L A W

O F F I C E

O F

T H E

P U B L I C

D E F E N D E R

Delivering America's Promise of Justice for All

2004-2005
ANNUAL REPORT

M

C

P

D

M A R I C O P A

C O U N T Y

CONTENTS
CONTENTS
purpose and goals

FY05
Annual Report

3
improvement initiatives

4
training and diversity

organizational chart

6

10

budget and mfr

12
statistical abstracts

14

The mission of the Office of the Public Defender is to provide quality
legal representation to indigent individuals assigned to us by the
court, thus safeguarding the fundamental legal rights of each member
of the community.
Page 2

MARICOPA COUNTY PUBLIC DEFENDER'S OFFICE

GOALS
GOALS
T

he Maricopa County Public Defender’s Office

provides tremendous value to the community by

FY05
Annual Report

To enhance the professionalism
and productivity of all staff.

serving an important public safety function. By
seeking effective dispositions and addressing the
underlying problems that contribute to their criminal
behavior, MCPD gives clients their best chance to
become productive and law-abiding individuals.
Our goals are:

defend

protect

To perform our obligations in
a fiscally responsible manner

enhance

including maintaining cost
effectiveness by limiting the

promote

percentage of increase in the
annual cost per case to no more

To protect the rights of our clients, to guarantee

than the percentage of increase

that clients receive equal protection under the

in the overall annual funding

law, regardless of race, creed, national origin or

of the County’s criminal justice

socioeconomic status, and to ensure that all ethical

group.

improve

ensure

and constitutional responsibilities and mandates are

partner

respond

fulfilled.
produce

To obtain and promote dispositions that are
effective in reducing recidivism, improving clients’

resolve

well-being, and enhancing quality of life for all.
achieve

To work in partnership with other agencies to
improve access to justice, develop rational justice

represent

system policies, and maintain appropriate caseload
and performance standards.

lead

Page 3

MARICOPA COUNTY PUBLIC DEFENDER'S OFFICE

IMPROVEMENT
IMPROVEMENTINITIATIVES
INITIATIVES
A dvocacy for system wide and internal process

Teen Courts

improvements are part of our ongoing commitment
as members of the criminal justice system. The

We staffed teen courts in Tempe, Chandler,

Office took a leading role in several criminal justice

Fountain Hills, Glendale and Gilbert. These courts

system improvement initiatives this year. Through

are proving very effective in positively impacting

a variety of opportunities, efforts were made to

teenage offenders and keeping them out of the

enhance services and processes. What follows are

juvenile justice system.

snapshots of some of our efforts.

Project Restore

Homeless Court
Staff assisted members of our community, especially
We are particularly proud of our efforts towards

the children, by restoring their rights through

establishing a Homeless Court in Phoenix. A

participation in Project Restore. This project is

homeless court is a special court session held

a collaborative effort with the Supreme Court

periodically at local shelters that offers homeless

Commission on Minorities, the Arizona Building

individuals an opportunity to resolve outstanding

Blocks Initiative, the Maricopa County Attorney’s

misdemeanor criminal cases, thus eliminating

Office, the Clerk of the Maricopa County Superior

significant barriers to successful reintegration

Court, and others.

into the community. The project is a partnership

Community Speaking Engagements

between the court, prosecutor, public defender,
and local shelters and service agencies.

Intervention for the Seriously Mentally Ill

We continued to educate the citizens of our
community by having our attorneys participate in
Cop Watch and speaking at schools (elementary

The Office participated in Supervisor Don Stapley’s

- high school). In addition, attorneys participated

Commission on Justice System Intervention for the

in several "Know Your Rights" forums, two at Arizona

Seriously Mentally Ill. The commission is exploring

State University and one at the Mesa Public Library.

alternative approaches for working with mentally ill

The forums are open to the public. Members of the

individuals who come into contact with the criminal

community are provided general information about

justice system.

their rights, including how to assert them.

Page 4

M A R I C O P A C O U N T Y P U B L I C D E F E N D E R ' S O F F I C E

M C
P D
Juvenile Diversion

FY05
Annual Report

the new IRIS database. Included in IRIS are the
Assigned Attorney and Scheduled Court Event

Staff continued to work with the Probation

data feeds, a Spangenberg case weighting

Department, the Juvenile Division of Superior Court

feature and Outlook calendaring of court

and the County Attorney to resolve juvenile matters

events. A comprehensive IRIS training program

without the need of court intervention by providing

is in development and will be delivered to Trial

advice to children who request it at the diversion

Division staff. IRIS will be deployed to a platform

level.

that includes 24 hour a day, 7 day per week

E-Filing

application delivery.

The Office is working with the Clerk of the Superior

We established a fully redundant/fault tolerant

Court to more widely implement its E-filing project.

hardware and network infrastructure to support

We have trained attorneys and staff from our

the IRIS application. This will ensure that system

Vehicular Group and Trial Group D to use E-Filing as

failures due to server problems will not cause

a pilot project, and plan to set up training on how to

more than a ten minute window of downtime.

use E-Filing for our other trial groups next year.

