Annual Report Maricopa County Office of the Public Defender 2011-2012 MARICOPA COUNTY OFFICE OF THE PUBLIC DEFENDER 620 W. Jackson Street, Suite 4015, Phoenix, AZ 85042 (602) 506-7711 pdinfo@mail.maricopa.gov Annual Report Maricopa County Office of the Public Defender Mission The mission of the Office of the Public Defender is to provide quality legal representation to indigent individuals assigned to us by the court, thus safeguarding the fundamental legal rights of each member of the community. Goals The Maricopa County Public Defender’s Office provides tremendous value to the community by serving an important public safety function. We seek effective dispositions for addressing the underlying problems that contribute to our clients' criminal behavior, thus providing them with their best chance to become productive and law-abiding individuals. Our goals are:    Annual Report | 2011-2012   1 To protect the rights of our clients, to guarantee that clients receive equal protection under the law, regardless of race, creed, national origin or socioeconomic status, and to ensure that all ethical and constitutional responsibilities and mandates are fulfilled; To obtain and promote dispositions that are effective in reducing recidivism, improving clients’ well-being, and enhancing quality of life for all; To work in partnership with other agencies to improve access to justice, develop rational justice system policies, and maintain appropriate caseload and performance standards; To enhance the professionalism and productivity of all staff; and To perform our obligations in a fiscally responsible manner including maintaining cost effectiveness by limiting the percentage of increase in the annual cost per case to no more than the percentage of increase in the overall annual funding of the County’s criminal justice group. DEFEND ~ PROTECT ~ ENHANCE ~ PROMOTE ~ IMPROVE ENSURE ~ PARTNER ~ RESPOND ~ PRODUCE ~ RESOLVE ACHIEVE ~ REPRESENT ~ LEAD Department Initiatives In FY12, the Maricopa County Public Defender’s Office continued to support initiatives addressing the root causes of offenders’ criminal behavior and reducing recidivism. The reduction in recidivism enhances public safety and reduces future demands on the criminal justice system. Veterans Court is now a reality. Phase 1 of this court, focused on veterans who are probation violators, began in February, 2011. The Regional Homeless Court (RHC), which had been limited to municipal matters, is in the process of being expanded to misdemeanors in the Maricopa County Justice Courts. The RHC brings the homeless population and the regional limited jurisdiction courts together in one accessible location to resolve lingering post-adjudicated and pre-adjudicated matters for homeless individuals who are on the road to becoming productive members of our community. Courts are thus able to quash warrants and close stale files while defendants are able to settle obligations which inhibit employment and block the reinstatement of driving privileges. In addition, the Continuity of Care Court continues to expand. This court, which is staffed by a mitigation specialist, gathers information within days of the arrest of mentally ill defendants. The information gathered by our staff in this court has resulted in at-risk inmates receiving critical medication while incarcerated and evidence based plea offers focused on the root causes of these offenders’ criminal behavior being provided at the RCC and EDC. We will continue to work on expansion of Veterans Court, Homeless Court and the Continuity of Care Court. New legislation from the 2012 Session expanding the types of individuals eligible for diversion programs. Streamlining the ability of homeless courts to handle matters from other courts should assist us in these efforts.        