A senseless death in the Harris County Jail

Debora Ann Lyons is the second inmate in the Harris County Jail to commit suicide in the last month. Ms. Lyons, who was taken into custody on July 22, 2018, hung herself on Tuesday night.

Ms. Lyons was arrested on misdemeanor theft charge. However, based upon her prior convictions, she was charged with a felony. Now, as an aside, I understand why the legislature allows prosecutors to enhance some offenses based upon prior convictions. The theory being that if you've been in trouble once or twice for the same offense the punishment needs to be a bit more severe. But, this doesn't work out so well on petty thefts.

I've had a client before who was charged with shoplifting toiletries from a drug store. What he did warranted no more than a Class B charge. But, since he had multiple theft convictions in the past, that little misdemeanor theft ended up landing him in district court with a felony charge. And I don't care how tough on crime you are, charging someone with felony theft over less than $100 worth of toiletries doesn't serve anyone's interests. Prison should be reserved for those who have done heinous crimes, sending someone to prison for petty theft is a waste of resources.

On the date she was charged, bail was set at $1,500. Ms. Lyons didn't have that kind of money -- but because the felony courts still rely on a piece of paper to determine how to set bond, that number was written down on a piece of paper without regard to Ms. Lyons' ability to pay.

Sound familiar?

It should.

This is the system which 14 Republican misdemeanor judges in Harris County are fighting to keep in place. Thus far they have spent over $6 million of taxpayer's money to defend a cash bail system that is unconstitutional. If US District Judge Lee Rosenthal's order applied to the district courts, Ms. Lyons would have been eligible for release on a PR bond within 48 hours of her arrest. Instead she sat in jail for nearly a month before she took her life.

The ultimate irony, of course, is that she was granted a PR bond on Wednesday -- the day after she hung herself.

So, even though this case was filed in district court as a felony, I still would like to hear one of the Republican misdemeanor judges defend the old system. It's the old system that killed Ms. Lyons. The last time I checked, the penalty for theft in Texas wasn't death.

It should come as no surprise to anyone that the 14 Republican misdemeanor judges who are fighting bail reform are all white. If you know anything about Harris County you also know that the vast majority of the people affected by bail reform aren't white. Racism, you see, plays real well out in the suburbs where the Republicans pick up most of their votes. And for all the talk you will hear from those judges, they aren't fighting bail reform to protect the public -- they are fighting it because the old system gave the state coercive power over minority defendants who couldn't afford to post bond. They were forced to plead guilty in order to get out of jail.

And, if they happened to get in trouble later, those convictions came back to bite them in the ass as their new cases were enhanced.

Ms. Lyons died because Harris County is doing everything it can to preserve a coercive system to force the poor to plead guilty regardless of the facts of their cases so they can get on with their lives.

In case you've forgotten the names of the judges who are fighting to preserve an unconstitutional system, here they are again:

• Paula Goodhart, County Criminal Court at Law No. 1
• Bill Harmon, County Criminal Court at Law No. 2
• Natalie Fleming, County Criminal Court at Law No. 3
• John Clinton, County Criminal Court at Law No. 4
• Margaret Harris, County Criminal Court at Law No. 5
• Larry Standley, County Criminal Court at Law No. 6
• Pam Derbyshire, County Criminal Court at Law No. 7
• Jay Karahan, County Criminal Court at Law No. 8
• Analia Wilkerson, County Criminal Court at Law No. 9
• Dan Spjut, County Criminal Court at Law No. 10
• Diane Bull, County Criminal Court at Law No. 11
• Robin Brown, County Criminal Court at Law No. 12
• Don Smyth, County Criminal Court at Law No. 13
• Jean Spradling, County Criminal Court at Law No. 15

The next time you see any of these judges, ask them why they are defending an unconstitutional cash bail system. Ask them why they are opposed to bail being set in a timely matter based upon the defendant's ability to pay. Ask them why they are wasting your tax dollars fighting bail reform.

Ask them why they haven't joined Judge Darrell Jordan and Judge Mike Fields on the other side of the coin.

