NOTE: As provided in LFC policy, this report is intended for use by the standing finance committees of the legislature.  The Legislative Finance Committee does not assume responsibility for the accuracy of the information in this report when used in any other situation.



The LFC is only preparing FIRs on bills referred to the Senate Finance Committee, the Senate Ways and Means Committee, the House Appropriations and Finance Committee and the House Taxation and Revenue Committee. The chief clerks are responsible for preparing and issuing all other bill analyses.



Only the most recent FIR version, excluding attachments, is available on the Intranet. Previously issued FIRs and attachments may be obtained from the LFC office in Room 416 of the State Capitol Building.





F I S C A L I M P A C T R E P O R T



SPONSOR: Dana DATE TYPED: 02/15/99 HB 590
SHORT TITLE: Protection of Mails Act SB
ANALYST: O'Connell

APPROPRIATION



Appropriation Contained
Estimated Additional Impact
Recurring

or Non-Rec

Fund

Affected

FY99 FY2000 FY99 FY2000
NFI NFI



(Parenthesis ( ) Indicate Expenditure Decreases)



Duplicates/Conflicts with/Companion to/Relates to

SOURCES OF INFORMATION



LFC files

Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC)



SUMMARY



Synopsis of Bill



House Bill 590 enacts a new section of the Criminal Code entitled the Protection of Mails Act. The bill would provide new criminal offenses related to the obstruction of the mails or mail carriers, destruction of letter boxes or mail, or theft of mail.



Offenders who obstruct, destroy or steal mail in an amount less than $0.1 would be guilty of a petty misdemeanor. Mail theft that involves mail valued over $0.1 but less than $1.0 is guilty of a misdemeanor; more than $1.0 but less than $2.5 a fourth degree felony; more than $2.5 but less than $20.0 a third degree felony; and over $20.0 a second degree felony.

Significant Issues



House Bill 590 would offer affirmative defenses where the defendant was unaware that the property was that of another, the defendant reasonably believed that he or she was entitled to the property involved or had a right to acquire or dispose of it, or the property belonged to the defendant's lawful spouse, unless they were not living together as husband and wife and were living in separate residences.



BOC/gm