,
that's
what
they
are
called
like
in
the
courts
and
you
leave
a
urinalysis
and
it
is
diluted,
so
they
can't
test
it
because
you
drink
too
much
water.
Okay,
should
you
be
terminated
from
the
program
because
they
couldn't
test
your
urinalysis
that
time?
G
Maybe
not,
but
should
there
be
a
penalty
for
violating
that
term
and
condition
of
the
specialty
program?
Yes,
and
so
this
gives
those
judges
an
opportunity
to
look
at
what
the
violation
is
and
determine
whether
or
not
that's
someone
they
want
to
keep
in
the
program
or
they
want
to
terminate
from
the
program.
L
So
just
a
quick
follow-up,
then
then
it
is
in
the
writing
of
the
bill
in
again
section
four
stub
2a
or
what
you're
saying
is
that
you
don't
want
it
to
say.
The
court
may
impose
sanctions
against
the
defendant
for
the
violation
but
allow
the
defendant
to
remain
in
the
program
you
want
it
to
say.
The
court
will
then
have
discretion
to
allow
the
defendant
to
remain
in
the
program
after
violation
of
a
term
or
condition.
Is
that
what
you're
saying.
G
That
that's
essentially
what
it
is
again.
This
is
the
language
that's
existing
in
all
of
the
specialty
court
like
statutes,
so
this
is
how
all
of
our
30,
or
so
specialty
courts
run
off
of
this
like
same
language,.
L
I
I
guess,
I'm
just
concerned
because
you
know
again
it's
it's
somebody
beating
up
their
spouse,
it's
domestic
battery
and-
and
this
isn't
really
a
right-
it's
sort
of
a
you
know,
a
specialty
court
where
we
allow
them
to
go
so
they
have
a
clean
record
after
this,
I
don't
I
don't
know.
I
just
I
just
have
a
few
concerns
about
allowing
somebody
who
goes
back
and
re-batters
their
spouse
to
stay
in
this
program
where
they're
then
getting
their
record
clean.
A
And
you
know
if
I
could
jump
in
assemblywoman
krasner,
I
don't
think.
If
someone
commits
another
battery
domestic
violence,
any
judge
in
the
state
is
going
to
allow
them
to
remain
in
the
program.
I
just
think
that's
an
a
pretty
unrealistic
scenario.
The
way
I
read
the
language,
the
court
has
two
options
under
provision
a
they
can
allow
the
program's
participant
to
stay
in
the
program
with
a
sanction,
or
under
b.
They
can
essentially
terminate
the
person
and
enter
a
judgment
of
conviction.
A
So
I
think
the
language
that's
there
with
the
may
does
give
the
discretion
that
both
of
you,
I
think,
are
speaking
to
maybe
you're
kind
of
speaking
around
each
other
a
little
bit.
But
I
think
that
is
the
intent
and
that's
how
every
other
specialty
court
program
is
structured,
but
I
I
don't
see
any
way
where
a
judge
would
allow
someone
who
commits
the
same
crime
to
remain
in
the
program.
I
just
in
my
experience.
It's
just
not
ever
going
to
happen.
A
A
All
of
us
lawyers
can
be
guilty
of
that
at
times.
So
it's
no
problem,
but
I
just
want
to
confirm
that
assembly.
Bill
339,
as
presented
in
the
amendment,
does
not
require
any
court
to
set
up
a
specialty
court
program
for
battery
domestic
violence.
A
A
Great
well,
I
think
that
is
it
for
my
questions
and
I
think,
given
the
time
we
ought
to
move
on
to
some
testimony
on
the
bill,
so
vice
chairwin.
Thank
you
for
presenting
miss
salcedo
if
you're
still
there
with
us.
Thank
you
for
presenting
as
well
we'll
ask
the
two
of
you
to
sit
tight
and
let's
take
some
testimony
on
the
bill
before
coming
back
to
wrap
up.
So
at
this
time,
I'm
going
to
open
it
up
for
testimony
in
support
of
assembly
bill
339.
A
D
B
Thank
you,
chair
yeager
members
of
the
assembly
judiciary
committee.