This infrastructure also provides a standard
platform for all four IR departments as they

Indigent Representation Information System
The Indigent Representation Information System (IRIS)
is a major project in which our office is adapting the
County Attorney’s case management system to
replace our antiquated system (CRMS) and to take

come online with IRIS. This promotes the use of a
standard reporting process that will ensure that
County management receives statistics that are
calculated in a consistent manner between IR
departments.

full advantage of the efficiencies being created by
the County’s Integrated Criminal Justice Information
System (ICJIS). It is expected that IRIS will go live
early next fiscal year for all Trial Division staff. Over
750,000 records from CRMS will be converted to

Page 5

M A R I C O P A C O U N T Y P U B L I C D E F E N D E R ' S O F F I C E

TRAINING
TRAININGACTIVITIES
ACTIVITIES
T

he Office remains committed to operating

penalty litigation. The Arizona Supreme Court

one of the premier defender training programs in

and the Arizona Rules of Criminal Procedure

the country. Operating funds for the program are

require all lawyers involved in death penalty

generated entirely from monies collected through

litigation to receive a minimum of six credit

an assessment imposed on people who pay court-

hours of continuing legal education. Without

ordered fees and, therefore, the program creates

this seminar, many capital case litigators in

no tax burden on Maricopa County taxpayers.

Arizona would struggle to meet the guidelines for

Substantive, job-specific educational opportunities

representing clients facing the death penalty.

are afforded to staff using training funds. Training
of the quality offered enhances employees’ skills to

In March, we completed the Eighth Anniversary

perform their responsibilities and provides staff with

of the Office’s Trial Skills College. The college

needed tools to carry out their duties.

stressed cross-examination skills, openings,
jury communication skills and evidentiary

This year, the Office sponsored a statewide seminar

objections. An added focus of the program this

on DNA and related scientific issues. DNA has

year was voir dire (jury selection questioning).

become an integral part of all areas of public

Because the cost of facilities arranged through

defender representation. Consequently, training

Arizona State University are minimal, the Office

in the fundamentals of DNA scientific principles

was able to engage instructors with national

is crucial to quality representation. In addition,

reputations. Terence McCarthy, a nationally

the Office sponsored a seminar on jury selection,

recognized expert on cross-examination,

an important element for providing quality

taught impeachment and cross-examination.

representation. Ira Mecklenburg, a nationally known

Additionally, Professor Sunwolf, an attorney and

trainer, conducted the all-day seminar.

a national speaker on jury communications,
presented classes on storytelling and jury impact.

In conjunction with the Federal Public Defenders’
Habeas Division, the Office sponsored a two-day
death penalty seminar in December. The seminar

Remaining faculty were highly regarded trial
attorneys from the Office and other county public
defense agencies.

is crucial to lawyers representing clients in death
Page 6

MARICOPA COUNTY PUBLIC DEFENDER'S OFFICE

M C
P D

FY05
Annual Report

For the first time in many years, the Office

functional approach to the various needs of

sponsored a Spanish immersion course. Maria Jesus

employees who want to communicate briefly

Camara, a resident of Burgos, Spain, volunteered

with a Spanish-speaker in person or on the

her time to provide instruction in Spanish to the

telephone. Participants took part in listening and

Maricopa County Public Defender employees.

speaking competencies, learning how to respond

The Office’s Administrator Diane Terribile and

to simple questions and how to exchange key

Diversity Coordinator Norma Munoz organized and

information such as name, date of birth, address,

facilitated the training. This course was designed

and telephone numbers. There were eight total

to introduce and teach basic Spanish to beginners.

sessions, two per week, for four weeks. Fifteen

The goal was to provide an instructional and

employees attended.

Back row from Left to Right: Elmer Parker, Daniela Brokl, Alicia Maher, Michael Baker, Victoria Washington, Susan Corey
Front row from Left to Right: Maria Camara (Instructor), Alan Tavassoli, Jennifer Willmott, Kristi Adams, Diane Terribile (Administrator)

Page 7

MARICOPA COUNTY PUBLIC DEFENDER'S OFFICE

TRAINING
TRAININGACTIVITIES
ACTIVITIES
New Attorney Training continues to be one of the

program. In addition, the Office conducted four

focal points of providing CLE and other training

new employee orientation sessions for support

office-wide. The MCPD continues to receive

personnel. Twenty-five new employees went

recognition for the quality of our program. Five

through the four-day program. At the same

other public defender offices including Yavapai,

time, we provided training to sixteen attorneys

Coconino, Mohave and Pima County have sent

and four staff from other criminal justice offices.

new attorneys to our program and an administrator
The Office maintains our commitment to

from one of these other offices described the
Office's training program as the “gold standard”
of new attorney training in Arizona. This fiscal year,
the Office conducted five separate new attorney
training sessions. Approximately forty-two attorneys
participated in our intensive, multi-week training

Title of Conference/Training
Brush Fires v Forest Fires: Brown
Bag
The ABC’s of DNA

Date(s)

encouraging employees and other criminal
defense practitioners to better themselves by
taking part not only in educational opportunities
offered by the Office, but by affording staff
opportunities to attend outside training. Because

Topic

# of
attendees

July 12, 2004

Typology of male adolescent sex offenders

31

July 16, 2004

Overview of the use of DNA forensic evidence

62

Dealing w/the Language Barrier:
Brown Bag

August 5, 2004

Speaking to the Spanish-speaking client through an
interpreter

13

Work Furlough/Work Release &
Reach Out Programs

Sept. 28, 2004

Overview of the different jail programs

20

Death Penalty 2004

Dec. 2 & 3, 2004 Mitigation and litigation of capital cases

340

Voir Dire Trial Skills

February 4, 2005 Jury selection questioning techniques

65

2005 Trial Skills College
Interstate Compact: Brown Bag

March 16-18, 2005 Storytelling and cross-examination skills enhancement
March 21, 1005

45

The latest information and procedures from the probation
department

16

Gambling Addictions & Treatments:
Brown Bag

April 8, 2005

The process of treatment and addiction problems

17

Living Wills: Brown Bag

June 3, 2005

Step-by-step instructions on writing your own living will

38

rd

APDA: 3 Annual Conference

June 22-24, 2005 Various criminal defense and management related topics

906

* Denotes that the Office co-sponsored the event with another organization.

