MARICOPA COUNTY JUSTICE SYSTEM ANNUAL ACTIVITIES REPORT FISCAL YEAR 2004-05 Report available on-line at http://www.maricopa.gov/justice_activities/default.aspx Maricopa County Justice System Annual Activities Report Fiscal Year 2004-05 A Typical Workday for the Maricopa County Justice Systems Means* . . . • 328 adults booked into jail • 9,060 total adults in jail • 441 juveniles in detention • 35,888 meals served to juvenile and adult detainees • 505 adult inmates transported to a court appearance • 1,000 hearings scheduled in Superior Court Welcome to the Annual Activities Report regarding the efforts of the Maricopa County justice and law enforcement agencies. This report highlights activity from July 2004 through June 2005. Maricopa County Justice System partners witnessed the culmination of many long-term efforts while continuing to lay groundwork for new innovations and efforts. National Experience Levels of violent crime have been decreasing since 1994 and were at the lowest levels ever in 2003. According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, U.S. Department of Justice, residents experienced approximately 24 million crimes in 2003. For every 1,000 persons there was one rape or sexual assault, one assault with injury, and two robberies. • 28,631 adults in the community Only 39% of the total crimes committed in 2000 were reported to police, according to the National Crime Victimization Survey. The Uniform Crime Reporting Program indicated that, in 2003, 16% of the property crimes and 47% of the violent crimes were solved, compared to 16% and 46% respectively in 2001. Murder remained the offense cleared most often, with burglary and motor vehicle thefts cleared the least. • 98 new felony cases filed In 2003, 28.9% of those arrested for property crimes and 15.5% of those arrested for violent crimes were juveniles. • 278 (approx) residents appear for jury duty (to Superior, Justice, and most Municipal Courts) • 1,958 adults in the community under officer supervision pending trial supervised by probation officers after sentencing • 425 total cases filed with Superior Court • 12,493 court documents filed • 30,000 pieces of paper filed with the Clerk of the Superior Court • 250,567 daily page views for the Superior Court’s docket • $483,065 spent for detaining adults • $1.6 million spent in the overall County criminal justice system. * daily average of statistics for fiscal year 2004-05 In examining the 11.8 million crimes reported to law enforcement in 2003, 9% were violent crimes and 91% were property crimes (as captured by the Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) Program). The violent crime figure dropped 3.1% compared to 1999 and 25.6% from 1994. The property crime volume was 2.2% higher than in 1999 and 14.0% lower than in 1994. The monetary value of stolen property totaled nearly $17 billion, with motor vehicle theft representing the greatest monetary loss. States comprising the West region, as reported by the UCR, saw the violent crime rate decrease by 1.4% while the property crime rate increased by 2.0% for the period from 2002 to 2003. Of the 14 states in the West category, Arizona had the third highest decrease in the rate of violent crime per 100,000 persons; only New Mexico and Puerto Rico had larger decreases. Crime index categories where Arizona rates increased were murder and non-negligent manslaughter (up 11.1%) and forcible rape (up 12.5%). From 1995-2004, the number of jail inmates per 100,000 residents increased across the country from 193 to 243. From midyear 2002-2004, 17 of the 50 largest jail jurisdictions had a decrease in the number of inmates while Maricopa County saw a 12% increase. Twenty of the 50 largest jail systems operated above capacity, with Maricopa County having the highest over-capacity rate (176%). Maricopa County’s jail planning project, in process since voters approved the funding in November 1998, was largely completed this fiscal year and should help address the issue of operating over capacity. Table of Contents Page Adult Probation 15 Adult Probation, Pretrial Svcs 16 Budget 6 Clerk of the Court 9 Constables 8 Correctional Health 12 County Attorney 16 Criminal Justice Indicators 3 Directory 17 Detention Facilities 3 Propositions 400 & 411 Indigent Representation 14 Justice Courts 8 Justice System Highlights 2 Juvenile Court Services 10 Juvenile Probation Dept 11 Maricopa County Highlights 2 Medical Examiner 12 Other Proposition 400 and 5 411 Projects Sheriff’s Office 13 Superior Court 7 PAGE 2 MARICOPA COUNTY JUSTIC E SYSTEM AC TIVITIES REPORT FISC AL YEAR 2004-05 Maricopa County Government Highlights of Fiscal Year 2004-05 Maricopa County Justice System Highlights of Fiscal Year 2004-05 Population continued to increase. Now home to over 3.5 million residents, Maricopa County faces an ever-increasing demand for services. The justice and law enforcement agencies of Maricopa County each hold distinctive mandates yet function as part of a system. Responsibilities of these agencies are diverse; they investigate, arrest, charge, protect, defend, heal, prosecute, supervise, fine, adjudicate, mediate, test, autopsy, or detain members of this community. Maricopa County is the fourth most populous county in the nation. The population in Maricopa County grew 14% from 2000-2004. This growing community is extending to the outreaches of Maricopa County, resulting in great geographic distance to be covered in order to provide services. Maricopa County has a land area of just over 9,220 square miles (84.4% unincorporated), is the 14th largest county in landmass, and is larger than seven states. While many regions this size have a stable population base, Maricopa County is challenged by the need to increase government to effectively meet the growing demand for services. Maricopa County removed itself from the healthcare business by turning over the integrated health system to a Special Health Care District. After voters approved the creation of a Special Health Care District in November 2004, Maricopa County handed over responsibility for plans and patients to the district. The transfer has not been without challenges. Staff previously employed by Maricopa County Integrated Health Systems were laid off, although every effort was made to find other jobs for those who wished to remain with the County. The Board of Supervisors has continued to provide financial support to the health system, in the form of various loans. The District now oversees the Maricopa Medical Center and its world-renowned Burn Center. It also has responsibility for eleven clinics throughout Maricopa County. Maricopa County Board of Supervisors updated the County’s Strategic Plan, providing guidance for the next five years. After much work by all County agencies, the Board of Supervisors approved a new Strategic Plan in May 2004. This plan lays out the following seven priorities on which the County will concentrate over the next five years: • Ensure safe communities and a streamlined, integrated justice system. • Promote and protect the public health of the community. • Provide regional leadership in critical public policy areas. • Carefully plan and manage land use in Maricopa County to promote sustainable development and to preserve and strengthen our environment. • Continue to exercise sound financial management and build the County’s fiscal strength while minimizing the property tax burden. • Maintain a quality workforce and equip County employees with the tools, skills, workspace and resources they need to do their jobs safely and well. • Continue to improve the County’s public image by increasing citizen satisfaction with the quality and cost-effectiveness of services provided by the County. This was an historic year for the justice system. New jail facilities were opening at the same time Maricopa County began a more direct focus on alternatives to incarceration. Master Planning was continued for Superior Court and for the Jails. The Superior Court Master Plan is to establish the ten year (20052015) space needs for the Superior Court. The primary objective is “To evaluate existing court facilities and future needs, and to develop criteria for optimal delivery of court services for all Maricopa County residents.” A primary component of the plan is to centralize criminal court in Downtown facilities. Meetings with affected Maricopa County agencies indicate their approval of this suggestion. The 1997 Jail Master Plan laid the original groundwork leading to Proposition 400. Maricopa County has decided to hire a consultant to update this plan. Specific deliverables will include an evaluation of all recommendations made in the original report; growth projections in Adult and Juvenile populations to 2020; recommendations to reduce the Average Length of Stay (ALOS) and Average Daily Population (ADP) in the jails; an assessment of operational effectiveness of the new jails in areas that impact ALOS and ADP; and an assessment of future jail bed space needs. The update should be completed by the end of 2006. Superior Court created a new Mental Health Department. Administered under the Probate Department, this Department will begin diverting seriously mentally ill defendants out of the Criminal Department sooner than occurs now, and ideally reduce the amount of time they spend in jail. The Commission on Justice System Intervention for the Seriously Mentally Ill was authorized by the Board of Supervisors. Created in December 2004, this group began meeting in March 2005. Members include representatives from various Maricopa County agencies, the Arizona State Legislature, the Arizona Department of Health Services, Value Options, limited jurisdiction courts, local law enforcement, and the mental health advocacy community. Initial meetings focused on prioritizing the issues and educating members on the scope of the problem. Agencies continued to jointly achieve system-wide goals. The Countywide strategic priority related to the justice system was renewed this year. It is to ensure safe communities and a streamlined, integrated criminal justice system. To further this effort, agencies have developed, modified, and met components of the following goals: • Relating to preventing crime: Renew efforts to develop regional strategies and collaborations by FY07. Efforts are also PAGE 3 MARICOPA COUNTY JUSTIC E SYSTEM AC TIVITIES REPORT FISCAL YEAR 2004-05 • underway to research practices that help reduce crime while ensuring that Maricopa County programs meet these evidencebased criteria. Relating to improving case processing: Progress continues to be evaluated to determine what additional steps can be taken to more efficiently administer active criminal cases