STAND. COM. REP. NO. 2591

Honolulu, Hawaii

RE:    S.B. No. 2367

       S.D. 1

Honorable Donna Mercado Kim

President of the Senate

Twenty-Seventh State Legislature

Regular Session of 2014

State of Hawaii

Madam:

     Your Committee on Judiciary and Labor, to which was referred S.B. No. 2367, S.D. 1, entitled:

"A BILL FOR AN ACT RELATING TO PRODUCTION OF RECORDS,"

begs leave to report as follows:

     The purpose and intent of this measure is to clarify chapter 806D, Hawaii Revised Statutes, by:

     (1)  Amending the definition of "recipient" to clarify that an out-of-state recipient who is issued criminal process must have conducted business or engaged in transactions or activities occurring at least in part in Hawaii;

     (2)  Clarifying that criminal process issued by or in another state:

          (A)  May be served upon a person or business located in Hawaii, but not a government agency;

          (B)  Is for the production of records in the actual or constructive possession of that person or business located in Hawaii; and

          (C)  Is based on a pending criminal investigation or prosecution in that other state;

     (3)  Specifying the circumstances under which certain persons or businesses located in Hawaii may be served criminal process issued by or in another state; and

     (4)  Specifying the information the service of criminal process issued by or in another state must include.

     Your Committee received testimony in support of this measure from the Department of the Attorney General; Department of the Prosecuting Attorney, City and County of Honolulu; and Police Department, City and County of Honolulu.

     Your Committee finds that Act 325, Session Laws of Hawaii 2012, codified as chapter 806D, Hawaii Revised Statutes, created a criminal long arm statute to authorize Hawaii courts to order the production of records, including electronic records, held by entities outside of the State for criminal matters.  Prior to the enactment of chapter 806D, Hawaii Revised Statutes, out-of-state entities could not be compelled to comply with service of process in criminal matters issued by Hawaii courts.  However, as the Department of the Attorney General notes in testimony, several issues have arisen out of this law, including a lack of a nexus requirement between a Hawaii recipient of process and the service-issuing state, confusion regarding the use of certain terms, and the potential for other states to issue process in an attempt to compel government agencies to disclose protected records.  This measure corrects these issues and improves the application of the criminal process records law.

     As affirmed by the record of votes of the members of your Committee on Judiciary and Labor that is attached to this report, your Committee is in accord with the intent and purpose of S.B. No. 2367, S.D. 1, and recommends that it pass Third Reading.

Respectfully submitted on behalf of the members of the Committee on Judiciary and Labor,

____________________________

CLAYTON HEE, Chair