MARICOPA COUNTY JUSTICE SYSTEM ANNUAL ACTIVITIES REPORT FISCAL YEAR 2005-06 Report available on-line at http://www.maricopa.gov/justice_activities/default.aspx Maricopa County Justice System Annual Activities Report Fiscal Year 2005-06 A Typical Workday for the Maricopa County Justice Systems Means* . . . • 344 adults booked into jail • 9,733 total adults in jail • 433 juveniles in detention • 41,382 meals served to juvenile detainees and adult inmates • 569 adult inmates transported to a court appearance • 1,200 hearings scheduled in Superior Court • 300 (approx) residents appear for jury duty (to Superior, Justice, and most Municipal Courts) • 1,973 adults in the community under officer supervision pending trial • 29,217 adults in the community supervised by probation officers after sentencing • Over 1,700 cases filed in Justice Courts • 107 new felony cases filed • 430 total cases filed with Superior Court • 12,659 court documents filed • 37,000 pieces of paper filed with the Clerk of the Superior Court • $514,081 spent for detaining adults • $1.78 million spent in the overall County criminal justice system. * daily average of statistics for fiscal year 2005-06 Welcome to the Maricopa County Justice and Law Enforcement Annual Activities Report. This report highlights activity from July 2005 through June 2006. During FY 2005-06, Maricopa County Justice System partners continued to work at expediting case processing and improving the system. At the same time, they began to explore more ideas and programs along the lines of Crime Prevention in an effort to reduce the demand for detention and jail beds. National Experience According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, U.S. Department of Justice, the overall violent crime rate remained stable between 2004 and 2005, while the overall property crime rate declined. Residents experienced approximately 23 million crimes in 2005, one million fewer than experienced in 2004: 77% were property crimes; 22% were crimes of violence; and 1% were personal thefts. For every 1,000 persons age twelve and older there was one rape or sexual assault, one assault with injury, and three robberies. Murders were the least frequent violent victimizations, with about 6 murders per 100,000 in 2005. However, according to 2005 data from the Uniform Crime Report, violent crime rates increased 2.3% throughout the nation compared to 2004. When comparing a 5-year trend, though, violent crime decreased 3.4%. Property crime rates decreased 1.5% compared to 2004 and 13.9% compared to 1996. Based on information provided by victims, 47% of violent crimes and 40% of property crimes were reported to police in 2005, according to the National Crime Victimization Survey. The Uniform Crime Reporting Program indicated that clearance rates for violent crimes were 45.5% and for property crimes were 16.3%. Murder remained the offense cleared most often, with burglary and motor vehicle thefts cleared the least. In 2005, 26.4% of those arrested for property crimes, and 15.3% of those arrested for violent crimes, were juveniles. This compares to 2004 numbers of 28.3% and 16.4% respectively. In examining the 11.6 million crimes reported to law enforcement in 2005, 12.0% were violent crimes and 88.0% were property crimes (as captured by the Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) Program). The violent crime figure dropped 3.4% compared to 2001 and 17.6% from 1996. The property crime volume was 13.9% lower than in 1996. The monetary value of property crimes (excluding arson) totaled nearly $16.5 billion in 2005. Motor vehicle theft continued to represent the greatest monetary loss. States comprising the West region, as reported by the UCR, saw the violent crime rate increase by 1.6% while the property crime rate decreased by 0.6% for the period from 2004 to 2005. Of the 14 states in the West category, three states (Colorado, Idaho, and New Mexico) had larger increases in violent crime per 100,000 persons than Arizona while the remainder had lower increases or actually showed a reduction. According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, U.S. Department of Justice, from 1995-2005, the number of jail inmates per 100,000 residents increased across the country from 193 to 252. From midyear 2004-2005, the number of local jail inmates rose by 33,539. Local jail authorities held or supervised 819,434 offenders at mid-year 2005. Overall, local jails were operating at 5% below their rated capacity. The total incarceration rate (number of inmates per 100,000 residents on June 30, 2005) was 738. Ten states had higher total incarceration rates, with six of those states being in the South. However, Arizona is also higher than the national average, with 808 inmates per 100,000 residents. Table of Contents Adult Probation Adult Probation, Pretrial Svcs Budget Clerk of the Court Constables Correctional Health County Attorney Criminal Justice Indicators Directory Indigent Representation Justice Courts Justice System Highlights Juvenile Court Services Juvenile Probation Dept Maricopa County Highlights Medical Examiner Proposition 400 and 411 Projects Sheriff’s Office Superior Court Page 14 15 5 8 7 11 16 3 17 13 7 2 9 10 2 11 4 12 6 PAGE 2 MARICOPA COUNTY JUSTIC E SYSTEM AC TIVITIES REPORT FISCAL YEAR 2005-06 Maricopa County Government Highlights of Fiscal Year 2005-06 Maricopa County Justice System Highlights of Fiscal Year 2005-06 Population continued to increase. Home to over 3.5 million residents, Maricopa County continues to face an everincreasing demand for services. While each justice and law enforcement agency within Maricopa County is tasked with distinctive mandates, all must function as part of a system. Agencies’ responsibilities are varied: they investigate, arrest, charge, protect, defend, heal, prosecute, supervise, fine, adjudicate, mediate, test, autopsy, or detain members of the community. Maricopa County is the fourth most populous county in the nation, quickly closing in on Harris County, Texas for the third spot (most populous is Los Angeles County, California while the second is Cook County, Illinois). The population in Maricopa County grew 18% from 2000-2005. This influx is causing people to move to the outer boundaries of Maricopa County, resulting in great geographic distance to be covered in order to meet the increasing demand for services. Maricopa County has a land area of just over 9,220 square miles (84.4% unincorporated), and is the 14th largest county in landmass, larger than seven states and the District of Columbia. Maricopa County is challenged by the need to increase government to effectively meet the growing demand for services which is anticipated to increase into the foreseeable future. In addition to the growing demand for services that an increasing population brings, Maricopa County is also challenged by an increasing population that is incredibly diverse. This requires constant education regarding issues such as language and cultural differences. The approved FY06-07 Maricopa County budget included funding for Crime Prevention Grants. The Maricopa County Board of Supervisors authorized $2 million for each of the next three fiscal years (FY06-07, FY07-08, and FY08-09) for Crime Prevention Grants. The FY06-07 authorization was available to cities, towns, or tribal nations within Maricopa County so they could offer evidence-based crime prevention programs. Three grants were awarded in May 2006. The approved FY06-07 Maricopa County budget included funding based on recommendations made through the Commission on Justice System Intervention for the Seriously Mentally Ill. The Maricopa County Board of Supervisors authorized $1 million for a pilot Mobile Crisis Team to provide on-the-street intervention for officers responding to those who are suspected of having a serious mental illness. The Board also authorized $550,000 for the Alpha Program designed for inmates with co-occurring disorders. Finally, the Board authorized funding for additional staffing required in the Mental Health Court and related agencies. House Bill (HB) 2819 approved the shift of State funding for Standard and Intensive Probation to the County in exchange for a corresponding reduction in the County AHCCCS contribution. The FY 2006-07 General Fund (100) shift from AHCCCS to Juvenile Probation is $7,435,400. The FY 2006-07 Juvenile Probation Grants Fund (227) revenue and expenditure appropriations are reduced by $7,561,210 to remove State funding that had been anticipated prior to the passage of the bill. Other FY06-07 budget allocations related to Criminal Justice System. Funding was allocated for a pilot project to offer Extended Court Hours for juvenile and family court. Other funded initiatives included programs for Auto Theft and ID Theft prosecution. FY05-06 was the first full year of operation for the new jail facilities. Because Maricopa County has fully utilized these facilities, plans are being made to try to reduce future demand for jail beds. History of Propositions 400 and 411. Recognizing a need for additional jail facilities, more programs to better manage defendants through the system, and programs to stem the tide into the jails, Maricopa County asked for authorization to go before the voters for funding. Although legislators scaled down the request, primarily by removing