Debora Ann Lyons was no angel. But she was someone's daughter. She was someone's mother. She had a family and she had friends. And she damn well didn't deserve to die in the Harris County Jail.

Oh, I'm sorry, was that the record button I just pushed?

On Wednesday Grits for Breakfast gave us the inside scoop on a scandal in Austin over video-monitoring at the county jail. It seems that, despite promises to the contrary, that the contractor running the system records video conferences between inmates and their attorneys. As a result a federal lawsuit has been filed in Travis County seeking to stop the recording and to destroy all existing recordings.

The company, Securus Technologies, claims that the problem lies with deputies working in the jail not checking a box on a form. Oops.

Now that tells us that the default is to record the conversations. That isn't what the company promised attorneys. That isn't what the county promised attorneys.

Says Grits:

The Sheriff and DA say the recorded attorney client conversations were mistakes, the result of deputies failing to check the appropriate boxes on computerized forms. But those mechanisms are internal to the Sheriff and there's no mechanism for defense counsel to ascertain whether their conversations were recorded or shared with prosecutors unless the state later hands them over, by which time any strategic damage has been done. Said Austin Criminal Defense Lawyers Association president Bradley Hargis, “Basically, we just have to trust the sheriff and prosecutors not to listen to these calls but we have no way to verify they won’t.”

Grits goes on to say that the same issues have been raised in other states in which Securus installed and managed a video conferencing system for the jail. In each case the company, and the government, lied to attorneys about the technology. In each case the company, and the government, shifted the blame.

Securus Technologies is the same company hired by Harris County to run its video conferencing system. When the county first introduced the idea both county officials and the company swore up and down that none of the conversations would be recorded.

We now know that was a lie.

Back in 2012 I wrote an article following Sheriff Adrian Garcia's announcement that video conferencing was coming to the Harris County Jail. It now seems somewhat prophetic:

But do you really know for sure? The county maintains the equipment. The county maintains the software. You know, the same people who are trying to convict your client of whatever alleged misdeed he committed. Are you really having a secure conversation?

Jails maintain visitor logs. They record all outgoing inmate calls. They read all the mail - both incoming and outgoing - unless (fingers crossed) it says "attorney-client communication" (or words to that effect) on the envelope. What are they doing with the video feeds?

Does the software just facilitate the transfer of video and audio from one monitor to another? Does the software allow the state to "capture" audio or video? Does the software allow a third party to monitor the communication?

Does it really come as a surprise that we were lied to (again)? It shouldn't. Anyone who bought the promises of Securus and Harris County really needs to get their head examined because there are some synapses that aren't firing on all cylinders.

And it doesn't really matter if no one from the DA's office or law enforcement ever listens to, or views, the conferences. The mere fact that the state has a back door available to obtain privileged communications is troubling enough. And we should all be aware of the fact that in 2014, any back door that is available will be exploited by the government.

So the next time someone from the government stands up and says they have a great idea that will make life easier for defense attorneys, ask yourself why on earth the state would do anything at all to help us defend our clients.

Making the trains run on time

I heard from a colleague the other day that after a trial in which his client was acquitted the judge ordered the defendant taken back to jail in order to be processed out. My head began to hurt from spinning so fast.

His client couldn't afford to post bond and the judge wouldn't allow him a personal bond so he sat in the county jail for months waiting for trial. He could've easily pled guilty and taken time served (or less than what he ended up serving) but he insisted on his innocence.

I'm certain that he had some personal effects and items that were still sitting in his cell or in the property room but once that jury came back with a not guilty verdict, any authority the court may have had over him vanished into thin air. He should have been free to return to the jail when it was convenient for him to do so instead of having to go back into custody for another four or five hours while he was processed out.

It was bad enough that he had to sit in custody for months awaiting trial for the crime of not being able to scrape up enough money to pay a bondsman to get him out. That deprivation of his freedom can never be undone and the jury's verdict was a sharp rebuke to the police, prosecutors and the judge. But the illegal detention of an innocent man afterward is inexcusable.

I wish I knew the name of the judge so I could plaster it in bold type. I wish I knew the name of the judge so I could question his qualifications to sit on the bench. I wish I knew the name of the judge so the rest of the world would know who he was.