Drug Court DUI Court Spanish-speaking DUI Court Veterans’ Court Veterans’ Drug Court Domestic Violence Court Mental Health Court       JTOP Youthful Sex Offender Court Continuity of Care Court Unsupervised Probation Court PSRB Homeless Court In March 2012, the Maricopa County Adult Probation Department and Superior Court held a celebration honoring the 20th anniversary of the Adult Drug Court in Maricopa County. The mission of drug court is to reduce substance abuse and recidivism by assessing the risk and Annual Report | 2011-2012 To enhance and best manage our efforts regarding specialty, therapeutic courts in Maricopa County, the Office created a new group Specialty Court Group to consolidate our operations in the following areas: 2 need of individual offenders and providing a continuum of treatment, services, supervision, rewards and sanctions. The contribution of Public Defender's Office to the success of the drug court program was acknowledged during the celebration. As part of the celebration, a short Drug Court 20th Anniversary video was shown which included comments from MCPD attorneys. In May 2012, MCPD Attorney Manager Dan Carrion co-chaired the Arizona Problem Solving Courts Conference: Collaborating for Positive Change, a two day conference held at Arizona State University West campus sponsored by the Arizona Association of Drug Court Professionals (AADCP), ASU Center for Applied Behavioral Health Policy and the Pacific Southwest Addiction Technology Transfer Center. This conference brought together more than 250 professionals from all areas of criminal justice and behavioral health, including judges, public defenders, prosecutors, probation officers, recovery coaches and seven graduates, counselors, and social workers, to provide the most up-to-date research and education on problem-solving courts. Collaborating partners for the event included representatives from the Office, the National Drug Court Institute, Arizona Governor’s Office for Children, Youth & Families, Arizona Prosecuting Attorneys’ Advisory Council (APAAC), Maricopa County Superior Court, Supreme Court of Arizona, David’s Hope, and county probation departments from across the state. Annual Report | 2011-2012 In June, 2012, the National Association of Counties selected Project SAFE: Improving Outcomes of Transferred Juveniles on Adult Probation as one of the 2012 NACo Achievement Award winners. The goal of Project SAFE (Swift Accountable Fair Enforcement) is to immediately address the drug and alcohol use by transferred juvenile probationers in the Adult Court. An attorney and two mitigation specialists work closely with the Court and the Adult Probation Department in ensuring the success of the transferred youth in the program. After one year, the program has shown decreases in the number of new arrests petitions to revoke probation, and probations sent to prison. 3 Finally, the Office continues to devote considerable efforts to other evidence based initiatives by working with the courts and prosecution on potential expansion of diversion programs, working with Arizona Attorneys for Criminal Justice and a nationally recognized expert on an indepth report of evidence-based practices, serving as a member of the Department of Justice’s LEEC’s Reentry Committee, serving on the County’s SMI Commission, speaking at community forums on evidence based practices, working with Magellan and Correctional Health Services to address the ever-widening gap in mental health services to our clients caused by recent budget cuts, serving on the Executive Committee of the County’s recently created Jail to Community Services reentry committee and working with the Adult Probation Department on several training programs regarding expanded use of evidence based practices. Training Activities The Public Defender Training Fund (PDTF) continues to be vital to the Office’s mission. It enables the Office to provide high-quality training for our employees, giving them the necessary resources and tools to provide effective representation. Further, the PDTF enables the Office to serve as a leader and primary sponsor for several statewide indigent defense training programs. In anticipation of ongoing State and County budget issues, as well as a decrease in PDTF funding, the Office continued to operate with several fiscal constraints. We maintained our moratorium on out-of-state travel (with limited exceptions) and restrictions on in-state training. Our conservative approach resulted in a training reserve of $181,447.12 at the end of the fiscal year, which helps us start the new year on a strong footing. Training new public defenders from around the state remains a high priority. This year, our new training director revised the Office’s curriculum for new attorneys, which included new speakers and materials in digital format. During the