without diminishing effectiveness, by the end of FY06: ♦ Clear 95% of non-complex, non-capital cases within 180 days of arraignment. ♦ Clear 90% of complex cases within 365 days of arraignment (excluding capital cases). Proposition 400 revenues continued to fund construction of new detention facilities. This Fiscal Year saw all facilities completed within budget and operational. Other criminal justice facilities were begun or completed as Maricopa County addresses the needs of the Criminal Justice System. Several court facilities are envisioned in the Superior Court Master Key Criminal Justice Indicators FY03 Sheriff’s Office Detention Bookings Avg Length of Stay (days) Avg Daily Population FY04 FY05 %CHG 118,515 122,115 119,694 24.81 25.96 27.65 8,044 8,657 9,054 Superior Court—Criminal Department Filings 35,200 36,748 Terminations 27,959 31,306 Case Clearance Rate 79.4% 85.2% Active Pending Inventory 7,964 9,791 Trials 707 498 -2.0% 6.5% 4.6% 35,953 33,096 92.1% 10,603 607 -2.2% 5.7% 8.1% 8.3% 21.9% Pretrial Services (monthly averages) General Supervision 700 Intensive Supervision 331 Electronic Monitoring 97 990 657 153 978 816 164 -1.2% 24.2% 7.2% Adult Probation (monthly averages) Standard Supervision 25,400 Intensive Supervision 1,267 23,957 1,078 26,091 1,456 8.9% 35.1% Juvenile Court, Probation, Detention Petitions Filed 17,238 Juv Avg Daily Population 401 Juv Avg Length of Stay (days) 15.1 4,387 Standard Supervision (mthly avg) 659 Intensive Supervision (mthly avg) 18,566 431 16.6 4,232 518 19,555 443 18.7 4,108 547 5.3% 2.8% 12.7% -2.9% 5.6% Note: Throughout this report, the percent change columns (%CHG) indicate the percentage increase or decrease over the prior year. Plan. Projects include integrating the Downtown Superior Court Complex including the addition of a Court Tower, and centralizing criminal court downtown. A groundbreaking ceremony was held in March 2005 for the 254,300 square-foot, five-story Maricopa County Downtown Justice Center. This facility will house nine county departments and five justice courts. Projected completion is Fall 2006 for this building located on Jackson Street, between 5th Avenue and 7th Avenue. The Northeast Regional Court Center is scheduled for occupancy in Fall 2005. This 104,900 square-foot facility is located on the southeast corner of State Route 51 and Union Hills Road. A state-of-the-art Durango Juvenile Court Building was opened for business in July 2005. This three-story, 263,000 square feet facility is located at 3131 W. Durango in Phoenix. Efforts are refocusing toward crime prevention. The County mandate related to criminal justice is reactive. However, County Criminal Justice partners realize that true improvements for the future require an offensive effort to prevent criminal behavior. Proposition 400 recommended an increased commitment to innovative prevention programs. With the completion of the building projects funded through Proposition 400, the focus has now turned with more intensity to potential prevention aspects recommended. This is supported through the County Strategic Planning and the decision to hire a consultant to update the 1997 Jail Master Plan. This region supports public safety. Regardless of economic conditions, Maricopa County voters have supported the need to detain defendants when such is deemed by the Courts to be in the best interests of life and safety. Proposition 400 was approved by 69% of the voters in 1998. Then Proposition 411 was approved in November of 2002, also by 69% of the voters. Maintaining a safe environment will continue to be a prime concern as the region continues to grow. In 1998 voters overwhelmingly approved Proposition 400, creating a one-fifth cent sales tax to fund new detention facilities. Maricopa County faced significant overcrowding for both adult and juvenile detention, due to unprecedented population growth in the region and no funding for capital construction to keep pace with the need. With a Master Plan developed by a team of national experts, a citizens committee concluded that the County needed a threephase, 15-year plan to expand jail capacity for adults by 5,100 beds and for juveniles by 777 beds, and to institute a series of programs to better manage defendants through the system. The legislative authorization for the County to put this issue to the voters resulted in a scaled-down version of that plan, to construct 3,139 adult and 388 juvenile beds. Although the Master Plan recommended an ongoing tax for operations, legislative decisions capped Proposition 400 at nine years or $900 million. Since construction costs represent only around 10% of the total investment in a jail over its useful life, the Master Plan recommended continuing funding to pay for operations. Yet legislators felt the County should make do with a scaled-down version of the plan, to a nine-year tax. The Board of Supervisors adopted a fiscal policy to try to assume the operating costs over time within the general fund, and use jail tax revenues for only onetime expenses. PAGE 4 MARICOPA COUNTY JUSTIC E SYSTEM AC TIVITIES REPORT FISC AL YEAR 2004-05 offices, Correctional Health Services offices, a central infirmary and pharmacy, Central Services (Food Factory and Warehousing, Central Laundry, and Central Plant), and a psychiatric area that can treat up to 268 inmates. A large video visitation center is available at this facility, where visitors and inmates are able to visit via video providing for additional security. These strategies had potential for making needed funds available without going back to the voters to continue the jail tax. Meanwhile, nearly three-quarters of the total tax collected since 1998 was dedicated to construction and other one-time costs, leaving approximately $250 million for operational costs. To ensure public safety in the region, Maricopa County voters approved Proposition 411 which continues the existing jail tax. Juvenile Detention and Courts ($117.5 million): The Durango facilities are located south of Durango Street between 27th and 35th Avenues in Phoenix. The approximately 263,000 square foot project contains 220 rooms, 12 new courts, and judicial suites and associated office space for support staff and related functions. A Residential Treatment Facility located at the corner of Durango and 35th Avenue includes approximately 32,000 square feet and 48 beds. The Mesa Juvenile Southeast Detention facility included 84,000 square feet of new construction to add 120 beds to the existing facility. The jail construction program was finished in FY05. Building Improvement/Major Maintenance ($74.9 million): These costs are associated with renovating or replacing existing mechanical, electrical, plumbing, security, roofing, flooring, painting, and glazing systems at existing county detention facilities. These completed projects have improved operation of the existing detention facilities. Specific projects include the Durango Jail Demolition, Madison Street Jail Renovations, and Towers Jail Renovations. Once County financial planners realized it would be impossible to pay for new detention facility operations without a dedicated revenue stream, the County returned to the State Legislature for authority to request of voters that they continue the jail tax. House Bill 2313 became law. On November 5, 2002, voters overwhelmingly approved Proposition 411. This tax extension will begin upon expiration of the existing jail tax levy, and may continue up to 20 years. Construction was funded in a “pay-as-you-go” method, avoiding interest. Some of the projects are explained in more detail below: 4th Avenue Jail Complex ($150.6 million): The jail is located between 3rd and 4th Avenues, and Madison and Jackson Streets in downtown Phoenix. The approximately 615,000 square foot mid-rise building contains 1,993 pretrial maximum custody jail cells, an intake processing center, two Initial Appearance Courtrooms, two Early Disposition Courtrooms, and an administrative support space. A tunnel system connects the new facility with the existing Madison Street Jail and Courts. Integrated Criminal Justice Information System ($19.8 million): This department is responsible for providing automated systems and information technology expertise to promote efficient sharing of case information between criminal justice agencies. This expedites case processing, reduces redundant data input, and ultimately enhances public safety. Lower Buckeye Jail ($247.2 million): The jail is located on Lower Buckeye Road just east of 35th Avenue in Phoenix. The approximately 654,000 square foot facility is designed to hold up to 2,512 inmates. The Lower Buckeye Jail also includes jail command Jail Expansion Program Construction Completion Times Mar-00 Mesa Parking Garage Estrella Support Building Sep-99 Complete Complete Dec-00 Oct-00 Lower Buckeye Adult Detention Lower Buckeye Central Services Durango Residential T rtment Cntr Durango Juvenile and Courts Southeast Juvenile Complete May-01 Durango Parking Structure Durango Utility Relocation Complete Apr-01 Fourth Avenue Jail Jackson Street Storm Sewer May-01 Jul-01 Complete Sep-02 Complete Oct-00 Mar-04 Aug-02 Complete Feb-01 Jun-04 Complete Oct-00 Jul-01 Aug-03 Complete Complete Jun-01 Jul-01 Apr-03 Complete Nov-04 Nov-03 Jan-99 Jun-99 Dec-99 Jun-00 Dec-00 Jun-01 Dec-01 Jun-02 Dec-02 Jun-03 Dec-03 Jun-04 Nov-04 MARICOPA COUNTY JUSTIC E SYSTEM AC TIVITIES REPORT FISC AL YEAR 2004-05 Maricopa County leaders continue to pursue improvement in the criminal justice system. Recognizing that we cannot ‘build our way out of the problem,’ Maricopa County is focusing efforts on evidence-based crime prevention, the only true means to reduce public investment for the future. County leaders also continue to identify ways to streamline case processing and otherwise improve efficiencies in the criminal justice system. The Board Resolution on Proposition 411 states, “The County will continue a commitment to reduce crime and improve functioning of the criminal justice system, in order to reduce the expense of adult and juvenile jail facilities. The projects identified in Proposition 400 . . . will receive high priority consideration for general fund or other allocations, balanced against other priorities identified during annual budgetary reviews.” Citizens continue to monitor County implementation of new detention facilities and programs. Review of detention needs has always been a partnership between County government and citizens. In 1997, the Citizens Advisory Committee on Jail Planning held 19 public meetings on the crisis and received information from hundreds of citizens and nationally recognized jail experts. Presently a Citizens Jail Oversight Committee (CJOC) meets