My
name
is
jon
jones,
j-o-h-n
j-o-n-e-s,
and
I'm
here
this
morning
on
behalf
of
the
clark
county
district
attorney's
office,
we
are
in
support
of
ab
339
with
assemblywoman
wins
proposed
amendment,
and
I
want
to
thank
her
for
reaching
out
to
us
on
this
bill
and
having
some
constructive
discussions
with
us
surrounding
this
issue.
Domestic
violence
cases
are
among
the
most
serious
cases
prosecutors
handle
at
the
clark
county
district
attorney's
office.
B
We
have
a
specialized
unit
of
prosecutors
who
handle
only
these
cases
as
assemblywoman
when
indicated
during
her
testimony.
There
are
a
lot
of
dynamics
at
play
with
these
cases
and
having
specialized
prosecutors.
Handle
them
helps
us
get
the
best
possible
outcome
in
each
case,
and
it
is
important
to
note
that
this
language
is
enabling
allowing
each
jurisdiction
to
make
its
own
determination
with
an
eye
toward
their
own
resources
and
community
needs.
B
I
want
to
take
this
opportunity
to
invite
you
to
observe
a
day
in
domestic
violence
court
if
you're
interested
in
observing
domestic
violence,
court
and
meeting
with
the
prosecutor
who
handles
these
cases,
please
let
me
know
and
I'll
make
sure
to
set
that
up
in
the
interim,
but
with
that,
mr
chairman,
again
I
want
to
reiterate:
we
are
in
support
of
ab339
with
the
amendment.
Thank
you.
D
L
Good
morning,
chairman
yeager
and
members
of
the
assembly
judiciary
committee,
this
is
john
pirro
j-o-h-n-p-I-r-o
from
the
clark
county
public
defender's
office.
We
are
also
in
support
of
this
measure,
we'd
like
to
thank
assemblywoman
rochelle
nguyen
for
bringing
this
forward
and
for
bringing
a
new
option
for
courts
to
use
in
order
to
combat
this
problem
that
we
have
in
this
state.
Thank
you.
D
O
Good
morning,
my
name
is
mark
skifalaqua,
marc
m-a-r-c-s-c-h-I-f,
a-l-a-c-q-u-a
from
the
city
of
henderson,
and
I
am
the
city's
chief
prosecutor,
I'm
testifying
this
morning
in
support
of
assembly
bill
339.
We
believe
that
section,
10
appropriately
restores
the
executive
discretion
regarding
domestic
violence
cases.
This
is
especially
important
since
these
cases,
as
you
heard
a
few
weeks
ago,
are
now
entitled
to
a
jury
trial.
O
We
fully
support
the
addition
of
a
statutory
mechanism
for
a
victim
to
clearly
voice
their
concerns
to
a
court
before
a
defendant
can
even
be
considered
for
the
program,
as
well
as
excluding
repeat
offenders
or
those
who
proceeded
to
trial
from
assignment
to
the
program.
I
want
to
thank
the
vice
chair
for
bringing
this
bill
hearing
our
concerns
and
the
city
of
henderson
does
support
the
bill
as
amended.
Thank
you,
mr
chairman.
D
B
B
N
N
The
amendments
that
have
been
proposed
go
a
long
way
in
addressing
our
initial
alarms
about
this
bill.
Although
some
of
my
colleagues
are
not
convinced,
and
there
may
need
to
be
additional
amendments,
when
we
first
read
the
bill
before
we
saw
any
amendments
we
were
concerned,
it
seemed
to
provide
for
every
court
setting
up
a
program
to
send
all
first-time
defendants
through
a
loosely
defined
program
and
have
the
charges
dismissed.
N
Adding
to
that
the
removal
of
any
requirement
for
a
prosecutor
to
prosecute
these
cases.
It
seemed
to
roll
back
40
years
of
progress
in
a
single
bill
and,
as
a
historical
note,
that
requirement
was
added
to
nrs
in
1997,
at
the
request
of
prosecutors,
because
of
concerns
that
too
many
cases
were
being
dismissed
not
because
a
drink
was
spilled,
but
because
of
attitudes
about
domestic
violence.