Page 8

MARICOPA COUNTY PUBLIC DEFENDER'S OFFICE

M C
P D

FY05
Annual Report

staff development is considered a critical component

The Public Defender Training Fund also provided

of our training efforts, the Office sponsored (or co-

more than ninety opportunities for staff to receive

sponsored) eleven training events this year. During

training sponsored by organizations other than

the year, staff participated in several training sessions

the County. Employees benefiting from these

and cultural experiences (see table). We recorded

opportunities included attorneys, paralegals,

1,553 attendees to the seminars listed. In addition,

mitigation specialists, investigators, secretaries

ninety-three employees registered for training classes

and other support/administrative staff. Of these

offered by County Staff Development and another

opportunities, twenty-six required out-of-state

ten employees took advantage of the County’s tuition

travel and seven required in-state travel, for which

reimbursement benefit.

arrangements and travel expenditures are closely
monitored.

Diversity Initiatives
The diversity strategy of the Public Defender’s Office is to create an atmosphere that encourages hiring,
retaining, and managing a diverse workforce, while promoting a workplace that is free from intolerance
and discrimination. Diversity initiatives and cultural experiences are viewed as opportunities to encourage
open thinking and allow staff to make a difference in the workplace. This year, the Office's Training
Facilitator, Norma Munoz, was selected to serve as the Office's Diversity Facilitator. In that role, Ms. Munoz
promotes events that foster culture diversity and enhance cultural experiences for staff of the Public
Defender’s Office. As part of the Office's diversity efforts, staff participated in the Maricopa County African
American and Hispanic Networks while also benefiting from the following opportunities this year:
•
•
•
•
•

Organizational Values: Valuing Diversity Training
What is the Difference Between S.M.I. and General Mental Health Status
Civil Rights History Celebration
The Fourth Annual Cesar Chavez Day Luncheon
APDA Conference (AZ Recognition of Racial Profiling, Women Offenders and Reintegration Issues,
Personality Styles in the Workplace, Jurisdictional Issues in Indian Country, Availability and Utilization of
Interpreters, Transcribers and Translators

Page 9

MARICOPA COUNTY PUBLIC DEFENDER'S OFFICE

ORGANIZATIONAL
ORGANIZATIONALCHART
CHART

Office of the Maricopa County Public Defender
Organization Chart
Public Defender
Jim Haas
P.D.
Administrator
(Terribile)

Spec Proj
Manager
(Farrow)

Support
Services
Manager
(Thomas)

HR
Spec
(Hyler)

Legislative
Liaison
(Vacant)

IT Trainer
(Graham)

HR
Executive
Assist
Asst
(Klosinski) (Storey)

Fin Srvs
Coord
(Hudak)

Facilities
Admin.
Coord
Recept.
(Wheeler) (Schaffer)

Legal Sec
Legal Support
Assist

Records Coord
(Blakely)
Shevock)

Legal Sec
Legal Support
Assist

Receptionist

Chief
Investigator
(Moller)

Legal
Support
Manager
(Pape)

Prgrmr/
DBA

IT Manager
(Brokschmidt)

LAN
LAN
Adminstrtr Adminstrtr
(Chang)
(Moore)
Help Desk

Capital
Investigators
Trial
Legal Sec
& Support Sup

Aides
Trial
Records
Staff

IRIS Project
Manager
(Adams)

Special Assistant
Attorney
(Mussman)

Appeals
Legal
Sec Sup

Trial Div
Coord
Homicide/MH
Sec

Group A
Investigators

Trial Lead
Investigators
(Clesceri - B)
(Fusselman - D)
(Munoz - E)
(Barwick - C&F)
(Casanova - Veh)

Process
Server

Transcrptnst

Investigators

Aides
Aide
Legal Sec
Legal Support
Assist
Capital
Mitigation
Specialist
(Davis)
Paralegal
Supervisors
(Spears - Mesa)
(Jaichner – Downtown)
(Rivera-Thomas - Capital)

Paralegals

Capital
Mitigation
Spclists.