to ensure that promises made in 1998 through Proposition 400 are kept, and will ensure proper implementation of Proposition 411. In Spring 2005, the CJOC found itself at a turning point. With the majority of the building projects completed, they decided to turn their focus to the non-structural components of Proposition 400. Status of Other Proposition 400 Projects at Close of Fiscal Year 2004-05 Implement an Integrated Criminal Justice Information System: The ICJIS Project helps criminal justice agencies efficiently share quality data and supports agency decisions regarding case management and jail population. Progress includes completing: •Seven computer interfaces through an integration engine and webbased interfaces, providing more than two million transactions per month. •Development of additional data exchanges among agencies. •Development and test lab, training, and service level agreements with agencies. •Assignment of common case numbers through the CCN Application. ICJIS is a leader in developing and implementing initiatives that integrate criminal justice information systems. ICJIS is a leader in criminal justice information sharing technology, has been featured in technical articles, and has made presentations in state and national criminal justice conferences. Develop Regional Centers for Courts Not-of-Record and/or Reduce Transports to Justice of the Peace Courts: Now in their fifth year, the Regional Court Centers continue to expedite case processing. They help consolidate early court processing from the Justice Court and Superior Court into a single event at one location. Incustody defendant jail days are kept to a minimum and over half of all cases are resolved through plea or dismissal. Implement Differentiated Case Management: Capital and complex cases are now identified and managed separately early in the process. Additionally, a third commissioner has been added to the DUI Center which handles class four felony aggravated DUI cases or below from Initial Pretrial Conference through sentencing. In FY05, the DUI Center held 105 trials. PAGE 5 Eliminate Unnecessary Court Proceedings: The Court has long struggled with “orphan” complaints, where the County Attorney files a complaint but indicates intent to pursue a supervening indictment through the Grand Jury. If the Grand Jury fails to hand down an indictment in a timely manner, the complaint remains active but without a future court date. Court administration now aggressively monitors these complaints by asking the County Attorney for a determination while taking the complaints to a commissioner. As a result, most “orphan” complaints are resolved within 30 days. The Court has started an aggressive plea negotiation calendar within the Pretrial Conference Center based on the model of the Regional Court Centers. Lower level indicted cases (Class 4, 5, and 6 felonies) are now scheduled before commissioners who encourage counsel to exchange discovery, make plea offers, and discuss the offers in a timely manner. This innovative new project started in February 2005. Consolidate Criminal Divisions to a Common Location: Upon completion of a downtown court tower, the Court will move most Southeast criminal divisions to the downtown court complex. Downtown criminal divisions and Probation Revocation proceedings have already been consolidated downtown, which significantly reduces inmate transports [also applies to prior initiative]. Expand Pretrial Release Supervision & Jail Court Functions: The Supervised Release component has expanded services to include intensive supervision ranging from random drug/alcohol testing and treatment, to electronic monitoring. Electronic monitoring supervision ranges from traditional home curfew enforcement to the more sophisticated Global Positioning Satellite (GPS) tracking. Expansion of Bail Review is budgeted for the upcoming fiscal year 2005-2006. Jail Court has expanded to eight daily Court hearings; a Deputy County Attorney staffs two of those hearings. Enhance Substance Abuse Evaluation and Programming: The Reach Out Program continues to assess jailed, non-violent probationers with substance abuse problems and determines their level of treatment need. During FY05, Reach Out staff conducted 2,186 clinical assessments and made possible the early release of 538 probationers to outpatient and/or residential treatment. Assessments conducted by Reach Out staff report a wait-list of more than 139 sentenced offenders needing residential treatment. The ALPHA Program, offered through the Sheriff’s Department, allows sentenced inmates to request help for substance abuse treatment. Over 2,400 inmates have graduated from this intensive sixweek program since it began in February 1996, with a recidivism rate of 16%. The program’s success has led to the creation of Alpha II, which will treat inmates with co-occurring disorders of mental illness and substance abuse. Expand Drug Court: Early Disposition Court targets low-level drug offenders (Proposition 200 cases), as well as welfare fraud cases. In addition, the Drug Courts (post-adjudication) handled a total of 1,208 defendants after sentencing in FY05, with Superior Court hoping to expand the number of cases assigned to this program over the next year. Expand Community Based Programs for Juveniles: The 48-bed Residential Treatment Facility is completed and operated by an outside vendor. This Youth Recovery Academy is for substance abusing juveniles. Presently one-half of the facility serves males and is fully operational. Recently, the additional 24-bed section was opened to females. Grant funding for the Status Offender Alternative Response (SOAR) program was ended; however, alternative funding continues to support the Families in Need of Services (FINS) program. FINS addresses the Federal mandate of deinstitutionalization of status offenders. PAGE 6 MARICOPA COUNTY JUSTIC E SYSTEM AC TIVITIES REPORT FISC AL YEAR 2004-05 Justice System Agency Budgets Maricopa County government is consistently challenged by the population growth in this region. One of the systems that is most affected FY06 Adopted Budget by Department by this growth is the criminal justice system. The Board of SuperviGeneral Detention Grants1 and sors continues to focus budget priorities on the criminal justice sysFunds Funds Other Funds Total tem, while balancing those needs against other responsibilities. Sheriff’s Office $54,730,461 $148,519,235 $17,911,099 $221,160,795 67,135,563 0 16,674,245 83,809,808 Trial Courts The justice system is also the arena offering the greatest potential for 57,520,494 0 12,799,672 70,320,166 County Atty efficiencies and improvements, as the system continues to grow. 0 14,536,894 64,839,938 Adult Probation 50,303,044 61,219,382 0 2,352,706 63,572,088 Indigent Rep For fiscal year 2004-05, the net Maricopa County budget was $2.59 Juv Probation 11,680,865 30,471,655 15,519,533 57,672,053 billion. The budget for the justice system agencies comprised 22.2% Correctional 3,580,435 39,120,480 513,895 43,214,810 of the total county budget, a slight increase from 19.9% the prior Health year. 26,383,155 0 8,874,258 35,257,413 Clerk of Court Medical 4,970,959 0 12,689 4,983,648 Examiner 0 4,398,212 0 4,398,212 ICJIS 1,908,645 0 0 1,908,645 Constables Aggregate Annual Budgets Total $339,433,003 222,509,582 89,194,991 651,137,576 for Maricopa County Justice Agencies General Fund Detention Fund Grants/Other Funds $800M 1Grants are primarily from state agencies. $ 676M $700M $ 575M $600M $ 427M $ 439M $500M $400M $ 367M $ 467M $ 477M FY06 Adopted Budget by Departm ent $ 407M General Funds Detention Funds Grants/Other Funds $300M Sheriff’ s Office Trial Co urts $200M $100M Co unty A tty A dult P ro batio n $M FY99 FY00 FY01 FY02 FY03 FY04 FY05 FY06 Indigent Rep Juv P ro batio n Co rr Health Clerk o f Co urt M ed Examiner ICJIS Co nstables $0 $ 25 $ 50 $ 75 $ 100 $ 125 $ 150 $ 175 $ 200 $ 225 Millions of Dollars Report Information •Please excuse minor differences in data reporting between agencies, due to the point in time when data are captured and different definitions. Also agencies do not all deal with the same cases; Superior Court criminal cases include both County Attorney and Attorney General filings, and Indigent Representation and the County Attorney have cases at Justice Courts and the Superior Court. •In percent change columns (%CHG), the number indicates the percentage increase or decrease over the prior year. •For questions or suggestions regarding this report, contact Amy Rex at 602-506-1310. •For information regarding departmental reporting and data please contact representatives listed on the last pages. PAGE 7 MARICOPA COUNTY JUSTIC E SYSTEM AC TIVITIES REPORT FISCAL YEAR 2004-05 Superior Court Specialty Courts are helping set probationers back on the right track. The Mental Health Department oversees Mental Health Court and the Rule 11 calendar. Additionally, there is the Family Violence Court, Drug Court, DUI Court, and Spanish DUI Court. Agency Information The Superior Court provides a public forum for dispute resolution and court services so that the public may realize timely, fair, and individualized justice. Superior Court Case Filings by Case Type FY03 FY04 Civil 36,749 37,840 Criminal 36,638 38,685 Family Court 44,109 49,098 Juvenile 17,847 19,317 Probate 6,740 7,067 Mental Health 2,163 2,178 Tax Court 1,053 1,275 Total Filings 145,299 155,460 FY05 38,016 38,605 49,918 18,825 6,624 1,994 1,014 154,996 %CHG 0.47% -0.21% 1.7% -2.5% -6.3% -8.4% -20.5% -0.30% Family Court 32% Juvenile 12% Probate Tax Mental 4% Court Health 1% 1% Civil 25% Felony Case Filings by Class of Felony FY02 FY03 FY04 Class One 205 168 217 Class Two 3,962 4,223 4,315 Class Three 4,867 5,408 5,592 Class Four 12,614 15,057 15,517 Class Five 1,817 2,020 1,907 Class Six 6,555 8,324 9,200 FY05 138 4,344 5,547 15,288 1,745 8,828 %CHG -36.4% 0.7% -0.8% -1.5% -8.5% -4.0% Total 35,920 -2.3% 30,020 35,200 36,748 Indigent Defense Reimbursement Unit (IDRU) recoups Maricopa County costs of representation. The Court appoints a public defender for the vast majority of arrested defendants. A County funded unit, the IDRU was established in March of 2005 to assess defendants who use public defense services. The unit has exceeded expectations, collecting over $2,000 a month. Expanded settlement conference availability helps resolve cases. Presiding DUI Center Commissioner Richard Nothwehr has agreed to set aside other matters on Fridays, making himself available for settlement conferences. In addition, an interpreter has been assigned, allowing more Spanish speaking defendants to engage in settlement conferences. The Lower Level Indicted Plea Program deals with indicted cases. Initial