Maricopa County Justice System Annual Activities Report Fiscal Year 2007-08 A Typical Workday for the Maricopa County Justice System Means* . . . • 358 adults booked into jail • 9,265 total adults in jail • 335 juveniles in detention • 40,211 meals served to adult and juvenile inmates • 668 adult inmates transported to a court appearance • 214 residents appear for jury duty (to Superior, Justice, and most Municipal Courts) • 2,138 adults in the community under officer supervision pending trial • 30,983 adults in the community supervised by probation officers after sentencing • 1,192 cases filed in Justice Courts • 112 new felony cases filed • 487 total cases filed with Superior Court • 12,218 court documents filed • 35,554 pieces of paper filed with the Clerk of the Superior Court • $667,384 spent for detaining adults • $2.24 million spent in the overall County criminal justice system. * daily average of statistics for fiscal year 2007-2008 Welcome to the Maricopa County Justice and Law Enforcement Annual Activities Report. This report highlights activity from July 2007 through June 2008. During FY 2007-08, 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, National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS), the overall violent crime rate decreased between 2005 and 2007 by 1.9%; the overall property crime rate declined by 5.0%. Residents experienced approximately 22.9 million crimes in 2007, half of one million fewer than experienced in 2005: 77% were property crimes; 23% were crimes of violence. For every 1,000 persons age twelve and older there was one rape or sexual assault, 17 assaults, and 147 robberies. In 2007, 72% of violent incidents did not involve the use of a weapon while 20% did. 8% of victims did not know. According to the 2007 NCVS, males were more likely to experience assault (19 out of 1,000); while females were more likely to experience rape or sexual assault (1.8 out of 1,000). As in previous years, males, blacks, and persons age 24 or younger in 2007 continued to experience violent crime victimizations at higher or somewhat higher rates than females, whites and persons age 25 or older (NCVS). Based on information provided by victims, 46% of violent crimes and 37% of property crimes were reported to police in 2007, according to the NCVS. In 2007, 26.8% of those arrested for property crimes, and 17.2% of those arrested for violent crimes, were juveniles. This compares to 2006 numbers of 27.0% and 17.7% respectively. In examining the 14,209,365 arrests made in 2007 nationwide for all offenses (except traffic violations), 597,447 were violent crimes and 1,610,088 were property crimes (as captured by the Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) Program). The violent crime figure dropped 1.9% compared to 2003 and 17.7% from 1998. The property crime volume was 10.1% lower than in 1998. States comprising the West region, as reported by the UCR, saw the violent crime rate decrease by 2.1% while the property crime rate decreased by 5.4% for the period from 2006 to 2007. Of the 13 states in the West category, two states (Colorado and Alaska) had larger decreases in violent crime per 100,000 persons than Arizona while the remainder had smaller decreases or actually showed an increase. The Bureau of Justice Statistics reported nation wide, a total of 7,328,200 persons were under adult correctional supervision in 2007, which was a 2% increase from 2006. 5,117,500 or 70% of the individuals under correctional supervision were on community supervision. The largest number of individuals on community supervision in 2007 had a drug offense (27%) followed by property crime (24%). 17% of persons on supervision had a violent offense. Nationally, 1,873 persons out of 100,000 were on probation in 2007. In the same year, 360 out of 100,000 persons were on parole. In the same year, Arizona’s probation and parole population was lower than the national average with 1,627 and 144 per 100,000 respectively. According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, U.S. Department of Justice, from 1995-2007, the number of jail inmates per 100,000 residents increased across the country from 193 to 259. From midyear 2006-2007, the number of local jail inmates rose by 14,571. Local jail authorities held or supervised 780,581 offenders at mid-year 2007. Overall, local jails were operating at 4% below their rated capacity. Table of Contents Adult Probation Adult Probation, Pretrial Svcs Budget Clerk of the Court Constables Correctional Health County Attorney Criminal Justice Indicators Directory Public Defense Services (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 18-19 13 7 2 9 10 2 11 4 12 6 PAGE 2 MARICOPA COUNTY JUSTIC E SYSTEM AC TIVITIES REPORT FISCAL YEAR 2007-08 Maricopa County Government Highlights of Fiscal Year 2007-08 Maricopa County Justice System Highlights of Fiscal Year 2007-08 Population and economic growth slow. Maricopa County cuts budget while keeping up with increased demand. 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, Arizona, is the nation’s fourth largest county in terms of population - approximately 4 million by 2008, according to the Arizona Department of Economic Security. Twenty-five cities and towns are located in Maricopa County. Its largest city, Phoenix, is the County seat and State Capital. Out of the nation’s 3,141 counties Maricopa County had the greatest population increase between 2000 and 2006, according to the U.S. Census Bureau. Between July 2006 and July 2007, Maricopa County added more to its populace than any county in the U.S. (101,583). However, in 2008 indicators pointed to a dramatic slowdown in the population and economic growth of Maricopa County. Data from the Census shows Arizona’s population growth as a whole slowed to 1.6%, less than half of the 2006 growth rate. Many indicators, such as water hookups and arrests, point to an actual decrease in Phoenix’s population. As population growth slowed so did economic growth. Facing revenue shortfalls, Maricopa County looked to reduce costs and maximize efficiencies in FY 2008, while continuing to provide high levels of service to the community. Certain contingency funds were reduced, salary advancements and hirings were frozen, and most capital projects were halted. Although Pay for Performance was frozen, the Peak Performer gift card program amount was authorized to be tripled for 2009. Maricopa County received upgraded bond rating. Fitch Ratings and Standard & Poor’s Rating Services rank Maricopa County the highest-possible AAA, and Moody’s Investor Services upgraded it to AA1, a tick below triple-A. The increased bond rating allows Maricopa County to borrow money for less interest, which saves taxpayer’s dollars. West Valley Career Center opened. The Maricopa Workforce Connection opened a new facility in West Phoenix. Services provided by MWC are directed by a workforce investment board; a policy and oversight board who partner with the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors to deliver employment and training services to county residents. The Center houses a multitude of services from many agencies. The Center also includes the SGT Elijah Wong Veterans Service Center, which focuses specifically on the needs of Maricopa County’s veterans. Animal Care and Control opened new shelter. The new shelter has improved the work environment for employees; the quality of life for animals; and the customer experience for those who visit. The new shelter allows for more effective provision of the following services: intake, adoptions, return to owner, rabies vaccinations, quarantine, court hold, licenses, microchip, alternative placement, fostering and veterinary care. History of Propositions 400 and 411. In the mid-1990s, 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 detention facilities were completed in FY05, with construction funded in a “pay-as-you-go” method. Master Planning continued for Superior Court 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.” 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, centralizing criminal court downtown. The basement of the Central Court Building was remodeled to house the RCC/EDC Courts to accommodate the high volume case loads in those courts. Planning for expansion, the PNI property adjacent to the Southeast Facility was acquired. Additionally, two new Justice Precincts were authorized: Desert Ridge (Northeast Regional) and Highland Regional are scheduled to become operational in January 2009. 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 met to discuss options and assess status on many issues: • Partner with other government agencies and community based organizations on crime prevention efforts such as the 85041/Legacy Project. Although the County mandate related to criminal justice is reactive, Criminal Justice partners realize that true improvements for the future require an offensive effort to prevent criminal behavior. • Continue to research evidence-based programs to incorporate these programs within Maricopa County and to ensure that existing programs also are evidence-based. • Continue to focus on expediting and improving case processing. PAGE 3 MARICOPA COUNTY JUSTIC E SYSTEM AC TIVITIES REPORT FISCAL YEAR 2007-08 • Effective management of jail population while balancing public safety. House Bill (HB) 1476 allows the court to adjust a person’s length of probation if the person has qualified for earned time credit by exhibiting positive progress towards goals and treatment, is current on payments to the Court, and is current on community restitution. The law also provides for a cost savings to be used for probation programs if departments reduce the number of probationers convicted of a new felony offense each year. Maricopa County leaders continue to pursue improvement in effectively moving cases through the criminal justice system. 