Client
Services
Supervisor
(Johnson)
Initial
Services
Lead
Initial
Services

Mitigation
Spclists

Records
Processor

Juvenile
Legal
Sec Sup

Juvenile Lead
(Corbett)

Investigators

Trial Division
Trial Groups
(Prato)

Trial Division
Early Rep.
(Carrion)

Juvenile,
MH, & Appeals
(Phillis)

Training
Division
(Lowrance)

Training
Facilitators

Extern
Supervsr

Page 10

MARICOPA COUNTY PUBLIC DEFENDER'S OFFICE

FY05

M C
P D

Trial Division
Trial Groups
(Prato)

Annual Report

Special
Assignment
Attorneys
Homicide Attys
Major Fraud Atty

NW RCC
Lead
(Riggs)

Group Supervisors
(Davis - A)
(Blieden - B)
(Schreck - D)
(Bublik - E)
(Antonson - C)
(Peterson - F)
(Potter – Vehicular)

Senior
Attorneys
Senior Associate
Attorneys

Group Counsel
(Willmott - A)
(Wilson - B)
(Vincent - D)
(Evans - E)
(Shoemaker – C&F)
(Force – Vehicular)

Associate
Attorneys

Juvenile, MH
& Appeals
(Phillis)

Trial Division
Early Reprsntatn
(Carrion)

Training Division
(Lowrance)

NW RCC
Attys

PV
RCC/EDC
Lead
Lead
(Mitchell) (Conlon)

PV
Attys

RCC/EDC
Attys

SE RCC
Lead
(Bond)

Mental Health
Supervisor
(Jones)

SE RCC
Attys

Senior
Sr Associate
Associate

Special
Assignment
Attorneys
Mental Health
Justice Crt

Indigent
Representation

Law
Clerks

Public
Defender
Haas

Legal
Defender
Briney

OCC
Kennedy

Juvenile
Supervisors
(Merchant)
(Sanchez)

SEF
Senior
Sr Assoc.
Associate

Durango
Senior
Sr Assoc.
Associate

Mitigation
Specialist
SEF

Mitigation
Specialist

Juvenile
Appeal
Atty

Law
Clerk

Appeals
Supervisor
(Krull)

Appeals
Senior
Sr Assoc.
Associate

Law
Clerk

Legal
Advocate
Sherwin

Financial
Services
Manager
(Dairman)
Fiscal
Analyst
(McMillen)

Finance
Business
Asst
(Lazzell)

Page 11

MARICOPA COUNTY PUBLIC DEFENDER'S OFFICE

BUDGET
BUDGETABSTRACT
ABSTRACT
MARICOPA COUNTY PUBLIC DEFENDER’S OFFICE BUDGET
7/1/04 THROUGH 6/30/05

ACCOUNT
SALARIES & BENEFITS
GENERAL SUPPLIES

EXPENDITURES
$27,562,717.17
$552,051.02

FUEL

$38,476.36

NON-CAPITAL EQUIPMENT

$73,805.43

LEGAL SERVICES
HEALTH CARE SERVICES
OTHER SERVICES
OPERATING LEASES AND RENTS

$1,730,663.34
$900.00
$242,329.48
$1,956,305.51

REPAIRS AND MAINTENANCE

$66,274.48

INTERNAL SERVICE CHARGES

$106,694.03

TRAVEL AND EDUCATION

$300,343.64

POSTAGE/FREIGHT/SHIPPING
INTEREST EXPENSE (FTG Special Revenue Fund)
CAPITAL EQUIPMENT
VEHICLES
DEBT SERVICES (Technology Financing)
TOTAL EXPENDITURES

APPROPRIATIONS
GENERAL FUNDS
TRAINING SPECIAL REVENUE FUND
FILL THE GAP SPECIAL REVENUE FUND
DEA GRANT
TOTAL APPROPRIATIONS

$42,840.52
($21.44)
$165,008.63
$12,271.92
$211,244.57
$33,061,884.69

AMOUNT
$30,914,581
$413,751
$1,784,130
$401,666
$33,514,128.00

Page 12

MARICOPA COUNTY PUBLIC DEFENDER'S OFFICE

M C
P D
Budgeting and Managing for Results

FY05
Annual Report

Maricopa County began to implement Managing for Results (MfR) - a fully integrated management system
focused on results - by encouraging departments to develop departmental strategic plans in 2000. By
the fall of 2001, the Public Defender's Office completed our first strategic planning document. The Office
began reporting performance measurement data along with commentary on a quarterly basis. During
the FY03 budget preparation process, the Office allocated the recommended budget by programs and
activities within the departmental strategic plan, setting the stage for Budgeting for Results (BfR) in future
years.

Since then, MfR and BfR have become fully-integrated ways of doing business for the Public Defender’s
Office. In developing the FY05 budget, “Budgeting for Results Forms” were prepared for each of the
various activities performed by the Office. The documents included case assignment, case resolution,
expenses, and attorney workload figures (% over caseload standard). Both projections and historical
actuals were included for each of those figures. The resulting worksheets were utilized significantly by the
County Office of Management and Budget to establish the Office's budget.

Throughout the year, case and budget projections were reported in the MfR and BfR structure. Collection,
reporting, and analysis of that data allowed for better communication with County Management by
allowing expenses to be put in context with the cost-drivers (i.e., cases). In addition, all requests for
additional funding included “Budgeting for Results Forms” that detail out how the funding impact cases
accepted, cases closed, and attorney workload.

The Office strives to maintain strategic fitness by ensuring that goal and issue statements are complete and
up-to-date, that performance measures are complete and timely, and that progress on strategic goals is
reported quarterly. For efforts during FY05, the Office was recognized with an honorable mention for the
County’s Strategic Fitness Award.