pretrial conferences were established in July of 2002. Two commissioners in the Initial Pretrial Conference Center (IPTC) conduct pretrial conferences 35 days after arraignment and are available to take changes of plea in the afternoons. The Center ensures counsel is adequately preparing for trial so that trial dates are firm. In March of 2005, the Court implemented a program, housed in the IPTC Center, to encourage pleas in class four, five, and six indicted cases. Two commissioners ensure discovery has been exchanged, a plea offer has been tendered, and the offer has been seriously discussed with the client. Preliminary reports are that the program generates about a 25 percent plea rate. Superior Court Filings by Case Type - FY05 Total Filings 154,996 Criminal 25% defendants however, averages less than 40 percent. A calendar strictly for summonsed defendants was started in the summer of 2005. The summonsed IA calendar does not require attorneys’ presence, thus allowing both the County Attorney and Public Defender to focus on preparing for cases where defendants are more likely to appear. Major Events Early Disposition Court (EDC) handles drug-related offenses. EDC was initiated in 1997 after passage of Proposition 200, which required treatment rather than jail as a possible sanction for low–level drug possession charges. Drug related offenses account for about 30 percent of all felonies. Nearly 12,000 drug cases were funneled through EDC in fiscal year 2004–2005. The two EDC commissioners in downtown and the two EDC–RCC commissioners in Southeast resolve most simple possession and drug use cases in approximately 20 days. EDC also hears welfare fraud and spousal support fugitive matters. Initial Appearance (IA) Court sets bonds on bench warrant cases. In response to a recent Appellate Court decision, judicial officers now set bond amounts on most bench warrants (except where defendants are likely to be sent to prison). IA Court commissioners review bond amounts on defendants arrested on bench warrants, then schedule the case for disposition. A special summonsed initial appearance calendar frees attorneys for other work. Both the EDC and the RCCs used to handle defendants who were summonsed to appear. The appearance rate on summonsed The Probation Violation Center improves post–disposition defendant monitoring. The Probation Violation Center, established in July 2003, averages over 1,200 probation arraignments a month. Offenders alleged to have violated the terms of their probation are managed in a consistent manner. Other noteworthy efforts: • In the fall of 2004, the Sheriff’s Office and ICJIS installed the Jail PreBooking Module, which streamlines information from booking to the IA Court and creates an electronic arrest information sheet (“Form IV”). • The Sheriff’s Office and Court Technology Services (CTS) developed an electronic version of the daily Alpha Inmate List so Court staff can more effectively identify defendants in jail too long. • Work is under way to 1) install the File-A-Case module, designed to streamline the initiation of County Attorney complaints and 2) develop an electronic warrant system to eliminate duplicate data entry during the issuance and quashing of warrants. • The Court continues to expand its use of electronic audio-video recording as the official court record. 11000 Active Crim inal Case Inventory 10000 9000 8000 7000 6000 Jul-02 Jan-03 Jul-03 Jan-04 Jul-04 Jan-05 PAGE 8 MARICOPA COUNTY JUSTIC E SYSTEM AC TIVITIES REPORT FISC AL YEAR 2004-05 Justice Courts Court Technology Services is converting the County’s 23 Justice Courts to iCIS. Justice Court iCIS conversion helps the Superior Court track pending misdemeanor cases with companion pending felonies. Agency Information Filings and Terminations The 23 justice courts are limited jurisdiction courts that process DUI, criminal traffic, civil traffic, misdemeanor, civil, small claims, forcible detainer, domestic violence and injunction against harassment cases. Driving Under the Influence Major Events FY04 FY05 %CHG Filings 11,826 12,280 3.8% Terminations 10,773 10,554 -2.0% Filings 22,799 27,018 18.5% 22,249 24,098 8.3% Filings 148,230 171,476 15.7% Civil Traffic Terminations Filings 153,627 30,367 170,264 30,969 10.8% 2.0% Misdemeanor Terminations 30,268 28,703 -5.2% Criminal Traffic Terminations • Implemented the centralized citation entry project through which a private vendor performs data entry of all traffic citations within 24 hours with increased quality control. • Developed a civil traffic caseload report to track the progress of these cases through the justice court system. • Began the development of a new automated system using the iCIS platform, which system has been implemented in September 2005 in one justice court on a test basis. • Continued working with the county on developing co-located sites for the justice courts with the Northeast facility scheduled to open in October 2005 and the Northwest facility scheduled to open in January 2006. Filings 21,546 18,940 -12.1% Small Claims Terminations 20,634 18,999 -7.9% Forcible Detainer Filings 82,303 82,102 -0.2% Terminations 81,651 85,912 5.2% Filings 30,946 33,156 7.1% Terminations 28,952 31,406 8.5% Filings 6,280 5,822 -7.3% Terminations 6,253 5,797 -7.3% Filings 5,557 5,936 6.8% Terminations 5,545 5,903 6.5% • Worked with Superior Court on the development of Cour Tools, a system to measure court performance which will be implemented in late 2005. • Installed new digital recording equipment in all the justice courts. • Began development of a new operational review unit to increase the efficiency and effectiveness of the justice courts. • Worked with Superior Court on the development of an overall strategic plan for the trial courts in Maricopa County. Other Civil Orders of Protection Injunctions Against Harrassment • Completed a staffing analysis using a weighted caseload approach and began hiring additional employees based on that analysis. • Developed a new appeals report in conjunction with Superior Court. • Initiated warrant and default fees in order to partially recover processing costs of non-compliant defendants and enhanced postadjudicated collections towards greater enforcement of judicial orders. Harrassment Orders of Protection Other Civil Forcible Detainer Small Claims Terminations Misd. Civil Traffic Criminal Traffic 200,000 175,000 150,000 125,000 100,000 75,000 50,000 25,000 0 DUI Filings Other Proceedings FY04 FY05 %CHG Small Claims Hearings/Defaults 3,610 3,033 -16.0% Small Claims (w/Hearing Officer) 2,245 2,102 -6.4% Civil Traffic Hearings 4,354 3,323 -23.7% FY04 Trials NonJury Jury Criminal Traffic 329 Misdemeanor Civil Total 282 FY05 Total NonJury Jury Total 54 383 278 35 313 6 288 255 5 260 9 34091 40,627 10 40,637 34,082 41,238 70 41,308 34,615 Constables Agency Information Constables are elected to serve criminal and civil process of the 23 Justice Courts. Their duties include: executing and returning writs of possession, restitution, and execution; serving orders of protection and orders prohibiting harassment; and serving criminal and civil summons and subpoenas. Fees Received by Constables 2,000,000 Initial Appearance 256 165 -35.5% 1,600,000 Order of Protection Review Hearings 881 752 -14.6% 1,200,000 Injunctions Against Harassment Review 849 909 7.1% 800,000 Search Warrants Issued 3,073 2,178 -29.1% Note: Throughout this report, the percent change columns (%CHG) indicate the percentage increase or decrease over the prior year. 49 34,664 1,705,333 1,693,111 1,222,334 1,213,402 509,872 400,000 0 FY01 FY02 FY 03 FY 04 FY 05 PAGE 9 MARICOPA COUNTY JUSTIC E SYSTEM AC TIVITIES REPORT FISCAL YEAR 2004-05 Clerk of the Court The Office launched a new website called “E-ventures” designed to provide information about the Office’s Electronic Document Management System (EDMS) initiatives. The website can be accessed at http://eventures.clerkofcourt.maricopa.gov/. Agency Information The Clerk of the Superior Court provides court-related records management, as well as financial and family support services to the public, legal community, and the Superior Court. The Office’s functions satisfy over 500 state statutes and court rules. Among the Office’s responsibilities are to: • Provide public access to records of the Superior Court • Attend each Superior Court session to record the actions of the court • Be the first stop in initiating any Superior Court action in civil, criminal, mental health, probate, tax, family court matters, and juvenile which includes delinquency, dependency, adoption, and severance cases • Collect and disburse court-ordered fees, fines, and victim restitution • Provide various family support services to the public Public Access Terminals: The Customer Service Center allows customers to instantly view actual court documents on computer monitors, rather than waiting for staff to pull the file. The documents accessible at these computers are scanned images — probate documents from 1998 forward and all adult case types from 2002 forward. After viewing the documents, customers can print the page(s), pick them up at the counter, and pay the fee. This process saves time for customers and staff, and allows more than one person access to a file at the same time. Customers ordered approximately 13,000 copies from terminals in FY05. • Receive, distribute, and preserve official court documents • Store exhibits for all court cases • Issue and record marriage licenses; and • Process passport applications New Cases Initiated Civil Criminal Juvenile Family Probate/Mental Health Tax 40,000 35,000 30,000 25,000 20,000 15,000 10,000 5,000 0 FY02 FY03 FY04 The following is a summary of three new e-filing pilot programs: CIVIL COMPLEX LITIGATION—The project involves complex civil litigation cases where there are multiple parties, cases, and/or issues. The parties involved in the case must agree to participate in the project and the case must meet the specific criteria to be eligible. CRIMINAL—Electronic filing began on a permissive basis in Judge Donahoe’s criminal court division, as well as in Commissioners Nothwehr, Cunanan, and Anderson’s DUI Courts. The initial beneficiaries are the County Attorney’s Office and the four offices of Indigent Defense. CIVIL—Attorneys began filing legal documents electronically in Judge Swann’s civil division. The new system allows attorneys to file from any computer. Documents are immediately available to the judge. Parties to the case and the public can review the electronic files on computers at the Customer Service Center. FY05 Major Events The Electronic Document Management System (EDMS) and E-Filing: The vision to narrow the paper trail in the Clerk of the Court’s Office