Panel #1: Criminal Justice System Presentation for the Tacoma - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Panel #1: Criminal Justice System

Presentation for the Tacoma Property Crimes Reduction Task Force Meeting 3: January 6, 2016 Panelists: The Honorable Edmund Murphy, Judge, Pierce County Superior Court; The Honorable Drew Henke, Judge, Tacoma Municipal Court; Kristine Skipworth, Field Administrator, Department of Corrections; Jean Hayes, Supervising Deputy City Attorney; Prosecution Division; Stephen Penner, Chief Criminal Deputy, Pierce County Prosecutor; Michael Kawamura, Director, Pierce County Assigned Counsel

Today’s Presentation

 We will hear from the following Panelists:

 Prosecutors/City Attorney’s Office, Defense Bar, Judicial System  Washington State Department of Corrections (Confinement, Supervision)

* Agencies limited to Adult System

Who’s in this part of the system?

• Prosecuting Authority (Tacoma City Attorney, Pierce County

Prosecutor)

• No offense charged, nature and severity of offense.
• Conditions of release
• Recommendation as to conditions of Pre-Trial release (Bail versus P.R.)
• Judicial Officers
• Determination of probable cause as to charged offense.
• Pre-trial conditions of release.
• Prosecutor, Defense Counsel
• Case processing

Who’s in this part of the system?

Judicial Decision Pierce County Superior Court 2015

Approximate Total Admissions Approximate Total of Eligible Felony

• Drug Court

200 (Est.) A - 345 (Est.)

• Mental Health Court

35 (Est.) B - 1,843 (Est.)

• Friendship Diversion

151 cases referred C - 2,432 (Est.) (Prosecutor driven decision. No Judicial Involvement)

• Traditional SRA Resolutions Balance

Total Projected - 4,620 (Est.) (Confinement in PCJ or Prison, Fines) * All Jurisdictions within Pierce County Non SRA Cases, City of Tacoma Gross and Simple Misdemeanor cases are generally not subject to limitations of SRA, determinate sentences, prohibition on affirmative conduct as part of sentencing, etc. (Some misdemeanor and gross misdemeanor offenses have mandatory minimums for confinement and mandatory sentence conditions).

• Misdemeanor - Up to 90 days incarceration, fines, affirmative conditions, supervision
• Gross Misdemeanor – Up to 365 days incarceration, fines, affirmative conditions, supervision

Who’s in this part of the system?

 Judicial Decision Tacoma Municipal Court 2015

Mental Health Cases Total New Cases 172 (Est.) 2,577 (Est.) *To level of Competency Issues Misdemeanor & Gross Misdemeanor

 Post Disposition

• DOC Supervision (Felony)
• Bench Supervision (City of Tacoma Bench)

An informal ‘SWOC’ assessment – what we do well, where are the gaps?

Strength – Each agency excels at work they do, i.e. core functions Weaknesses – Individual agency communication with each other,

lack of coordination, lost opportunities for non-conventional action, loss of concerted efforts to share information, lost

• pportunities to address issues in holistic manner.

Opportunities – “See Above” Challenges – “See Above”

Current initiatives or programs relevant to reducing property crime

 Tacoma Municipal Court

• Dismiss and Refer
• Graffiti Task Force
• Retail Theft Program
• Burglary Emphasis
• Pierce County Superior Court
• Pre-trial Release
• Drug Court
• Mental Health Court
• Burglary Emphasis
• Friendship Diversion
• Staffing changes to address vulnerable client populations

Longer-term agency goals relevant to property crime reduction?

 Emphasis on having attorneys consider collateral consequences of dispositions and fashioning outcomes which increase odds of longer term client success within Rules of Professional Conduct.

How well are we coordinating -- with each

• ther, and with
• ther parts of

the system?

 Communication with each stakeholder. Need a more concerted effort to share information about those we have in common, trends, concerns, safety issues or ideas to keep communities safer.  Coordination and discussion regarding traditional case processing functions, frequent.  Coordination, discussion regarding outcomes on a holistic level are less frequent.

 Exceptions - Drug Court, Mental Health Court, Friendship Diversion

 Review of Conditions of Release Protocols

 Pre-trial release dismiss & refer

Suggestions and Observations

 Near universal response to property crime by traditional (SRA) basic punitive measures alone is unlikely to reduce future similar conduct.  Specific programs (Drug Court, Mental Health Court, Dismiss & Refer, etc.) currently address underlying causes of property crime. Percentage of application of existing programs are small in comparison to total number of criminal cases.  Eliminating/Reducing justice system resources on low end spectrum of criminal offenders may create additional resources to address high end offenders.