Page 13

MARICOPA COUNTY PUBLIC DEFENDER'S OFFICE

ABSTRACTS
ABSTRACTS

Statistics
Statistics

STATISTICAL ABSTRACT TABLE/CHART

PAGE

All Divisions
A C T I V I T Y A N D P R O G R A M A L L O C AT I O N S B A S E D O N C A S E
ASSIGNMENTS

Page 16

D I V I S I O N T O TA L S N E E D E D V. F I L L E D A N D F U N D E D
AT T O R N E Y P O S I T I O N S

Page 17

Case Assignment History
H I S T O R Y O F C A S E S A S S I G N E D B Y S PA N G E N B U R G
C AT E G O R I E S

Page 18

Case Assignments by Division
T R I A L D I V I S I O N T O TA L
J U V E N I L E D I V I S I O N T O TA L
A P P E A L S D I V I S I O N T O TA L
M E N TA L H E A LT H T O TA L

Page
Page
Page
Page

19
19
19
19

Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page

20
20
20
20
20
20
21
21
21
21

Page
Page
Page
Page
Page

21
22
22
22
22

Case Assignments by Case Type
C A P I TA L
ALL OTHER HOMICIDE
CLASS 2-3 FELONY
DUI
CLASS 4-6 FELONY
V I O L AT I O N O F P R O B AT I O N
MISDEMEANOR
M E N TA L H E A LT H
JUVENILE FELONY LEVEL DELINQUENCY
JUVENILE MISDEMEANOR LEVEL DELINQUENCY AND
INCORRIGIBILITY
J U V E N I L E V I O L AT I O N O F P R O B AT I O N
A P P E A L S ( I N C L U D E S C A P I TA L )
PLEA PCR (APPEAL PCR)
TRIAL PCR (PCR)
JUVENILE APPEALS

Page 14

MARICOPA COUNTY PUBLIC DEFENDER'S OFFICE

M C
P D

FY05
Annual Report

Case Resolutions History
H I S T O R Y O F C A S E S R E S O LV E D B Y S PA N G E N B U R G
C AT E G O R I E S

Page 23

Case Resolutions by Division
T R I A L D I V I S I O N T O TA L
J U V E N I L E D I V I S I O N T O TA L
A P P E A L S D I V I S I O N T O TA L
M E N TA L H E A LT H T O TA L

Page
Page
Page
Page

24
24
24
24

Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page

25
25
25
25
25
25
26
26
26
26

Page
Page
Page
Page
Page

26
27
27
27
27

Case Resolutions by Case Type
C A P I TA L
ALL OTHER HOMICIDE
CLASS 2-3 FELONY
DUI
CLASS 4-6 FELONY
V I O L AT I O N O F P R O B AT I O N
MISDEMEANOR
M E N TA L H E A LT H
JUVENILE FELONY LEVEL DELINQUENCY
JUVENILE MISDEMEANOR LEVEL DELINQUENCY AND
INCORRIGIBILITY
J U V E N I L E V I O L AT I O N O F P R O B AT I O N
A P P E A L S ( I N C L U D E S C A P I TA L )
PLEA PCR
TRIAL PCR
JUVENILE APPEALS

Page 15

MARICOPA COUNTY PUBLIC DEFENDER'S OFFICE

ABSTRACTS
ABSTRACTS

Statistics
Statistics

ALL DIVISIONS
Activity and Program Allocations Based on Case Assignments
July 1, 2004 - June 30, 2005
Case Type
Capital
All other Homicide
Class 2-3 Felony
Class 2 & 3 in RCC/EDC
Class 2 & 3 not RCC/EDC

DUI
DUI in RCC/EDC

FY05

Attorneys to
Meet Standard

Standard
5

2.1

2.4

109

11.4

9.6

5,488

70.0

78.4

207

184.3

1.1

5,281

65.5

80.6

2,438

187.2

13.0

145

432.0

0.3

2,293

129.0

17.8

15,421

313.8

49.1

Class 4-6 Felony in RCC/EDC

7,520

532.6

14.1

Class 4-6 Felony not RCC/EDC

7,901

152.6

51.8

17,765

1004.0

17.7

5,089

407.6

12.5

DUI not RCC/EDC

Class 4-6 Felony

Violation of Probation
Misdemeanor
Trial Division Total
Juvenile Felony

46,315 N/A
3,072

182.7
144.9

21.2

Juvenile Misdemeanor and Incorrigibility

4,686

278.6

16.8

Juvenile Violation of Probation

2,221

360.1

6.2

Juvenile Division Total

9,979 N/A

Mental Health

2,054

278.6

7.4

348

24.0

0.0

Non-Capital Appeals
Capital Appeals

44.2

2

2.0

1.0

Plea PCR (Appeal/PCR)

844

240.0

3.5

Trial PCR (PCR)

145

18.0

8.1

Juvenile Appeal

70

36.0

1.9

1,409

294.0

14.5

Appeals Division Total
Total of Above

59,757 N/A

248.8

Standard column represents the finding of the Spangenburg Case Weighting Study conducted in 2003. This number indicates the workload standards
by case category , or the annual average caseload for one full time staff attorney in Maricopa County assuming the attorney handled only the number of
cases in each individual category. The standard is calculated by dividing the average FTE attorney by case type standard.