operational costs, Proposition 400 was put before the voters in 1998. This one-fifth sales tax, to be collected for nine years or until it collected $900 million, was approved by 69% of the voters. County financial planners realized it would be impossible to pay for new detention facility operations without a dedicated revenue stream, so the County returned to legislators for authority to request voters to continue the jail tax up to 20 years after expiration of the first tax. Proposition 411 was approved in November of 2002, also by 69% of the voters. The new detention facilities were completed in FY05, with construction funded in a “pay-as-you-go” method. Master Planning continued for Superior Court and for the Jails. The Superior Court Master Plan, formally adopted by the Board of Supervisors in December 2005, 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.” The 1997 Jail Master Plan established the original groundwork leading to passage of Proposition 400, providing sales tax money to build the now-completed new jail facilities and fund programs designed to reduce the need for jail beds. Maricopa County hired DMJM Design to update this plan, specifically related to the nonconstruction initiatives. Phase I of the update has been completed; during this phase, the consultants met with criminal justice stakeholders to understand perspectives and determine the implementation status of each initiative listed in Proposition 400. In Phase II, the consultants are gathering data to begin making projections and recommendations. The update should be completed by the end of FY06-07. Agencies worked to achieve system-wide goals. Criminal Justice agencies worked jointly toward achievement of the Countywide strategic priority related to the justice system: to ensure safe communities and a streamlined, integrated criminal justice system. Agencies meet regularly to discuss options and assess status on many issues related to the following goals: • Crime Prevention: Add questions to the Maricopa County Citizen Satisfaction Survey so data about crime is more readily PAGE 3 MARICOPA COUNTY JUSTIC E SYSTEM AC TIVITIES REPORT FISCAL YEAR 2005-06 • available. Develop regional collaboration through the Maricopa County Crime Prevention Grants. Continue to research evidence-based programs to incorporate these programs within Maricopa County and to ensure that existing programs are also evidence-based. Relating to improving case processing: Discuss options to meet case processing timelines. Examine changing locations of courts (especially RCC/EDC) to improve and increase case flow. Implementation of Extended Court Hours in Juvenile and Family Court. Criminal justice facilities beyond the scope of Proposition 400 were begun or completed as Maricopa County continued to address the needs of the Criminal Justice System. a Downtown Court Tower programming consultant in October 2006. The Northeast Regional Court Center began operations in September 2005, while the Northwest Regional Court Center began operations in March 2006. The Downtown Regional Court Center began operations in December 2006. The SanTan Regional Court Center is scheduled to begin operations in April 2007. 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. Maricopa County leaders continue to pursue improvement in effectively moving cases through the criminal justice system. Several court facilities are envisioned in the Superior Court Master Plan. Projects include integrating the Downtown Superior Court Complex including the addition of a Court Tower, and centralizing criminal court downtown. The RCC/EDC Courts may move out of East Court Building to accommodate the high volume case loads in those courts. Concepts for a Restorative Justice Tower which would provide space for all necessary criminal justice partners in one building were also being discussed. The Board approved funding of County leaders 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.” Key Criminal Justice Indicators Maricopa County leaders focus efforts on crime prevention. FY04 FY05 FY06 %CHG Sheriff’s Office Detention Bookings Avg Length of Stay (days) Avg Daily Population 122,115 119,694 125,505 25.96 27.65 28.36 8,657 9,054 9,733 Superior Court—Criminal Department Filings 36,748 35,920 Terminations 31,306 33,096 Case Clearance Rate 85.2% 92.1% Avg Monthly Active Pending Inventory 9,106 10,603 Trials 498 607 4.9% 2.6% 7.5% 39,039 35,812 91.7% 8.7% 8.2% -0.4% 10,774 817 1.6% 34.6% Pretrial Services (monthly averages) General Supervision 990 Intensive Supervision 657 Electronic Monitoring 153 978 816 164 775 1,077 190 -20.8% 32.0% 15.9% Adult Probation (monthly averages) Standard Supervision 25,055 Intensive Supervision 1,078 26,091 1,456 27,896 1,321 6.9% -9.3% Juvenile Court, Probation, Detention Petitions Filed 18,566 Juv Avg Daily Population 431 Juv Avg Length of Stay (days) 16.6 4,232 Standard Supervision (mthly avg) 518 Intensive Supervision (mthly avg) 19,254 442 18.8 4,171 571 19,675 433 18.5 4,081 551 2.2% -2.0% -1.6% -2.2% -3.5% Note: Throughout this report, the percent change columns (%CHG) indicate the percentage increase or decrease over the prior year. Although the County mandate related to criminal justice is reactive, many Criminal Justice partners are looking to evidence-based programs that will reduce the need for future jail beds. There is a realization 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. This is supported through the County Strategic Planning and the decision to hire DMJM Design to update the 1997 Jail Master Plan, particularly the nonconstruction related initiatives. It is recognized that Maricopa County cannot build its way out of the problem; additional facilities will fill as quickly as they are built. Therefore, more efforts must be focused on crime prevention, the only true means to reduce public investment for the future. 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. The CJOC has supported Maricopa County’s increasing focus on Crime Prevention and are interested in being informed about current status of the nonstructural components of Proposition 400. PAGE 4 Status of Other Proposition 400 Projects at Close of Fiscal Year 2005-06 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: • Thirty-three web-based computer interfaces, providing more than twenty 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 #s 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: The Regional Court Centers (RCC) and the Early Disposition Courts (EDC) continue to expedite case processing. They handled nearly 33,000 cases this last fiscal year. Along with felony complaints being filed directly with the Superior Court (direct filing), the RCCs and EDCs consolidate preliminary hearings and arraignments into a single event at a single location. In-custody defendant jail days are reduced. Almost 60 percent of the RCC cases and 80 percent of the EDC cases are resolved. An additional commissioner has been added at the Glendale RCC location, adding to that site’s capacity. The Maryvale and Tolleson precinct filings have been moved from the downtown RCC to Glendale to relieve pressure on the downtown operation. Implement Differentiated Case Management: • Capital and complex cases are identified and separately managed • • • • • early in the process. Court Technology Services (CTS) is enhancing the iCIS computer system to easily identify capital cases. Plans are underway to designate a specific cadre of judges to handle capital cases. A third commissioner was added to the Initial Pretrial Conference Center (IPTC) to more aggressively manage discovery and trial preparation earlier in the life of a case. A commissioner from the DUI Center was assigned to the IPTC to handle more aggressive case management, leaving the DUI Center short staffed. A commissioner has now been reassigned back to the DUI Center bringing that operation to full strength. A Comprehensive Mental Health Court has been instituted to monitor seriously mentally ill defendants under a single judicial officer early in the system and to stabilize mentally ill defendants more quickly. A new summonsed initial appearance calendar was created to take some pressure off both defense attorneys and prosecutors. The Probation Violation Center continues to operate in the basement of the Fourth Avenue Jail, handling arraignments, for virtually all probation revocation petitions and a majority of the violation and disposition hearings. The Center is on target to handle over 16,000 defendants in the coming fiscal year. Eliminate Unnecessary Court Proceedings: • Starting in the fall, a commissioner is being assigned to try exclusively class 4, 5, and 6 felonies cases scheduled for trial. • CTS is developing a computer enhancement that will allow attor- MARICOPA COUNTY JUSTIC E SYSTEM AC TIVITIES REPORT FISC AL YEAR 2005-06 • neys to easily find judicial officers with available time to hear settlement conferences. A calendar exclusively for defendants summonsed to court on felony complaints was established to free attorneys’ time to devote to other cases and relieve the pressure on the RCCs and EDCs. Consolidate Criminal Divisions to a Common Location: When the Restorative Justice Center is completed, 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. Expand Pretrial Release Supervision & Jail Court Functions: The Court started a pilot program conducting second bail reviews for selected defendants in the RCC and the EDC. 