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 FY06 FY07 FY08 %CHG 125,505 127,842 130,979 2.5% Sheriff’s Office Detention Bookings Avg Length of Stay (days) 28.36 25.51 25.82 1.2% Avg Daily Population 9,733 8,941 9,265 3.6% Superior Court—Criminal Department Filings 39,039 38,599 41,036 6.3% Terminations 35,812 35,495 38,137 7.4% Case Clearance Rate Avg Monthly Active Pending Inventory Trials 91.7% 92.0% 93.2% 1.3% 10,774 817 11,107 1,003 12,209 953 9.9% -5.0% Implement an Integrated Criminal Justice Information System: The mission of ICJIS (Maricopa County Integrated Criminal Justice Information System) is to provide automated systems, electronic data exchanges, and information technology services so that J&LE agencies (justice and law enforcement) can efficiently share information when they process criminal cases. Progress includes: • Thirty-four data exchanges integrated with J&LE networks, hardware, and software, replacing paper and manual processes. • Thirty-five million data transactions processed monthly. • Operation and maintenance of data exchanges among Maricopa County J&LE agencies, and with federal, state, and local criminal justice agencies to more efficiently process case information. • Services include convergent architecture, integration systems development lab, community of interest training, service level agreements, incident management, and change management. • Justice Web Interface (JWI), with federal, state, and local criminal justice information-sharing (ACJIS, NCIC, ACIC, III, AZAFIS, NLETS, Interpol, DPS, MVD, SBINet, SRFERS, ACTIC, DHS-ICE, ADOC, MCSO Mugshots, and others), helping ensure efficient case processing and enhancing public safety. 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 38,000 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. Implement Differentiated Case Management: • Capital and complex cases are identified and separately Pretrial Services (monthly averages) General Supervision Status of Other Proposition 400 Projects at Close of Fiscal Year 2007-08 775 741 772 4.2% Intensive Supervision 1,077 1,077 1,290 19.8% Electronic Monitoring 190 238 255 7.1% Standard Supervision 27,896 30,230 29,891 -1.0% Intensive Supervision 1,321 1,257 1,092 -13.0% 18,739 413 16.5 20,695 335 14.4 10.4% -18.9% -17.5% 3,941 3,766 -4.4% 470 447 -4.9% Adult Probation (monthly averages) Juvenile Court, Probation, Detention Petitions Filed 19,675 Juv Avg Daily Population 433 Juv Avg Length of Stay (days) 18.5 Standard Supervision (mthly avg) 4,081 Intensive Supervision (mthly avg) 551 Note: Throughout this report, the percent change columns (%CHG) indicate the percentage increase or decrease over the prior year. managed early in the process. Court Technology Services (CTS) is enhancing the iCIS computer system to easily identify capital cases. Capital cases are heard by a group of specially designated judges. At the conclusion of FY08, there were 119 active capital cases in the Court. This is nearly twice as many pending capital cases as in June 2004, and it is one of the largest inventories of capital cases in a single court in the United States. Under the direction of the Criminal Department Presiding Judge, and with the support of the Arizona Supreme Court Capital Case Task Force, the Court implemented a number of initiatives to improve the caseflow management of capital cases. They include weekly administrative meetings to manage scheduling conflicts among the judicial officers and lawyers who handle capital cases, the creation of “Mitigation Special Masters” who monitor the discovery process and ensure that it does not impede trial readiness, and the development of Resolution Management Conferences to encourage parties to explore earlier resolution of these cases. As a result, 35 capital cases were resolved in FY08, the highest number ever resolved in one year in this Court. PAGE 4 Status of Other Proposition 400 Projects at Close of Fiscal Year 2007-08 • 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 is located in the basement of the Fourth Avenue Jail, which provides fewer inmate transport challenges and preserves the accessibility of these court proceedings to the public and interested parties. This Court handles arraignments for virtually all probation revocation petitions and a majority of the violation and disposition hearings. In FY08, more than 14,300 probationers were arraigned through this process, which enabled trial judges to spend more time hearing trials. Eliminate Unnecessary Court Proceedings: • 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. • Court leaders examined the use of Master Calendaring in other large metropolitan jurisdictions as a method to reduce unnecessary court proceedings, improve time to disposition, and gain other system-wide efficiencies while maintaining a focus on providing justice in all cases. Efforts are underway to adapt that methodology for this jurisdiction, and implement a pilot program in FY09 to examine it using key metrics. Consolidate Criminal Divisions to a Common Location: When the Downtown Criminal Tower is completed, the Court will have the capacity to consolidate more 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 Initial Appearance (IA) Court expanded demand for additional information on previously non-interviewed and non-researched cases in it’s continued effort to make the most informed release decision. The Supervised Release component has expanded services to include intensive supervision ranging from random drug/alcohol testing and treatment to electronic monitoring. Intensive monitoring is now utilized by the court more frequently than general supervision. Electronic monitoring supervision ranges from traditional home curfew enforcement to the more sophisticated Global Positioning Satellite (GPS) tracking. The IA 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. MARICOPA COUNTY JUSTIC E SYSTEM AC TIVITIES REPORT FISC AL YEAR 2007-08 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 FY08, staff conducted 1,203 clinical assessments and made possible the early release of 162 probationers to outpatient and/or residential treatment. This represents 5441 jail days saved. Residential treatment placement continues to be impacted by limitations imposed by treatment providers, most notably construction of new facilities and a shift from grant funding to Regional Behavioral Health Authority (RBHA) funding for new placements. Reach Out is collaborating with the Custody Management Unit in an effort to further increase treatment options for jailed offenders. If implemented, we believe we will be able to not only address the substance abuse needs of the offender, but increase jail releases as well. Expand Drug Court: Drug Court, presided over by Commissioner Shellie Smith, handles over 500 defendants after sentencing. The program receives some federal grant funding for methamphetamine specific treatment and recovery support services. The program is a minimum of one year during which time the participant receives drug treatment, on-going supervision and interaction with the Drug Court Judge. Upon successful completion of the Drug Court Program the defendant is granted an early termination from probation and if the offense is undesignated it will be designated a misdemeanor. Drug Court has grown by 100 participants in the last six months. Expand Community Based Programs for Juveniles: The Maricopa County Juvenile Probation Department (MCJPD), due to budgetary constraints, made some necessary changes to community based programs for juveniles. Maricopa County utilized funding to construct and operate the Youth Recovery Academy (YRA), a 48-bed residential treatment facility for substance abusing juveniles. Families in Need of Services (FINS), is a program addressing the Office of Office of Juvenile justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) mandate regarding the deinstitutionalization of status offenders. Maricopa County made the decision to close the YRA facility in 2006 based on the needs of the department. Additionally, the FINS program has been adopted and enhanced by another member of the Judicial Branch Family, Juvenile Court Administration. The FINS program was organizationally repositioned to be seated in the Community Services Unit (CSU) of Juvenile Court Administration. Some funding was retained from the YRA program in order to continue to meet the treatment needs of our clients. Currently, MCJPD funds various Detention Alternative Programs (DAP) to support the practice of maintaining youth in the community with the least restrictive care. The county reserves approximately 38 beds in residential programs available to divert detained youth. This number will be reduced to 17 beds effective February, 2009. Additionally, the county provides Juvenile Electronic Monitoring (JEM), the Glendale Evening Reporting Center (ERC), Home Detention, and Voice Identification DAP programs. Further funds are used to provide Drug Diversion as an opportunity for substance abuse treatment and to keep this population out of detention. The MCJPD would like to further enhance ERC development by supplementing start up funding for evidence based programs with community providers. PAGE 5 MARICOPA COUNTY JUSTIC E SYSTEM AC TIVITIES REPORT FISC AL YEAR 2007-08 Justice System Agency Budgets Aggregate Annual Budget For All Maricopa County Justice Agencies 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. $ 900 M $ 800 M $ 700 M Gener al Fund Detenti on Fund Gr ants/ Other Funds $ 600 M $ 500 M $ 400 M The justice system is also the arena offering the greatest potential for efficiencies and improvements, as the system continues to grow. For fiscal year 2007-08, the net Maricopa County budget was $2,214,275,629. The budget for the justice system agencies comprised 36.9% of the total county budget, an increase from 34.6% the prior year. FY07 Adopted Budget by Department General Funds Detention Funds Grants/Other Funds Sheriff’ s Office Trial Co urts Co unty A tty A dult P ro batio n Indigent Rep Juv P ro batio n Co rr Health Clerk o f Co urt M ed Examiner ICJIS Co nstables 0 25 50 75 100 125 150 175 200 225 250 275 Millions of Dollars FY08 Adopted Budget by Department General Funds Detention Funds Grants/Other Funds Sheriff’ s Office Trial Co urts Co unty A tty A dult P ro batio n Indigent Rep Juv P ro batio n Co rr Health Clerk o f Co urt M ed Examiner JSP I Co nstables 0 25 50 75 100 125 150 175 200 225 250 275 300 Millions of Dollars $ 300 M $ 200 M $ 100 M $0 M FY00 FY01 FY02 FY03 FY04 FY05 FY06 FY07 FY08 FY07 Adopted Budget by Department General Detention Grants1 and Total Funds Funds Other Funds 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. FY08 Adopted Budget by Department General Detention Grants1 and Funds Funds Other Funds Adult Probation $65,774128$ — $17,815,999 34,177,630 — 9,323,510 Clerk of Court 2,424,814 — — Constables Correctional 3,570,368 48,797,341 Health 70,629,513 — County Atty 75,708,101 — Indigent Rep. 846,536 1,983,802 JSPI 21,235,324 36,216,301 Juv Probation Medical 8,056,892 — Examiner 71,117,264 196,533,189 Sheriff’s Office Trial Courts 86,217,528 — Total $439,758,098 $283,530,633 1Grants Total $83,590,127 43,501,140 2,424,814 351,729 52,719,438 13,759,698 2,736,635 — 11,814,322 84,389,211 78,444,736 2,830,338 69,265,947 ─ 8,056,892 20,442,259 288,092,712 17,727,473 103,945,001 $93,971,625 $817,260,356 are primarily from state agencies. 