There are far too many judges sitting on the bench in Harris County who have the mistaken belief that they work in the district attorney's judicial division. They are only too willing to bend over backwards to impose coercive bond conditions on defendants who are legally innocent. They are only too willing to help out the members of "their team" in the courtroom.

This is not the first incident in which a judge has infringed upon the freedom of a defendant after receiving a not guilty verdict. A few years ago a visiting judge, Carolyn Marks Johnson, presided over a DWI trial. Now, before we go any further I must disclose that Ms. Johnson was my voir dire professor at South Texas - and she did a damn good job. However, after the jury acquitted the defendant, the judge decided that the defendant (innocent person sitting in the courtroom) needed to be drug tested. So she ordered it.

She had no jurisdiction over the (former) defendant. Once the jury returned their verdict the case was over as was the judge's power over the accused. But that's just a little detail. Why let things like constitutional protections get in the way when you can show someone you're the boss?

I'm sure that both the judge and Sheriff Adrian Garcia can come up with a myriad of excuses and reasons why a person who was just acquitted should have to go back into custody. There's all that paperwork and clothes and bedding to worry about. We certainly can't inconvenience the sheriff, can we? Besides, if he was charged with a crime we all know he was up to something - the fact that a jury found him not guilty doesn't make him innocent y'know.

A person's liberty shouldn't be infringed upon for the sole purpose of making life easier for the sheriff. The judge knows this and the judge also knows damn well that what he (or she) did was wrong and was a violation of the oath they took when they were elected (or appointed) to the bench.

No more room at the inn

Anyone who practices criminal law in Harris County knows that the Harris County Jail is packed to the gills. The two main causes that people know about are coercive bond policies and arrests for possession of trace amounts of cocaine and other drugs. But there is another cause.

According to the Houston Chronicle, Harris County has spent almost $50 million over the past two years to hold illegal immigrants at the request of federal authorities. Over that time span, Harris County housed more than 30,000 detainees on immigration holds. That is more than two-and-a-half times what Travis County (the second ranking county) held during the same time period.

The reason for Houston's hospitality is the county's participation in two federal programs aimed at the immigrant community - 287(g) and Secure Communities. Under both programs, law enforcement officers in Harris County run inmates' fingerprints through an immigration database. Those that have "questionable" histories are reported to los federarles.

For its efforts, Harris County is reimbursed about $2 million by the federal government.

Critics of the programs, such as University of Houston law professor Michael Olivas said the programs encourage law enforcement agencies to overcharge immigrants. Alan Bernstein, chief apologist spokesman for the Harris County Sheriff's Office, has a different take on the matter. According to Mr. Bernstein, the immigrants sitting in the county jail on immigration detainers would be sitting in jail anyway so the programs aren't costing taxpayers any more money than would already have been spent.

But, conveniently, Mr. Bernstein seems to have forgotten that once an immigration detainer has been placed on a detainee he is held without bond. That means one less space to house an inmate.

Harris County has no business doing the work of federal immigration officials. As I have pointed out before, being in this country without the permission of the government is not a crime (albeit, coming into the country without permission is). Hiring illegal immigrants and not paying taxes is, however, against the law.

Many undocumented immigrants work to support their families here in the Houston area and back in their country of origin. They pay rent and they pay taxes. The taxes they pay help to fund the public schools and the county-run hospitals. They are here for the same reason my ancestors, and your's, came over generations ago -- to make a better life for themselves and their families.

These programs tear up families and punish children for the (alleged) sins of their parents. Funny that the "family values" folks who support Ted Cruz and the Tea Party have no qualms about tearing families apart, ain't it?

State Senator Tommy Williams (R- The Woodlands) argues that the federal government isn't doing its job and that states and localities need to be reimbursed for the number of detainees who are being held in our county jails. Mr. Williams seems to forget that no one forced counties to adopt these federal programs. No one came down from Washington and told local officials they were now going to be in charge of immigration policy on the ground.

