JROB-2017-11

JUSTICE REINVESTMENT OVERSIGHT BOARD Meeting:  11/15/2017

House Appropriations Committee Rm (120), Delegates Building, Annapolis

The purpose of this meeting was to share updates from the agencies/departments on implementation of the Justice Reinvestment Act since it went into effect on October 1.  The following is a summary of the proceedings by MAJR monitors.

I. Call to order: Judge Daniel Long, Chair

Judge Long spoke briefly of the history of the Justice Reinvestment Act (JRA) and emphasized the broad base of support it had enjoyed in both Houses.  This is the first meeting since implementation of the JRA 10/1/17.  He expressed particular appreciative of the cooperative spirit that has characterized the implementation work from every branch of government – “unprecedented,” he said, in his 35 years of service to the State.

Introduction:  Glenn Fueston, Director of the Commission, introduced Angelina ___ , newly appointed as Director of Information for the JR Commission to work with data now being requested from every agency and department involved in corrections.  The Commission has initiated requests for data from all appropriate agencies and parties.  The work of the Oversight Board is dependent on good data flow.

Minutes of previous meetings were reviewed and approved as published. Official minutes of the Board’s August meeting are now available: https://goccp.maryland.gov/wp-content/uploads/justice-reinvestment-oversight-20170828-minutes.pdf

II. Agency Implementation Updates

Department of Health & Mental Hygiene is working to be able to meet the 21-day placement requirement in the JRA for prisoners who need treatment. The Department has launched a single point of contact for communication: Michelle Fleming is in charge of all admissions and inquiries.  There will be a customer-service oriented approach.  The phone number will be available to individuals and families, who will be able to call and get information about where the individual is in the process.  It is a cell phone and Michelle is expected to answer it at all times, not just during working hours.

The Department expects to meet the 21-day placement requirement.  (On October 1?), there were 26 individuals in the prison system who needed to be placed.  Of these, 13 are now (as of the date of this Board meeting) have been placed; 7 have places ready; 3 are waiting; 3 others cannot be found. (This compares with upwards of more than 100 days average wait-time for placement prior to implementation of JRA; performance has been improving since passage of the Act in 2016).

A new case management system to support the workflow is to be deployed next week.  Then (in January?) there will be a computer system in place that will further facilitate tracking of people in the system.  Judges will have their own portals into the system.

They are meeting with staff individually to go over new policies to make sure the new quality metrics with this population will be met.  Clinical cost care will be reimbursable.  $60.01 will be available per client for incidental costs, such as for transportation, court costs, training.  The network of contracted providers of health services is being expanded. Six new providers are expected, 3 of these in Baltimore City.  The system plans to place clients in services close to their usual residence, but emphasis will be on placing people into services as soon as possible, which may mean transporting clients to where beds are available.

Staff recognize that there is more work to do.  They will focus particularly on the needs of Baltimore City.  Centralized Admissions Office still has some problems.  All court orders will go into one place, with a common email address, common fax and phone, to enable tracking progress and know when new processes will be placed in service.  The process has been communicated to the courts.

Comments

  • Excellent communication, excellent plan.
  • Dumais: How many folks will travel? Response: We are developing a centralized system among our hospitals.  We will try to keep people as close to their jurisdiction as possible, but if there is no bed, they will go to nearest bed possible rather than not be admitted to a hospital.  There is no data yet on how this is working.
  • An MoU with Adventist Hospital has been fully executed. Others are in process.  Now we are looking to see who can go to that facility.  Hospitals and other treatment centers were listed on a handout.

Department of Public Safety and Correctional Services. 

The Division of Corrections is tasked with developing four new processes and policies including a Certificate of Rehabilitation, Earned Credits, and Graduated Sanctions.  Innovation teams have come up with policy drafts for each of the 4 areas.  All 4 have been reviewed and approved by the Attorney General and published; they were up and running on 10/1.  The Division has created “starter guides” to help staff. They are sending out “cultural change” notes to people for increasing understanding of the new policies and understanding that implementation of JRA is the law.  They have strengthened the pool of trainers, who have now trained about half the staff.  The training is offered in Sykesville and across the state.  The training covers principles of intervention, based on “cognitive therapies.” The next step is to put together our own advisory board for questions of what needs to be improved.