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 all agencies do not 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 2007-08 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 case 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. Superior Court 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 FY06 FY07 Civil 36,691 40,746 Criminal 40,928 40,096 Family Court 50,878 51,505 Juvenile 19,675 21,171 Probate 6,758 6,140 Mental Health 2,261 2,282 Tax Court 765 916 Total Filings 157,956 162,856 FY08 51,191 42,611 52,028 23,391 5,997 2,543 1,131 177,892 Search Warrant Center By statute, law enforcement officers can appear before any magistrate in Maricopa County to obtain a search warrant and other orders. %CHG The IA Court offers round the clock service to law enforcement officers requesting a search warrant. Last year the IA Court reviewed close to 6,000 search warrant 25.6% requests. That is 1,100 more warrant requests than the total for FY2007. 6.3% 1.0% 10.5% -2.3% 11.4% 23.5% 9.2% Criminal 26% Civil 23% Felony Case Filings by Class of Felony FY05 FY06 Class One 168 195 Class Two 4,344 4,321 Class Three 5,547 5,971 Class Four 15,288 16,510 Class Five 1,745 1,831 Class Six 8,828 10,211 Juvenile 12% Probate M ental 5% Tax Health Court 1.5% 0.5% FY07 254 4,169 5,365 16,576 1,969 10,266 FY08 244 4,911 5,239 17,044 2,054 11,544 A special summonsed initial appearance calendar frees attorneys for other work. Both the EDC and the RCCs used to handle defendants who were summonsed to appear. The appearance rate on summonsed defendants, however, continues to average around 40 percent. A calendar strictly for summonsed defendants was started in the summer of 2005. The summonsed IA calendar does not require the presence of attorneys, thus allowing both the County Attorney and Public Defender to focus on preparing for cases where defendants are more likely to appear. Initial Pretrial Conferences (IPTC) were established in July of 2002. Three IPTC commissioners conduct pretrial conferences 45 days after arraignment and are available to hear changes of plea and settlement conferences in the afternoons. The IPTC ensures counsel is adequately preparing for trial by confirming that discovery has been exchanged, a plea offer has been tendered, and the offer has been seriously discussed with the client. Superior Court Filings by Case Type - FY08 Total Filings 177,892 Family Court 32% rights, 5) appoint attorneys to represent defendants when appropriate, and 6) evaluate defendants’ mental health needs. More than 75,400 defendants were seen in IA Court during FY2008, which is an increase from just under the 75,000 defendants seen in FY2007. The DUI Center provides three courtrooms located together in one building that focuses exclusively on the adjudication of felony DUI cases. These courts, presided over by commissioners, improve the efficiency of managing that caseload for the lawyers, the Court, and the parties. %CHG -3.9% 17.8% -2.3% 2.8% 4.3% 12.4% The Probation Violation Center improves post–disposition defendant monitoring. The Probation Violation Center, established in July 2003, has averaged approximately 1,200 probation arraignments a month for the last two fiscal years. Offenders alleged to have violated the terms of their probation are managed in a consistent manner by appearing at one of two dedicated courtrooms in the Lower Level of the Fourth Avenue Jail. Capital Case Management At the conclusion of FY2008, there were 129 active capital cases in this Court. That is a 140% increase in cases since June of 2004, and is one of the largest inventories of capital cases in a single court in the United States. Under the direction of Criminal Department Presiding Judge Anna Baca, Total 35,920 39,039 38,599 41,036 6.3% and with the support of the Arizona Supreme Court’s Capital Case Task Force, this Court implemented a number of initiatives to improve the caseflow management Major Events of these cases. They include weekly administrative meetings to manage schedule Early Disposition Court (EDC) handles drug-related offenses. EDC was initiated conflicts among the judicial officers and lawyers who handle capital cases, the in 1997 after passage of Proposition 200, which required treatment rather creation of “Mitigation Special Masters” who monitor the discovery process and than jail as a possible sanction for low–level drug possession charges. More ensure that it does not impede the case’s trial readiness, and the development of than 13,600 drug cases were funneled through EDC in fiscal year 07-08, Resolution Management Conferences to encourage parties to explore earlier resoaccounting for about a third of all felonies filed. That is 1,700 cases more lution of these cases. As a result of these efforts, 34 capital cases were resolved than the number handled by EDC in FY2007. The two EDC commissioners in in FY08, which is the highest number of capital cases resolved in one year by this downtown and the two EDC–RCC commissioners in Southeast resolve most Court. In comparison, a total of 29 capital cases were resolved in FY 2007. simple possession and drug use cases in approximately 20 days. EDC also handles welfare fraud matters brought to the Court by the Arizona Attorney General’s Office. Active Criminal Case Inventory 14000 Regional Court Centers (RCCs) combine multiple front-end felony proceedings to reduce time to disposition and increase efficiencies for all stakeholders. RCCs started in early 2001 with Legislative “Fill the Gap” funding. The RCCs 13000 consolidate felony preliminary hearings and arraignments on the same day. The three RCC sites (Downtown Phoenix, Mesa, and Glendale) reduced delay and duplication of effort in the nearly 24,500 cases they handled in FY2008. 12000 That is an increase of more than 1,000 cases compared to the number of filings in RCC in FY2007. In addition to expediting case processing, the RCCs 11000 help manage the need for detention services and improve efficiency and safety for jail transports. Initial Appearance (IA) Court is a 24 hour a day, seven day a week court located within the 4th Avenue Jail that sets bonds on newly arrested defendants and those arrested on warrants. IA Court commissioners: 1) review new arrests for probable cause, 2) review bond amounts on defendants arrested on warrants, 3) schedule cases for disposition, 4) advise defendants of their 10000 9000 Jul-05 Jan-06 Jul-06 Jan-07 Jul-07 Jan-08 PAGE 7 MARICOPA COUNTY JUSTIC E SYSTEM AC TIVITIES REPORT FISCAL YEAR 2007-08 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 Other Proceedings There are 25 justice courts in Maricopa County that hear a combined caseload of approximately 400,000 cases each year. These include civil lawsuits where the amount in dispute is $10,000 or less, landlord and tenant controversies, small claims cases and the full range of civil and criminal traffic offenses, including DUIs. Justices of the Peace also resolve other types of misdemeanor allegations (e.g. shoplifting, writing bad checks, violating restraining orders) and, like other trial judges, also handle requests for orders of protection and injunctions against harassment. Small Claims Hearings/Defaults Major Events • The justice courts entered into negotiations with the Administrative Office of the Courts and the Superior Court to affect changes to Administrative Order 2006-56, which gave control of the individual justice courts back to the judges. The year long effort resulted in the publication of Administrative Order 2008-59, which among other things returned 18 administrative positions to the justice courts. • The excellent work of the Professional Standards Committee continued. To date 10 internal policies and standards have been published. This Committee has gained statewide and national recognition. Two additional committees, the Technology Committee and the Career Development Committee, were also formed. • The justice courts also worked with the County in the creation of two new courts: the Highland Justice Court, which will be located in the Gilbert Municipal Court complex, and the Desert Ridge Justice Court, which will be located in the Northeast Regional Court facility. These courts will come on line on January 1, 2009. FY07 Civil Traffic Hearings1 Order of Protection Review Hearings Search Warrants Issued 1With FY08 %CHG 2,733 3,243 18.7% 39,306 32,151 -18.2% 2,371 1,931 1,773 2,357 -25.2% 22.1% switch to iCIS, count is more accurate and now includes defaults. Filings and Terminations Filings Driving Under the Influence Terminations Filings Criminal Traffic1 Terminations Filings Civil Traffic Terminations Filings Misdemeanor Terminations Filings Small Claims Terminations Filings Forcible Detainer Terminations Filings Other Civil Terminations Filings Orders of Protection Terminations Injunctions Against Filings Terminations Harrassment FY07 11,968 FY08 11,552 %CHG -3.5% 11,198 65,492 63,857 148,642 153,826 26,900 20,900 14,276 14,048 81,936 73,178 50,653 59,796 5,557 5,321 5,269 5,237 10,080 68,130 70,337 152,729 156,853 24,275 19,650 16,520 12,594 80,764 82,825 70,150 56,165 4,945 4,811 4,974 4,973 -10.0% 4.0% 10.1% 2.7% 2.0% -9.8% -6.0% 15.7% -10.4% -1.4% 13.2% 38.5% -6.1% -11.0% -9.6% -5.6% -5.0% • Statistically, FY2008 saw record case filings, 435,014 cases, and revenue, $41,303,452. 