1 / 31

Jaime Esparza District Attorney

Jaime Esparza District Attorney. District Attorney’s Office 34th Judicial District (El Paso, Hudspeth and Culberson Counties). Intake Options. ARREST. CHARGE. JAIL. 1. ARREST. CHARGE. MAGISTRATE. JAIL. 2. ARREST. MAGISTRATE. JAIL. CHARGE. 3. Direct Filing of Criminal Cases:.

emiko
Télécharger la présentation

Jaime Esparza District Attorney

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. Jaime EsparzaDistrict Attorney District Attorney’s Office34th Judicial District(El Paso, Hudspeth and Culberson Counties)

  2. Intake Options ARREST CHARGE JAIL 1 ARREST CHARGE MAGISTRATE JAIL 2 ARREST MAGISTRATE JAIL CHARGE 3

  3. Direct Filing of Criminal Cases: Closing the Paper Trap

  4. Direct Electronic Filing: Closing the Paper Trap (2006) • Why is this Important to Indigent Defense? • Assumption– for prompt appointment to be meaningful charges should be filed promptly. • Assumption – cases lacking evidence to prosecute will be screened out faster resulting in less time in jail. • Assumption – technology enhancements can facilitate changes in court processing that help local jurisdictions better meet the requirements of the FDA.

  5. Purpose of this Study: • Provide practical evidence-based guidance for jurisdictions to follow in implementing criminal justice processes that are fair, accurate, timely, efficient, and effective • Caveat: • There should never be a rush to judgment. Processes should ensure that defense counsel and prosecutors alike have ample opportunity to develop their cases.

  6. Study Sample Number of Misdemeanor Defendants and Charges by Study Site Calendar Year 2004

  7. I. Cases Screened and Released at the time of arrest

  8. * Excludes warrant cases where filing was made prior to arrest. Mean Days from Arrest until Prosecutor Receives Law Enforcement Report* DIMS Non-DIMS • Lengthy delay in transferring offense reports to the prosecutor can make it difficult for manual case processing systems to quickly dispose cases. • DIMS speeds case information to decision-makers.

  9. Early DA Screening Charges Declined Released Non-DIMS DIMS Arrest DA Screening (24/7/365) Charge Accepted (by LE Officer) Charge Accepted (by DA) Jail Booking DA Screening (up to 30 days) • DA screening occurs at arrest • Defendants with no charges are released immediately

  10. I. Cases Screened and Released at Arrest COUNTY savings: $663 / defendant PERSONAL savings: $549 / defendant El Paso-DIMS Cases Rejected Prior to Booking DIMS • 19% of El Paso’s DIMS cases were reviewed and rejected for prosecution at the scene of offense. Harris County estimates a minimum 10% case rejection rate prior to booking.

  11. I. Cases Screened and Released at Arrest EP County Cost Factors • Professional Time • Non-DIMS: 5 hrs. on average • Defendant transport, booking, offense report submission, magistration, and bond. • $18.73/hr. x 1.28 benefits • Assigned Counsel • 41 percent of cases @ $168.90/case avg. • Pre-Disposition Jail Days • Non-DIMS: 65 percent of cases detained 14.57 days avg. • $50/day

  12. I. Cases Screened and Released at Arrest EP Defendant Cost Factors • Lost Wages • 65 percent of Non-DIMS cases detained 14.57 days avg. • $41.20/day @ minimum wage • Retained Counsel • 11 percent of cases @ $200/case avg. • Bond Fees • 81 percent of cases @ $170/case avg.

  13. I. Cases Screened and Released at Arrest If All El Paso County Misdemeanors Were Processed through DIMS… • 19 percent of all 13,927 defendants would have their cases reviewed and declined before arrest(2,646 cases) • Resulting Savings vs. Non-DIMS: • EP County:$1.49 million ($663/case) • Defendants:$1.23 million($549/case)

  14. II. Cases Bonded within three days of arrest

  15. Streamlined Access to Bond No Bond Posted Non-DIMS Seek Arrest Warrant Charges Accepted (by LE Officer) Defendant Transported to Magistrate Probable Cause Determination Jail Booking Bond Posted Released (5 hours/case)

  16. Streamlined Access to Bond No Bond Posted DIMS Avg. Misdemeanor Bond in El Paso: DIMS: $1,102 Non-DIMS: $2,580 Charges Accepted (By DA) Jail Booking Bond Set By Judge’s Schedule Bond Posted Released (3 hours/case) • Bond schedule approved by judges expedites bond and improves consistency. • Defendants preferring bond set at magistration will see the judge within 24 hours of arrest.