Page 16

MARICOPA COUNTY PUBLIC DEFENDER'S OFFICE

FY05

M C
P D

Annual Report

ALL DIVISIONS

Division Totals Needed Vs. Funded Attorney Positions
Attorneys to Meet Standard

FY05 Monthly Average Funded Attorney Positions

350

300

286.1

250

233.9
205.5

200
174.5

150

100

44.2

50

33.4

29.0
19.0
7.4

7.0

0
Trial - Excluding Capital

Juvenile Division Total

Mental Health

Appeals Division

Total Office (excluding
capital)

The capital caseload standard used herein is not based on empirical data, because the number of resolutions of capital cases that occurred during the case weighting study
was too small to be considered statistically significant. The standard used here is based on the opinions of capital attorneys, who considered the question prior to Ring v.
Arizona. It has become evident that the capital caseload standard is too high in light of changes brought about by the Ring case. This results in misleading staffing needs
data. For this reason, capital cases and capital attorneys have been excluded from the trial division data to allow us to depict the remaining case types without skewed
data. Beginning in the second quarter of FY06, the Public Defender’s Office began having capital attorneys track their time. The intention is to obtain the data needed to
develop an updated standard. Because of the long duration of capital cases, there might be sufficient data by the end of FY07 to yield a new statistically-sound standard.
Until then, trial division data will be represented without capital cases or capital attorneys.

Page 17

MARICOPA COUNTY PUBLIC DEFENDER'S OFFICE

ABSTRACTS
ABSTRACTS

Statistics
Statistics

Case Assignment History
History of Cases Assigned by Spangenburg Categories
FY01-FY05 Cases Assigned
Case Type

FY01

Capital2

Unkn

All other Homicide
Class 2-3 Felony

FY02

FY03

Unkn

FY04

FY05

12

12

5

122

143

115

143

109

5,695

5,875

6,017

5,859

5,488

Class 2-3 Felony - RCC/EDCUnkn

Unkn

Unkn

258

207

Class 2-3 Felony - Non RCC/EDCUnkn

Unkn

Unkn

5,601

5,281

2,816

2,438

DUI

2,238

2,513

2,736

DUI - RCC/EDCUnkn

Unkn

Unkn

136

145

DUI - Non RCC/EDCUnkn

Unkn

Unkn

2,680

2,293

Class 4-6 Felony

11,118 11,965 15,221

Class 4, 5, & 6 Felony - RCC/EDCUnkn

Unkn

Unkn

Class 4, 5, & 6 Felony - Non RCC/EDCUnkn

Unkn

Unkn

Violation of Probation
Misdemeanor
Trial Division Total
Juvenile Felony Level Delinquency

13,294 14,934 14,951
4,170

5,177

4,906

36,637 40,607 43,958
3,013

2,936

2,812

15,891 15,421
7,396

7,520

8,495

7,901

16,104 17,765
5,168

5,089

45,993 46,315
3,003

3,072

Juvenile Misd. Level Delinquency &
Incorrigibility

4,435

4,054

3,907

4,961

4,686

Juvenile Violation of Probation3

2,773

2,718

2,717

2,384

2,221

10,221

9,708

9,436

10,348

9,979

1,690

1,772

2,164

2,203

2,054

Appeals (includes Capital)

489

448

450

316

350

Plea PCR (Appeal PCR)

770

1,251

1,269

958

844

Trial PCR (PCR)

266

256

269

185

145

Juvenile Appeal

127

86

67

82

70

1,652

2,041

2,055

1,541

1,409

Juvenile Division Total
Mental Health Total

Appeals Division Total
Total of Above

50,200 54,128 57,613

60,085 59,757

1 Calculated as total cases opened during the time period, minus cases closed during the time period
with the following dispositions: no complaint, administrative transfer, and workload withdrawal cases).
2Until FY03, Capital cases were not tracked seperately from other Murder 1 Cases.
3Juvenile violation of probation information is not available for dispositions of conflict withdrawal or
retention of private counsel for FY01. It is estimated, the missing data would result in approximately
83 cases (3% of total opened). That number has been used to “normalize” the data for comparative
purposes.

Page 18

MARICOPA COUNTY PUBLIC DEFENDER'S OFFICE

M C
P D

FY05
Annual Report

Case Assignments by Division

Trial Division Total

Juvenile Division Total

50,000

10,600

45,993
45,000

46,315
10,400

10,348

43,958
10,221
10,200
40,607

40,000

9,979

10,000
36,637
35,000

9,800
9,708

9,600
30,000
9,436
9,400
25,000
9,200

20,000

9,000
01

02

03

04

05

01

Appeals Division Total

02

03

04

05

Mental Health Total

2,200
2,400

2,041

2,055
2,203

2,000

2,164

2,200

2,054
2,000

1,800
1,652

1,772

1,800

1,600

1,690

1,541
1,600

1,409
1,400
1,400

1,200
1,200

1,000

1,000

01

02

03

04

05

01

02

03

04

05

Case assignments are calculated as total cases opened during the time period, minus cases closed during the time period with the following dispositions: no complaint,
administrative transfer, and workload withdrawal cases).