1Serious traffic offenses now counted in Criminal Traffic instead of Civil Traffic. • The justice courts became part of the statewide DUI project with the San Marcos and Hassayampa justice courts acting as pilot courts. Currently, all 23 justice courts are part of this project. • Over the past 12 months administrative staff worked with the Superior Court automation department to correct some Minimum Accounting Standards problems, to prepare for the implementation of FARE (a statewide collection program) and photo radar, and to implement new case management reports. • The justice courts also contracted with the National Center for State Courts to produce a staffing study to update an internally created staffing study which has been in use over the past four years. The final Center report will be published shortly. FY 08 FY08 NonJury Jury Total NonJury Jury Total Criminal Traffic 643 421 1064 789 686 1475 Misdemeanor Civil 933 15 948 1,359 16 1,375 2,503 59 2562 2,565 52 2,617 Total 4,079 495 4574 5,467 754 6,221 1Forcible detainer hearings not counted as civil non-jury trials in FY06 Constables Agency Information Terminations Constables are elected to serve criminal and civil process of the 23 Justice Courts. Their duties include: executing and returning writs of possession, restitution, and execution; serving orders of protection and orders prohibiting harassment; and serving criminal and civil summons and subpoenas. Fees Received by Constables 2,000,000 Harrassment Orders of Protection Other Civil Forcible Detainer Small Claims Misd. Civil Traffic Criminal Traffic 1,705,333 DUI 160,000 140,000 120,000 100,000 80,000 60,000 40,000 20,000 0 Filings FY07 Trials1 1,693,111 1,729,504 1,740,067 1,600,000 1,603,777 1,200,000 FY04 FY05 FY06 FY07 FY08 PAGE 8 MARICOPA COUNTY JUSTIC E SYSTEM AC TIVITIES REPORT FISCAL YEAR 2007-08 The Clerk of the Court’s website (www.clerkofcourt.maricopa.gov) received worldwide recognition this year when it was selected as being one of the Top 10 court websites in the world by the organization Justice Served. They reviewed more the 1,000 court websites throughout the world. Clerk of the Court 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 in Maricopa County. • Keep a docket. • 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. • Process passport applications. New Cases Initiated Civil Criminal Juvenile Family Probate/Mental Health Tax 50,000 45,000 40,000 35,000 30,000 25,000 20,000 15,000 10,000 5,000 0 FY06 FY07 FY08 Major Events Electronic Court Records For the past several years, the Office has been implementing an Electronic Court Record (ECR) system that enables the Clerk to receive, store, route, and make available electronic documents and eliminate the paper documents. Following are summaries of two major ECR accomplishments: • Electronic Repository - Each month, more than 208,000 paper documents that are filed with the Office are scanned, converted to electronic format, and stored within an electronic repository. This repository now contains more than 18.5 million electronic documents. Access to these electronic documents has been granted to 27 governmental agencies. The public is also able to access the electronic images at public terminals in four office locations. • eFiling - The Office has launched four eFiling Pilot Programs that resulted in a total of 116,389 eFilings this year. The pilot programs are: • Civil Complex Litigation - applies to complex civil litigation cases with multiple parties, cases, and/or issues. More than 110 cases are involved. • Criminal - applies to civil cases in all court divisions. There are several thousand cases involved. • Civil - applies to civil cases in 21 court divisions. There are more than 5,800 cases involved. • Family - applies to family court cases in four court divisions. There are more than 150 cases involved. Benefits of electronic filing include: customers do not have to travel to the Office to file documents; the court can download court files quickly and conveniently; judges, parties, and the public (where permissible) can view a case simultaneously and immediately; increased speed and accuracy of processing the case; and reduce paper consumption.. Public Access Terminals: To provide the public access to the Electronic Court Record (ECR), the Office has installed public access terminals at four office locations: the Customer Service Center (31 terminals), Southeast (4), Northeast (6), and Northwest (2). The terminals allow customers to instantly view court documents, select the images to be printed, go to the counter where they are printed, and pay the fee. Customers can view the electronic images as follows: all probate cases from 1998 forward (and active cases from 1994-1997) and all other Adult case types from 2002 forward. The terminals save significant time for customers and staff, and allow more than one person to access the file at a time. 1/1/07 Initiative: January 1, 2007 began a new era for the Office. It was the day that Clerk of the Court Michael Jeanes implemented an end to placing paper documents (approximately 12,000 per day) into the hard copy files (adult case types only). In addition, folders stopped being created to hold the paper documents for the new complaint filings. Instead, the paper documents received were scanned, audited, and then disposed of after a series of quality checks. Paper documents and file folders fill hundreds of shelving units, and disposing of the paper documents saves a tremendous amount of storage space for the Office. At the end of the fiscal year, the Office had disposed of a total of 3,342,542 documents from various case types. Juvenile: One of the biggest changes in the Office this year happened in the Juvenile Division when it converted to a new case management system. The division moved from the “Juvenile On Line Tracking System” (JOLTS) to the “Integrated Court Information System” (iCIS) and Minute Entry Electronic Distribution System (MEEDS). This change in automation affected all aspects of service delivered to the Court and the public including case management, court calendaring, court dockets, financial obligation records, and development and implementation of an electronic court record for Juvenile cases. Other Workload Indicators FY06 FY07 FY08 %CHG Marriage licenses issued 25,517 24,781 24,573 -0.8% Passport applications 17,901 32,695 45,727 39.9% Documents added to electronic repository 2,318,193 2,937,552 3,077,672 4.8% $1,979,899 $1,943,931 $2,230,804 14.8% $10,588,185 $9,861,957 $8,762,021 -11.2% 160,310 155,775 -2.8% Total funds collected Total restitution monies disbursed Exhibits processed and released 148,679 ECR Online: A significant achievement in expanding access to the electronic court record was made when the Office implemented the ECR (Electronic Court Record) Online Program. This program allows attorneys to use the internet to register and view documents filed on cases in which they or a member of their firm are the attorney of record. Currently, there are 857 attorneys registered in ECR Online. Parties of record are also able to register and view documents filed on cases in which they are a party of record. Efforts are underway to expand the ECR Online usage by attorneys and parties to a case. Prior to this program, attorneys and parties to a case had to visit the Office public access terminals. (Continued on page 17) MARICOPA COUNTY JUSTIC E SYSTEM AC TIVITIES REPORT FISC AL YEAR 2007-08 Juvenile Court Services PAGE 9 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.” Agency Information • Available by phone or in person at each facility to assist members of the 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. • Assist petitioners who are filing Guardianship, Emancipation and De- Petitions Filed with Juvenile Court FY05 FY06 FY07 14,065 13,772 14,421 Delinquency Dependency 1,906 1,652 1,726 Adoption 1,081 1,152 1,042 Guardianship 911 1,799 1,099 Certifications 965 947 1,072 Severance 326 353 N/A 19,254 19,675 19,675 Total FY08 %CHG 13,987 -3.0% 1,857 7.6% 1,166 11.9% 1,999 81.9% 1,020 -4.9% 337 N/A 19,346 1.7% Juveniles Committed to the Department of Juvenile Corrections FY06 FY07 FY08 %CHG 400 449 415 -7.6% Major Events The Juvenile Court envisions a community free from crime, where every child has a functional, safe and permanent family. 