first year of employment, attorneys attend a three part training regiment including Introduction to Criminal Defense, Pretrial Practice, and Trial Skills. First year attorneys also attend the State Bar Professionalism Course. We also train attorneys with two to four years of experience by providing trial advocacy technique courses. Our Fall Trial College focuses on case themes and theory, opening statements, voir dire, and closing argument. It is taught by nationally known speaker Ira Mickenberg. Participants met in small groups, brought a case of their own, and developed a theme through which to tell their client’s story of innocence in opening statement. They practiced asking voir dire questions to expose jurors least open to believing their clients’ innocence. Attorneys practiced tying in the evidence and applicable law to support a legal theory of innocence in closing argument. We supplement this training with the APDA Annual Conference (which the Office co-sponsors), the Annual Death Penalty Conference, bi-monthly brown-bag lectures, technology training, and publication of our Office newsletter for The Defense. We continue our partnership with the Federal Defender’s Capital Habeas Division to offer quarterly trainings on Capital Appeals and Rule 32 proceedings. The trainings have been well attended and received. In summary, the Public Defender Training Fund remains a cost-effective and dynamic tool for training public defenders and staff. Annual Report | 2011-2012 Spring Trial College focuses on cross-examination, witness control, evidence, objections, impeachment, and motive and bias. This year, we did not hire speakers and, instead, our own trial attorneys presented short lectures. The participants met in small groups to apply the techniques learned. They cross examined, controlled, impeached, and showed motive and bias of witnesses played by actors. Participants received valuable feedback from mentor attorneys. 4 Training Events Summary Title of Conference/Training Date(s) # of attendees The Cannabis Chef and the K-9 Brown Bag August 4, 2011 30 PowerPoint and Courtroom Presentations Capital Direct Appeals and PCR Training Series: Litigating Brady Claims August 24, 2011 12 August 26, 2011 40 Fall Trial College November 16-17, 2011 41 Annual Death Penalty December 7-9, 2011 309 Public Service Loan Forgiveness Webinar August 11, 2011 10 Westlaw General Refresher Westlaw Next September 16, 2011 4 Mentally Ill Offender in the Criminal Justice System Webinar August 26, 2011 15 Justice Court Training Coordinating State & Federal Sentencing to (Possibly) Benefit Your Client August 19, 2011 11 September 30, 2011 32 Capital Direct Appeals and PCR Training Series October 20-21, 2011 41 CHS: Medical Charges November 2, 2011 21 iCIS View for PD July 1, 2011 – June 30, 2012 51 IRIS Case Management July 1, 2011 – June 30, 2012 50 E-Filing Through IRIS July 1, 2011 – June 30, 2012 1 IRIS - Case Initiation July 1, 2011 – June 30, 2012 4 IRIS – Updating and Closing Cases July 1, 2011 – June 30, 2012 4 Criminal E-Filing July 1, 2011 – June 30, 2012 35 Adding Other Case People July 1, 2011 – June 30, 2012 1 NEO Computer/Scanner July 1, 2011 – June 30, 2012 48 PPT 101 July 1, 2011 – June 30, 2012 9 PPT Advanced Formatting July 1, 2011 – June 30, 2012 4 PPT Animation July 1, 2011 – June 30, 2012 3 PPT Inserting Objects July 1, 2011 – June 30, 2012 4 IRIS Follow Up March 22, 2012 10 IRIS Time Sheets July 1, 2011 – June 30, 2012 7 February 14, 2012 1 Editing Audio with Window Movie Maker March 29, 2012 10 New Rules of Evidence SBOA October 6, 2011 21 DNA Testing Innocence Project Brown Bag October 28, 2011 52 Juror Voir Dire Training Capital Attorneys October 12-13, 2011 21 Interview Tips & Techniques For Attorneys November 15, 2011 38 Westlaw General Refresher/Ethics December 1, 2011 5 Class 6 Undesignated Project October 20, 2011 10 Webinar Innovations in Public Defense November 30, 2011 8 TASC Program Overview RCC/EDC DT November 22, 2011 12 Annual Report | 2011-2012 MS Word/Outlook Overview 5 Title of Conference/Training Date(s) # of attendees Basics of Neuropsychology Evals in Mitigation January 24, 2012 51 Basics of Neuropsychology Competency to Proceed January 31, 2012 33 Spring Professionalism April 20, 2012 18 Spring Trial College April 11, 2012 26 February 1, 2012 56 Webinar: Gathering Social Media January 26, 2012 18 Drug Court Overview February 13, 2012 12 February 22 & 24, 2012 February 2012 thru March 2012 28 Real Colors February 29, 2012 20 Forensic Tool Box March 22, 2012 19 APDA Annual Conference June 20-22, 2012 965 Patron Saints Seminar / Cancelled June 19, 2012 0 Drug Court Overview March 21, 2012 33 Interstate Compact Updates March 23, 2012 14 County Open Enrollment Overview April 5 & 12, 2012 84 OST / CANCELLED April 25, 2012 0 Deferred Comp Overview May 3, 2012 8 Interstate Compact Updates May 4, 2012 11 Juvenile System Overview May 17, 2012 33 Westlaw General: Ethics May 18, 2012 7 June 12 & 14, 2012 19 June 12, 2012 64 Veterans Stand Down Brown Bag Court Tower / Train the Trainer Court Tower / Technology Training Mail Merge - MS Office 2007 Taking a Stand Against Bullying: Protecting Everyone 59 Organizational Chart Jim Haas Public Defender Keely Farrow Business Programs Manager Vacant Legal Support Manager David Jones Client Services Manager Stephanie Conlon Training Director HR Associate HR Specialist Amy Thomas Support Services Manager C. Daniel Carrion Attorney Manager Early Representation (RCC & EDC), PV, Justice Courts, Specialty Groups Vehicular Dan Lowrance Atttorney Manager Trial Groups 1 through 6, Law Clerks, Interns Appeals, Capital, and Major Fraud Training Staff New Attorneys Annual Report | 2011-2012 Jeremy Mussman Deputy Director Diane Terribile Administrator 6 Managing for Results, Statistics and Budgeting Over the past eight years, the Public Defender’s Office has reported strategic and statistical information using Managing for Results (MFR). MFR is a comprehensive and integrated management system that was established in 2000. Four cycles (planning, budgeting, reporting, evaluating) comprise the MFR system which is used heavily in budgetary decision-making. Annual Report | 2011-2012 MFR data is comprised of four types of measures: demand, output, efficiencies, and results. Data reported for these measures in prior years included projections and historical actuals for case assignment (demand), case resolution (output), and expenses by case type (efficiency), as well measures geared for demonstrating effectiveness and/or efficiency (result). As previously reported, the Public Defender's results measures were significantly revamped in FY10. To a large extent, the Office can’t control the timeliness or even the effectiveness of representation. The specifics of the cases and the relevant case law, along with the power and authority of Court and County Attorney, restrict our impact on process timeliness and case outcomes. FY12 marks the third year for data in the new structure, allowing further comparison of year-to-year changes in those numbers. The newly established trend for the revamped data allows us to consider the information in part of our ongoing efforts toward monitoring the quality of our representation. 7 In addition to MFR data, the Office also began using a new fifteen criteria case weighting system in FY10. We were able to retrieve and reevaluate historical data as far back as FY08, under the case weighting structure developed. The additional historical data makes it possible for an even more valuable trend analysis. The Office continues to utilize this data. Department-wide and individual attorney reports are available to Office management and supervisors. These figures help to quantify the relative difficulty of cases in an effort to understand attorney workloads better. Case weighting information is used in conjunction with the supervisors’ more-detailed understanding of their attorney’s cases, to assist supervisors in workload leveling. The intention of these efforts is to ensure workloads are not excessive for any particular attorney(s), and to inform supervisors which attorney(s) might have the ability to take additional cases. Finally, with regard to FY12 budgeting, the Office managed to stay within budget. Achieving such results continues to be a struggle given the volatile nature of public defense representation and the complicating impacts of a struggling economy. Budget Abstract EXPENDITURES SALARIES & BENEFITS $31,442,986.97 GENERAL SUPPLIES $312,143.32 FUEL $13,385.51 NON-CAPITAL EQUIPMENT $18,101.50 LEGAL SERVICES $1,530,120.34 OTHER SERVICES $659,280.61 RENT & OPERATING LEASES $60,749.51 REPAIRS AND MAINTENANCE $13,792.75 INTERNAL SERVICE CHARGES $402,766.75 TRAVEL $38,912.03 EDUCATION $96,659.02 POSTAGE/FREIGHT/SHIPPING $41,798.02 CAPITAL EQUIPMENT $265,307.02 VEHICLES $0.00 DEBT SERVICES (Technology Financing) $0.00 TOTAL EXPENDITURES $34,896,003.35 APPROPRIATIONS AMOUNT GENERAL FUNDS TRAINING SPECIAL REVENUE FUND FILL THE GAP SPECIAL REVENUE FUND DEA GRANT TOTAL APPROPRIATIONS $32,986,216.00 $417,720.00 $2,678,475.00 $449,732.00 $36,532,143.00 Annual Report | 2011-2012 ACCOUNT 8 Statistical Abstracts Cases Assigned History of Cases Assigned by Case Categories 1,2 FY08-FY12 Cases Assigned Case Type FY08 FY09 FY10 Capital 14 7 8 All other Homicide 189 160 126 Class 2-3 Felony 5,709 6,352 5,292 Class 2-3 Felony - RCC/EDC 2,438 2,835 2,579 Class 2-3 Felony - Non RCC/EDC 3,271 3,517 2,713 DUI 2,206 2,331 2,052 DUI - RCC/EDC 1,616 1,659 1,310 DUI - Non RCC/EDC 590 672 742 Class 4-6 Felony 18,903 16,776 14,279 Class 4, 5, & 6 Felony - RCC/EDC 14,663 13,061 11,344 Class 4, 5, & 6 Felony - Non RCC/EDC 4,240 3,715 2,935 Violation of Probation 15,904 15,235 12,216 Misdemeanor 3,276 3,176 2,896 Trial Division Total 46,201 44,037 36,869 3, 4 Mental Health Total 2,818 3,453 3,572 Appeals (includes Capital) 318 371 467 Plea PCR (Appeal PCR) 527 243 374 Trial PCR (PCR) 128 70 133 Juvenile Appeal 46 38 23 Appeals Division Total 1,019 722 997 Total of Above 47,220 44,759 37,866 1 FY11 13 129 5,272 2,191 3,081 1,960 1,236 724 13,574 10,269 3,305 12,259 2,763 35,970 3,521 380 191 75 1 647 36,617 FY12 9 151 5,322 1,996 3,326 1,521 1,006 515 13,206 9,751 3,455 13,358 2,157 35,724 0 272 175 78 0 525 36,249 Data after 2007 is updated as information is available. Data may not match older reports. 2 Total cases opened minus cases closed during the time period with the following dispositions: no complaint, administrative transfer, and workload withdrawal cases. Annual Report | 2011-2012 3 9 From FY09 to FY11, Mental Health case assignment methodology was revised. In prior years, a new case was created in the event of Judicial Reviews, Annual Reviews or Review Status Hearings. The revised process and procedures were changed so that when such events occurred, the original case was reactivated instead of creating a new case in the Office’s case management system. 4 Effective FY12, the Mental Health unit was transferred to the Office of the Public Advocate. Cases Resolved History of Cases Resolved by Case Categories 1,2 FY08-FY12 Cases Resolved Case Type FY08 FY09 FY10 Capital 8 8 21 All other Homicide 86 106 88 Class 2-3 Felony 3,847 4,276 3,929 Class 2-3 Felony - RCC/EDC 1,390 1,496 1,533 Class 2-3 Felony - Non RCC/EDC 2,457 2,780 2,396 DUI 1,676 2,007 1,738 DUI - RCC/EDC 1,114 1,266 1,091 DUI - Non RCC/EDC 562 741 647 Class 4-6 Felony 14,921 15,282 12,968 Class 4, 5, & 6 Felony - RCC/EDC 11,136 11,175 9,933 Class 4, 5, & 6 Felony - Non RCC/EDC 3,785 4,107 3,035 Violation of Probation 14,835 14,132 11,783 Misdemeanor 2,765 2,827 2,726 Trial Division Total 38,138 38,638 33,253 3,4 Mental Health 2,712 3,358 3,510 Appeals (includes Capital) 283 334 441 Plea PCR 485 329 223 Trial PCR 69 47 64 Juvenile Appeals 53 22 41 Appeals Division Total 890 732 769 Total of All Above 41,740 42,728 37,532 1 FY11 10 63 3,342 1,277 2,065 1,588 957 631 12,096 9,318 2,778 11,236 2,381 30,716 1,110 379 176 61 5 621 32,447 FY12 4 65 3,409 1,070 2,339 1,275 736 539 11,449 8,420 3,029 11,952 1,993 30,147 0 310 213 41 1 565 30,712 Data after 2007 is updated as information is available. Data may not match older reports. 2 Case resolutions are total cases closed during the fiscal year, minus cases closed during the fiscal year that were not resolved by the office directly (i.e., reduced by cases in which no complaint is filed, private counsel is retained, conflict withdrawals, workload withdrawals, and transfers to another IR department). From FY09 to FY11, Mental Health case assignment methodology was revised. In prior years, a new case was created in the event of Judicial Reviews, Annual Reviews or Review Status Hearings. The revised process and procedures was changed so that when such events occurred, the original case was reactivated instead of creating a new case in IRIS. 4 Effective FY12, the Mental Health unit was transferred to the Office of the Public Advocate. Annual Report | 2011-2012 3 10