  • Comment: Public safety is really working hard to implement JRA – kudos.

The Division of Parole and Probation:  As in the Division of Corrections, the Crime and Justice Institute (CJI) has been very involved with suggestions, with observations of what works in other states, and with training Maryland workers to be trainers in implementing JRA requirements.

The Division of Field Support Services, Christine Donnelly reporting.  The Division has sent out documents for inmates as well as staff for information regarding medical and geriatric parole and other issues.  They have partnered with CJI to train staff and trainers; the training can now be done ‘in house’.   Training is expected to be completed by mid-December.  BJA has given funding assistance.  University of Cincinnati has provided training in substance abuse modification.  First reports on that initiative are due today.

Department of Labor, Licensing and Regulation:  Ken Weadon reporting

The Correctional Education program seeks to provide academic upgrading so that inmates can participate in occupational courses which all require minimum of GED completion.  Many inmates are found to have only 5th-8th grade reading level; math level is usually 2 grades lower than individual’s reading level.  Fewer than half of the prison population have a high school diploma. There are 41 occupational classes on any given day; 2500 inmates are involved per day, 12,000 per year (of a total 19,300 inmates).

Some of the courses taught have national accreditation and certification so that participants can get the jobs.  All aspects of the construction fields are offered for certification; this is the largest course area.  Automotive service certification is second; Vehicles for Change trains for 6 months after inmates do 6 months behind the walls.  The occupational training programs in Fabric Cleaning and in HVAC are also nationally certified.  Jobs are immediate for those who receive certification in the nationally accredited courses.  However, there is a problem: the certification tests can’t easily be accessed because internet access is severely limited for the inmates (internet access is deemed to be a safety and security issue).

The occupational training available has a long list of people in the prisons who want it. We are developing partnerships with the private sector and expect to have employer groups for each program.  The employer groups will work with the training personnel to assure that what they are doing in the training programs will help the trainees do the jobs.  Transition skills are the main reasons folks lose their jobs.

In Hagerstown and Jessup, the Joint Skills Training Program (JSTP) is in place to document skills folks acquire that they can reflect on their resumes.  This includes working within the prison system at jobs that inmates traditionally do inside as part of running the prisons.  We anticipate being able to give certification for work experience, such as cooks, kitchen workers, etc.

  • Question: Are public speaking skills included?
  • Answer: Yes, self-confidence is a critical factor in re-establishing in the community. You need to know how to project that you know what you are doing.

Administrative Office of the Courts:  Judge Morrissey reporting

70% of the training has been completed, moving geographically starting in western Maryland.  They are using e-forms to help with tracking and guiding. Training includes understanding the JRA changes in sentencing with regard to mandatory minimums, distinguishing between technical and non-technical violations, the graduated sanction process, and expungement process changes.  Staff and inmates are provided with a new expungement brochure, a companion list of expungable charges, and legal advice re expungement.  Phone in chat and email services are available for application for expungement; this service uses Legal Aid.

Application forms have been created to submit reports on technical violations.  New forms have been created for in-patient and out-patient concerns.  The administrative office of the courts connected with Parole and Probation and met many times with the Department of Health.

In reference to the restitution process, restitution is ordered in the jail; it is now checked.  A goal is to make the restitution process transparent.

Handouts are now available for alcohol and drug treatment.

The courts will seek help from the legislature to meet the need for additional employees because of the high volume of requests for expungement.

In reference to parole and probation, effective ways to track minor deviations (as opposed to immediate sanctions) are being sought.

Judge Morrissey’s office has sent an e-mail blast to the judges regarding the changes that are now law; it was positively received, but he noted that he “cannot tell judges what to do.”.

The administrative office of the courts has had good collaboration with Parole and Probation and with Corrections services, and he remarked on the admirable extent of cooperation among agencies.