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 decides cases involving children in Guardianships, Adoptions and the Child Welfare and Juvenile Justice Systems. In FY08 the Juvenile Court Juvenile Offenses and Information and Intake Unit processed 22,125 referrals and 11,114 citations from local law enforcement agencies and schools. Goals of the Juvenile Court for 2007-2012 are as follows: Goal #1: Integrated Juvenile Court System Goal #2: Public Access Goal #3: Elimination of Disproportionate Contact and Disparate Outcomes for Children of Color Goal #4: Prevention and Early Intervention Strategies Goal #5: Planning for Successful Futures Goal #6: Professional Development and Cultural Competency The Community Service Unit (CSU) • Established in 2006, to provide services to children and families through collaboration among the Court, Juvenile Probation, Child Protective Services, Magellan and community providers. • Services are available to both post and pre adjudicated youth with an effort made towards high quality services and alternatives to detention. • In FY08, the CSU received over (2000) telephone and walk-in re- quests from the public for services and information. The CSU facilitated between (45) and (60) monthly requests from the Juvenile Court judiciary, Juvenile Probation Department and the CASA Program for professional assistance involving the areas of expertise of respective CSU members. In addition, the CSU conducted (135) Children’s Resource Staffings (CRS’s). The Juvenile Court Guides community seeking options for children who are without proper parental custody and care. pendency petitions. In FY08, Juvenile Court Guides handled over (5000) telephonic requests for information and over (1,900) walk-in requests for information. A total number of 1,999 petitions for guardianship were filed in FY08. The Early Resolution Conference • Designed to assist with case processing of dependency petitions filed by parties other than the Attorney General’s office. Provides comprehensive information for the initial court hearing and allows for more appropriate time frames for investigation and case preparation. • Conference provides a mediated venue for discussion and the possible resolution of case issues and offers information to the Court to assist in case decision-making. • Currently in the pilot stage and involves two (2) judicial divisions at each juvenile court facility. • Anticipated assessment of the pilot project to occur in January 2009 and Court wide roll-out to occur shortly thereafter. Extended Hours Court • Established in January 2007, extended hours court services are offered during evening and weekend hours, which provide greater access to justice for litigants. Extended hours court hearings include, but are not limited to, guardianship and private adoptions. • In FY08 Extended Hours Court held 1,034 court hearings. • In FY08 the Court Orientation for Dependent Youth (C.O.D.Y.) served 190 youth. The goal of the program is to help children who are twelve years of age and older better understand the dependency court process, the roles of the various professionals who are integral to their case, and the importance of each youth’s voice in Court. C.O.D.Y. strives to demystify the court process while educating and empowering youth to encourage their active participation in court. The Court partners with alumni of the foster care program and other government and community agencies to offer a comprehensive program to youth in residential, kinship and foster care out of home placements. Court Appointed Special Advocate (CASA) Program Positive Action Powerful Results In FY08, the Maricopa County CASA Program processed approximately 1,000 requests for information and applications, ultimately adding approximately 50 new CASA volunteers. This year the Program focused on increasing the number of children served by 5% from FY07. The CASA Program consistently has served approximately 300 children during any given reporting period. CASA volunteers drove nearly 90,000 miles and completed 10,000 hours of direct contact on their cases this year. In FY08, the Maricopa County CASA program began to utilize more technology to assist CASAs and staff to be more efficient and productive. Advances such as electronic court reports, Excel based mileage logs and contact sheets, and the use of virtual meetings assisted the program both to increase efficiency and to reduce pollution and waste. The Maricopa County CASA Program continues to collaborate with both the Juvenile Court and community organizations including the Casey Family Foundation to create and improve program design to ensure better outcomes for foster children. The Maricopa County CASA Program attended trainings and ultimately five CASA Coordinators were certified by National CASA to be facilitators of the National CASA training curriculum for new advocates. The Program also piloted a 30 hour training that was well received by both the new advocates and the judicial bench. PAGE 10 MARICOPA COUNTY JUSTIC E SYSTEM AC TIVITIES REPORT FISC AL YEAR 2007-08 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 Juvenile Court and manages two detention facilities with a 376 bed capacity and a functional (staffing) capacity of 340. In addition, the Department administers community-based prevention programs, formal diversion in collaboration with the Maricopa County Attorney and Community Justice Centers and Communities as an extension of restorative justice. Juvenile Detention FY06 FY07 Average Daily Population Average Daily Capacity 433 406 413 406 Average Daily % Over Capacity Avg Length of Stay (Days) 7% 18.5 2% 16.5 -17% -950.0% 14.4 -12.7% Average Daily Juvenile Probation Population FY06 FY07 Standard Probation 4,081 3,941 Intensive Probation 551 470 Total 4,632 4,411 FY08 %CHG 3,766 -4.4% 447 -4.9% 4,213 -4.5% FY08 %CHG 335 406 -18.9% —- FY07 98,258 Functional Capacity: The Department worked to remain at or below functional capacity (the number of youth that can be safely supervised with existing staff). While the rate varies from day to day, as of June 30, 2008, Durango was at 77% of functional capacity and the Southeast Facility was at 81% of functional capacity. Behavioral Health: In conjunction with the Juvenile Court Tinker Toy Committee, the Department is developing a pilot project with Magellan to assist youth who are in detention and have behavioral health needs. The project will provide comprehensive assessments and treatment recommendations for youth pending court. Juvenile Population vs. Referrals Population Ages 8 -17 Referrals (delinquent, incorrigibility) 600,000 Juvenile Community Restitution Hours Completed FY06 140,735 Detention Reform: The Detention Space Task Force was created to address the recommendations of the County Juvenile Master Plan Update. Three workgroups reviewed the appropriate use of detention, detention alternatives, and strategized for the elimination of disproportionally (Detention Index, Alternatives to Detention, and Disproportionate Minority Contact respectively). FY08 45,311 %CHG -53.9% 400,000 Juvenile Compliance with Diversion Consequences FY061 FY07 FY08 %CHG Consequences Given 17,607 18,679 10,810 -42.1% Completed on Time 12,672 14,730 9,844 -33.2% 2,501 3,176 2,250 -29.2% 251 463 27 -94.2% 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 will not add up to total Consequences Given because some completed consequences may have been assigned in a prior fiscal year. The Did Not Comply category is much smaller in FY08 due to a change in coding processes in closing consequences. Major Events Detention – Durango and Southeast Staff Development: This year, both facilities trained all staff to use Handle With Care techniques to defuse and de-escalate crisis situations with detained youth. All staff was also trained in the Prison Rape Elimination Act (PREA) which establishes a zero tolerance approach to youth-on-youth and staff-on-youth sexual misconduct. Services for Detained Youth: Both facilities were certified to become independent GED testing sites and have had several youth take and pass the test. With grant funding through the Governors Office for Children, Youth and Families Division for Children and the Arizona Parents Commission, both facilities offer detained youth who are parents of children or who are about to become parents, the opportunity to participate in the HOPE (Helping Others with Parenting Education) program. The program teaches detained youth parenting skills and how to care for their infant children. 200,000 6.7% 6.8% 6.3% 0 FY06 FY07 FY08 Collaboration with Community Partners Disproportionate Minority Contact: The Department, in collaboration with the Casey Family Foundation and the Juvenile Court, conducted Disproportionate Minority Contact and Education Convenings as part of ongoing efforts to engage Probation, Juvenile Court and community members together to serve our youth and families. In addition, the Department created an internal Disproportionate Minority Contact (DMC) Committee to develop formal recommendations including creating different curricula for training sessions on DMC and improving caseload management. Youth Programming: A county-wide collaboration established late night basketball and other programs for juveniles on probation. A “Mother/Daughter” Night was conducted to promote parent involvement and improve family relationships. A community cleanup was coordinated in the Heather Brea Neighborhood with over 100 students and community members. A “Peer Leadership” program was developed with assistance from a $12,000 grant from the City of Phoenix Youth and Education Department. Finally, the Department worked the City of Phoenix’s “Project Scrub” and involved over 70 youth in graffiti abatement projects. (Continued on page 17) PAGE 11 MARICOPA COUNTY JUSTIC E SYSTEM AC TIVITIES REPORT FISC AL YEAR 2007-08 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. Case Completion (% Closed in . . . ) Agency Information 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. FY04 FY05 FY06 FY07 FY08 40% 78% 42% 77% 43% 83% 68% 91% 47% 81% 45 Days 90 Days Caseload Summary FY05 Number of Cases % of Autopsies Performed 4,611 50% Accident 1,671 Homicide %CHG -1.2% 0.9% 2,017 -3.5% 1,853 2,090 395 455 395 386 -2.3% 1,910 1,951 1,971 1,946 -1.3% Suicide 463 480 548 552 0.7% Undetermined 133 128 140 154 10.0% 44 260 — 14 — Pending 5,400 5,200 5,000 4,800 4,600 4,400 4,200 FY05 Correctional Health FY06 FY07 FY08 Correctional Health funded a nurse market study without requesting additional funds, which has allowed us to recruit and retain at a much higher level than in past years. Agency Information Other Indicators 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 has increased the service level to our patient population by up to 44% in certain activities and has achieved a goal of completing more than 90% of the physical assessments within the 14 day time frame. We have been able to make these strides in providing increased patient care primarily due to a reduction in our clinical vacancy rate. Encounters by Visit Type Dental Specialty FY08 5,103 53.2% Medical Exam iner Cases As a result of legislative changes to the Arizona Revised Statutes in FY07, the Office of the