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. The Initial Appearance Court continues to expand its Search Warrant Center program offering law enforcement officers a reliable central location to obtain search warrant reviews 24 hours a day, seven days a week. The Center is expected to handle well over 5,000 search warrants in fiscal year 2006-2007. Enhance Substance Abuse Evaluation and Programming: The Reach Out Program continues to assess jailed, non-violent probationers with substance abuse problems to determine their level of treatment need. During FY06, staff conducted 1,831 clinical assessments and made possible the early release of 267 probationers to outpatient and/or residential treatment. This represents 12,903 jail days saved. Residential treatment placement was impacted by limitations imposed by treatment providers, most notably construction of new facilities and a shift from grant funding to RHBA funding for new placements. The ALPHA Program, offered through the Sheriff’s Department, allows sentenced inmates to request help for substance abuse treatment. Over 3,800 inmates have graduated from this intensive program since it began in February 1996. The program’s success has led to the creation of Alpha II, which will treat inmates with cooccurring disorders. Both programs have faced challenges hiring counselors, although it is anticipated that a recent increase in the counselor salary structure should alleviate some of those challenges. Expand Drug Court: • The EDC targets low-level drug offenders (Prop. 200 cases) and welfare fraud cases. Besides changes of plea, the EDC offers drug treatment through Treatment Assessment Screening Center, Inc.. Defendants arrested on warrants are “short set” into the EDC and offered a plea five days after their initial appearance. • Drug Court, presided over by Hon. Carey Hyatt, handles over 1,000 defendants after sentencing. The Court hopes to expand the number of defendants assigned to this program. 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. 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 5 MARICOPA COUNTY JUSTIC E SYSTEM AC TIVITIES REPORT FISC AL YEAR 2005-06 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 by this growth is the criminal justice system. The Board of Supervisors continues to focus budget priorities on the criminal justice system, while balancing those needs against other responsibilities. The justice system is also the arena offering the greatest potential for efficiencies and improvements, as the system continues to grow. For fiscal year 2005-06, the net Maricopa County budget was $1,988,468,647. The budget for the justice system agencies comprised 32.7% of the total county budget, an increase from 22.2% the prior year. With the removal of the health care system from the budget, Public Safety now comprises the largest percentage of the budget. FY06 Adopted Budget by Department General Detention Grants1 and Total Funds Funds Other Funds Adult Probation $50,303,044$ — $14,536,894 $64,839,938 26,383,155 — 8,874,258 35,257,413 Clerk of Court 1,908,645 — — 1,908,645 Constables Correctional 3,580,435 39,120,480 513,895 43,214,810 Health 57,520,494 — 12,799,672 70,320,166 County Atty 61,219,382 — 2,352,706 63,572,088 Indigent Rep — 4,454,554 — 4,398,212 ICJIS 11,680,865 30,471,655 15,519,533 57,672,053 Juv Probation Medical 4,970,959 — 12,689 4,983,648 Examiner 54,730,461 148,519,235 17,609,361 220,859,057 Sheriff’s Office Trial Courts 67,135,563 — 16,674,245 83,809,808 Total $339,433,003 $222,509,582 $88,893,253 $650,835,838 1Grants FY06 Adopted Budget by Departm ent General Funds Detention Funds FY07 Adopted Budget by Department Grants/Other Funds Sheriff’s Office Trial Courts County Atty Adult Probation Indigent Rep Juv Probation Corr Health Clerk of Court M ed Examiner ICJIS Constables 0 25 50 75 100 125 Millions of Dollars 150 175 200 225 FY07 Adopted Budget by Department General Funds Detention Funds are primarily from state agencies. General Detention Grants1 and Total Adult Probation $55,280,402 $ — $16,132,870 $71,413,272 32,090,197 — 9,561,2878 41,651,484 Clerk of Court 2,126,145 — — 2,126,145 Constables Correctional 3,719,176 41,139,040 699,460 45,557,676 Health 67,528,212 — 11,918,136 79,446,348 County Atty 69,588,808 — 2,679,127 72,267,935 Indigent Rep — 1,817,932 — 1,817,932 ICJIS 21,320,911 32,490,356 7,447,459 61,258,726 Juv Probation Medical 6,677,385 — — 6,677,385 Examiner 21,151,327 256,806,241 Sheriff’s Office 67,507,004 $168,147,910, Trial Courts 77,815,530 — 17,892,544 95,708,074 Total $403,653,770 $243,595,238 $87,482,210 $734,731,218 1Grants are primarily from state agencies. Grants/Other Funds Aggregate Annual Budgets for Maricopa County Justice Agencies Sherif f ’s Of f ice Trial Court s Count y At t y Adult General Fund Detention Fund Grants/Other Funds $900M Indigent Rep Juv Probat ion Corr Healt h $ 735M $700M Clerk of Court Med Examiner ICJIS $500M $ 407M $ 427M $ 439M $ 467M $ 477M $ 575M $ 651M $300M Const ables 0 25 50 75 100 125 150 175 Millions of Dollars 200 225 250 275 $100M FY00 FY01 FY02 FY03 FY04 FY05 FY06 FY07 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 6 MARICOPA COUNTY JUSTIC E SYSTEM AC TIVITIES REPORT FISCAL YEAR 2005-06 Superior Court Specialty Courts are helping set probationers back on the right track. The Mental Health Department oversees Mental Health Court, the Rule 11 calendar, and is monitoring pretrial cases processing for seriously mentally ill defendants. Additionally, there is the Family Violence Court, Drug Court, DUI Court, Spanish DUI Court, and a court for juveniles transferred to adult probation. Agency Information The Superior Court provides a public forum for the resolution of disputes and court services so that the public may realize individualized justice in a timely, fair, and impartial manner. Superior Court Case Filings by Case Type FY04 FY05 Civil 37,840 38,016 Criminal 38,685 38,605 Family Court 49,098 49,918 Juvenile 19,317 18,825 Probate 7,067 6,624 Mental Health 2,178 1,994 Tax Court 1,275 1,014 Total Filings 155,460 154,996 FY06 36,691 40,928 50,878 19,675 6,758 2,261 765 157,956 S up e r i or C o ur t F i l i n gs b y C a se Ty pe - FY0 6 Search Warrant Center By statute, law enforcement officers can appear before any magistrate in Maricopa County to obtain a search warrant and %CHG other orders. The IA Court offers round the clock service to law enforce-3.5% ment officers requesting a search warrant. Last year the IA Court reviewed 6.0% well over 5,000 search warrant requests. 1.9% A special summonsed initial appearance calendar frees attorneys for other 4.5% work. Both the EDC and the RCCs used to handle defendants who were 2.0% summonsed to appear. The appearance rate on summonsed defendants, 13.4% however, averages around 40 percent. A calendar strictly for summonsed -24.6% defendants was started in the summer of 2005. The summonsed IA calendar does not require attorneys’ presence, thus allowing both the County 1.9% Attorney and Public Defender to focus on preparing for cases where defendants are more likely to appear. To t a l Fi l i ng s 15 7 , 9 5 6 Family Court 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. 32% Juvenile 12% Criminal 26% Probat e Tax Ment al Civil Court Healt h 23% 0.5% 1.5% 5% Felony Case Filings by Class of Felony FY03 FY04 Class One 168 217 Class Two 4,223 4,315 Class Three 5,408 5,592 Class Four 15,057 15,517 Class Five 2,020 1,907 Class Six 8,324 9,200 FY05 168 4,344 5,547 15,288 1,745 8,828 FY06 195 4,321 5,971 16,510 1,831 10,211 Total 35,920 39,039 35,200 36,748 cause, 2) review bond amounts on defendants arrested on warrants, 3) schedule the case for disposition, 4) advise defendants of their rights, 5) appoint an attorney to represent defendants if appropriate, and 6) evaluate defendants’ mental health needs. 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 expanded the program to three commissioners, and now issues pretrial orders to encourage pleas in class four, five, and six indicted cases. The Center ensures discovery has been exchanged, a plea offer has been tendered, and the offer has been seriously discussed with the client. Preliminary reports show that the program generates about a 25 percent plea rate. %CHG 16.1% -0.5% 7.6% 8.0% 4.9% Starting in July of 2005 a commissioner is now assigned exclusively to try class four, five, and six trials, thus relieving the regular trial divisions of 15.7% these lower level cases. The court expects this division will resolve a signifi8.7% cant number of cases ready for trial. 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. Nearly 12,000 drug cases were funneled through EDC in fiscal year 05–06, accounting for about 30 percent of all felonies filed. 