is becoming reality. Within the past two years, the Office launched three e-filing pilot programs which have many benefits. Each month, more than 235,000 paper documents are filed with the Clerk of the Superior Court, filling hundreds of rows of shelving units. However, with the new electronic storage system used in the e-filing projects, the electronic images are stored in a “jukebox,” which holds 500 optical disks. Each disk can hold 9.1 gigabytes of images. Approximately 260,000 pages of paper can fit onto one 5.25 inch optical disk as an electronic image. Other benefits of electronic filing include: ability to download an entire file in less than two minutes; ability for parties, judges, and the public (where permissible) to electronically view the case simultaneously and immediately; ability to process the case with increased speed and accuracy; and convenience for customers. Future plans include expanding the paperless system throughout the court system in all casetypes. In cases participating in the current e-filing pilot programs, the electronic records are considered the original documents of the case. Alternative Filing: During the past several years, the Office has been installing external and internal filing depository boxes to provide customers with an alternative method to file documents. Two external filing boxes are available for customers 24 hours a day, seven days a week. They are located at Mesa’s Southeast Court entrance and at the Madison Street parking garage in downtown Phoenix. The office also has eight internal filing boxes available 8 a.m. to 5 p.m., Monday through Friday. These boxes are located in the Downtown Distribution Center, Probate, and Southeast and Northwest Court lobbies. This fiscal year, there were 41,929 filings in the external boxes and 173,050 in the internal boxes. Other Facts: •On average, 30,000 pieces of paper are filed with the Clerk of the Superior Court each day. •The Clerk’s Office scans over 200,000 paper documents per month. •There are 331 law firms representing more than 2,776 attorneys enrolled in the Minute Entry Electronic Distribution System (MEEDS). Other Workload Indicators FY03 FY04 FY05 %CHG Marriage licenses issued 22,346 23,425 23,987 2.4% Passport applications 21,788 21,335 17,035 -20.2% 12,471 12,280 12,219 -0.50% 1,887,330 2,316,758 2,545,596 9.9% $1,169,339 $1,791,802 $2,035,982 13.6% $9,189,976 $8,200,819 $9,077,419 10.7% 128,082 137,644 7.5% Notary bond applications processed Documents added to electronic repository Total funds collected Total restitution monies disbursed Exhibits processed and released 124,209 MARICOPA COUNTY JUSTIC E SYSTEM AC TIVITIES REPORT FISCAL YEAR 2004-05 PAGE 10 Juvenile Court Services Since October 18, 2004, the juvenile court has had 535 Title XIV guardianship cases filed at the Durango facility and 329 cases filed at Southeast juvenile facility in Mesa. Agency Information Juvenile Court Services provides information, services, and programs to County residents so they can solve problems associated with juvenile crime. Petitions Filed with Juvenile Court FY02 FY03 FY04 15,026 13,780 14,584 Delinquency Direct File as Adult 335 313 283 Dependency 1,033 1,367 1,740 Adoption 945 888 966 Guardianship N/A N/A 3 293 244 276 Severance Other 496 646 714 18,128 17,238 18,566 Total FY05 %CHG 14,064 -3.6% 319 12.7% 1,906 9.5% 1,081 11.9% 911 30,266% 795 188.0% 479 -32.9% 19,555 5.3% Petitions Filed with Juvenile Court 20,000 19,000 18,000 17,000 16,000 FY02 FY03 FY04 FY05 Juveniles Committed to the Department of Juvenile Corrections FY03 FY04 FY05 %CHG 325 356 421 18.3% Major Events Court Appointed Special Advocate (CASA) Program: The Maricopa County CASA Program was very active in FY05. Seventy-nine new CASAs were trained, and the program ended the year with 279 CASAs. Additionally, over 60 hours of continuing education was offered to CASAs throughout the year. In FY05, CASAs • Wrote 437 court reports to judges on their children’s cases • Donated 15,141 hours on their cases, serving over 400 children • Drove 143,873 miles on their cases, visiting their children, providing sibling and/or parent visits, attending training and attending CPS staffings and court hearings. The CASA Program received several grants to help in program outreach and service to children. These include a Diversity Grant from National CASA that provided funds to advertise in publications that reach Maricopa County’s minority populations, to increase the diversity of our volunteer base. In addition, the program received an Urban Initiative Grant from National CASA to allow urban programs to mentor each other on program issues. The Maricopa County Program Manager mentored the Santa Clara CASA Program and was mentored by the St. Louis Child Advocate Program. Finally, the program received a grant from the Jeweler’s Association of America to create a program for older youth transitioning out of foster care at the age of 18. These funds were used to provide tutoring and skills training. The Maricopa CASA Program revamped its website and was updated on all search engines which led to an increase of activity on the site of 71% from March – June 2005. Several special events were held in 2005, including the April Light of Hope Event during Child Abuse Prevention and Awareness month, the Annual CASA/Theta picnic for CASAs and children, the Annual Holiday Party, and a special Zoolights night for CASAs and children funded through a grant from a private foundation in the valley. Dependency: At the conclusion of FY05, the Juvenile Court was overseeing 5,541 children who had open dependency cases, an 18% increase over the 4,689 juveniles who had open dependency cases at the end of FY04. Newly-filed dependency petitions are scheduled for a Preliminary Protective Conference (PPC) and Preliminary Protective Hearing (PPH) within 5-7 days of the children’s removal from the home. The PPC is facilitated by a Court Administration staff member. Issues including placement of the children, paternity, services, and visitation are discussed. The PPH occurs immediately after the PPC. In FY05, 1,784 cases were scheduled for a PPC/PPH (up from 1,651 in FY04). One of the programs operated by Juvenile Court Administration is Children’s Resource Assistance, whereby parties who appear at Juvenile Court seeking information about the dependency process are put in touch with Court Administration staff to receive information. Often these citizens are referred to the Juvenile Court by other court departments, law enforcement agencies, or even Child Protective Services, because they have concerns about the welfare of a child. These are unscheduled meetings conducted when the Clerk of Court notifies Court Administration that a prospective petitioner is inquiring about the dependency process. The process is explained, questions are answered, and referrals are made. Typically, the child in question is a grandchild or other relative. In FY05, 192 individuals availed themselves of this service (up from 161 in FY04), with 46 of those individuals filing a dependency petition (down from 51 in FY04). Another program is Children’s Resource Staffings. This is a program wherein Court Administration, Juvenile Probation, Child Protective Services, and ValueOptions collaborate to provide information and referrals to guardians ad litem and other persons who are contemplating filing a dependency petition. Meetings are held once per week at Durango and at Southeast. The goal is to explore providing services to a family which will obviate the need for a dependency filing. In FY05, 126 Staffings were conducted (there were 132 in FY04). Of these, only 12 (9.5%) resulted in the filing of a dependency. Mediation of contested dependency cases continues to be a significant alternative dispute resolution program at Juvenile Court. All legal parties in a dependency or severance case meet to discuss a mutually acceptable resolution. At all times, the safety and protection of the child is paramount. Any agreements reached are forwarded to the court for judicial approval. In FY05, 1,443 cases were scheduled for mediation (up from 1,213 cases in FY04). 358 (25%) did not occur because of the non-appearance of a parent. Of the remaining 1,085 cases, 516 (48%) reached a full agreement of all issues, 343 (31%) reached agreements on some but not all issues, and 226 (21%) reached no agreements. Late FY04 was also a period when a multidisciplinary group worked together to establish a separate downtown dependency district at the Central Court Building. The zip codes of the homes from which children were removed were recalibrated so that cases would feed into Durango, SEF, and the Central Court Building. It is expected that the two full-time dependency/severance judges at the CCB will be handling at least one-quarter of dependency caseload when the full implementation takes effect. PAGE 11 MARICOPA COUNTY JUSTIC E SYSTEM AC TIVITIES REPORT FISCAL YEAR 2004-05 Juvenile Probation Dept. Juvenile Probation continues to make a positive difference in the lives of juveniles and the community as evidenced by the awards we received for a video on preventing bullying, a school-based girls’ program, and the Arizona Law-Related Education Officer of the Year. In addition, the new Durango Detention facility was completed, enhancing the safety of detained juveniles. Agency Information The Juvenile Probation Department supervises youth placed on probation by the Court and manages two detention facilities with a 404 bed capacity. In addition, the Department administers community-based prevention programs, formal diversion in collaboration with the County Attorney, and Community Justice Centers and Committees as an extension of restorative justice. Juvenile Detention Average Daily Population Average Daily Capacity Average Daily % Over Capacity Avg Length of Stay (Days) FY03 FY04 400 357 431 357 442 404 2.6% 13.2% 12% 15.1 21% 16.6 9% 18.8 -57.1% 13.3% Average Daily Juvenile Probation Population FY03 FY04 Standard Probation 4,490 4,315 Intensive Probation 773 552 Total 5,263 4,867 FY05 %CHG FY05 4,171 571 4,742 %CHG -3.3% 3.4% -2.6% Juvenile Community Service Hours Completed FY03 155,789 FY04 149,076 FY05 147,519 %CHG -1.0% Juvenile Compliance with Diversion Consequences FY03 FY04 FY051 %CHG Consequences Given 17,329 17,142 17,067 -5.6% Completed on Time 13,648 13,607 12,446 -8.5% 3,608 3,486 2,464 -29.3% 73 49 197 302.0% Closed Did not Comply Note: Consequences may include community service, participation in educational programs or counseling programs, and restitution. Consequences may be closed due to loss of jurisdiction, new offense, or a decision to change the consequence. 