Nope. The counties that are complaining about the cost of housing immigrants on federal detainers are the ones that decided to sign up to be junior immigration officials. If they don't like looking at the red numbers that indicate the amount of money they're spending, there is an easy solution -- just tell los federales they're no longer interested in doing their job.

At a time when we should be looking for ways to reduce our jail populations, programs that contribute to overcrowded jails should be questioned.

The unintended consequences of a campaign pledge

Back when the late Mike Anderson was running for DA against incumbent Pat Lykos he attacked her over and over again for her decision not to try so-called trace cases. Under the Lykos administration, if someone were arrested for possessing less than .01 grams of cocaine, the case was either dismissed or the defendant was offered a plea to a paraphernalia case.

There were a multitude of reasons for the policy. First, if there was less than .01 grams of residue, there wasn't enough for both the state and the defense to test the sample. Second, during her 2008 campaign, Ms. Lykos said the criminal (in)justice system couldn't cure every problem and that some folks were better off seeking treatment for their addictions. Third, the Harris County Jail was full to the gills and the county was having to lease jail space in other counties in Texas as well as in Louisiana. 

The situation was untenable. Not that Chuck Rosenthal and his team of true believers gave a second thought to the consequences of their actions.

Well Ms. Lykos wasn't part of the good ol' boy network so she had to go. Mike Anderson took up the banner of Holmes worship and pledged to undo everything that Ms. Lykos had done in office. One of his promises was to start prosecuting trace cases as felonies once again. The police and true believers thought the rapture had come and Mr. Anderson was swept into office.

Once there Mr. Anderson began the process of changing office policy. No longer would the Harris County District Attorney's Office go soft on those wrongdoers who had less than .01 grams of drug residue on their person. Nope. If you give them a break, the next thing you know someone else is going to want some leniency on some other crime. Damn that slippery slope!

Under Mike Anderson's watch, trace cases were prosecuted as felonies but defendants were offered so-called 12.44a sentences. That designation refers to a provision in the penal code that allows the court to assess misdemeanor punishment on state jail felony convictions.

And so, predictably, the inmate population in the Harris County Jail began to creep higher toward full capacity. Someone was going to have to to do something quick. The voters had already nixed the idea of issuing bonds to build a fourth jail downtown. County commissioners weren't keen on the idea of spending money to house inmates in other counties.

Interim District Attorney Devon Anderson, the widow of Mike Anderson, acknowledges there is a problem -- something that Mr. Anderson never did. Of course she told the Criminal Justice Coordinating Council that she wasn't worried about filing felony charges against folks possessing less than .01 grams of cocaine. She, on the other hand, was worried about the number of defendants who were punished under Section 12.44a of the Penal Code. She said she was concerned about the number of first time offenders who were now walking around with felony drug convictions.

She said she preferred treatment to incarceration. But she never said she was opposed to prosecuting the cases as felonies. And there's the disconnect.

If you charge folks with a felony and they can't post bond, the attorneys appointed to plead them out are going to try either to get the charges reduced to misdemeanors or, at worst, to get the prosecutor to offer county time for a felony conviction under 12.44a. Folks who are out on bond for a trace case are unlikely to go to prison or jail in exchange for a plea (though there are exceptions). They'll take their felony deferred or probation and walk on out of the courthouse.

Such pleas are rarely offered to someone sitting in the holdover - unless they are willing to put up a fight on their case. Besides, the folks who can't post bond tend to have backgrounds and live in circumstances that make them bad risks for probation.

Ms. Anderson points to her background as a drug court judge (before getting booted out of office in 2008) - but y'all already know my opinion of drug courts. The criminal (in)justice system does a very poor job of reducing addiction. Those who suffer from addiction are going to fall off the tracks from time-to-time on their way to recovery. When they do suffer a relapse, treatment and counseling - not prosecution - is the answer. 

Our courts operate in an adversarial environment. The theory is that the truth (or something vaguely resembling it) will emerge though two parties telling competing stories. When one side rolls over and plays dead - or, in the parlance of the specialty courts, works as part of a team - the adversarial system doesn't work as planned and the defendant is always the one getting jobbed.

