NOTE:  As provided in LFC policy, this report is intended only 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 for other purposes.

 

The most recent FIR version (in HTML & Adobe PDF formats) is available on the Legislative Website.  The Adobe PDF version includes all attachments, whereas the HTML version does not.  Previously issued FIRs and attachments may be obtained from the LFC in Suite 101 of the State Capitol Building North.

 

 

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

 

 

 

SPONSOR:

HJC

 

DATE TYPED:

 3/19/03

 

HB

215/HJCS

 

SHORT TITLE:

Protection of Mails Act

 

SB

 

 

 

ANALYST:

Fox-Young

 

APPROPRIATION

 

Appropriation Contained

Estimated Additional Impact

Recurring

or Non-Rec

Fund

Affected

FY03

FY04

FY03

FY04

 

 

 

 

 

$0.1

See Narrative

 

 

(Parenthesis ( ) Indicate Expenditure Decreases

 

SOURCES OF INFORMATION

 

Responses Received From:

Corrections Department (CD)

Attorney General (AG)

Association of District Attorneys (AODA)

Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC)

 

SUMMARY

 

     Synopsis of Bill

 

The House Judiciary Committee Substitute for HB 215 enacts the crime of “destruction of a letter box,” making it a misdemeanor to intentionally destroy a letter box. 

 

Destruction of a letter box consists of intentionally and without the consent of the owner:

·        Tearing down, taking, damaging or destroying a letter box; or

·        Breaking open a letter box.

 

     Significant Issues

There is a question as to whether federal law would preempt this Act. 

The AG notes that federal law already punishes anyone who “knowingly and willfully obstructs or retards the passage of the mail, or any carrier or conveyance carrying the mail” with a fine and up to six months in jail.  Additionally, AG notes that Congress has exclusive authority “to establish post offices and post roads.”  (U.S. Const. Art. I, § 8)

 

AG reports that both federal and state courts have indicated that federal law may preempt state regulation of the mail.  In Carter v. State (420 So.2d 292, 298 Ala. Ct. Crim. App. 1982), the court ruled that “Alabama may be precluded from prosecuting offenses involving mail theft by virtue of the preemption doctrine.”  The AG also references United States v. Eddy (25 F. Cas. 975 N.D. Ill. 1858) where the court ruled that once a letter is in the mail “the laws of the United States operate on it, and not the laws of the state.” 

 

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS

 

Courts, district attorneys and public defenders would likely experience increases in caseload, with the passage of this bill.  

 

County jails will likely see population increases as a result of the bill.

 

The Corrections Department (CD) notes that probation and parole may see an increase in clients. 

 

JCF/yr