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. In addition, as recommended by the Director of the Office of Legal Defender, in-custody defendants arrested on warrants are set for a plea hearing only five days after the initial appearance, which gives defendants an opportunity to resolve their case even more quickly. EDC also hears welfare fraud and spousal support fugitive matters. Regional Court Centers (RCCs) consolidate front-end felony proceedings. RCCs started in early 2001 with Legislative “Fill the Gap” funding. The RCCs consolidate felony preliminary hearings and arraignments on the same day. Each of the three RCC sites (downtown, Mesa, and Glendale) reduces delay and duplication of effort in the nearly 23,000 cases they handle annually. In addition to expediting case processing, the RCCs help manage the need for detention services and improve safety for jail transports. Initial Appearance (IA) Court is a 24 hour a day, seven day a week court that sets bonds on newly arrested defendants and those arrested on warrants. IA Court commissioners: 1) review new arrests for probable The Probation Violation Center improves post–disposition defendant monitoring. The Probation Violation Center, established in July 2003, now averages over 1,300 probation arraignments a month. Offenders alleged to have violated the terms of their probation are managed in a consistent manner. Other noteworthy efforts: • In Fall 2004, the Sheriff’s Office and ICJIS installed the Jail Pre-Booking Module to streamline information from booking to the IA Court and create an electronic arrest information sheet (“Form IV”). This last year ICJIS expanded the electronic Form IV to include extradited warrant arrests. • The File-A-Case module is now initially installed and the Court is seeing almost 90 percent compliance with the data coming from the County Attorney’s Office. • The Court continues to expand its use of electronic audio-video recording as the official court record. Active Crim inal Case Inventory 12000 11000 10000 9000 8000 7000 Jul-03 Jan-04 Jul-04 Jan-05 Jul-05 Jan-06 PAGE 7 MARICOPA COUNTY JUSTIC E SYSTEM AC TIVITIES REPORT FISCAL YEAR 2005-06 Justice Courts Court Technology Services converted the County’s 23 Justice Courts to iCIS. This 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 Filings Influence Terminations Major Events Criminal Traffic1 • Per an Administrative Order from the Arizona Supreme Court, management control of the justice courts was returned to the judges to some degree, leading to a reorganization in Justice Court Services. • A retreat involving the judges and court administrative staff was held to chart a new direction given the Supreme Court reorganization directive. • The justice courts implemented a new automated system using the iCIS platform developed at the Superior Court level. mini reviews of eight justice courts, at the request of the affected judges. • All justice court forms were reviewed, updated and reissued for use by the courts. • With the advent of the new iCIS system many of the court operational 12,280 11,653 -5.1% 10,554 12,452 18.0% Filings 27,018 41,896 55.1% Terminations 24,098 38,115 58.2% 171,476 153,887 -10.3% Terminations Filings 170,264 30,969 154,561 24,624 -9.2% -20.5% Misdemeanor Terminations 28,703 21,106 -26.5% Filings 18,940 14,153 -25.3% Terminations 18,999 12,494 -34.2% Filings 82,102 84,730 3.2% Terminations 85,912 80,877 -5.9% Filings 33,156 48,555 46.4% Terminations 31,406 38,841 23.7% Filings Orders of Protection Terminations 5,822 5,797 5,793 5,793 -0.5% -0.1% Filings Injunctions Against Harrassment Terminations 5,936 5,140 -13.4% 5,903 5,140 -12.9% Small Claims Forcible Detainer Other Civil • Justice Court Services created an operational review team and began %CHG Filings • To better equalize workload, many of the justice court boundary lines were changed effective January 2006. FY06 Civil Traffic • New regional court centers were opened in the Northeast and Northwest with plans for the downtown and Chandler facilities well underway. FY05 1Serious traffic offenses now counted in Criminal Traffic instead of Civil Traffic. manuals were updated and reissued. • Staff from Justice Court Services worked with others to revise the Managing for Results (MFR) goals and to implement Cour Tools, a new management information reporting system. Filings Criminal Traffic Misdemeanor Civil Total Terminations Harrassment Orders of Protection Other Civil Forcible Detainer Small Claims Misd. Civil Traffic Criminal Traffic 1Forcible DUI 160,000 140,000 120,000 100,000 80,000 60,000 40,000 20,000 0 Other Proceedings FY05 FY06 %CHG Small Claims Hearings/Defaults 3,033 2,801 -7.6% Small Claims (w/Hearing Officer) 2,102 633 -69.9% 1 Civil Traffic Hearings 3,323 50,147 1,409.1% Initial Appearance 165 N/A Order of Protection Review Hearings 752 855 13.7% Injunctions Against Harassment Review 909 1,027 13.0% 2,178 1,920 -11.8% Search Warrants Issued 1With FY05 Trials1 FY06 NonJury Jury 278 35 255 34,082 34,615 Total NonJury Jury Total 313 313 160 473 5 260 368 9 34,091 16,949 49 34,664 17,630 16 384 42 16,991 218 17,848 detainer hearings not counted as civil non-jury trials in FY06 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. 2,000,000 1,600,000 1,200,000 Fees Received by Constables 1,222,334 1,213,402 FY02 FY03 1,705,333 1,693,111 1,729,504 FY04 FY05 FY06 800,000 switch to iCIS, count is more accurate and now includes defaults. 400,000 0 Note: Throughout this report, the percent change columns (%CHG) indicate the percentage increase or decrease over the prior year. PAGE 8 MARICOPA COUNTY JUSTIC E SYSTEM AC TIVITIES REPORT FISCAL YEAR 2005-06 Clerk of the Court The Office re-designed its website to provide a more user-friendly site with more options. The website can be accessed at www.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 • 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 45,000 40,000 35,000 30,000 25,000 20,000 15,000 10,000 5,000 0 FY03 Family Probate/Mental Health Tax FY04 FY05 FY06 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 three years, the Office launched e-filing pilot programs which have many benefits. E-Filing is taking place in Civil Complex Litigation, Criminal, and Civil cases. Additional milestones will be reached in FY07, when the Clerk’s Office will utilize automatic eFiling of unsigned minute entries. This will eliminate the need to print and file approximately 1,500 paper minute entries each business day. Public Access Terminals: The Clerk’s Office allows customers to instantly view actual court documents on computer monitors in their customer service areas, rather than waiting for staff to pull the file. The documents accessible at these computers are scanned images — probate documents from 1997 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. 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. Three external filing boxes are available for customers 24 hours a day, seven days a week. They are located at Mesa’s Southeast Court entrance, NE 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 39,689 filings in the external boxes and 171,425 in the internal boxes. Other Facts: •On average, 37,000 pieces of paper are filed with the Clerk of the Superior Court each day. •The Clerk’s Office scans over 202,000 paper documents per month. •There are more than 5,000 attorneys enrolled in the Minute Entry Electronic Distribution System (MEEDS). •The Clerk’s Office expanded its passport service to accommodate residents into the Northeast and Northwest sections of Maricopa County. The Northwest Court in Surprise and Northeast Court in Phoenix both began offering processing passport applications this fiscal year. In addition, both locations also issue marriage licenses. •The Clerk’s Office designed a new website to offer quick and easy access for customers to check the status of notary bond or certificate information. To access the feature, customers can go to the Office website at www.clerkofcourt.maricopa.gov and select “Notary Bond.” Each month, more than 263,000 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 Workload Indicators 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. Notary bond applications processed Documents added to electronic repository 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. Total funds collected FY04 FY05 FY06 %CHG Marriage licenses issued 23,425 23,987 25,517 6.4% Passport applications 21,335 17,035 17,901 5.1% 12,280 12,219 15,375 25.8% 2,316,758 2,545,596 2,318,193 -8.9% $1,791,802 $2,035,982 $1,979,899 -2.8% $8,200,819 $9,077,419 $10,588,185 16.6% Total restitution monies disbursed Exhibits processed and released 128,082 137,644 148,679 8.0% PAGE 9 MARICOPA COUNTY JUSTIC E SYSTEM AC TIVITIES REPORT FISC AL YEAR 2005-06 Juvenile Court’s Vision Statement: “The Juvenile Court envisions a community free from crime, where every child is empowered to reach his or her full potential with the loving support of a functional, safe and permanent family.” Juvenile Court Services Agency Information The Juvenile Court decides cases involving children in Guardianships, Adoptions and the Child Welfare System, as well as those children who are referred to the Court for delinquent or incorrigible acts. Petitions Filed with Juvenile Court FY03 FY04 FY05 Delinquency 13,780 14,584 14,065 Dependency 1,367 1,740 1,906 Adoption 888 966 1,081 Guardianship N/A 3 911 Certifications N/A N/A 965 Severance 244 276 326 17,238 18,566 19,254 Total FY06 %CHG 13,772 -2.1% 1,652 -13.3% 1,152 6.6% 1,799 97.5% 947 -1.8% 353 8.3% 19,675 2.2% Juveniles Committed to the Department of Juvenile Corrections FY04 FY05 FY06 %CHG 356 398 397 FY06 Guardianship Filings Temporary / Permanent Emergency Jul-05 Aug-05 Sep-05 Oct-05 Nov-05 Dec-05 Jan-06 Feb-06 Mar-06 Apr-06 May-06 Jun-06 SEF/DUR Divided -0.3% Termination