The answer to reducing the county's jail population isn't to prosecute trace cases, the answer is to make treatment available for those who want it - regardless of their ability to pay. Drug addiction is a public health issue - not a criminal issue - and until we begin to treat it as such, we will never make any headway in reducing the problem.

Just another death in the Harris County Jail

On January 16, 2011, Norman Hicks was assaulted by a detention officer in the Harris County Jail. Christopher Pool hit Mr. Hicks in the face and left him lying on the floor bleeding. Six days later Mr. Hicks was dead as a result of complications from a heart attack after suffering a broken nose and blunt force trauma.

Two days after he was beaten by Officer Pool, Mr. Hicks was charged with the felony offense of harassment  in a correctional facility. The criminal complaint alleged that he threw a shirt covered with feces and urine at detention officer Pool on January 7, 2011.

It can hardly be a coincidence that nine days later Mr. Hicks, who was 72 at the time, found himself on the wrong end of Officer Pool's fist.

But what is not clear from the Harris County District Clerk's website is why Mr. Hicks was in jail in the first place. While he had been jailed for violating a protective order in 2010, there are no records of what he was charged with that landed him in jail in January. In September of 2010 a motion to adjudicate guilt in a felony domestic violence case was dismissed. Mr. Hicks was scheduled to appear for a review of his probation conditions on the mental health docket on the 18th - it was noted in the records that he was absent that day.

Mr. Hicks had a history of mental illness and had been jailed before on charges involving domestic violence.

On September 14, 2011, a Harris County Grand Jury cleared Officer Pool of any wrongdoing in the death of Mr. Hicks. It would seem to me that one could make a very compelling case that Officer Pool plotted his revenge after the alleged incident on January 7 and, when he had the opportunity, punched Mr. Hicks, almost 50 years his senior, in the face and then left him on the floor covered in blood.

But no one in the District Attorney's Office wanted to see a detention officer charged with criminally negligent homicide for killing an inmate. That would be too unseemly. But, they couldn't dismiss the case because the fallout from the community would be too great. So, someone decided to give a half-assed presentation to the grand jury so that Pat Lykos could blame the grand jury for no-billing Officer Pool if there was any outrage at the dismissal.

Now Mr. Pool, another detention officer and a sheriff's deputy have appealed their firings.

While Mr. Pool was no-billed by a grand jury, the fact remains that he used more force than was necessary in response to Mr. Hicks' actions. His callous act of punching Mr. Hicks in the face and leaving him on the ground unresponsive should give everyone pause. Is this the kind of person we want roaming the streets of Harris County carrying a loaded weapon and a taser? What would the reaction from prosecutors have been if the incident didn't involve a detention officer and an inmate? Would Joe Blow have been no-billed had he done the same thing to a neighbor who threw a feces-covered shirt at him?

The other two individuals were fired for not doing anything to help Mr. Hicks and for not reporting what they had seen. They both knew what Mr. Pool did was wrong. They both saw that Mr. Hicks was lying on the flood bleeding. And they both stood around and did absolutely nothing.

It's hard to decide whose conduct was worse.

Getting credit where credit isn't due

A man who puts out a fire on his neighbor's property should be commended for his actions. Going out of one's way to help someone else is a noble deed. Even more so when that person places his life in danger in coming to the aid of another.

But when the man putting out the fire is the same man who set it - well, that's a different story altogether.

And so it goes down south of Houston in Galveston County.

Y'all may remember my post a couple of weeks ago about the Galveston County Jail recording conversations between inmates and their attorneys. Galveston County DA Jack Roady said he would get to the bottom of the cess pool and stop the recordings.

Well, Jack didn't exactly move at the speed of light to insure that the rights of inmates in the county jail were protected after State District Judge Susan Criss shone a little light on the problem.

"What's to prevent a sheriff's deputy from listening to a call and finding other evidence that was illegally derived and then it's given to the prosecutor?  - Gary Trichter, TCDLA President

To his credit, Mr. Roady did ask his prosecutors if any of them had ever listened in on a conversation between an inmate and his attorney. Only one raised his hand. Whether that means that no one else did, or that no one else is willing to admit it, I don't know. I certainly hope that it's the former.