N
For
example,
we
know
that
victims
can
be
prosecuted
in
cases
where
in
self-defense
they
cause
injury,
which
is
not
identified
as
self-defense
or
in
frustration
or
fear
they
lash
out
and
are
the
ones
arrested.
These
might
be
the
kinds
of
defendants
that
would
be
particularly
suited
for
this
type
of
court.
N
D
There
are,
if
you
have
recently
joined
the
meeting,
and
you
would
like
to
provide
a
testimony
in
support
of
bill.
Ab39
press
star
9,
now
to
take
your
place
in
the
queue
and
we
will
go
on
to
our
next
caller
with
the
caller,
with
the
last
three
digits
of
three
one,
eight
slowly
state
and
then
spell
your
name
for
the
record.
You
will
have
two
minutes
and
may
begin.
E
Good
morning,
this
is
kendra:
burchie
k,
e
n
d,
r,
a
d
e
r
t
s
d,
h
y
with
the
washoe
county
public
defender's
office.
Thank
you
to
jager
and
members
of
the
assembly
judiciary
for
allowing
me
to
speak
today
on
behalf
of
this
extremely
important
bill.
We
appreciate
assemblywoman
wen
for
all
of
her
hard
work
with
this
special
with
creating
an
enabling
statute
for
the
specialty
court
in
reno.
The
arena
municipal
court
currently
allows
for
those
charged
with
domestic
violence
to
participate
in
their
veterans
court
program.
E
This
has
been
extremely
successful,
where
I
can
say
that
I
have
several
clients
who
are
participating
in
that
program
and
are
doing
exceptionally
well.
It's
connecting
them
to
services,
it's
connecting
them
with
opportunities,
it's
allowing
them
to
obtain
employment,
housing
and
the
necessary
medical
attention
that
they
need.
In
order
to
succeed.
E
The
second
judicial
district
court
specialty
courts
have
a
very
high
success
rate
in
2018
to
2019.
They
indicated
that
they
had
over
a
70
and
I
believe
it
was
over
70,
but
at
least
for
veterans
court.
It
was
a
77
percent,
successful
completion
rate,
even
individuals
who
started
a
specialty
court
program,
but
did
not
finish.
It
still
benefited
from
having
been
in
the
program.
According
to
the
second
judicial
court's
study
in
2018.
E
Even
if
an
individual
failed
to
complete
a
specialty
court
program,
the
fact
of
their
participation
in
a
specialty
court
program
substantially
reduced
the
likelihood
that
an
individual
would
commit
another
offense
in
domestic
battery.
This
is
extremely
important
as
you've
heard
myself
and
mr
pero
testify
over
and
over.
E
We
need
to
do
something
in
order
to
address
our
offenders
for
domestic
battery
in
order
to
ensure
that
we're
no
longer
in
the
top
tiers
with
these
issues,
and
we
truly
believe
that
this
is
one
of
the
ways
that
we
can
successfully
accomplish,
of
reducing
our
domestic
battery
cases
by
offering
courts
and
opportunities
to
ensure
that
we
are
providing
offenders
with
the
appropriate
treatment.
Thank
you
for
your
time
and
attention
today.
A
A
A
D
And
we
will
begin
with
the
caller
with
the
last
three
digits
of
573,
please
slowly
state
and
spell
your
name
for
the
record.
You
will
have
two
minutes:
press
star,
9
press
star
6
now
to
unmute
yourself.
E
Good
morning
my
name
is
melissa,
x-line
e-x-l-I-n-e
good
morning,
chairman
yeager
committee
members,
I'm
a
family
law
attorney
in
northern
nevada,
and
I
work
with
the
nevada
justice
association,
I'm
here
in
opposition,
but
I'm
looking
forward
to
working
with
chairman
or
vice
chairman
when
and
continuing
efforts
to
make
acceptable
modifications.
As
we
proceed
down
the
legislative
path,
our
concerns
echo
assembly,
women,
cohen
ab-339,
could
have
unintended
consequences
that
does
more
harm
than
good
to
nevada
families.
E
Specifically,
this
includes
erasing
or
wiping
out
the
underlying
criminal
act
that
led
to
the
domestic
violence
charge,
while
it's
meritorious
to
look
at
addressing
criminal
issues
in
a
way
that
helps
the
person
charged
when
appropriate.