Medical Examiner made significant changes to their business model. The changes to the business model allowed cases (Cases Not Admitted) that met certain requirements to be released directly to funeral homes/mortuaries. Cases Not Admitted increased to 8% in FY07 and 18% in FY08 from .41% in FY06. Mental Health FY06 Natural Major Event Medical FY07 5,156 5,165 48.8% 52.7% FY07 506,284 FY08 530,604 %CHG 4.8% 35,522 39,528 11.3% 2,612 1,837 3,034 2,985 16.16% 62.45% Prescriptions Filled IP Infirmary pt. Days IP Mental Health pt. Days Receiving Screenings % Physical exams done w/in 14 days Outside Hospital Days FY06 FY07 FY08 %CHG 190,594 214,918 217,802 1.34% 10,547 13,312 14,778 11.01% 38,093 38,760 55,890 44.20% 96,794 99,653 103,179 3.54% 37.80% 84.46% 95.62% 13.21% 3,279 3,217 3,254 1.15% Note: Throughout this report, the percent change columns (%CHG) indicate the percentage increase or decrease over the prior year. PAGE 12 MARICOPA COUNTY JUSTIC E SYSTEM AC TIVITIES REPORT FISCAL YEAR 2007-08 Sheriff’s Office The average daily population was 9,265 in FY08, an increase of 4% over FY07. Agency Information The Sheriff’s Office provides law enforcement, jail detention, and crime prevention services to the public. Average Daily Jail Population 11,000 10,500 10,000 Bookings 135,000 127,842 130,000 9,737 9,500 130,979 8,941 8,500 125,505 125,000 FY05 119,695 120,000 9,265 9,059 9,000 FY06 FY07 FY08 115,000 Inmate Population High Count FY05 110,000 FY05 FY06 Bookings by Local Police Federal County State Other Self Surrenders City Court Justice Court Superior Court Total FY05 91,432 1,199 8,473 247 573 FY 07 FY06 96,923 1,203 8,704 403 527 FY 08 FY07 FY08 97,439 100,813 1,113 1,714 9,381 9,428 568 531 465 414 %CHG 3.5% 54.0% 0.5% -6.5% -11.0% 12,822 12,899 14,127 13,581 3,335 3,031 2,968 2,710 1,614 1,815 1,781 1,788 119,695 125,505 127,842 130,979 -3.9% -8.7% 0.4% 2.5% Date Population 6/27/05 9,732 FY06 FY07 FY08 %CHG 11/13/05 10,371 6/9/06 9,667 9/23/07 9,884 1.2% 2.2% FY07 7.58 29.29 65.27 3.07 25.51 FY08 7.4 26.08 60.97 3.45 25.82 %CHG -2.4% -11.0% -6.6% 12.4% 1.2% Average Length of Stay by Type (in days) FY05 FY06 Pretrial 8.24 7.92 Sentenced 30.64 32.83 Agency Hold 73.71 75.62 Other 3.43 4.87 Total 27.30 27.92 Average Length of Stay by Type Pretrial Average Daily Population by Category of Offense FY05 FY06 FY07 FY08 %CHG Felony 6,966 7,632 7,101 7,267 2.3% Misdemeanor 1,525 1,523 445 497 11.5% — — 999 1,088 8.8% 507 519 347 364 4.7% Other 61 64 53 55 3.2% Total 9,059 9,737 8,946 9,270 3.6% Agency Hold Agency Hold Other Inmate Transports 60 Days City Sentenced 80 40 20 0 FY05 FY06 FY07 FY08 Other Workload Indicators 200,000 150,000 100,000 FY 07 FY 08 %CHG $19,437,546 $17,124,865 -11.9% Net Canteen Sales $7,736,152 $7,732,705 0.0% Meals Served 14,110,808 14,717,302 4.3% Warrants Received 53,301 55,988 5.0% Dom Violence Orders Rec'd 20,629 19,696 -4.5% 911 Calls Received 287,798 181,254 -37.0% Calls for Service 552,207 556,273 0.7% Bonds/Fines Processed 50,000 0 FY05 FY06 FY07 FY08 Inmates Transported Superior Court Justice Court Justice Video Special Total FY05 FY06 116,404 132,748 2,524 1,671 7,229 7,243 — 1,015 126,157 142,677 FY07 138,894 1,420 6,103 3,249 149,666 FY08 %CHG 154,485 11.2% 1,689 18.9% 7,591 24.4% 3,227 -0.7% 166,992 11.6% Special includes downtown remands, SEJD remands and SEJD unscheduled 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 2007-08 Public Defense Services The Public Defense Services departments were consolidated so that they all report through a single director. While each of the departments remains autonomous, this allows the departments to interact with each other in a more meaningful manner. (Indigent Representation) Agency Information Public Defense Services (formerly Indigent Representation) provides legal defense services to indigent individuals when assigned by the Court, primarily for: • Criminal proceedings including felony, misdemeanor, probation violation, appeals, post-conviction relief, and cases in which defendants oppose extradition. • • Juveniles facing delinquency or incorrigibility charges. Indigent individuals at risk of a loss of liberty in civil mental health proceedings. • Those involved in civil child dependency or severance proceedings. Office Type Program Activity FY06 FY07 Adult Felony Capital Felony Other Homicide (non-capital) Class 2-3 Felony Class 4-6 Felony Felony DUI Violation of Probation Witness 34 175 8,217 22,849 2,299 20,313 4 33 44 214 259 7,475 6,818 22,709 23,203 2,199 2,240 19,420 16,762 5 5 Adult Misd. Misdemeanor 3,724 3,235 3,096 -4.3% Appeals Adult Appeal Adult Post Conviction Relief Juvenile Appeal 439 1,193 112 483 1,045 90 374 1,091 88 -22.6% 4.4% -2.2% Parental Report and Review Parental Severence 555 210 83 1,003 0 0 1,097 342 54 1,167 990 287 466 -57.5% 54 -84.2% 672 1144.4% 1,037 -11.1% 952 -3.8% 289 0.7% Felony-Level Delinquency Juvenile Delinquency Incorr. & Misd-Level Delinq. & Incorrigibility Juv. Violation of Probation 3,114 4,244 1,667 2,777 4,969 1,865 2,885 5,265 1,869 3.9% 6.0% 0.2% To provide constitutionally mandated legal representation to indigent Staffed individuals in the most cost-effective manner, Maricopa County maintains Office three staffed defender offices and contracts with a limited number of Child Dependency Child Report and Review private attorneys. Multiple offices are necessary to address legal Child Severance conflicts of interest that arise primarily because of prior representation of Dependency Parental Dependency co-defendants, victims, or witnesses. Major Events In May 2007 the Public Defense Services departments were consolidated so that they all report through a single director. While each of the departments remains autonomous, this allows the departments to interact with each other in a more meaningful manner. Budget and reporting activities have been consolidated at this level to provide for more uniform collection and reporting of data. Additionally, some Human Resources activities have been transferred to the administrative office to insure consistency in application. During the past three years, the Public Defense Services has developed, implemented, and maintained numerous modules in the Indigent Representation Information System (IRIS). In FY08, accomplishments include adding system functionality and data exchanges, converting the Mental Health data system (adding 10 new users and 17,749 records), and converting over 123,000 Public Defender records for the newly independent Juvenile Public Defender’s Office, effective FY09. In addition, Public Defense Services initiated preliminary phases for conversion of Legal Defender and Legal Advocate felony data during FY08. Public Defense Services 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. The Public Defender’s Office continues to play a front-line role in related efforts, including those that focus on increasing public education and awareness. In FY08, activities included participation in: the Homeless Court, Teen Court, SMI Commission, several immigration projects, and a multitude of other workgroups and community forums. 2410 41 2546 20 2818 25 10.7% 25.0% Adult Felony Capital Felony Other Homicide (non-capital) Class 2-3 Felony Class 4-6 Felony Felony DUI Violation of Probation Witness 22 86 2,812 3,262 7 729 58 23 85 2,757 2,898 142 687 70 16 80 3,185 3,718 505 784 86 -30.4% -5.9% 15.5% 28.3% 255.6% 14.1% 22.9% Adult Misd. Misdemeanor 108 146 512 250.7% Appeals Adult Appeal Adult Post Conviction Relief Juvenile Appeal 21 308 204 37 213 188 170 264 72 359.5% 23.9% -61.7% Civil Adult Guardian Ad Litem Probate Family Court Juvenile Notification 2141 728 394 77 1933 776 219 47 2276 834 551 51 17.7% 7.5% 151.6% 8.5% Child/GAL Dependency Child/GAL Severance/ 2,542 1,816 1,839 1.3% Permanent Guardnshp Parental Dependency Parental Severance/ 318 3,347 594 1,831 191 1,643 -67.8% -10.3% Permanent Guardnshp 373 709 202 -71.5% 2,209 1,839 303 2,090 1,937 268 1,595 1,304 152 -23.7% -32.7% -43.3% 42 47 65 38.3% 26 32 69 115.6% Contract Dependency Mental Health Mental Health Private P ublic Defender 66% Counsel Expense Legal A dvo cate 3% 33.3% 21.0% -8.8% 2.2% 1.9% -13.7% 0.0% Mental Health Sexually Violent Persons Felony-Level Delinquency Juvenile Delinquency Incorr. & Misd-Level Delinq. & Incorrigibility Juv. Violation of Probation Co ntract Co unsel 22% %CHG Mental Health Case Assignment Proportions FY2007-08 Legal Defender 9% FY08 Payments ordered for persons who represent themselves or who are represented by private counsel 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. PAGE 14 MARICOPA COUNTY JUSTIC E SYSTEM AC TIVITIES REPORT FISCAL YEAR 2007-08 Adult Probation 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 FY05 FY06 FY07 Standard Probation 26,091 27,896 30,230 Intensive Probation 1,456 1,321 1,257 Total 27,547 29,217 31,487 FY08 29,891 1,092 30,983 %CHG -1.0% -13.0% -1.0% Additional Probation Department Activities FY07 FY08 %CHG 20,746 21,888 680,989 565,878 $29,844,813 $27,949,087 2.0% -17.0% -6.4% Presentence Reports Community Restitution Hrs1 Collections2 1 Standard and Intensive Probation Includes reimbursement, restitution, fines, probation fees, and taxes. It should be noted that for three months in FY 2008 (Dec. 2007, Jan 2008, Feb 2008) no tax funds were collected. A new system was in place and due to techni2 Managing for Results Victim Satisfaction Survey Pretrial Successful Completion Rate FY07 % 53 81 FY08 % 53 82 Probationers who successfully completed MCAPD operated and/or funded treatment and residential services 58 55 Standard probationers who successfully completed probation 59 63 Warrants Cleared 101 1091 1Closure rate for FY2008 warrants only - 86% Major Events CJI Grant Awarded: During the past reporting period, the Crime and Justice Institute announced that the Department was one of two agencies chosen nationally to participate in the Implementing Effective Correctional Management of Offenders in the Community project. The Department, along with the Los Angeles, California, Orange County Probation