Of course we'll never the know the full extent to which Galveston County violated the rights of those it held in custody. The mere fact that the conversations were recorded violates the right of the accused to have privileged communication with his or her attorney. If they're taping phone calls between inmates and attorneys, what other rights are being trampled on down along the coast?

And, what's this - the Harris County Jail is doing the same thing?

The Harris County Jail also has been routinely recording all conversations, including those between attorneys and clients, but is trying to change the practice, sheriff's spokesman Alan Bernstein said. Bernstein said the jail has been programming defense attorney phone numbers into the system over the past few months. 

These are the same folks who want to install a video conferencing system to cut down on the cost of in-person visits. These are the same folks who swear up and down that they won't be recording or listening in on privileged communications on the proposed system. But here they are making a mockery of the right to converse with an attorney in confidence.

There is no need to praise Galveston County Sheriff Freddie Poor or Harris County Sheriff Adrian Garcia (or whatever PR flack he puts out in front of the cameras) for ending the practice. No one involved in this mess should be lauded for doing the right thing and putting an end to an illegal practice.

What else aren't we being told? Hmm, might want to get on that right away and let us know.

Sheriff proposed video conferencing at the county jail

Video conferencing. Virtual jail visits. Meeting with your client without ever leaving the office. It's the wave of the future. Better climb aboard now or get left behind.

Harris County Sheriff Adrian Garcia is in full cost-cutting mode. His latest idea on lowering the cost of allowing prisoners to see their families and attorneys is video conferencing. Both Fort Bend and Galveston counties have video conferencing set-ups in their jails.

Instead of going to a room to speak with their loved one through plexi-glass or by phone, visitors can sit down at a television monitor and have their face-to-face time. No doubt it's more convenient - but everyone in the lobby can hear your conversation.

In Fort Bend County they have special booths for attorneys to meet with their clients. It gives a greater sense of confidentiality since no one (you assume) outside the booth can listen in.

But do you really know for sure? The county maintains the equipment. The county maintains the software. You know, the same people who are trying to convict your client of whatever alleged misdeed he committed. Are you really having a secure conversation?

Jails maintain visitor logs. They record all outgoing inmate calls. They read all the mail - both incoming and outgoing - unless (fingers crossed) it says "attorney-client communication" (or words to that effect) on the envelope. What are they doing with the video feeds?

Does the software just facilitate the transfer of video and audio from one monitor to another? Does the software allow the state to "capture" audio or video? Does the software allow a third party to monitor the communication?

And now Harris County wants to go the video route, too. I'm sure there are plenty of attorneys out there who hate going to the jail to meet with their clients. The buildings reek. Attorneys have to pass through metal detectors. It's freaking cold. You have to speak through holes punched in a plexi-glass screen.

I don't care for it. But it's what I signed up for when I decided to be a defense attorney. I won't "meet" with my client via the county's video conferencing system because I don't trust the county.

There are too many unanswered questions when it comes to video conferencing at jails. And the folks that have the answers to those questions are the ones holding your client behind bars.

Staggering dockets won't relieve jail overcrowding

Harris County Sheriff Adrian Garcia has taken it upon himself to try to resolve the county's long-term problem of jail overcrowding. It's too bad that it won't solve a thing.

There are 22 district (felony) criminal courts and 15 county courts-at-law (misdemeanor) in the Harris County Criminal (In)justice Center. There is a "holdover" cell in each courtroom that is supposed to hold no more than 19 inmates. As they would say across the pond, that guideline is honored more in the breach than in the observance.

There is a giant holding cell in the tunnel between the county jail and the courthouse that can hold roughly 250 inmates. Now do the math. Thirty-seven courts with 19 inmates is a bit more than 250. The overflow inmates are lined up in the tunnel where they wait.

What is one to do?

Sheriff Garcia decided to stagger the times he has inmates delivered to courtrooms.This means that an attorney may walk into a courtroom and have no idea when his client might be brought over.