1 Completed on Time, Closed, and Did Not Comply do not add up to total Consequences Given. Difference is due to those consequences still pending completion. ing. The program is research-based in content, as well as methodology, and everything is available in Spanish and English. The Juvenile Probation Department is invested in this program as a direct service to schools and the community. On the behavioral health and substance abuse treatment front, the Department has been active. The Youth Recovery Academy, a substance abuse residential treatment center, will open a unit for girls in October 2005. The program, run by Spectrum, addresses major risk factors associated with adolescent substance abuse and crime. The opening of the new facility will allow for services for 24 girls, a complement to the 24-bed boys’ facility that opened in May of 2003. The Juvenile Probation Department operates two detention facilities, one in Phoenix at the Durango Juvenile Court Center, and the other in Mesa at the Southeast Juvenile Court Center. Both facilities have undergone expansions in the last year. The Southeast Facility has a current capacity of 184 with a future maximum capacity of 248 and the new Durango Facility became fully operational in April of 2005 with a current capacity of 222 and a future maximum capacity of 302. In addition, the detention facilities adopted new suicide standards this year designed to better identify and address potentially suicidal juveniles. The Juvenile Probation Department has also been involved in collaboration with other agencies within the state. For example, probation representatives have worked with the Governor’s Office and state agencies to maximize the draw down of federal funds for mental and behavioral health care. To this end, two employees from ValueOptions have been hired as Juvenile Justice Engagement Team members to work with youth in detention to get needed services that carry over into their return to the community. Additionally, Probation Officers verify Title XIX and XXI eligibility for youth on probation or diversion. The Department partners with the Arizona Building Blocks for Youth project. Building Blocks addresses the issue of the over-representation of minority youth in the juvenile justice system with an emphasis on community awareness and change. As part of this project, probation officers work with the Gateway Project, a truancy initiative aimed at 6th, 7th and 8th graders. In the first year (when only 6th graders were given services), 432 youth were served by this program in two schools and truancy rates in one of the schools was the lowest in the district. Juvenile Population vs. Referrals Population Ages 8 -17 Referrals (delinquent, incorrigibility) 600,000 Major Events The Department was honored with two awards this year. The first was an Arizona Judicial Branch Achievement Award for Connecting with the Community. The “Dare to Dream” program, developed by a Safe Schools Probation Officer at Loma Linda School, brought the Girl Scouts of America into the school to deliver a curriculum that specifically addresses the needs of young girls. The “Dare to Dream” experience allowed the girls to develop a stronger sense of belonging, to improve their leadership skills, and to set long-term goals. The second award was from the National Association of Counties (NACo) for the project titled: “Fight Back with Love: Every Adult Has a Responsibility to Prevent Bullying.” This project is a set of videos, print materials and web support designed to educate adults on the seriousness of bully- 400,000 200,000 7.1% 7.0% 6.6% 0 FY03 FY04 FY05 Note: Throughout this report, the percent change columns (%CHG) indicate the percentage increase or decrease over the prior year. PAGE 12 MARICOPA COUNTY JUSTIC E SYSTEM AC TIVITIES REPORT FISC AL YEAR 2004-05 Medical Examiner To help accomplish Maricopa County’s goal of improved communication, the Medical Examiner’s office now posts its reports on-line for retrieval by appropriate parties. Agency Information Caseload Summary The Office of the Medical Examiner makes a public inquiry and investigation to determine the cause and manner of death when that death is unattended, unnatural, or suspicious (approximately one-fifth of all deaths in Maricopa County). FY02 FY03 FY04 FY05 %CHG Number of Cases % of Autopsies Performed 4,153 60% 4,199 55% 4,639 51% 4,611 50% -0.6% -2.0% Upon completion of the investigation, the Medical Examiner will issue a report of findings of any contributing factors and cause of death, and a determination as to the manner of death. Manner of death is designated in one of five categories: accident, homicide, natural, suicide, and undetermined. Accident 1,454 1,386 1,656 1,671 0.9% 417 415 415 395 -4.8% Natural 1,736 1,785 1,921 1,910 -0.6% Suicide 452 488 504 463 -8.1% In cases involving criminal investigation and prosecution, the final report is made available to the law enforcement agency and County Attorney’s Office. When a case involves public health or safety, results are reported to the Public Health Department and safety regulatory boards. Undetermined 82 117 131 133 1.5% Pending 12 4 2 44 - Unlike a coroner, who is an elected official and usually not required to be a medical doctor, a medical examiner is a licensed physician specializing in pathology, with a sub-specialty in forensic pathology. Major Event In FY05, the Office of the Medical Examiner made its reports available to the media, law enforcement, criminal justice, and health and regulatory agencies on the internet. Case Completion (% Closed in . . . ) 45 Days 90 Days FY01 43% 75% FY02 62% 94% Correctional Health FY03 34% 84% FY04 40% 78% Homicide Medical Exam iner Cases 4,700 4,600 4,500 4,400 4,300 4,200 4,100 4,000 3,900 FY02 FY05 42% 77% FY03 FY04 FY05 Correctional Health Services has been awarded an additional federal grant of $245,000 to finalize implementation of a comprehensive Telemedicine Program in the Maricopa County jail system. Encounters by Visit Type Agency Information FY05 Correctional Health Services provides medical, dental, and mental health services to inmates in the adult and juvenile detention facilities operated by Maricopa County. Counseling 49,910 Dental 10,493 Medical Doctor Major Event Nursing The jail telemedicine system will integrate with Maricopa Medical Center and the Arizona Telemedicine Network, using video technology to expedite patient visits. The agency’s goal is to develop the model jail telemedicine program in the nation. Psychiatry Women’s Care Deliveries Prescriptions Filled 46,376 212,623 11,973 936 45 274,626 Report Information •Please excuse minor differences in data reporting between agencies, due to the point in time when data are captured and different definitions. Also agencies do not all deal with the same cases; Superior Court criminal cases include both County Attorney and Attorney General filings, and Indigent Representation and the County Attorney have cases at Justice Courts and the Superior Court. •In percent change columns (%CHG), the number indicates the percentage increase or decrease over the prior year. •For questions or suggestions regarding this report, contact Amy Rex at 602-506-1310. •For information regarding departmental reporting and data please contact representatives listed on the last pages. PAGE 13 MARICOPA COUNTY JUSTIC E SYSTEM AC TIVITIES REPORT FISCAL YEAR 2004-05 Sheriff’s Office The average daily population in Maricopa County jail facilities for fiscal year 2004-05 reached 9,054, up 20% from fiscal year 2001-2002. Agency Information The Sheriff’s Office provides law enforcement, jail detention, and crime prevention services to the public. Bookings 124,000 122,117 122,000 119,695 118,465 120,000 118,000 Average Daily Jail Population 9,500 9,000 8,500 8,000 7,500 7,000 6,500 9,059 8,661 8,044 7,559 FY02 FY03 FY04 FY05 115,855 116,000 114,000 Inmate Population High Count FY02 FY03 FY02 FY03 Bookings by Agency Local Police Federal County State Other Self Surrenders City Court Justice Court Superior Court Total FY02 90,781 1,192 6,934 235 785 FY04 FY03 91,336 1,207 6,764 316 665 FY04 93,025 1,592 7,940 266 551 FY05 FY05 91,432 1,199 8,473 247 573 %CHG -1.7% -24.7% 6.7% -7.1% 4.0% 10,934 12,388 12,687 12,822 2,725 3,215 3,388 3,335 2,269 2,574 2,668 1,614 115,855 118,465 122,117 119,695 1.1% -1.6% -39.5% -2.0% Average Daily Population by Category of Offense FY02 FY03 FY04 FY05 %CHG Felony 5,779 6,013 6,586 6,966 5.8% Misdemeanor 1,207 1,388 1,503 1,525 1.5% Agency Hold 545 603 524 507 -3.2% Other 28 40 48 61 27.1% Total 7,559 8,044 8,661 9,059 4.6% FY05 %CHG 6/2/2002 10/20/2002 6/13/2004 6/27/2005 8,168 8,380 9,293 9,732 4.7% Average Length of Stay by Type (in days) FY02 FY03 Pretrial 11.88 12.62 Sentenced 22.38 21.49 Agency Hold 59.76 59.58 Other 4.67 3.81 Total 23.57 24.36 Pretrial FY04 FY05 FY03 92,245 8,539 — 100,784 FY04 104,301 3,052 6,303 113,656 %CHG -29.9% 29.0% 17.2% -10.0% 10.8% Other 80 60 40 20 0 FY02 FY03 FY04 FY05 FY05 %CHG 116,404 11.6% 2,524 -17.3% 7,229 14.7% 126,157 11.0% $17,500,750 Net Canteen Sales $3,717,226 Meals Served 13,099,157 Warrants Received 65,459 Dom Violence Orders Rec'd 26,377 Posse Members Reserve Members Inmates Transported FY02 93,527 7,926 — 101,453 FY05 8.24 30.64 73.71 3.43 27.30 Average Length of Stay by Type Sentenced Agency Hold Bonds/Fines Processed FY03 FY04 11.75 23.75 62.88 3.81 24.64 FY05 140,000 120,000 100,000 80,000 60,000 40,000 20,000 0 FY02 FY04 Other Workload Indicators Inmate Transports Superior Court Justice Court Justice Video Total Date Population Days 112,000 2,370 78 911 Calls Received 253,531 Calls for Service 540,429 Note: Throughout this report, the percent change columns (%CHG) indicate the percentage increase or decrease over the prior year. PAGE 14 MARICOPA COUNTY JUSTIC E SYSTEM AC TIVITIES REPORT FISC AL YEAR 2004-05 Indigent Representation [The] Public Defender’s Office began development of a Case Management system in FY05. This integrated system will enhance efforts by the County to reduce data entry and improve the quality of data collected. Agency Information The offices of Indigent Representation provide legal defense services to indigent defendants in the following instances: • Criminal proceedings including felony, misdemeanor, probation violation, appeals, post-conviction relief, and cases in which defendants oppose extradition. • Juveniles facing delinquency or incorrigibility charges. • Witnesses in criminal cases, when assigned by the court. • Indigent individuals at risk of a loss of liberty in civil mental health proceedings. • Those involved in civil child dependency or severance proceedings. To provide constitutionally mandated legal representation to indigent individuals in the most cost-effective