Comments from the Commissioners:

  • Baltimore Co. has been experiencing a slow trickle of Petitions for Modification because the States Attorney’s office is slow since much background work is required to file and to respond with relevant information.
  • 102 petitions have been filed in the state. In Baltimore County, of 4 petitioners, 2 have been released and 2 have not.
  • Re violations of Parole and Probation procedure, reviews apply to anything that has been heard in court since Oct 1 in Baltimore County, whether technical or non-technical. There is disagreement about whether the date the complaint occurred should determine whether or not the case is filed.
  • The state requires reports to be filed by race and ethnicity. Baltimore County does not have that information and they do not think it is appropriate to do so.

Sentence Modification Requests.  Re drug conviction sentences, there have been 473 requests for review of mandatory minimum sentences. 65 have been released after review.   1 has died.  64 did not respond.  342 remain incarcerated in 20 of Maryland’s 24 counties.  All have been assigned counsel. Many jurisdictions are still working.  37 individuals in Baltimore City are serving mandatory sentences.

There is a 1-year window to file a motion.  To deny without a hearing seems inappropriate.

A number of judges took it upon themselves to do the JRA training.  “Bench cards” that provide summaries of modifications of laws have been distributed and appreciated.

 

Local Detention Centers, Anne Arundel County Department of Corrections administrator reporting

10,000 people are in local jails, including 2,000 in Baltimore City; about 7,000 of these are pre-trial.  There is presently no data collection on length of stay prior to trial, but that is changing.  Sentence time is usually about 18 months. Diminution credits changes under conduct time and pre-trial time.  8000 requests have to be declined because they occurred prior to October 1, the start date for JRA.  Should there be reconsideration of this policy?

Restitution orders – changes: Clerks of the courts send restitution orders to local detention facilities and are getting a roster of them so they can develop a mechanism to transfer funds from state to local for the restitution effort.  There is also an effort to develop local statutes re restitution.  Restitution funds are being collected but how the funds are used or delivered to victims is unclear.  (See later remarks in Kevin Coombs remarks re Restitution Work Group). From local incarceration to probation, process is developing.

We do not have consistent practice regarding who administers Mental Health evaluation.  There are individuals for whom court order for a mental health bed is not met and they are sent to local jails. In Anne Arundel County there is no waiting for beds.

Pre-trial detention has grown dramatically, with 7,000 of 10,000 imprisoned in local jails being held without bond in local jails.

The “one stop shop” re reporting populations will assist local/state collaboration.

  • Comment (Judge Morrisey): Pre-trial incarceration has increased drastically. But, under new rules in the Appeals Court, releases are occurring more often.

III. States Attorneys Association (SAA) Presentation re concerns of impact of JRA

Impact on Specialty Courts: Laura Martin reporting

  • Non-violent offenders in the drug courts (and sometimes other specialty courts) are offered treatment. Treatment provides an opportunity to get lives back in order; however, their goal for accepting it is to avoid jail.  Treatment can only work if they get into the program, and if the period of incarceration is long enough to permit administration of Vivitrol (a minimum of 15 days, drug free).  JRA gives a way for them to avoid jail without doing the work of the drug court.  At district level, you’ll be out in 3 months, so why agree to a year in jail, albeit for rehabilitation treatment?
  • Compliance credit for probationers. It is rare for someone to get through the entire program, which takes 2-3 years on average.  Under JRA, the sentence can cut a sentence in half, which does not usually provide enough time to make a difference.  Drug courts work because of fear of jail sentences.
  • Being absent from drug court is considered a technical violation.
  • There is ambiguity regarding what happens in drug court. Sanctions will run afoul of the JRA sentencing changes.
  • Unsuccessful completion of drug court orders is not a violation under the JRA. This can be dealt with if the defendant is a threat to someone else; but they are usually only a threat to themselves.

There is a need to exempt the drug courts from the JRA’s process.  The States Attorneys’ Association did request a graduated sanctions program, a problem solving court.  An intervention to make this clear is needed. “Please, exempt the specialty courts from the JRA.”

Comments:

  • Hough questioned this view, noting that you can give vivitrol without having the individual in jail and commenting that a judge in Hawaii was putting folks in prison for 1-2 days and having success with drug rehabilitation.
  • Judge Morrissey recognized a need to make this matter clearer to the judges.