DUR 75 79 68 44 56 63 55 54 61 69 71 61 SEF 67 80 28 50 34 23 43 34 56 33 43 60 DUR 21 26 19 14 21 27 13 26 22 29 23 14 SEF 14 21 8 20 14 9 19 15 20 14 17 18 DUR 0 4 3 5 3 3 9 6 4 3 3 7 SEF 0 0 1 0 0 2 4 4 1 3 4 4 756 551 255 189 50 23 Monthly Totals 177 210 127 133 128 127 143 139 164 151 161 164 1824 Major Events The mission of the Juvenile Court is to fairly and impartially decide cases and administer justice through comprehensive delivery of services to children and families, victims of crime and the community so that: children reach their full potential; victims of crime are restored; and families and the community function in the best interest of children. The Juvenile Court is in a unique position to provide the necessary leadership to affect changes in delinquency and dependency processes. The Juvenile Court promotes individualized services and assessments for all children, youth and families involved in the juvenile system. The changing needs of a growing county population require that the Juvenile Court become increasingly available to the public, including special language accommodations for Spanish and other non-English speaking members of the community. This change will lead to greater public access to the Juvenile Court and an enhanced ability to provide needed services to the community. The youth and families that come to the Juvenile Court and Probation have greater mental and behavioral health needs (including substance abuse issues) than ever before. This necessitates increased collaboration with treatment providers, local schools, and community partners with a new emphasis on keeping youth out of the system and a continued commitment to improving services to youth currently in the system while also focusing on reducing disproportionate contact with and disparate outcomes for youth of color. In 2006, the Juvenile Court established a Community Services Unit to centrally focus available resources within the system to provide services to children and families through collaboration among the Court, Juvenile Probation, Child Protective Services and ValueOptions. Services will be made available to both post and pre adjudicated youth with an effort made towards service delivery that will lend to high quality services and alternatives to detention. Juvenile Court Guide Services were also established in 2006. Presently, Juvenile Court has Court Guides available either by phone or in person to assist members of the community seeking to file Guardianship Petitions. Although the Juvenile Court Guides cannot give legal advice, they educate the parties as to all available options. If the parties decide that filing a Guardianship is in the best interest of the juvenile, the Guide assists them in filing out the proper documents and reviews the documents to ensure the information is complete. This practice minimizes the need for amended petitions as well as reduces the number of continued hearings due to incomplete data. The Guides similarly assist individuals in filing Emancipation petitions. In 2006, the Juvenile Court also entered into the planning phase for extended hour court services during evening and weekend hours, which will provide greater access to justice for litigants, especially for the large number of self-represented litigants who use Juvenile Court. Also, litigants will receive more timely hearings so that overall satisfaction is improved. Extended hours court is designed to increase access and, consequently, participation in court proceedings. Extended hours court hearings will include (but not be limited to) guardianships and private adoptions. Court Appointed Special Advocate (CASA) Program Positive Action. Powerful Results. The CASA program continues to recruit, train and manage community volunteers who are assigned to juvenile dependency cases. In FY06, the total number of CASA volunteers reached 326, with 235 of the volunteers actively serving children. These volunteers donated over 17,625 hours of their time, served over 450 children and drove over 160,000 miles visiting children and providing sibling visits. CASA volunteers submitted 478 written reports to Judicial Officers in Dependency cases. CASA volunteers have varied backgrounds and education. A snapshot shows that sixty two percent work full time while thirty percent are retired; seventy three percent of CASA volunteers hold an Associates Degree or higher. Women represent approximately eighty percent of CASA volunteers. CASA training staff have offered volunteers over eight hours of training toward the annual CASA program volunteer training requirements. CASA continues to collaborate with community groups and participate in events to educate, recruit and provide outreach regarding the program and the needs of abused and neglected children in Maricopa County. Juvenile Court Cases Delinquency: At the conclusion of FY06, 4,839 juveniles had open cases with the Juvenile Court for Delinquency offenses, a 3% decrease from FY05. Dependency: At the conclusion of FY06, the Juvenile Court was overseeing 5,811 children who had open dependency cases, an 8% increase over the 5,474 juveniles who had open dependency cases at the end of FY05. 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, 1,629 cases were scheduled for a PPC/PPH. PAGE 10 MARICOPA COUNTY JUSTIC E SYSTEM AC TIVITIES REPORT FISC AL YEAR 2005-06 Juvenile Probation Dept. Juvenile Probation continues to make a positive difference in the lives of juveniles and the community as evidenced by the work done on expanding detention alternatives, promoting accountability through community service, and promoting fiscal accountability within our own department. 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) FY04 FY05 431 357 442 404 433 406 -2.0% —- 21% 16.6 9% 18.8 7% 18.5 -22.2% -1.6% Average Daily Juvenile Probation Population FY04 FY05 Standard Probation 4,315 4,171 Intensive Probation 552 571 Total 4,867 4,742 FY06 %CHG FY06 %CHG 4,081 -2.2% 551 -3.5% 4,632 -2.3% Juvenile Community Restitution Hours Completed FY04 149,076 FY05 147,519 FY06 140,735 %CHG -4.6% Juvenile Compliance with Diversion Consequences FY04 FY05 FY061 %CHG Consequences Given 17,142 17,067 17,607 3.2% Completed on Time 13,607 12,446 12,672 1.8% 3,486 2,464 2,501 1.5% 49 197 251 27.4% 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. will enable detention to collaborate with community partners to provide a program designed to offer teen parents the full spectrum of services, including education, mentoring, community referrals and aftercare. The Department worked with the Administrative Office of the Courts, the County's Office of Management and Budget, and representatives in the State Legislature to move 160 state-funded positions to County-funding. This will result in the retention of $7.5 million that would have been sent to the State from the County. The Probation Department received funding from the County to establish an Investigative Unit wherein selected juvenile probation officers have primary responsibility for pre-disposition investigation and reporting. This allows case-carrying probation officers to spend more time working with probationers and their families. The Juvenile Probation Department has been working to identify alternative funding sources for treatment. The Title IV-E program, officially launched in January 2006, allows the Department to be reimbursed with federal funding for some out-of-home placements and foster care. Additionally, Probation Officers further explore alternatives by verifying Title XIX and XXI eligibility for youth on probation or diversion. The Juvenile Community Offender Restitution and Public Service program (JCORPS) provides juveniles with an opportunity to pay restitution through community work hours. During the year, a total of 31,107 work hours (valued at $155,535) were completed by juveniles and $25,686.95 in restitution was earned and paid to victims. The Department partners with the Arizona Building Blocks for Youth to address the issue of the over-representation of youth of color in the juvenile justice system with an emphasis on community awareness and change. The focus during the past year has been on continuing the truancy programs and working with the Juvenile Justice Workgroup to identify effective detention alternatives. In addition, the Detention Alternatives Unit expanded their use of Voice ID and Electronic Monitoring, thus increasing community contacts. The Unit also expanded the number of out-of-home beds available for shortterm placement and family stabilization from 22 to 39. Juvenile Population vs. Referrals Population Ages 8 -17 Major Events 600,000 A Safe Schools Probation Officer was honored with the Phoenix Mayor’s Partnership Award for Innovation for her work with the Cesar Chavez Community School. 