manner, Maricopa County created three in-house defender offices and maintains a limited number of contracts with private attorneys. Multiple offices are necessary to address legal conflicts of interest that arise primarily because of prior representation by attorneys of co-defendants, victims, or witnesses. Major Events Office Type Program Contract Adult Felony Adult Misd. Appeals Civil Dependency For the Public Defender’s Office, FY05 was one of the most difficult years on record. A total of 50 attorneys resigned during the fiscal year, most of them from the Trial Division (21% turnover). The Office also experienced significant difficulty hiring replacements for departed staff. As a result of the vacancy and turnover rates, the Public Defender’s Office was ethically obligated to withdraw from over 2,000 felony cases to reduce the excessive workload of the remaining attorneys. Fortunately, a late-year market study supported substantial salary increases for the staffed offices in Indigent Representation. It is hoped that the subsequent pay increases implemented early in FY06 will help slow turnover and improve recruitment to, hopefully, allow for a reduction in workload withdrawals. On a more positive note, the Public Defender’s Office began development of a Case Management system in FY05. The intent is to create an integrated Case Management System in which all Indigent Representation departments choose to participate, thereby enabling the Offices to generate comparable statistical data for more effective longterm planning and to share information readily with each other and with our Justice System partners. This integrated system will enhance efforts by the County to reduce data entry and improve the quality of data collected. The Office of the Legal Advocate successfully applied for the Arizona Quality Award (AQA). The focus for the AQA is on processes and systems used within organizations to make the workflow more efficient and accurate. The Office of the Legal Advocate submitted our case management system for consideration. We focused particularly on the felony aspect of our case management system, due to the complexity and variety of cases found in the felony arena. The AQA application process includes a site visit, which took place in late August. Case Assignment Proportions FY2004-05 Public Defender 69% Legal Defender 7% Contract Counsel 22% Legal Advocate 2% Case Type Capital Felony Other Homicide (non-capital) Class 2 & 3 Felony Class 4, 5, & 6 Felony Felony DUI Violation Of Probation Witness Misdemeanor Adult Appeal Adult Post Conviction Relief Juvenile Appeal Adult Guardian Ad Litem Probate Family Court Juvenile Notification Child Dependency Parental Dependency Felony-Level Delinquency Juvenile Delinquency & Incorrigibility Incorrigibility & MisdemeanorMental Health Juvenile Violation Of ProbaMental Health Private Counsel Adult Appeal Private Counsel Expense Cases with some costs paid Adult Civil Private Counsel by County Staffed Adult Felony Offices Adult Misd. Appeals Civil Dependency Adult Felony Private Counsel Capital Felony Other Homicide (non-capital) Class 2 & 3 Felony Class 4, 5, & 6 Felony Felony DUI Violation Of Probation Witness Misdemeanor Adult Appeal Adult Post Conviction Relief Juvenile Appeal Juvenile Notification Child Dependency Parental Dependency Felony-Level Delinquency Juvenile Delinquency & Incorrigibility Incorrigibility & MisdemeanorMental Health Grand Total Juvenile Violation Of ProbaMental Health Sexually Violent Predator FY04 49 25 1,622 1,332 4 253 49 19 21 279 79 302 729 295 30 3,834 2,820 1,850 FY05 18 46 2,277 2,564 11 602 38 89 20 255 122 2,372 767 463 72 2,216 3,122 2,002 1,879 1,754 407 8 361 70 11 8 2 29 26 31 31 217 181 7,372 7,066 19,931 19,095 2,852 2,461 16,619 18,386 19 12 5,169 5,091 438 406 1,738 1,338 97 89 0 0 224 199 910 1,209 3,003 3,072 4,961 4,686 2,384 2,221 2,203 2,054 51 42 84,145 86,916 The number of cases assigned equals all cases of indicated type opened during the fiscal year, minus cases disposed during the fiscal year with one of the following results: No Complaint, Workload Withdrawal, and Administrative Transfer to Another IR Department. PAGE 15 MARICOPA COUNTY JUSTIC E SYSTEM AC TIVITIES REPORT FISCAL YEAR 2004-05 Adult Probation Use of the Offender Screening Tool (OST), a validated assessment tool, enables officers to determine an offender’s risk, assign the appropriate level of supervision, and develop an effective supervision plan. Agency Information Adult Probation has the following duties: • Managing offender risk by enforcing Court orders. • Encouraging probationers to engage in pro-social change, law-abiding behavior, and personal accountability under general and intensive supervision. • Providing presentence reports to assess offender risk/needs in order to help guide Court decisions and to apply the appropriate level of service. • Working in community partnerships to provide crime prevention and intervention services. • Facilitating victim involvement and restorative justice services. Average Daily Population on Supervision FY02 FY03 FY04 Standard Probation 24,448 25,400 23,957 Intensive Probation 1,564 1,267 1,079 Total 26,112 26,667 25,036 FY05 26,091 1,456 27,547 %CHG 8.9% 34.9% 10.0% Additional Probation Department Activities FY04 FY05 Presentence Reports 15,325 15,817 Community Service Hrs 769,314 527,650 Collections1 $25,349,639 $28,327,438 %CHG 3.2% -31.4% 11.7% 1 Includes reimbursement, restitution, fines/surcharges, probation fees, and taxes paid. Managing for Results FY04 % 61 78 Victim Satisfaction Survey Pretrial Successful Completion Rate Probationers who successfully completed MCAPD operated and/or funded treatment and residential services Standard probationers who successfully completed probation Warrants Cleared FY05 % 65 79 57 57 61 84 66 95 Pretrial Services Operational Statistics Initial Appearance Interviews/Criminal Histories Defendant Monitoring Referrals Intakes Office Visits Average Daily Caseload: General Average Daily Caseload: Intensive Average Daily Caseload: Electronic Monitoring Bond Motions Completed FY04 70,844 43,452 16,982 7,812 16,296 990 657 FY05 69,481 46,263 17,141 7,844 17,483 978 816 %CHG -1.9% 6.5% 0.9% 0.4% 7.3% -1.2% 24.2% 153 464 164 576 7.2% 24.1% Major Events Evidence-based Practices: The Maricopa County Adult Probation Department (MCAPD) joined with the Dallas County Community Supervision and Corrections Department with the support of the National Institute of Corrections to develop a model for implementing Evidencebased Practices (EBP). In doing so, the Department made changes to its organizational structure and revised its Managing for Results strategic goals to incorporate EBP. During the fiscal year, the Department conducted mandatory training department-wide on EBP. To align with the important evidence-based practice of conducting an offender assessment and to meet MFR goals, the Department now requires that an Offender Screening Tool (OST) be completed on all defendants in the Presentence Division. The department also began the first phase of implementing the FROST (Field Reassessment Tool) that will be used to measure the offender’s progress and modify the supervision plan if needed. Information Technology: The Department improved its information technology capabilities in the following areas: upgraded ACJIS and the Justice Web Interface to more efficiently share information with other criminal justice agencies; upgraded its Intranet home page; improved booking efficiency with MCSO Pre-Booking Application; improved officer safety with new Dispatch Call Center emergency procedures; streamlined Pretrial Automation data; and completed an interface with the Department of Corrections to automatically receive offender release data on cases coming to probation for supervision. Pretrial Services: Pretrial Services moved the Initial Appearance Court functions into the new Fourth Avenue jail. The Probation Violation Court and the Court Liaison probation officers also moved to this location. In addition to meeting space needs, the structural design and procedures at the new facility enhance safety for staff. As a result of a time study assessing staffing needs in Pretrial Services, the Department secured County funding for additional positions. See additional information on the following page. Court Master Plan: MCAPD is currently in the development stages of the Court Master Plan working with representatives from the County’s Facilities Management Office and officials from Superior Court. Facility needs are being based on anticipated population growth in the County and in particular regions of the County through the year 2015. Sex Offenders: A grant was received from the U.S. Department of Justice to support multi-agency assessment and planning regarding sex offenders in Maricopa County. The focus of the project is the re-entry of sex offenders on probation from the jail to the community. Sex offender education and treatment services are being provided in the jail and other re-entry issues, such as housing, are being explored. Victim Services: In May of 2005, the Department conducted its sixth annual survey to assess victim satisfaction with the Department’s victim notification services. This survey was first conducted in June of 1999. The percent satisfied overall for FY05 was 65.1%. This is an increase from the baseline survey when the percent satisfied was 31.4%. It is also an increase from the 2004 survey in which the percent satisfied was 60.8%. The percent satisfied on the 2005 survey represents the highest percentage that have provided an overall satisfactory evaluation. Department Awards and Recognition • The Garfield Community Probation Center received an Arizona Judicial Branch Achievement Award for Connecting with the Community. Garfield has a state-of-the-art education computer lab, temporary housing for homeless and/or mentally ill men on probation, and offices for probation staff. For over 10 years, Garfield staff have been highly involved in the Garfield neighborhood, coordinating community service projects, hosting and participating in community events, and providing education services. • The Administrative Office of the Courts recognized MCAPD’s Education Center as LEARN Lab/Program of the Year (for the third time). The education program’s performance surpassed all of the core goals established by both the Arizona and U.S. Departments of Education. • The National Association of Counties recognized the sex offender residential density application with a NACo Achievement Award. This application was a response to safety concerns expressed by the community and legislature regarding multiple sex offenders living in close proximity. The Department now has the capability to manage sex offender residential density on an ongoing basis and to produce quantifiable measurements for internal use and in response to stakeholders. Page 16 MARICOPA COUNTY JUSTIC E SYSTEM AC TIVITIES REPORT FISCAL YEAR 2004-05 Adult Probation Pretrial Services conducted 46,263 interviews of arrested defendants in the Maricopa County Jail System in FY05. Pretrial Services Div Major Events Division Profile Pretrial Services, a division of Adult Probation, has five primary responsibilities: 1. Conduct background checks on arrested defendants, which involve interviews and information verification for persons booked into the Maricopa County Jail System. 