ENGROSSED
H. B. 3281
(By Delegates Amores and Craig)
[Introduced March 25, 2005; referred to the
Committee on the Judiciary ]
A BILL to amend the Code of West Virginia,1931, as amended, by
adding thereto a new section, designated §3-9-25, relating to
the crime of altering, destroying, or tampering with computer
equipment containing voter registration information;
accessing or attempting to access confidential voter
registration information and defenses.
Be it enacted by the Legislature of West Virginia:
That the Code of West Virginia, 1931, as amended, be amended
by adding thereto a new section, designated §3-9-25, to read as
follows:
ARTICLE 9. OFFENSES AND PENALTIES.
§3-9-25. Alteration, destruction, etc., of computer equipment
containing voter registration information; disclosure of
confidential voter registration information.
(a) Any person who knowingly, willfully and without
authorization from the Secretary of State or a county clerk, directly or indirectly, tampers with, deletes, alters, damages or
destroys or attempts to tamper with, delete, alter, damage or
destroy any computer or computer network that contains voter
registration files, records or data or who knowingly introduces,
directly or indirectly, a computer contaminant into any computer,
computer program or computer network that contains voter
registration files, records or data, is guilty of a misdemeanor
and, upon conviction thereof, shall be fined not more than one
thousand dollars or confined in a regional jail for not more than
six months, or both.
(b) Any person who knowingly, directly or indirectly,
accesses, attempts to access, or causes to be accessed any voter
registration files, records or data stored on or in a computer
owned by the Secretary of State, a county commission or
municipality, without authorization shall be guilty of a
misdemeanor and, upon conviction thereof, shall be fined not more
than five thousand dollars or confined in a regional jail not more
than six months, or both.
(c) In any criminal prosecution under subsection (b) against
an employee of the Secretary of State, a county commission or a
municipality, it shall not be a defense: (1) That the defendant had
reasonable grounds to believe that he or she had authorization to
access the data merely because of his or her employment; or (2)
that the defendant could not have reasonably known he or she did
not have authorization to access the data.