400,000 On the behavioral health and substance abuse treatment front, the Department has been active. The Department is working with the Administrative Office of the Courts to establish an Evening Reporting Center in the Maryvale Community. The intent is to provide youth with an alternative to detention that operates six days a week and offers a variety of programs including GED preparation, substance abuse education, tutoring, life skills, parenting classes and recreational activities. The Juvenile Probation Department operates two detention facilities—the Durango Juvenile Detention Facility in Phoenix and the Southeast Juvenile Detention Facility in Mesa This year, the Department was awarded a Justice Involved Youth with Children grant by the Governor’s Office which 200,000 7.1% Referrals (delinquent, incorrigibility) 7.0% 6.6% 0 FY04 FY05 FY06 Note: Throughout this report, the percent change columns (%CHG) indicate the percentage increase or decrease over the prior year. PAGE 11 MARICOPA COUNTY JUSTIC E SYSTEM AC TIVITIES REPORT FISC AL YEAR 2005-06 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). 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. 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. 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. FY03 FY04 FY05 FY06 %CHG Number of Cases % of Autopsies Performed 4,199 55% 4,639 51% 4,611 50% 5,156 49% 11.8% -2.0% Accident 1,386 1,656 1,671 1,853 10.9% 415 415 395 455 15.2% Natural 1,785 1,921 1,910 1,951 2.1% Suicide 488 504 463 480 3.7% Undetermined 117 131 133 128 -3.8% 4 2 44 Homicide Pending 6,000 260 490.9% Medical Exam iner Cases 5,000 4,000 Major Event 3,000 In FY06, the Office of the Medical Examiner experienced an 11% increase in cases over FY05. 2,000 1,000 0 FY03 Case Completion (% Closed in . . . ) 45 Days 90 Days FY02 62% 94% FY03 34% 84% Correctional Health FY04 40% 78% FY05 42% 77% FY04 FY05 FY06 FY06 43% 83% Correctional Health has received full funding from the Office of Management and Budget to achieve 100% of the demand for our Maricopa County Jail Population. Correctional Health Services (CHS) produced a comprehensive staffing plan by PAS code to accomplish this goal. Encounters by Visit Type Agency Information Correctional Health Services provides medical, dental, and mental health services to inmates in the adult and juvenile detention facilities operated by Maricopa County. Major Event Correctional Health Services is actively recruiting all new positions allowed for under the new staffing plan to meet 100% of the demand for services under Managing for Results. Counseling Dental Medical Doctor Nursing Psychiatry Women’s Care Deliveries Prescriptions Filled FY05 49,910 10,493 46,376 212,623 11,973 936 45 FY06 49,691 29,998 59,013 252,030 9,937 775 48 %CHG -0.4% 185.9%. 27.2% 18.5% -17.0% -17.2% 6.7% 274,626 190,594 -30.6% 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 12 MARICOPA COUNTY JUSTIC E SYSTEM AC TIVITIES REPORT FISCAL YEAR 2005-06 Sheriff’s Office The average daily population was 9,737 in FY06, an increase of 7.5% over FY05. Agency Information The Sheriff’s Office provides law enforcement, jail detention, and crime prevention services to the public. Average Daily Jail Population 12,000 10,000 8,000 8,661 9,059 9,737 8,044 FY03 FY04 FY05 FY06 6,000 Bookings 128,000 4,000 125,505 126,000 124,000 2,000 0 122,117 122,000 119,695 120,000 118,465 116,000 Inmate Population High Count FY03 FY04 114,000 FY03 Bookings by Local Police Federal County State Other Self Surrenders City Court Justice Court Superior Court Total FY04 FY03 91,336 1,207 6,764 316 665 FY05 FY04 93,025 1,592 7,940 266 551 FY05 91,432 1,199 8,473 247 573 FY06 FY06 96,923 1,203 8,704 403 527 %CHG 6.0% 0.3% 2.7% 63.2% -8.0% 12,388 12,687 12,822 12,899 3,215 3,388 3,335 3,031 2,574 2,668 1,614 1,815 118,465 122,117 119,695 125,505 0.6% -9.1% 12.5% 4.9% Average Daily Population by Category of Offense FY03 FY04 FY05 FY06 Felony 6,013 6,586 6,966 7,632 9.6% Misdemeanor 1,388 1,503 1,525 1,523 -0.1% Agency Hold 603 524 507 519 2.4% Other 40 48 61 64 4.9% Total 8,044 8,661 9,059 9,737 7.5% Date Population FY06 %CHG 10/20/2002 6/13/2004 6/27/2005 11/13/05 8,380 9,293 9,732 10,371 6.6% Average Length of Stay by Type (in days) FY03 FY04 Pretrial 12.62 11.75 Sentenced 21.49 23.75 Agency Hold 59.58 62.88 Other 3.81 3.81 Total 24.36 24.64 Pretrial %CHG FY05 FY05 8.24 30.64 73.71 3.43 27.30 FY06 7.92 32.83 75.62 4.87 27.92 Average Length of Stay by Type Sentenced Agency Hold %CHG -3.9% 7.1% 2.6% 42.0% 2.3% Other 80 Days 118,000 60 40 20 0 FY03 FY04 FY05 FY06 Inmate Transports 150,000 Other Workload 100,000 FY06 %CHG $17,500,750 $21,593,848 23.4% Net Canteen Sales $6,905,379 $8,114,441 17.5% Meals Served 13,099,157 15,104,392 15.3% Warrants Received 65,459 60,402 -7.7% Dom Violence Orders Rec'd 26,377 21,826 -17.3% 2,370 2,320 -2.1% 78 89 14.1% 911 Calls Received 253,531 278,508 9.9% Calls for Service 540,429 512,537 -5.2% Bonds/Fines Processed 50,000 0 FY03 FY04 FY05 FY06 Posse Members Inmates Transported Superior Court Justice Court Justice Video Special Total FY05 FY03 92,245 8,539 _______—_ _— 100,784 FY04 104,301 3,052 6,303 — 113,656 FY05 116,404 2,524 7,229 — 126,157 FY06 %CHG 132,748 14.0% 1,671 -33.8% 7,243 0.2% 1,015 — 142,677 13.1% Special includes downtown remands, SEJD remands, SEJD unscheduled Reserve Members Note: Throughout this report, the percent change columns (%CHG) indicate the percentage increase or decrease over the prior year. PAGE 13 MARICOPA COUNTY JUSTIC E SYSTEM AC TIVITIES REPORT FISC AL YEAR 2005-06 Indigent Representation Continued expansion of the Indigent Representation Information System (IRIS), intended for use in all the County Indigent Representation Offices, will facilitate efficiency in data entry and communication, improve data quality, and enhance reporting/analysis. 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. • • • • Office Type Program Case Type Contract Adult Felony Capital Felony Felony DUI Violation Of Probation Witness 19 108 91 Appeals 21 24 19 279 306 254 Dependency Juvenile Delinquency & Incorrigibility 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, or Administrative Transfer to Another IR Department. Adult Appeal Adult Guardian Ad Litem Probate Family Court Juvenile Notification Child Dependency Parental Dependency Felony-Level Delinquency Incorr. & Misd.-Level Delinq. Juv. Violation Of Probation Mental Health Mental Health Private Counsel Adult Appeal Private Counsel Expense Expense MCPD staff believe that we can enhance the quality of life in our community by addressing the underlying issues that contribute to criminal activity and recidivism. We are committed to playing a front-line role in related efforts. As such, we are focusing efforts on providing increased public education and awareness and are quickly gaining a reputation for our active participation in related planning and outreach activities. In FY06, activities included participation in projects such as: the creation of a Homeless Court, the Fugitive Safe Surrender Program, Teen Court, Cop Watch and improved programs for mentally ill clients. Grand Total MCPD staff serve on the County’s Commission for Justice System Intervention for the Seriously Mentally Ill and participate in committees focused on mentally ill clients in both pretrial and post-adjudication settings. Also, we have taken a lead role in seeking funding for and beginning creation of Spanish and English educational videos that will be shown in the jails. We are participating in redesigning sex education curriculum for a local school board, provide general legal advice for families seeking diversion from the criminal justice system, and initiated a procedure to help former juvenile clients obtain restoration of their civil rights. Additionally, MCPD Training Division supplements internal and external educational efforts by publishing newsletter articles and sponsoring seminars on collateral consequences and mental health issues. 49 2,275 2,558 Adult Misdemeanor Misdemeanor Juvenile Appeal Expansion of the Indigent Representation Information System (IRIS) continued in FY06. The system, intended for use in all the County Indigent Representation Offices, will facilitate efficiency in data entry and communication, improve data quality, and enhance reporting/analysis. FY06 activities included Phase I enhancements which incorporated: three new data exchanges, a streamlined screen flow, expert witness tracking, staff assignment and time-tracking capability, and enhanced file tracking. Additionally, efforts included conversion of the MCPD juvenile database and development of initial dependency screen flows. 25 102 1,622 2,829 1,332 3,265 9 603 41 Civil Staffed 26 4 727 60 Those involved in civil child dependency or severance proceedings. Major Events FY06 53 4 253 49 Adult Post Conviction Relief 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. FY05 49 Other Homicide (non-capital) Class 2 & 3 Felony Class 4, 5, & 6 Felony 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. FY06 market-based pay increases helped reduce attorney turnover in the Maricopa County Public Defender’s Office (MCPD) to a more manageable 11% in FY06, down from over 21% the previous year. Similarly, the Loan Repayment Assistance Plan (LRAP) developed in FY06 and being implemented early in FY07 is expected to positively impact attorney recruitment and retention activities. These efforts will improve MCPD efficiency, thereby supporting/enhancing systemic objectives. FY04 Adult Felony 79 124 172 302 729 295 30 3,834 2,820 1,850 1,879 407 2,366 730 462 71 2,238 3,136 2,059 1,749 362 2,129 768 393 77 2,455 3,318 2,206 1,825 303 8 40 71 11 5 6 3 1 Adult Civil Private Counsel Expense Adult Felony Private Counsel Expense 29 23 14 Capital Felony 39 31 30 173 182 Other Homicide (non-capital) 225 Class 2 & 3 Felony Class 4, 5, & 6 Felony Felony DUI Violation Of Probation Witness 7,349 19,928 2,852 16,616 16 Adult Misdemeanor Misdemeanor Appeals Adult Appeal Adult Post Conviction Relief Juvenile Appeal 6,990 8,267 19,059 23,343 2,461 2,301 18,364 20,636 6 4 5,169 5,091 390 445 1,530 1,346 108 113 3,491 439 1,193 112 Civil Juvenile Notification 0 0 0 Dependency Child Dependency Parental Dependency Felony-Level Delinquency Incorr. & Misd.