Page 19

MARICOPA COUNTY PUBLIC DEFENDER'S OFFICE

ABSTRACTS
ABSTRACTS

Statistics
Statistics

Case Assignments by Case Type
Capital

All Other Homicide

14

160
12

143

12

12

143

140
122
120

10

115
109

100
8
80
6
5
60
4
40
2
20
0

0

FY01

FY02

0
FY03

FY04

FY05

0
FY01

FY02

Class 2-3 Felony

FY03

FY04

FY05

DUI

6,100

3,000

6,017

2,816

6,000

2,800

5,875

5,900

2,736

2,600

5,859

2,513
2,438

2,400

5,800

2,238

5,700

2,200

5,695

2,000

5,600
1,800

5,488

5,500

1,600

5,400
1,400

5,300

1,200

5,200

1,000

FY01

FY02

FY03

FY04

FY05

FY01

Class 4-6 Felony

FY02

FY03

FY04

FY05

Violation of Probation

17,000

20,000

15,891

16,000

15,421

15,221

17,765

18,000

15,000

16,104

14,000
16,000

13,000

14,934

14,951

FY02

FY03

11,965

12,000

14,000
13,294

11,118
11,000
12,000

10,000

9,000
10,000

8,000
8,000

7,000
FY01

FY02

FY03

FY04

FY05

FY01

FY04

FY05

Page 20

MARICOPA COUNTY PUBLIC DEFENDER'S OFFICE

FY05

M C
P D

Annual Report

Case Assignments by Case Type

Mental Health Total

Misdemeanor
2,500

5,500
5,177

5,168

2,164

5,089

2,203
2,054

5,000

4,906

2,000
1,772
1,690

4,500

1,500

4,170
4,000

1,000
3,500

500
3,000

0

2,500
FY01

FY02

FY03

FY04

FY01

FY05

FY02

FY03

FY04

FY05

Juvenile Misd. Level Delinquency & Incorrigibility

Juvenile Felony Level Delinquency
5,500

3,100
3,072
3,050

4,961

5,000

3,013

3,003

4,686

3,000
4,500

2,950

4,435

2,936
4,054
3,907

4,000

2,900

2,850

3,500

2,812
2,800
3,000

2,750
2,500

2,700

2,000

2,650
FY01

FY02

FY03

FY04

FY01

FY05

FY02

FY03

FY04

FY05

Juvenile Violation of Probation
3,000

2,800

2,773
2,718

2,717

2,600
2,384

2,400

2,221
2,200

2,000

1,800

1,600

1,400

1,200

1,000
FY01

FY02

FY03

FY04

FY05

Page 21

MARICOPA COUNTY PUBLIC DEFENDER'S OFFICE

ABSTRACTS
ABSTRACTS

Statistics
Statistics

Case Assignments by Case Type
Appeals (includes Capital)

Plea PCR (Appeal PCR)
1400

600

1251
500

1269

1200

489
448

450

1000

958

400

844

350

800

316

770

300

600
200

400

100

200

0

0
FY01

FY02

FY03

FY04

FY05

FY01

FY02

Trial PCR (PCR)

FY03

FY04

FY05

Juvenile Appeal

300

140
127

269

266
256

120

250

100
200

185

86
82
80
145

150

70

67
60

100
40

50

20

0

0
FY01

FY02

FY03

FY04

FY05

FY01

FY02

FY03

FY04

FY05

Page 22

MARICOPA COUNTY PUBLIC DEFENDER'S OFFICE

M C
P D

FY05
Annual Report

Case Resolutions History

History of Cases Resolved by Spangenburg Categories
FY01-FY05 Cases Resolved1
Case Type
Capital

FY01

2

FY02

Unknown* Unknown*

All other Homicide

65

72

FY03

FY04

FY05

2

1

3

59

70

67

Class 2-3 Felony

4,686

4,735

4,865

4,579 4,404

DUI

1,887

2,091

2,086

2,097 1,860

Class 4-6 Felony

10,085 10,610 11,237 12,298 12,805

Violation of Probation

12,308 13,455 13,136 14,486 15,488

Misdemeanor

3,085

Trial Division Total

3,373

3,901

3,776 4,002

32,116 34,336 35,286 37,307 38,629

Juvenile Felony Level Delinquency

2,844

2,704

2,676

2,722 2,803

Juvenile Misd. Level & Incorrigibility

3,430

3,813

3,713

4,649 4,366

2,680

2,620

2,617

2,318 2,145

Juvenile Division Total

8,954

9,137

9,006

9,689 9,314

Mental Health

1,663

1,753

2,158

2,161 2,023

Appeals (includes Capital)

419

420

422

405

295

Plea PCR

513

852

956

1,154

632

Trial PCR

109

153

126

148

111

Juvenile Appeals

146

91

60

65

71

1,187

1,516

1,564

Juvenile Violation of Probation

Appeals Division Total
Total of All Above

3

1,772 1,109

43,920 46,742 48,014 50,929 51,075

1Calculated as total cases closed during the fiscal year, minus cases closed during the fiscal year
that were not resolved by the office directly (i.e., subtracts cases in which no complaint is filed,
private counsel is retained, conflict withdrawals, workload withdrawals, and transfers to another IR
department).
2Until FY03, capital cases were not tracked seperately from other murder 1 cases.
3Juvenile violation of probation information is not available for dispositions of conflict withdrawal or
retention of private counsel for FY01. It is estimated, the missing data would result in approximately
83 cases (3% of total opened). That number has been used to “normalize” the data for comparative purposes.
* Included in homicide.