Gang Statute/RICO Provisions: Wes Adams and Laura Oldham reporting

There have been 4 cases in 10 years.

The first one was a perfect fit for the Gang Statute.  The other 3 did not fit.  The flow chart of how you get from criminal investigation to the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) focuses on associations and criminality of conduct.  Smaller jurisdictions cannot use the gang statute, so Maryland should consider adopting a federal RICO model, which requires only that the perpetrator engage in at least 2 criminal collaborations.  A person involved in trafficking can’t be treated under the existing gang statute’s definitions of participants, incidents, type of crime, or victims of crime.  This type of offense is not similar to the Bloods and Crips, which were the model for the Gang Statute.

In Howard County, there is not the highly structured gang organization described in the JRA.  The definition requires complex investigation, flipping members against each other.  Currently, the primary goal of a gang member is to commit one of the enumerated crimes.  It is easier to establish conspiracy, which is only a misdemeanor, while a gang offense is a felony.  Malicious destruction of property isn’t included in the definition, but this is a method of tagging a property for a gang’s existence in an area.  In the Venue section, missing is the ability for states attorneys to prosecute the underlying crimes even if they occur in more than one jurisdiction.

  • Delegate Dumais: SAA could sponsor legislation to change the Maryland RICO statutes. Response: they will be in touch.

Driving Infractions: Steve Kroll and Dave Daggett

A police officer may arrest anyone they have probable cause to believe is driving with a suspended license.  The intent of the JRA, they suppose, was to keep folks from incarceration, so such people  should not be arrested.   State police are worried about arresting people in western MD and not taking them to a police station.  What is the person with a suspended license going to do?  What is the officer supposed to do?  A judge has the right to issue a bench warrant for a non-incarcerable violation.  The problem is the repeat offender.  Judges have the discretion to do what they feel best in repeat cases.  There is no “jail consequence” for failing to appear.

IV. Victim Notification Workgroup: Del. Kathleen Dumais reporting

Under JRA, prisoners can be released automatically after serving 25% of their sentence.  The importance of victims’ rights is uppermost.  There have been difficulties with how the victims’ rights components of the law has worked.  The Maryland Parole Commission says they don’t always get what they need.

Crime victims are getting a brochure that tells them what their rights are and what they should do.  A working group is working well to identify concerns re victims’ rights that were not well spelled out in JRA.   They have produced wording to add that will need to be approved by this Board.  It includes language on rights to require a hearing prior to release, and on expungement.

There is no resolution to the question of how victims are supposed to access updated information. Notification processes re victims’ rights must be made clear to all victims.  We need a process that allows the form used in the local court to be used also in district court.  Could the Board of Victims Rights suggest language?  A victim’s expressed wish to be heard should not, however, eliminate a possibility of Administrative Release, but would stall it until the Hearing Officer makes a determination.  (Note: the victim is not a victim until there is a trial with a guilty finding.)

  • Comments: several comments and concerns were raised.  Proposed changes were held over and referred back to the Working Group.

V. Victim Restitution Workgroup: Kevin Combs

Collection Process and Data System Update:

The Department of Public Safety and Correctional Services reports that a change note has been submitted to move funds for restitution into a separate bank account.

Local Departments of Corrections have a case number for each restitution case.  The local department will collect funds from inmates and remit quarterly to the State DOC. which will send disbursements to recipients.  This will facilitate auditing.  The Workgroup is still setting up the audit guidelines to be carried out by Auditor General.

Victim Information Notification Everyday (VINE) allows victims to call a toll-free number or visit a website.  There are 5 services.  A communication form is being developed; it has been submitted, and it hasn’t been turned down.  Updates to VINE are expected to be made every two hours.  https://vinelink.com

  • Question, Scott Schellenberger: Could expungement be added to this?  This would allow victims who want to know to get immediate clarity re status.
  • Response: They will look at this.

VI. Adjournment: Judge Daniel Long, Chair

Next meeting: 1st or 2nd week of January.

Judge Long, who is now retired, is visiting all members of the Justice Reinvestment Board.

 

MAJR thanks to Rosalie Dance and Adrian Bishop for preparing this thorough summary.