-Level Delinq. Juv. Violation Of Probation 393 910 3,003 4,961 2,384 708 1,209 3,072 4,686 2,221 555 1,002 3,270 4,612 1,987 Mental Health Sexually Violent Predator 2,203 2,054 57 36 2,410 41 Juvenile Delinquency & Incorrigibility Mental Health 84,059 88,911 93,538 Case Assignm ent Proportions FY2005-06 Legal Defender 7% Public Defender 69% Contract Counsel 22% Legal Advocate 2% PAGE 14 Adult Probation MARICOPA COUNTY JUSTIC E SYSTEM AC TIVITIES REPORT FISCAL YEAR 2005-06 The Department inaugurated its Evidence-based Practice Initiative with expanded use of the Offender Screening Tool (OST) and implementation of the Field Reassessment Offender Screening Tool (FROST), thereby putting in place scientifically proven methods to assess offenders' risks and needs. 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 FY03 FY04 FY05 Standard Probation 25,400 25,055 26,091 Intensive Probation 1,267 1,078 1,456 Total 26,667 26,133 27,547 FY06 27,896 1,321 29,217 Additional Probation Department Activities FY05 FY06 Presentence Reports 19,493 21,540 891,897 813,931 Community Restitution Hrs1 Collections2 $28,417,533 $32,078,615 1 2 %CHG 6.9% -9.3% 6.1% %CHG 10.5% -8.7% 12.9% Standard and Intensive Probation Includes reimbursement, restitution, fines, probation fees, and taxes. Managing for Results 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 FY06 % 1 802 57 54 66 95 61 98 1Not completed due to turnover in Court Technology Services. on 2nd and 3rd quarters; entire FY not available due to technical problems with conversion of PACTS to iCIS. 2Based Major Events Evidence-based Practices: Assessing offender risks and needs and enhancing offender motivation are two evidence-based principles. The Department increased use of the OST (Offender Screening Tool) so that one is now completed on every probationer. The FROST (Field Reassessment Offender Screening Tool), used to measure the offender’s progress in addressing factors that contribute to criminal behavior and to modify the supervision plan if needed, was fully implemented. A Motivational Interviewing training plan was developed; this evidencebased practice has a positive impact on offender behavioral change. The treatment curriculum and sanctions and rewards guidelines used in Drug Court were updated. The Drug Court now provides methamphetamine specific treatment. Information Technology: The E-filing of probation memos and forms to the court has proceeded. The interface and connection to the database to auto-fill the pilot form (Memo to the Court) has been accomplished, including necessary authorizations, signature and ability to file with the Clerk of the Court (COC) for transmittal to the Court. Judge Granville is working to identify three pilot Judicial Officers and to subsequently effect e-filing throughout the criminal division. The Court is determining a business process for edits and signatures of forms/petitions, methodology for authorizing filing by the COC and determining the format for returning the final product to the Department. The e-filing of presentence reports helps expedite the transfer of jailed inmates sentenced to the Arizona Department of Corrections (ADOC). The separate documents that comprise a presentence report have been identified and security and distribution of each document has been agreed upon by the Department, COC and the ADOC. Non-electronically received documents are scanned at each office and e-filed with electronically produced documents with the COC and forwarded to the Criminal Court. Court Master Plan: The Department continues to work with Court management regarding the Probation Master Plan. Adult Probation’s portion of the report is near completion. Ongoing design plans include sharing space and resources with Juvenile Probation. Collaboration: Canyon Corridor Weed and Seed Collaboration – Adult Probation supervisors and probation officers along with local activists joined with city police, prosecutors and neighborhood service agencies to address criminal activity in their neighborhoods. Meetings are held weekly to discuss trends and identify problems. As a result, the area (35th Ave to I-17 from Missouri to Indian School) was identified by Phoenix Law Enforcement personnel as a “hot-spot” for criminal activity. In FY06 the Canyon Corridor was officially recognized as a Weed and Seed site by the Department of Justice Community Capacity Development Office. The recognition as a Weed and Seed site, coupled with funding for additional services by police and treatment personnel, will help provide additional resources to combat what was becoming identified as a "blight" situation. Community Restitution Program - Staff coordinates over 7,500 community service projects annually and partners with 1,500 not-for-profit agencies. On an annual basis, probationers complete approximately 900,000 hours of community service representing a savings of over $9,000,000 to Maricopa County citizens. As an example, the City of Glendale requested assistance from the Community Restitution Program to help clean the front yard of an elderly resident. The work crew removed weeds, raked and bagged the dead vegetation. Eight tons of river rock was then spread over the yard. The probation work crew performed a total of 45 man-hours during this project. Department Awards and Recognition Sex Offenders - The Sex Offender Program received a Showcase in Excellence Award from the Arizona Quality Alliance in recognition of continuous improvement and performance excellence. Spanish DUI Court - The Spanish DUI Court received an Arizona Judicial Branch 2005 Achievement Award for Improving Communication and Cooperation with the Community, Other Branches of Government, and within the Judicial Branch. Managing for Results - FY05 marked the third consecutive year that the Department was presented with Management Fitness Awards. The Office of Management and Budget presents Strategic Fitness Awards annually to departments that best adhere to and embody the principles of Managing for Results. The Fiscal Fitness Award is presented to departments that excel in preparing the budget and that exhibit fiscal prudence. The Strategic Fitness Award recognizes departments for their efforts in effectively carrying out the strategic management requirements of the county. Education Program – The Department’s Education Program continues to present extraordinary opportunities. The program is open to all community adults who need assistance to become literate and obtain the skills necessary for employment and self-sufficiency. Support for the program comes from many sources, in the form of college and career counseling, up to a year of free college classes, scholarships, health classes, DES job lists of employers of probationers, food baskets and donated classroom items. Participation in the education programs are approximately 50% probationers and 50% non-probationers. Various agencies use classroom space in MCAPD buildings in exchange for setting aside a few student seats in each class for our clients. In March 2006 Adult Probation opened classes that provide Life Skills instruction and computer literacy intertwined with reading, writing and math lessons at the County Human Services Campus. Additionally, the Education Center was selected by the Administrative Office of the Courts as the LEARN Adult Education Center of the Year. PAGE 15 MARICOPA COUNTY JUSTIC E SYSTEM AC TIVITIES REPORT FISCAL YEAR 2005-06 Adult Probation Pretrial Services conducted 49,126 interviews of arrested defendants in the Maricopa County Jail System in FY06. Pretrial Services Division Division Profile Major Events Pretrial Services 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. • Engaged in evaluating division growth projections and planning and designing Pretrial Services • • • General Supervision Intensive Supervision Electronic Monitoring Total FY04 FY05 %CHG FY06 %CHG 990 978 -1.2% 738 -24.5% 657 153 1,800 816 164 1,958 24.2% 7.2% 8.8% 1,047 188 1,973 28.3% • 14.6% 0.8% • 2,400 Total Defendants on Pretrial Supervised Release • 2,000 1,600 FY04 FY05 FY06 • • • space in preparation for the move from the West Court Building to The Downtown Justice Center in January 2007. Expanded jail interviewing duties to include Probation Violation Proposition 200 cases and Superior Court bench warranted defendants. Also expanded criteria of cases requiring a criminal history and/or a financial disclosure and providing that information to assist judicial officers in securing the most amount of information to make accurate initial assessments and release decisions. Continued to collaborate with City of Phoenix for a Domestic Violence project via an Inter-Governmental Agreement. 