Department, has begun working on a two-year project with the National Institute of Corrections and the Crime and Justice Institute. The goal of the project is to assist these two agencies that have implemented an evidence-based initiative and to further advance the integrated model endorsed by the National Institute of Corrections, which combines the use of evidence-based principles, collaboration, and organizational development. During this past rating period, the Department had the opportunity to assess the organizational climate. As a result, the Department is utilizing the technical support from the grant to engage mid-managers in the decision-making process and improve the communication flow. It is believed this will help increase capacity of midmanagers and ownership of achieving organizational goals at all levels of the Department. A mid-manager committee co-chaired by two midmanagers (three Directors serve in a consultant role) will assume responsibility for increasing buy-in of Evidence-Based Practices and developing the knowledge and skill level of all supervisors. Existing committees will increase mid-manager and line staff involvement and responsibility. The current committees are working on Graduated Responses, Curriculum Development, Performance Appraisals, and Communication. Sex Offender Top Ten Most Wanted Web Page: On Monday, February 25th, Maricopa County Adult Probation’s Top Ten Most Wanted Sex Offender information not only hit the internet, it also hit the airwaves. Surveillance Officer Chris Hopkins, of the Fugitive Apprehension Unit, spear-headed the creation and distribution of information to various locations throughout the valley. His efforts have not been in vain, and critical information has begun to surface due to the exposure of names and faces. Based off a tip provided to the fugitive hotline on March 27, 2008, by US Marshalls in Tulsa, OK, our first arrest was made. After a name query in GOOGLE, a citizen was linked directly to our web page and contacted authorities, which led to the arrest. CJDATS Grant Award: The Maricopa County Adult Probation Department, in conjunction with probation departments in Pima, Yavapai, and Pinal counties, is testing therapeutic approaches to treating substance users involved in the criminal justice system. This effort is headed by the National Institute on Drug Abuse, which has employed a multi-disciplinary team of public safety and substance abuse treatment providers. The research component focuses on three objectives: · Evaluation of evidence-based practices among probation and communitybased treatment agencies. · Identification of feedback related to perceived organizational readiness to change and efficacy in implementation. · Development of a valid organizational measure of implementation. These objectives emphasize the implementation with regard to HIV continuum of care, substance abuse screening and assessment processes, and evidence-based substance abuse treatment practices. The target population of substance abusers within the criminal justice population was selected not only because they are such a large segment of the probation population, but because the population can provide significant data in evaluating the impact of evidence-based interventions on reduction of substance use and related criminal behaviors. 85041 Legacy Project: The Indirect Services Unit, Arizona Department of Corrections team (IDS/ADC), acts as a gatekeeper for those re-entering the community from ADC who are required to complete a probation grant upon their release. One of our major functions is to track and monitor future release dates. We also establish initial communication with those who first complete community supervision as well as with those who immediately begin probation. Because both the Maricopa County Adult Probation Department and the Arizona Department of Corrections share common values and issues, we have been able to come together in a partnership to exchange information and create a broader and more successful handoff of people re-entering the community from prison. This not only will increase community safety, it also will make it possible to provide essential services faster and easier. Additionally, it will give the probation officer relevant data to assist in supervision. In cases in which community supervision has been ordered, it also will provide the opportunity to share ideas and knowledge between community supervision officers and probation officers. Access to Recovery Grant: The Access to Recovery (ATR) grant has been implemented in Drug Court to provide treatment and recovery support services for methamphetamine addicted clients. The clients are given a choice of providers that can most effectively assist them in their recovery process. To date, 53 clients have been determined to be eligible for services. Sex Offender Global Positioning System (GPS): The Department began monitoring certain offenders utilizing a GPS after the legislature passed SB 1371. The new law indicates that persons sentenced on or after November 1, 2006, for a Dangerous Crime Against Children (DCAC) pursuant to ARS 13604.01 “shall be monitored by GPS for the duration of the term of probation.” At the end of FY 2008, there were 77 cases utilizing GPS. (Continued on page 17) PAGE 15 MARICOPA COUNTY JUSTIC E SYSTEM AC TIVITIES REPORT FISCAL YEAR 2007-08 Adult Probation Pretrial Services conducted 49,320 interviews of arrested defendants in the Maricopa County Jail System in FY07 and 56,438 interviews in ‘08. This constituted a 15% increase in reports provided to the courts. 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. 6. Say expanded growth of over 30% in bond unit investigations. • Relocated supervision services and administrative operations to the Downtown Justice Court Center. • Expanded jail interviewing duties to include Probation Violation cases and • • Pretrial Services FY06 General Supervision Intensive Supervision Electronic Monitoring Total 2,400 FY07 %CHG FY08 %CHG 775 741 -4% 772 1,077 190 1,800 1,077 238 1,958 0% 25% 8.8% 1,290 255 2.317 Total Defendants on Pretrial Supervised Release 4.2% • 19.8% 7.1% 15.5% • • • 2,000 • • 1,600 FY06 FY07 FY08 • • • 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. Per Supreme Court Administrative Order modified jail interview questionnaire to include questions to ascertain citizenship status in alignment with Proposition 100 requirements. Continued to collaborate with City of Phoenix for 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. (This program is being suspended due to City of Phoenix fiscal constraints in FY’08-’09). Expanded growth in bond unit investigations to determine feasibility of modified release conditions for defendants remaining in custody at various phases in their court process. Expanded pretrial electronic monitoring supervision to full capacity and increased utilization of GPS technology resulting in enhanced monitoring capabilities. Worked on enhancing the case management program in the court-wide iCIS automated system to provide for a more integrated system. This included projects working with the Consolidated Mental Health Court and the Regional Behavioral Health Authority (Magellan) to assist with defendant Seriously Mentally Ill designation at the front end of the system. Transitioned to the Justice Web Interface 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 intensive and electronic monitoring. 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 data-link 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 RBHA (Magellan) system. Also worked 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. Trained staff on the conversion of the JOLTs information system to the iCIS juvenile system. Expanded the Pretrial division to include Adult Probation Custody Management and Work Furlough Units comprised of post-adjudicated defendants. 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 all agencies do not 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 2007-08 County Attorney The Maricopa County Attorney’s Office prosecuted more than 42,000 adult felony cases in fiscal year 2007-08, a 4.5% increase in productivity over the previous fiscal year. Agency Information Major Events The Maricopa County Attorney’s Office is dedicated to the vigorous prosecution of those who commit crimes within the County. Criminals must be held accountable within the law and the Constitutional rights and emotional needs of victims properly served. The County Attorney also implements, promotes and participates in programs and activities to reduce crime, including crime prevention education. • The office also formed a Repeat Offender Bureau to target career criminals using specialized statutes to increase prison terms for recidivists. Table 1 reports that Maricopa County has experienced a steady increase in selected adult felony filings.1 ,2 Maricopa County Adult Felony Filings Table 1 45000 MCAO adopted policies to 1) ensure appropriate punishment for criminals and 2) deter potential offenders from committing crimes in the future. In particular, repeat violent and gang offenders receive enhanced penalties. • High rates of vehicle theft led the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office (MCAO) to create an Auto Theft Bureau in 2006. The bureau is tasked with prosecuting auto theft cases, including unlawful use of automobiles, operating a chop shop and trafficking in stolen vehicle cases. This is highly effective as it concentrates attention on one type of offense, allowing prosecutors to gain expertise in the field and apply that knowledge to successful prosecutions. The bureau also introduced a new campaign, “Stop and Lock” with tips for the public on auto theft prevention. Auto theft offenses have seen a decrease during the past FY. • In 2007, the Court of Appeals upheld MCAO’s interpretation of the human smuggling law allowing the prosecution of illegal immigrants who use the services of coyotes (people who transport humans across borders for profit). In 2008, the