1 / 28

STUDY OF MAINE S PRETRIAL CASE PROCESSING

chika
Download Presentation

STUDY OF MAINE S PRETRIAL CASE PROCESSING

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

    1. STUDY OF MAINE’S PRETRIAL CASE PROCESSING Corrections Alternatives Advisory Committee Presented by: Marie VanNostrand, Ph.D. May 25, 2006

    2. Corrections Alternatives Advisory Committee The Corrections Alternatives Advisory Committee was created by the Maine Legislature in Spring 2005 to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the State’s corrections system and to better manage costs

    3. Corrections Alternatives Advisory Committee Interim Report to the Maine Legislature – CAAC made several recommendations, one of which was to “reduce the average length of pretrial defendant’s stay within jail.” Based on a key finding: Pretrial defendant’s average length of stay along with probation revocations are driving costs and the use of jail bed space

    4. Pretrial Study CAAC commissioned a study of pretrial case processing in Maine Interest in study precipitated by need to better understand:

    5. Pretrial Study Goals Goals of the Study are to identify: strategies to appropriately manage defendant risk and needs opportunities for improvement in system efficiency at the state & local levels opportunities for improvement in system effectiveness at the state & local levels strategies to enhance state and county coordination

    6. Study Introduction Comprehensive study of all 16 Counties examining the following: the way local criminal justice systems currently process cases pending trial how the risk & needs of pretrial defendants are determined how bail decisions are made the resources available to manage pretrial risk and needs Complete data analysis of the populations for five County jails: Aroostook Cumberland Kennebec Penobscot York

    7. Study Timeline The project began on April 3, 2006 and is scheduled for completion on or about September 15, 2006

    8. Project Staff CAAC Pretrial Study Project Teams Cheryl Gallant, Onsite Project Manager Luminosity Consultants Marie VanNostrand, Ph.D. Patrick Jablonski, Ph.D. Gena Keebler Brian Kays Partnership with the National Institute of Corrections (NIC)

    9. Pretrial Study Project Teams CAAC Pretrial Study Project Team Mary Ashton, NIC Harold Doughty, MDOC Hartwell Dowling, Judiciary Neale Duffett, Defense Attorney Evert Fowle, District Attorney Cheryl Gallant, Cheryl A. Gallant, Inc Denise Lord, MDOC Robert Mullen, Maine District Court Judge Pat Murtagh, Volunteers of America Glenn Ross, Penobscot County Sheriff Mark Rubin, Muskie School of Public Service Elizabeth Simoni, Maine Pretrial Services Michael Vitiello, York County Jail Administrator Marie VanNostrand, Luminosity, Inc

    10. Pretrial Study Project Teams 5 County Analysis Project Team James Foss, Aroostook County Angela Berube, Cumberland County John Joy, Cumberland County Larry LaPointe, Cumberland County Glenn Ross, Penobscot County Linda Golden, Penobscot County Keith Hotaling, Penobscot County Everett Flannery, Kennebec County Randall Liberty, Kennebec County Richard Wurpel, Kennebec County David Lambert, York County Michael Vitiello, York County Hartwell Dowling, Judiciary Evert Fowle, District Attorney Mark Rubin, Muskie School Elizabeth Simoni, Maine Pretrial Serv. Mary Ashton, NIC Cheryl Gallant, Cheryl A. Gallant, Inc Marie VanNostrand, Luminosity, Inc Patrick Jablonski, Luminosity, Inc

    11. Implementation Strategy Stakeholders Important to actively engage stakeholders: Letters outlining study Informational e-mails News releases Invitation to attend CAAC meetings Distribution of project team materials Presentation at stakeholder group forums Solicit input regarding study findings and recommendations made to CAAC Publicize study findings (e.g., annual association meetings)

    12. Implementation Strategy Case Processing Research each County criminal justice system: county population profile crime and arrest rates law enforcement agencies district and superior court structure, locations, and case filings jail location, capacity, daily population pretrial, probation, and specialty courts & programs

    13. Implementation Strategy Case Processing Jail booking and intake Initial appearance in Court Arraignments Bail hearings

    14. Implementation Strategy Case Processing law enforcement sheriff’s department jail booking/intake and classification staff bail commissioners district attorney’s office lawyer of the day district court judge & clerk

    15. Implementation Strategy 5-County Data Analysis Complete data analysis of the populations for five County jails: Aroostook Cumberland Kennebec Penobscot York

    16. Implementation Strategy 5-County Data Analysis Complete data analysis of the populations for five County jails develop pretrial population profiles develop locally sentenced population profiles identify pretrial risks and needs determine the pretrial average length of stay determine the portion of the population that have probation violations

    17. Project Status 8 weeks into a 24 week study 7 of 16 Counties have been examined Beginning process of collecting and analyzing jail population data Preliminary identification of significant areas of improvement in efficiency and effectiveness Next briefing scheduled for July

    18. Study Activities On-site visits completed as planned in the following Counties: Cumberland Androscoggin Sagadahoc Lincoln York Oxford Currently on-site in Kennebec

    19. Study Activities law enforcement sheriff’s department jail booking/intake and classification staff bail commissioners district attorney’s office lawyer of the day district court judge & clerk

    20. Study Activities

    21. Study Activities Began working with the 5 Counties to examine the availability of desired data to complete the data analysis

    22. Study Activities

    23. Study Challenges Data availability is limited in a number of areas, including two critical areas Criminal History History of FTA History of Violence General adult history Bail Information Not automated

    24. Early Observations Maine’s criminal justice system has a number of particularly efficient, effective, and impressive characteristics Lawyer of the day Video arraignment Regional jail Specialty courts Regional CJ automated systems Warrant repositories Justices/Judges ability to ‘sit’ for each other

    25. Early Observations Accessibility of Criminal Histories are rarely or selectively comprehensive at pretrial stage Local vs. SBI & III/NCIC Rarely available to Bail Commissioners Sometimes available to ADA for initial appearance (practices vary greatly from County to County) Judge and LOD rely on ADA for CH Pretrial services does not have access to CH

    26. Early Observations Initial assessment of pretrial risk Most cases completed by Bail Commissioner ID rarely confirmed through fingerprints Limited criminal history available (local) Self-reported limited information: community ties, residence, employment Rarely substance use, mental or physical health information Information relayed by phone by corrections or police officer

    27. Early Observations Initial assessment of pretrial risk by Bail Commissioners Rarely any legal background 8 hours of training during first year of appointment Provided limited information to set bail Fee for service No formal identification Excessive conditions of bail

    28. Early Observations Availability of Pretrial Services Four counties have no pretrial services All counties visited report pretrial services to be severely understaffed and under funded Judges using Police Departments to provide pretrial supervision due to under funded services Under funded pretrial services results in – Fewer releases pretrial Longer detention pretrial

    29. Emerging Issues Potential Sources of Jail Crowding Bail Commissioner practices Insufficient or no pretrial services Delay in Ct. appointed attorneys Mandatory fines (indigent) Probation violations (authority, practices, time to disposition) Court date timeframe Lack of alternative misdemeanor sentences (jail in lieu of alternative and misuse of pretrial services)

More Related