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 those cases. Received funding for four non-caseload carrying officer positions to be used for jail unit expansion. This will provide the ability to implement more comprehensive investigation techniques allowing the IA Commissioners to have as much information as possible on which to base release decisions. Commenced with a Bail Review Pilot project in an attempt to reassess low level felony defendants who remain in custody on minimal bonds to determine release eligibility. The division is In the process of evaluating data from this project to determine outcome measures and the feasibility of expansion of the review criteria. Worked on expanding and enhancing the case management program in the court-wide iCIS automated system to provide for a more integrated system. This included projects such as: working with iCIS and ICJIS on an automated warrants filing project and working with the Consolidated Mental Health Court to assist with SMI designation at the front end of the system. Transitioned to the JWI masks in the Jail Management System for better and more efficient access to the State DPS database containing criminal history information. Reached all time highs in supervision levels for general, intensive and electronic monitoring. The division is in the process of formulating an Results Initiative Request to obtain additional positions in intensive and electronic monitoring units. Worked with the vision provided by Supervisor Don Stapley’s SMI Commission and Presiding Judge Barbara Mundell’s Consolidated Mental Health Court in obtaining a datalink at the 4th Avenue Jail and running all newly arrested defendants to determine if they had ever been evaluated for SMI services and if they were actively participating in the RHBA system. Also working on some of these cases to have them returned to treatment/residential facilities prior to loss of services. Continued to modify policies and procedures, as well as internal forms to conform to best practices identified through research of other jurisdictions throughout the country. 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 16 MARICOPA COUNTY JUSTIC E SYSTEM AC TIVITIES REPORT FISCAL YEAR 2005-06 County Attorney The Maricopa County Attorney’s Office prosecuted more than 39,000 felony cases in fiscal year 2005-06, a 15% increase over the previous year. Agency Information Major Events The Maricopa County Attorney’s Office highest priority is holding criminals accountable for the crimes they commit against people and the community. Criminals must be held accountable, while assuring that the statutory rights and emotional needs of the victims and witnesses are properly addressed. Additionally, the County Attorney seeks to implement, promote and participate in programs that reduce crime and enhance the quality of community life. • In early 2005, the office began analyzing attorney turnover within the office and took steps to reduce an attrition rate for prosecutors hovering at more than 20%. Today with a loan repayment system ready to be initiated and other organizational changes within the office, the attrition rate for attorneys has decreased to just 12%. • The Maricopa County Attorney's Office hosted two Table 1 reports that Maricopa County has experienced a steady increase in selected adult felony filings1 over the past six years.2 Selected Adult Felony Filings Maricopa County Attorney Adult Felony Filings Number of Adult Felony Filings 35,000 30,000 20,000 15,000 10,000 5,000 • The Maricopa County Attorney's Office participated in an FY01 FY02 FY03 FY04 FY05 undercover graffiti investigation that resulted in prosecutions of at least four juveniles for allegedly vandalizing property in the Valley. FY06 Fiscal Year 1 Aggravated Assault, Arson, Burglary, Child Molestation, DUI, Drug Related, Homicide, Robbery, Sexual Assault, Theft, and Vehicular Theft. 2 Source: County Attorney Information System • Table 2 reports the increase/decrease difference in selected Adult Felony Filings between the years 2001 and 2006 for the selected offenses. • While Maricopa County’s population has undergone a 13% increase between the years 2000 and 20051 the County Attorney’s Office realized a 33% percent increase in selected adult felony filings for the Fiscal Years between 2001 and 2006. 1 • A food safety program designed to better protect the public from disease and unsafe food was introduced by the Maricopa County Attorney's Office. Establishments that ignore repeated warnings and citations for food safety violations will face potential criminal charges for endangering the public. 25,000 FY01 FY02 FY03 FY04 FY05 FY06 % Change Agg. Assault 2,639 2,700 2,538 2,633 2,778 3,162 19.8 Arson 41 43 42 31 40 35 -14.6 Burglary 1,603 1,744 1,807 2,134 2,129 2,029 26.6 Child Molestation 363 371 409 369 330 361 -0.6 DUI 2,954 3,066 3,142 2,959 2,912 2,908 -1.6 Drug Related 10,990 11,708 12,409 15,041 15,638 15,884 44.5 Homicide 203 275 224 262 252 293 44.3 Robbery 705 838 797 743 783 924 31.1 Sexual Assault 93 92 115 113 98 101 8.6 Theft 933 1,003 948 1,004 1,086 1,234 32.3 Vehicular Theft 1,648 2,168 2,270 2,502 2,528 2,651 60.9 TOTALS 22,172 24,008 24,701 27,791 28,574 29,582 33.4% Offense Type Neighborhood Crime Summits to offer crime-fighting tips. Experts presented courses on identity theft, nuisance abatement, elder fraud, disaster preparedness, and meth lab identification. More than 400 members from the East and West Valley attended. Data from the U.S. Census website. • New sentencing policies were enacted to emphasize lengthy prison sentences for sex offenders who prey on children. The new policy extends to repeat child molesters and requires a minimum of 10 years in prison for offenders involved in serious, dangerous, or sexrelated crimes against a child. • To address the soaring property crime rate in Maricopa County, the office changed sentencing policies requiring defendants who are charged with auto or identity theft and have a prior felony conviction to go to prison as part of any plea agreement. The Maricopa County Attorney's Office also requested additional funding from the County Board of Supervisors to hire prosecutors and other staff dedicated to targeting auto and identity theft. • A television public service announcement series aimed at reducing the use of methamphetamines in the Valley was released. This marked the first time the office created its own anti-drug commercial, reflecting a commitment to focusing on local trends in its anti-drug advertising. • The office instituted a new policy to crack down on violent crime in the Valley. The new "Violent Crime - Hard Time" policy requires that violent criminals either plead guilty to the most serious criminal charge in their indictment or go to trial. The new policy "ended plea bargaining as we know it" for serious violent crimes. PAGE 17 MARICOPA COUNTY JUSTIC E SYSTEM AC TIVITIES REPORT FISC AL YEAR 2005-06 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 620 W. Jackson Phoenix, Arizona 85003 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, 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 602/506-5508 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 602/506-8541 602/506-1145 602/495-7014 602/506-5000 602/372-SLUM 602/506-3844 480/962-8002 602/372-4000 602/506-3411 602/506-5849 602/506-5840 602/372-7250 602/506-2600 602/506-3411 602/506-8522 ICJIS Office of Contract Counsel Mark Kennedy, Director General Information 602/506-7228 Justice Courts Karen Westover, Ltd. Jurisdiction Court Admin 602/372-1311 www.justicecourts.maricopa.gov www.maricopa.gov/constable Justice Courts Administration 602/506-1337 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. Integrated Criminal Justice Information Systems Don Thomas, Director General Information www.maricopa.gov/icjis/ 602/506-4698 Indigent Representation Public Defender Jim Haas, Public Defender 602/506-7711 620 W. Jackson, Suite 4015 Phoenix, Arizona 85003 www.pubdef.maricopa.gov General Information 602/506-7711 Appeals 602/506-7711 Juvenile – Durango 602/506-7711 Juvenile – Southeast 602/506-7711 Mental Health 602/344-2013 Trial Groups Downtown 602/506-7711 Trial Groups Mesa 602/506-7711 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 Juvenile Probation and Detention Carol Boone, 602/506-4210 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 Durango Detention 602/506-4280 Southeast Detention 602/506-2669 Medical Examiner Dr. Mark Fischione, Chief Medical Examiner General Information 602/506-3322 www.maricopa.gov/medex 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 PAGE 18 MARICOPA COUNTY JUSTIC E SYSTEM AC TIVITIES REPORT FISCAL YEAR 2005-06 Enforcement Support Investigations Bureau Custody Bureaus Administration Bureau Financial Bureau Technology Bureau Information Jail Information 602/876-1895 602/876-1813 602/876-1810 602/876-4400 602/876-5495 602/876-1625 602/876-1000 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 Officer 602/506-0959 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 Board of Supervisors Supervisor Fulton Brock, 602/506-1776 Chairman Supervisor Don Stapley, 602/506-7431 District 2 Supervisor Andy Kunasek, 602/506-7562 District 3 Supervisor Max Wilson, 602/506-7642 District 4 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 Peter Ozanne, 602/506-1417 Asst County Mgr, Criminal Justice 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. Bob England, 602/506-6600 Public Health Director February 2007 For additional copies call 602/506-1310 or visit http://www.maricopa.gov/justice_activities/ default.aspx