  17. II. Cases Released on Bond within Three Days of Arrest Percent of Cases Released on Bond within 3 Days of Arrest DIMS Non-DIMS • DIMS does not have as much impact on processing bonded defendants. • The majority of defendants are released on bond at every site.

  18. II. Cases Released on Bond within Three Days of Arrest Mean Days from Arrest to Release for Bonded Defendants Non-DIMS DIMS • Time from arrest to release of bonded defendants is the same irrespective of DIMS use.

  19. III. Cases Disposed within three days of arrest

  20. III. Cases Disposed within Three Days of Arrest Percent of Defendants with Cases Disposed within 3 Days of Arrest DIMS Non-DIMS Charges filed in avg.10 hours Charges filed in avg.34 hours • When charges were available quickly, sites with direct electronic filing could dispose of 15% to 25% of cases within 3 days.

  21. IV. Cases Detained three after days after arrest

  22. IV. Cases Detained 3 Days after Arrest If All El Paso County Misdemeanors Were Processed through DIMS… • There would be a 40 percent reduction in pre-disposition jail days. • Resulting Savings vs. Non-DIMS: • EP County:$3.95 million • Defendants:$3.26 million

  23. Case Quality for the State • Charges are developed while witnesses are still present. • Automated templates and online references improve charges. • Speed, accuracy and consistency of filings • Fair, accurate, and timely case resolution. Benefits Of Direct Electronic Filing

  24. Cost Savings to the Public Benefits Of Direct Electronic Filing • Cases lacking evidence to prosecute are screened out at arrest. • No book-in/processing costs • No detention costs • No court appointed counsel costs • No prosecution expenses • Prosecuted cases are disposed quickly. • Clears jail cells • Reduces court dockets • Total estimated savings to El Paso County if all misdemeanors were processed using DIMS: • $5.86 million

  25. Benefits Of Direct Electronic Filing Defendant Rights • Defendants with charges that cannot be successfully prosecuted are promptly released. • Defendants that are prosecuted can meet their legal obligations quickly. • Total estimated savings to El Paso County defendants if all misdemeanors were processed using DIMS: • $4.28 million

  26. Benefits Of Direct Electronic Filing Quality of Legal Defense • With early knowledge of charges: • Defense counsel can have a more meaningful dialog with client and prosecuting attorney. • Charges can be quickly resolved.

  27. Conclusion • Direct electronic filing successfully: • Increases system-wide efficiency; • Improves communication; and • Frees resources needed to strengthen indigent defense services.

  28. Intake Options ARREST CHARGE JAIL 1 ARREST CHARGE MAGISTRATE JAIL 2 ARREST MAGISTRATE JAIL CHARGE 3

  29. Opinions • Tex. Atty. Gen. Op. GA-0457, 2006 WL 3734652 (Tex.A.G.). • Terrell v. City of El Paso, No. EP-03-CV-0364-KC, 481 F.Supp.2d 757 (Feb.26,2007). • Telles v. City of El Paso, No. EP-03-CV-0528-KC, 481 F.Supp.2d 773 (March 8,2007). • Bittakis v. City of El Paso, No. EP-05-0402-FM, 480 F.Supp.2d 895 (March 13,2007). • Burkett v. City of El Paso, No. EP-06-CA-0122-FM, 513 F.Supp.2d 800 (March 14,2007).

  30. Resources Available for download at: www.courts.state.tx.us/tfid/resources.asp Evaluating the Impact of Integrated Electronic Systems in Criminal Case Filings: Closing the Paper Trap Dottie Carmichael, Ph.D. Research Scientist Melissa Gibson, Ph. D. Assistant Research Scientist Michael Voloudakis, Ph.D. Assistant Research Scientist Tony Fabelo, Ph. D. The JFA Institute, Austin, TX Direct Electronic Filing in Criminal Cases: Closing the Paper Trap Dottie Carmichael, Ph.D. Research Scientist

  31. Contact Information Jaime Esparza 34th Judicial District, District Attorney 500 E. San Antonio St. El Paso, TX 79901 915.546.2059 daesparza@epcounty.com

More Related