The problem with Sheriff Garcia's plan to alleviate overcrowding is that it doesn't. His plan only treats the symptoms, not the disease.

The way to reduce jail overcrowding in Harris County is to find a way to get those people in jail awaiting trial out of jail. Every person brought into the county jail is innocent unless proven guilty. To force someone to stay behind bars due to the arbitrariness of the county's bail schedule is a crime.

The first blog post I wrote dealt with the need to increase the number of personal bonds issued. Every person without a prior criminal record arrested for a non-violent offense should be released with a personal bond. The only reason to keep them behind bars is to coerce a plea out of them. Just wave that offer of time served in front of their face and they will gladly plead guilty to something they didn't do just to get out of that hellhole.

The other way to reduce the jail population in Harris County is to issue citations and summonses for non-violent misdemeanor drug possession cases. Confiscate the goods, issue the person a ticket along with a summons ordering them to appear in court on a certain day at a certain time under threat of arrest.

We need to do away with this notion that anyone charged with domestic assault must be held without bail until such time as he can see a magistrate so a temporary protective order can be issued. If we can find judges who are more than willing to hang around the courthouse (or by a fax machine) at all hours of the night to sign fill-in-the-blank warrants authorizing forcible blood draws, certainly we can find a judge or two who can sign an emergency protective order on short notice. It's not like they're going to read it or set a hearing to determine whether it's necessary or not.

Sheriff Garcia's plan addresses none of these issues.

Stuffed to the gills

Forget about all that 6th Amendment nonsense about the right to counsel, Harris County has decided that's not nearly so important as cramming as many pre-trial detainees into the Harris County Jail in order to coerce guilty pleas.

From: Armand, Stephanie (DCA)
Sent: Friday, May 20, 2011 2:50 PM
To: DC Criminal Coordinators (DCA)
Cc: DeLeon, Sisto (HCSO)
Subject: Contractual Logistics Transfers
Sent: Friday, May 20, 2011 2:50 PMTo: DC Criminal Coordinators (DCA)Cc: DeLeon, Sisto (HCSO)Subject: Contractual Logistics Transfers 

Good afternoon,   Due to jail overcrowding, pre-trial inmates with a future date of 35 days or over are transferred to outlying jail facilities in Newton and LaSalle County.      The inmates will be returned to Harris County Jail, two weeks prior to the setting in the court.     Video Conferences are available at both of these facilities to allow the defense attorney to visit with his/her client.         Defense attorneys may contact one of the following individuals to arrange the video conference: Lt. J.D. Clay @ 713-755-8434 or 713-755-8425 Sgts. C.D. Minshew or F. Dlouhy at 713-755-8420 Or Deputy Station at 713-755-1188 or 713-755-1189   Please convey this contact information to the defense attorneys.    This information is also available on the Coordinator’s Resource Webpage under Contractual Logistics Transfer Procedures.       Thank you in advance for your assistance in this matter.
 
Stephanie Armand Business Process Manager Administrative Offices of the District Courts 713-755-5704

Keep in mind that we aren't talking about people who have been found guilty of anything. These are the folks that are supposedly innocent unless proven guilty. These are the folks who are unable to post bond. These are the folks that most people don't give a rat's ass about.

But they're being transported all over the state because Harris County refuses to do anything to address the underlying problem of jail overcrowding -- punitive bonds.

And then there's HB 1173 that would allow counties with populations over 3 million people to extend the time they can hold a suspect without a probable cause hearing from 24 to 36 hours. That's just what we need here in Houston -- there's not enough room at the inn as it is and now we're going to allow the state to hold a citizen in jail an additional 12 hours.

Of course, if it's a bad bill related to criminal justice you know it must be sponsored by Sen. Joan Huffman. Interestingly enough, the fiscal analysis indicates that there should be no additional cost to the state (understood) or to local government (?). Just how many pretrial detainees are being transferred out of the county to make room for the new blood over on Baker Street?

Here's an idea for our legislators in Austin -- how about mandating the issuance of citations for Class B possession of marijuana cases? Confiscate the contraband, issue a citation with a promise to appear and go on about your business. It's going to be cheaper than shipping detainees out of the county and it might just allow Harris County to take care of its business when it comes to holding probable cause hearings within 24 hours.