We
cannot
forget
about
other
legal
implications
and
the
further
harm
to
a
domestic
violence
victim.
E
The
more
the
court
must
consider
the
best
interest
of
children
factors
and
one
obviously
big
factor
to
weigh
is
whether
there
was
an
act
of
domestic
violence
by
a
parent.
If
this
allegation
of
the
of
domestic
violence
is
raised
in
the
family
court,
it
can
strongly
impact
the
custody
decision.
The
fact
that
a
matter
was
admitted
to
or
adjudicated
in
a
related
criminal
case
by
the
offending
parent.
It
directly
impacts
a
custody
matter
and
it
eases
eases
the
generally
hard
to
prove
often
he
said
she
said
factual
situation.
E
The
accused
party
can
still
respond
to
the
allegation
and
make
his
or
her
case
before
the
family
court,
but
the
burden
shifts
this
issue
in
family
court,
and
this
is
very
important
to
consider
the
way
ab-339
is
written.
The
non-offending
parent
would
be
in
an
odd
situation
because
the
criminal
actions
are
wiped
clean
legally,
even
with
the
seven
year
period
before
sealing
applies,
the
many
family
relationships
and
custody
custody
disputes
have
cascading
and
ongoing
returns
to
court
to
address
custody
later
on,
there
can
be
multiple
interactions
with
police.
E
A
seal
or
a
dismissal
in
this
way
could
undermine
the
presumption
statute
that
we
look
to
in
family
court
and
that
the
offender
that
the
offender
engaged
in
the
act
of
domestic
violence
and
then
hamstring
the
victim
down
the
road.
Essentially,
it
could
blind
the
family
court
judge
from
access
to
very
important
information.
E
The
act
of
domestic
violence
and
considerations
regarding
whether
this
took
place
should
not
be
subject
to
illegal
erasure
and
thus
victimizing
the
non-offending
parent
again.
The
proposed
amendments
are
a
good
start.
We
are
thankful
to
assemblywoman
gwen
for
being
open-minded
on
this
issue
and
we're
confident
that
she'll
hear
us
out
on
this
issue,
but
we
were
looking
at
the
issue
of
of
examples
of
how
the
court
gets
information
in
other
cases.
So,
for
example,
in
abusing
the
cases
governed
by
nrs432b,
there
is
the
ability
of
the
court
to
keep
records
confidential.
E
But
we
don't
act
like
the
underlying
act,
didn't
take
place
or
fully
wipe
it
wipe
it
clean
from
legal
existence.
Indeed,
the
family
court
judge
appropriately
may
still
learn
that
there
have
been
an
allegation
regarding
child
abuse
and
neglect
and
subject
to
precautions
to
protect
the
accused,
and
the
record
is
available
with
appropriate
dissemination
to
the
courts.
In
certain
circumstances,
the
key
here
that
we
want
to
focus
on
is
just
to
make
sure
that
the
family
court
judge
has
the
information
in
front
of
them
as
the
trier
of
fact,
for
a
full
and
fair
adjudication.
E
So,
looking
at
the
examples
that
were
talked
about
the
drink
on
the
head
versus
you
know
punching
your
spouse
in
the
face
these
kind
of
this,
this
continuum
of
action
and
being
full
and
appropriate
and
how
that's
considered.
We
just
want
to
make
sure,
as
family
court
participants
that
the
information
gets
to
the
trier
of
facts
so
that
that
person
can
make
the
right
decision
when
custody
is
at
stake.
I've
personally
represented
parents
on
both
sides
of
this
issue,
been
accused
and
and
denied
things
or
accused
someone
and
been
a
victim
of
things.
E
D
K
Liz
ortenberger
l,
I
z,
o
r
t
e
n
b:
u
r
g
e
r,
I'm
the
ceo
for
safe
nest.
Thank
you
to
chairman
yeager
and
the
committee
for
hearing
this
bill
today
and
assemblywoman
win
for
bringing
it
forward
as
the
largest
provider
in
the
state
of
domestic
violence
services.
We
are
unique
in
that
we
are
the
only
provider
that
works
with
survivors,
batterers
and
children
affected
by
this
epidemic.