Office began enforcing the Legal Arizona Workers Act (LAWA), which prohibits illegal immigrants from using false documents to obtain employment and sanctions employers who intentionally or knowingly hire illegal immigrants. • MCAO was the proud recipient of four National Association of Counties (NACo) awards for community outreach and crime prevention in 2007-08. MCAO’s Road Map to Crime Prevention Booklet was the recipient of a prestigious NACo Achievement Award. The Crime Prevention booklet includes prevention tips and current information on issues including identity theft, gangs, graffiti and auto theft. The East and West Valley Neighborhood Crime Prevention Summits and the televised “County Attorney Report” also received awards. NACo members represent county governments across the U.S. and each year recognize the outstanding programs by elected county officials and their staff. • The MCAO sponsors continuous crime prevention and education efforts. Recent programs addressed methamphetamine abuse, truancy as an early warning sign of future problems, the tragic consequences of drug and alcohol DUIs and prescription drug abuse. MCAO’s award-winning websites (found at www.crimefreeaz.com) provide a wealth of crime prevention information. • Since 2005, MCAO has been analyzing attorney turnover and has taken steps to reduce the attrition rate for prosecutors. Loan repayment programs and other organizational changes have met with success. Once hovering at more than 20%, today’s attrition rate for prosecutors has decreased to around 10%. 40000 35000 30000 25000 20000 15000 10000 5000 0 FY04-05 FY05-06 FY06-07 FY07-08 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 from FY 04-05 to FY 07-08 • MCAO’s policies and sponsored legislation led to the incarceration of an estimated 3,100 additional Maricopa County offenders since 2005, primarily repeat and violent offenders. Selected Adult Felony Filings (Table 2) Agg. Assault Arson Burglary Child Molestation DUI Drug Related Homicide Robbery Sexual Assault Theft Vehicular Theft Totals FY04-05 2,772 40 2,130 328 2,904 15,650 252 784 98 1,085 2,524 28,567 FY05-06 % Chg. FY06-07 % Chg. FY07-08 % Chg. 3,162 14.1 3,021 -4.5 2,763 -8.5 36 -10.0 25 -30.6 52 108.0 2,044 -4.0 2,303 12.7 2,347 1.9 363 10.7 322 -11.3 366 13.7 2,881 -0.8 2,822 -2.0 3,147 11.5 16,036 2.5 16,873 5.2 16,790 -0.5 293 16.3 314 7.2 334 6.4 919 17.2 972 5.8 1,146 17.9 100 2.0 100 0.0 86 -14.0 1,239 14.2 1,099 -11.3 1,202 9.4 2,644 4.8 2,128 -19.5 1,668 -21.6 29,717 4.0 29,979 0.9 29,901 -0.3 PAGE 17 MARICOPA COUNTY JUSTIC E SYSTEM AC TIVITIES REPORT FISCAL YEAR 2007-08 Clerk of the Court Adult Probation (Continued from page 8) (Continued from page 14) eFiling Training: The Office offers a monthly eFiling training class to law firms and legal support staff to acquaint them with the new eFiling system. Approximately 700 individuals participated in the training course this year. Drug Monitoring Test Results FY2008: Drug monitoring results indicated the following drug free results during FY 2008: 87% - standard probationers 96% - sex offender probationers 89% - domestic violence probationers 86% - seriously mentally ill probationers 95% - transferred youth probationers 83% - IPS probationers Other Facts: •There are more than 5,900 attorneys enrolled in the Minute Entry Electronic Distribution System (MEEDS). •On average, the Office scans more than 12,000 paper documents daily to make them available as an electronic image. •The Office has internal and external filing depository boxes to provide customers with a method to file their documents without standing in line. The external boxes are available 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. The Office received 56,414 external box filings and 179,418 internal box filings in FY 2007 - 2008. •In Fiscal Year 2007 - 2008, the Office provided 1,544,424 copies of court documents via hard-copy and/or the electronic court record to the public, court, legal community and agencies upon their request. •The Customer Service Center, located in Downtown Phoenix, provides services for customers to obtain a marriage license, apply for a passport, and access court records. In FY 2007 - 2008, they center served 773,904 customers. •To ensure quality service is continually provided, a quick online survey is available for customers to provide feedback about the service they received from the Office. To access the survey, visit: www.clerkofcourt.maricopa.gov Juvenile Probation Dept. (Continued from page 10) Accountability: The Juvenile Community Offender Restitution and Public Service program (JCORPS) was very active in FY08. This program provides juveniles with an opportunity to pay restitution through community work hours. During the year, a total of 24,311 work hours (valued at $121,555) was completed and over $13,000 in restitution was earned and paid to victims. Community Justice Panels: By the end of May 2008, the Department had 71 Community Justice Panels operating in 40 locations and nine new Teen Courts. Community Justice Panels are alternatives to traditional Diversion citations. Panels are made up of local community members who employ the principles of Restorative Justice by focusing on accountability (by assigning consequences) and repairing harm to the community (because the panels are held in the community in which the youth lives). Operational Issues More Community Offices: Probation officers now have more community offices. The Department negotiated with the Northwest Regional Court Center, the Peoria YMCA and the Glendale Regional Court Center to allow officers space to meet with clients. West Valley Community Office Moved to Durango: The Department closed the West Valley Community Office and relocated staff to the Durango Juvenile Court Annex – Restorative Justice and Mediation Center. DUI Court: Presiding Judge Barbara Rodriguez Mundell and the Maricopa County Superior Court received a Highway Safety Award from the Arizona Governor’s Office of Highway Safety for Spanish DUI Court. The Financial Compliance Program: Received a Showcase in Excellence Award from the Arizona Quality Alliance in recognition of continuous improvement and performance excellence. Strategic Fitness Award: Received from the Maricopa County Office of Management and Budget for the department’s efforts in effectively carrying out the strategic management requirements of the County. Probation Officer Thomas Weiss: Selected by the Arizona Probation Chiefs Association for the Trainer Excellence Award (Category: Probation). Probation Officer William J. Harkins III: Was recognized by the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors for his bravery and service to the citizens of Maricopa County. His name was engraved on the Salute Pillar of Honor in front of the downtown Superior Court building to recognize exceptional achievement. Bill Pebler: GED teacher with MCAPD’s Education Center, was chosen by the Administrative Office of the Courts as LEARN Adult Teacher of the Year. Department Awards and Recognition FY 2008 The Automated Criminal History received a 2008 NACo Achievement Award from the National Association of Counties. Contingency Management in Drug Court was recognized by the National Association of Counties with a 2008 NACo Achievement Award. Tabletop Exercises were selected for a 2008 NACo Achievement Award from the National Association of Counties. Lindell W. Rhodes received the Arizona Department of Education’s “Adult Education Administrator of the Year” award. PAGE 18 MARICOPA COUNTY JUSTIC E SYSTEM AC TIVITIES REPORT FISC AL YEAR 2007-08 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 620 W. Jackson, Suite 3017 Phoenix, AZ 85003 www.clerkofcourt.maricopa.gov Department Information 602/506-3360 Customer Service Center 602/506-7400 (marriage licenses, passports) Family Court Services 602/506-3762 Criminal Financial Obligations 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 Betty Adams, 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 Juvenile Public Defender Christina Phillis, Juvenile Public Defender General Information 602/372-9550 Justice Courts Terry Stewart, Director of Administrative Services 602/372-1722 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 25 elected Justices of the Peace and Constables, may be obtained on the above noted websites. ICJIS Integrated Criminal Justice Information System Gary Huish, Program Manager Thomas Gendron, IT Consultant General information 602/506-4698 www.maricopa.gov/icjis Public Defense Services (Indigent Representation) Public Defense Services & Contract Administration James Logan, Director 620 W. Jackson, Suite 3077 Phoenix, Arizona 85003 www.maricopa.gov/OPDS General Information 602/506-7228 Public Defender Jim Haas, Public Defender 602/506-7711 www.pubdef.maricopa.gov General Information 602/506-7711 Legal Defender Robert Briney, Legal Defender www.maricopa.gov/legaldef/ General Information 602/506-8800 Legal Advocate Bruce Peterson, Legal Advocate General Information 602/506-4111 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 Enforcement Support 602/876-1895 PAGE 19 MARICOPA COUNTY JUSTIC E SYSTEM AC TIVITIES REPORT FISCAL YEAR 2007-08 Investigations Bureau Custody Bureaus Administration Bureau Financial Bureau Technology Bureau Information Jail Information 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 Max Wilson, 602/506-7642 District 4 Supervisor Fulton Brock, 602/506-1776 District 1 Supervisor Don Stapley, 602/506-7431 District 2 Supervisor Andy Kunasek, 602/506-7562 District 3 Supervisor Mary Rose Wilcox, 602/506-7092 District 5 ------------------------Fran McCarroll, 602/506-3766 Clerk of the Board Maricopa County Management David R. Smith, 602/506-3098 County Manager Sandra L. Wilson, 602/506-7280 Deputy County Manager Kenny Harris 602/506-8626 Asst County Mgr, Public Works Joy Rich, 602/506-3301 Asst County Mgr, Regional Development Svcs Dr. Rodrigo Silva, 602/506-8515 Asst County Mgr, Community Collaboration 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