Page 23

MARICOPA COUNTY PUBLIC DEFENDER'S OFFICE

ABSTRACTS
ABSTRACTS

Statistics
Statistics

Case Resolutions by Division

Juvenile Division Total

Trial Division Total
9,800

40,000
38,629
38,000

9,689

37,307

9,600
36,000

35,286
34,336

9,400

34,000

9,314
32,116

32,000

9,200

9,137

30,000

9,006
9,000

8,954

28,000

26,000

8,800

24,000

8,600
22,000

8,400

20,000
FY01

FY02

FY03

FY04

FY01

FY05

FY02

FY03

FY04

FY05

Mental Health

Appeals Division Total
2,400

1,900

1,800

1,772

2,200

2,158

2,161

1,700

2,023
2,000

1,600

1,564
1,516

1,800

1,500

1,753
1,663

1,400

1,600

1,300

1,400
1,200

1,187
1,109

1,200

1,100

1,000

1,000
FY01

FY02

FY03

FY04

FY05

FY01

FY02

FY03

FY04

FY05

Page 24

MARICOPA COUNTY PUBLIC DEFENDER'S OFFICE

FY05

M C
P D

Annual Report

Case Resolutions by Case Type
Capital

All Other Homicide

4

80
72
3

3

70

70

67

65
59

60
3

50

2
2

40
2

30
1
1

20

1

10

0

0
FY01

FY02

FY03

FY04

FY05

FY01

FY02

Class 2-3 Felony
4,900

FY03

FY04

FY05

DUI
2,200

4,865

2,091

2,086

2,097

4,800
2,000

4,735
4,700

1,887

4,686

1,860

1,800

4,579

4,600

4,500

1,600

4,404
4,400
1,400

4,300
1,200

4,200

4,100

1,000

FY01

FY02

FY03

FY04

FY05

FY01

FY02

FY03

FY04

FY05

Violation of Probation

Class 4-6 Felony
16,000

14,000

15,488
15,000
12,805

13,000
12,298

14,486
14,000
13,455

12,000

13,136
13,000

11,237

12,308

11,000
10,610

12,000
10,085
10,000

11,000
9,000

10,000

8,000

9,000

7,000

8,000
FY01

FY02

FY03

FY04

FY05

FY01

FY02

FY03

FY04

FY05

Page 25

MARICOPA COUNTY PUBLIC DEFENDER'S OFFICE

ABSTRACTS
ABSTRACTS

Statistics
Statistics

Case Resolutions by Case Type
Misdemeanor

Mental Health

4,100

2,500
4,002
3,901

2,158

3,900

2,161
2,023

3,776

2,000
3,700

1,753
1,663
3,500

1,500

3,373
3,300

3,100

3,085

1,000

2,900

500
2,700

2,500

0
FY01

FY02

FY03

FY04

FY05

FY01

Juvenile Felony-Level Delinquency

FY02

FY03

FY04

FY05

Juvenile Misd. Level & Incorrigibility

2,900

5,000
4,649

2,850

2,844
4,500

4,366

2,803
2,800
4,000
3,813
3,713

2,750
2,722
3,500

2,704

3,430

2,700
2,676
3,000

2,650

2,500

2,600

2,550

2,000

FY01

FY02

FY03

FY04

FY05

FY01

FY02

FY03

FY04

FY05

Juvenile Violation of Probation
2,800
2,680
2,620

2,617

2,600

2,400

2,318

2,200

2,145

2,000

1,800

1,600

1,400

1,200

1,000
FY01

FY02

FY03

FY04

FY05

Page 26

MARICOPA COUNTY PUBLIC DEFENDER'S OFFICE

FY05

M C
P D

Annual Report

Case Resolutions by Case Type

Appeals (includes Capital)

Plea PCR

450

1,400
419

420

422
405

400

1,200

1,154

350
295

300

1,000

956
852

800

250

632
200

600
513

150

400
100

200

50

0

0
FY01

FY02

FY03

FY04

FY05

FY01

FY02

Trial PCR

FY03

FY04

FY05

Juvenile Appeals

180

160
146

160

153

140

148
140

120

126
120

111

109

100
91

100
80
71

80

65
60
60

60
40

40

20

20

0

0

FY01

FY02

FY03

FY04

FY05

FY01

FY02

FY03

FY04

FY05

Page 27

MARICOPA COUNTY PUBLIC DEFENDER'S OFFICE

Administration

Appeals Division

Juvenile Division - Durango Juvenile Division - Southeast

11 West Jefferson, Suite 5

45 West Jefferson

3131 West Durango St.

777 West Southern, Bldg. A

Phoenix, AZ 85003

Phoenix, AZ 85003

Phoenix, AZ 85009

Mesa, AZ 85210

(602) 506-8200

(602) 506-8220

(602) 506-4230

(602) 506-2033

Mental Health Division

Trial Groups A,B,D,E and
Vehicular

Trial Groups C and F

Capital

570 West Brown Rd.

11 West Jefferson

Mesa, AZ 85201

2nd -9th Floors

Mesa, AZ 85210

Phoenix, AZ 85004

(480) 344-2013

Phoenix, AZ 85003

(602)506-2200

(602) 506-7669

1750 South Mesa Dr., Suite 150 222 North Central, Suite 4100

Group A (602) 506-8282
Group B (602) 506-2802
Group D (602) 506-3029
Group E (602) 506-3218
Page 28

Vehicular (602) 506-5759

MARICOPA COUNTY PUBLIC DEFENDER'S OFFICE