K
We
see
this
from
all
sides
and
we
stand
in
opposition
to
ab-339,
for
this
reason
creating
a
subgroup
of
batterers
treatment
that
the
courts
can
implement
without
oversight
of
the
already
existing
administrative
code
as
contrary
to
what
we've
been
working
with,
not
only
with
the
ag's
office,
but
also
including
extensive
research.
That's
currently
happening
with
unr.
K
In
addition,
restorative
justice
is
being
studied
by
unlv
in
the
domestic
violence
con
context,
and
none
of
that
is
included
in
this
bill
either.
We
are
stand
ready
to
work
with
the
assembly
woman
to
correct
this
bill,
but
at
no
time
should
firearms
be
put
back
in
the
hands
of
a
domestic
violence
batterer,
simply
because
they've
completed
classes.
A
A
D
D
D
B
As
the
vice
chair
said,
not
all
domestic
violence
situations
are
the
same,
and
domestic
violence
calls
are
the
most
dangerous
one
of
the
most
dangerous
calls
that
our
officers
go
on.
We
are
bound
by
state
law
to
arrest
the
primary
aggressor
when
the
primary
aggressor
can
be
determined
and
about
20
percent
of
our
homicides
annually
are
domestic
violence
related.
So
this
is
a
very
serious
issue
in
a
very
serious
area.
B
We
definitely
want
people
to
get
the
help
that
they
need
and
we
support
programs
that
provide
treatment
and
programs
that
end
domestic
violence,
but
we
also
want
to
ensure
that
potential
abusers
are
not
getting
two
bites
of
the
apple
so
to
speak,
and
we
want
to
ensure
that
victims
are
protected.
B
G
A
Thank
you
vice
chairwin,
for
your
presentation
this
morning
and
again,
thank
you
to
miss
salcedo,
who
did
an
excellent
job
testifying
this
morning
as
well.
I
will
now
close
the
hearing
on
assembly
bill
339
committee
members
that
takes
us
to
our
next
item
on
the
agenda,
which
is
public
comment.
By
way
of
reminder,
we
reserve
up
to
30
minutes
for
public
comment
at
the
end
of
each
meeting.
A
Callers
on
the
public
comment
line
will
have
two
minutes
to
provide
public
comment.
Public
comment
is
a
time
to
raise
matters
of
a
general
nature
that
are
within
the
jurisdiction
of
the
assembly
judiciary,
committee
bps.
Could
we
please
go
to
the
public
comment
line
and
see
if
there
is
anybody
there
who'd
like
to
give
public
comment
this
morning.
D
A
A
Okay,
I'm
not
seeing
anything
again.
Thank
you
all
for
being
here
on
time
and
helping
get
through
those
bills.
This
morning
I
do
have
good
news.
We
have
a
meeting
tomorrow,
but
we're
going
to
change
the
start
time
to
nine
o'clock
tomorrow,
so
you'll
get
an
extra
hour.
So
again
you
can
be
here
at
eight,
but
I
won't
be
here
until
nine.
So
if
you
want
to
show
up
at
nine,
we
have
a
work
session
tomorrow,
we're
going
to
start
with
the
work
session
at
nine
o'clock.
A
We'll
get
that
document
out
to
all
of
you
sometime
this
afternoon,
hopefully
to
take
a
look
at
those
bills.
There
shouldn't
be
any
surprises
there
in
terms
of
amendments
or
just
the
amendments
that
were
talked
about
in
the
various
bill
hearings,
and
then
we
do
have
a
bill
hearing
tomorrow
as
well.
So
we'll
take
that
second
after
we
do
the
work
session.
A
So,
even
though
we're
starting
at
night,
I
would
ask
if
everyone
can
be
here
promptly
at
nine,
so
we
can
get
our
work
session
done
in
a
timely
manner
and
then
for
the
rest
of
the
week.
We're
still
looking
at
what
those
agendas
might
look
like
as
bills
come
in
on
the
floor,
so
I
don't
have
an
update
for
you.
Yet,
on
thursday
and
friday
most
likely,
we
will
have
judiciary
committee
meetings,
I
just
don't
know
which,
what
time
and
which
bills
at
this
point.