2. Provide standard, intensive, and electronic monitoring services for defendants released to Pretrial Services and secure that defendant’s appearance in court. 3. Track defendants who fail to appear. 4. Refer defendants to needed social services, including drug treatment. 5. Complete Bond Modification investigations and reports for the Court. Pretrial Services General Supervision Intensive Supervision Electronic Monitoring Total FY03 FY04 %CHG FY05 %CHG 700 990 41.4% 978 -1.2% 657 98.5% 153 57.7% 1,800 59.6% 816 164 1,958 24.2% 7.2% 8.8% 331 97 1,128 Total Defendants on Pretrial Supervised Release 2,400 2,000 1,600 1,200 800 400 0 FY03 County Attorney FY04 FY05 The Maricopa County Attorney’s Office prosecuted more than 34,599 felony cases in fiscal year 2004-05, a 1.6% increase over the previous year. Agency Information The County Attorney’s highest priority is holding criminals accountable for the crimes they commit against people and the community. The Office provides criminal prosecution, victim services, crime prevention, and legal counsel for county government, on behalf of the people of Maricopa County. Major Events • • Relocated operations from Madison Street Jail to the new 4th Avenue Jail. Expanded duties to include interviews of probation and bench warranted defendants. Developed and completed a staffing study that will increase the division size by one-fourth and set caseload ratios at 1:75 for general and intensive supervision and 1:30 for electronic monitoring supervision. The current staff to defendant ratio for general supervision is 1:120 and for electronic monitoring approximately 1:35. Entered into an Inter-Governmental Agreement with the City of Phoenix for a Domestic Violence project. All City of Phoenix misdemeanor D.V. cases are interviewed and assessed for risk prior to court to assist judicial officers in making release decisions. Additionally, City of Phoenix D.V. cases can be assigned to pretrial supervision pending disposition of their case. Requested funding of one Probation Officer, one Surveillance Officer and two Screeners to begin a Bond Review process that will commence in the FY06 budget year. Completed Probation Officer certification and Defensive Tactics requirements for all badged officers. Worked to develop and migrate the PACTS (Pretrial Automated Case Tracking System) into the court-wide iCIS automated system to provide for a more integrated system. Reached all time highs in supervision levels for general, intensive and electronic monitoring. Instituted County Attorney staffed dockets Mon-Fri at the 11 a.m. & 2 p.m. calendar; criminal history information is provided to allow them to better assess release recommendations. Continued to modify policies and procedures, as well as internal forms to conform to best practices identified through research of areas throughout the country. The Office created three new websites designed to educate the community about identity theft (http://endidtheft.com), animal crimes (http://www.protectazanimals.com) and driving while intoxicated (http://www.stopduiaz.com). These websites include current Arizona and municipal laws, recently sentenced cases and defendants and timely news stories. The Fraud and Identity Theft Enforcement Bureau (FITE) was put into operation in October 2004, to improve the prosecution of cases involving identity theft, fraud, and forgery. The FITE Bureau handled over 1,500 cases in FY05. Selected Adult Felony Filings by Offense Type FY04 Homicide 270 Sexual Assault 113 Child Molestation 370 Robbery 743 Aggravated Assault 2,630 Burglary 2,135 Arson 31 Vehicular Theft 2,504 DUI 2,958 Theft 1,005 Drug Related 15,078 Total 27,837 FY05 256 99 333 783 2,768 2,119 42 2,522 2,909 1,083 15,597 28,511 %CHG -5.5% -14.1% -11.1% 5.1% 5.0% -0.8% 26.2% 0.7% -1.7% 7.2% 3.3% 2.4% The number of felony filings represents data as of 10/25/05 and is subject to change. Source: County Attorney Information System. PAGE 17 MARICOPA COUNTY JUSTIC E SYSTEM AC TIVITIES REPORT FISC AL YEAR 2004-05 Directory of Maricopa County Agencies Information related to justice and other Maricopa County agencies may be accessed through www.maricopa.gov. This Internet site provides information on hundreds of County services. The “Judicial & Law Enfc.” selection under the menu heading ‘Departments’ provides links to most of the agency partners in the Maricopa County criminal justice system. The Clerk of the Superior Court provides direct access to the court docket. To access any County agency or personnel via telephone, you may call the switchboard at 602/506-3011. Justice Agencies Adult Probation Department Barbara Broderick, 602/506-3262 Chief Probation Officer West Court Building 111 South Third Avenue, 3rd Floor Phoenix, Arizona 85003-2204 www.superiorcourt.maricopa.gov/adultPro Department Information 602/506-7249 Pretrial Services 602/506-8500 Clerk of the Superior Court Michael K. Jeanes, 602/506-3676 Clerk of the Superior Court 201 West Jefferson, 2nd Floor Phoenix, Arizona 85003 www.clerkofcourt.maricopa.gov Department Information 602/506-3360 Customer Service Center 602/506-7400 (marriage licenses, passports) Family Support 602/506-3762 Financial Services 602/506-8621 Juvenile Div – Durango 602/506-0466 Juvenile Div – Southeast 602/506-2850 Northeast Regional Center 602/506-3360 Northwest Regional Center 602/506-3360 Southeast Regional Facility 602/506-3360 Correctional Health Services Lindy Funkhouser, Interim Director www.maricopa.gov/corr_health Department Information 602/506-2906 County Attorney’s Office Andrew P. Thomas, 602/506-3411 Maricopa County Attorney County Administration Building 301 West Jefferson, 8th Floor Phoenix, Arizona 85003 www.maricopacountyattorney.org Department Information 602/506-3411 Administration Division Civil Division Criminal Trial Division Graffiti Hot Line Hate Crimes Hot Line Slum Lord Hot Line Investigations Division Juvenile Division Eastside Westside Law Enforcement Liaison Major Crimes Division I Major Crimes Division II Pretrial Division Southeast Division Speakers Bureau Victim Services Division 602/506-5508 602/506-8541 602/506-1145 602/262-7327 602/506-5000 602/372-SLUM 602/506-3844 Office of Contract Counsel Mark Kennedy, Director General Information 602/506-7228 480/962-8002 602/372-4000 602/506-3411 602/506-5840 602/506-7422 602/372-7350 602/506-2600 602/506-3411 602/506-8522 Jerry Porter, Associate Presiding Judge Limited Jurisdiction Courts 602/506-7106 Brian Karth, Ltd. Juris. Court Admin 602/506-7041 Debra Hall, Deputy Ltd. Juris. Court Admin 602/506-2376 www.justicecourts.maricopa.gov www.maricopa.gov/constable Justice Courts Administration 602/506-1337 ICJIS Integrated Criminal Justice Information Systems Don Thomas, Director General Information www.maricopa.gov/icjis/ Justice Courts Information on particular Justice Courts, including court locations and names of the 23 elected Justices of the Peace and Constables, may be obtained on the above noted websites or by calling Administration. 602/506-7906 Juvenile Probation and Detention Indigent Representation Public Defender Jim Haas, Public Defender 11 West Jefferson Phoenix, Arizona 85003 www.pubdef.maricopa.gov General Information Appeals Juvenile – Durango Juvenile – Southeast Mental Health Trial Groups Downtown Trial Groups Mesa 602/506-8200 602/506-7955 602/506-8220 602/506-4230 602/506-2033 602/344-5856 602/506-7711 602/506-2200 Legal Defender Robert Briney, Legal Defender General Information 602/506-8800 Legal Advocate Susan Sherwin, Legal Advocate General Information Adult 602/506-4111 Juvenile 602/506-5379 Barbara Broderick, 602/506-2638 Interim Chief Juvenile Probation Officer 3125 West Durango Phoenix, Arizona 85009 or 1810 South Lewis Mesa, Arizona 85210 www.superiorcourt.maricopa.gov/juvenileprob General Information 602/506-4011 Court Information - Durango 602/506-4533 - Southeast 602/506-2544 Durango Detention 602/506-4280 Southeast Detention 602/506-2669 Medical Examiner Dr. Philip Keen, Director General Information 602/506-3322 PAGE 18 Sheriff’s Office Joseph M. Arpaio, Sheriff 602/876-1801 100 West Washington – 19th Floor Phoenix, Arizona 85003 www.mcso.org Enforcement Operations 602/876-1822 Patrol Bureau 602/876-4435 Enforcement Support 602/876-1895 Investigations Bureau 602/876-1813 Custody Bureaus 602/876-1810 Administration Bureau 602/876-4405 Financial Bureau 602/876-5495 Technology Bureau 602/876-1625 Information 602/876-1000 Jail Information 602/876-0322 Superior Court Barbara Rodriguez Mundell, 602/506-6130 Presiding Judge Old Courthouse 125 W. Washington Phoenix, Arizona 85003 www.superiorcourt.maricopa.gov General Information / Court Administration 602/506-3204 Civil Court 602/506-1497 Conciliation Services 602/506-3296 Criminal Court 602/506-8575 Domestic Violence Prevention Center 602/506-5553 Family Court 602/506-1561 Jury Commission/Assembly 602/372-5879 Juvenile Court 602/506-4533 Law Library 602/506-3461 Mental Health Court 602/506-0959 Officer Probate Court 602/506-3668 Self-Service Center 602/506-SELF www.superiorcourt.maricopa.gov/ssc/info/ gen_info.asp Southeast Court (Mesa) 602/506-2020 Tax Court 602/506-8297 MARICOPA COUNTY JUSTIC E SYSTEM AC TIVITIES REPORT FISCAL YEAR 2004-05 Maricopa County Board of Supervisors Supervisor Max Wilson, 602/506-7642 Chairman Supervisor Fulton Brock, 602/506-1776 District 1 Supervisor Don Stapley, 602/506-7431 District 2 Supervisor Andy Kunasek, 602/506-7562 District 3 Supervisor Mary Rose Wilcox, 602/506-7092 District 5 ------------------------Fran McCarroll, 602/506-3766 Clerk of the Board Maricopa County Management David R. Smith, 602/506-3098 County Manager Sandra L. Wilson, 602/506-7280 Deputy County Manager Joy Rich, 602/506-3301 Asst County Mgr, Regional Development Svcs William C. Scalzo, 602/506-2930 Asst County Mgr, Community Services Tom Manos, 602/506-3561 Chief Financial Officer Dr. Jacquelynn Meeks, 602/506-6600 Public Health Director January 2006 For additional copies call 602/506-1310 or visit http://www.maricopa.gov/justice_activities/ default.aspx