Harris County Sheriff looks to ankle monitors to reduce overcrowding

Harris County Sheriff Adrian Garcia is looking into allowing low-risk inmate at the county jail to serve their time at home with ankle monitors. A test program will be conducted using 10-20 inmates who work outside the jail under armed guard.

The program seems aimed at inmates who serve weekends in the jail and work during the week. According to the sheriff's office, these so-called "weekenders" eat up more space and man-hours than necessary.

" 'Weekenders,' as we refer to them, take up costly jail cells that we would otherwise want to save for accused offenders that are a true danger to the public." Adrian Garcia, Harris County Sheriff

The idea is to reduce the severe overcrowding at the Harris County Jail which would serve to reduce the amount the county pays to other counties to house their inmates. Implementing the plan would require the cooperation of County and State District Court judges, as well.

Sheriff Garcia, if you really want to make a dent in the inmate population in downtown Houston, look into issuing citations for minor Class B misdemeanor offenses such as possession of marijuana and personal bonds for non-violent, first-time arrestees.

Welfare, Harris County-style

So it looks like Harris County and the City of Houston have agreed on a plan to foot part of the costs for a stadium for the Houston Dynamo just across US59 from Minute Maid Park. The stadium will also be used for TSU football games (seriously, they still play football over there?)

Now it's all nice and good that the city and the county have each agreed to spend $10 million on infrastructure improvements in the area - but isn't this the same county that just cut funding on indigent defense? Somehow the county can find the money to build a sandbox derby track, a man-made lake in Katy and a soccer stadium, but they insist on reducing the amount of money paid to attorneys to represent indigent defendants.

Oh, the deal also calls for a financing district to be created in downtown that will fund the construction of a new inmate processing center -- even though the voters of Harris County have consistently voted against building a new jail.

Welfare? Well, hell, we're all for it in Harris County -- only we take the money from the poor and hand it over to the wealthy.

Harris County to raze "old" jail

Harris County commissioners today accepted a report from architecture firm PGAL that recommends tearing down the eyesore that is 1301 Franklin. The building was erected in 1980 to serve as the county jail but jail operations were moved to 1200 Baker in 2002 after the building failed a Texas Commission on Jail Standards review due to its faulty smoke removal system.

The firm estimated it would cost $37 million to renovate the building and $4.4 million just to bring it into compliance with the city fire code.

Due to the sheer size and construction type of the existing building and its inherent code deficiencies, the overall renovation costs add a significant premium to any of the proposed uses. The result is that the proposed renovated space is not only less efficient but it is also more costly than the construction of new comparable space. Since no suitable use can be found for the building that is economically viable, the building should be demolished and the site utilized for another function. -- PGAL report.

Oh, the efficiencies of local government. An ugly, massive concrete structure that couldn't even serve it only purpose. And these are the folks that want us to approve construction of a new jail.

All I ask is that the county hire a demolition firm that will implode the building so that we can at least get a good show.

Houston mayor singing different tune on immigration as Senate campaign heats up

Has Mayor Bill White flip-flopped on screening county inmates' immigration status? Shortly after HPD Officer Rick Salter was critically wounded after being shot by a non-citizen, Mayor White announced that the City of Houston would take part in an ICE program to identify inmates who were not in the United States legally.

Now, US Senate candidate Bill White says he doesn't think the city should participate in ICE's 287(g) program in which jailers are trained to determine inmates' immigration status. White now says he favors the city participating in ICE's Secure Communities program in which officers would be notified when someone being fingerprinted has an immigration record.

White claims he never wanted to participate in the 287(g) program that would cost the city between $1.5 million and $2 million a year.

The question is, did White change his tune because he doesn't want local law enforcement officers to become de facto immigration agents or because he needs the support of Latin voters in Texas to become the first Democratic senator from Texas since Lloyd Bentsen?

Harrowing tales of conditions in the Harris County Jail

Randall Patterson of The Houston Press penned an article in the current issue on the conditions inside the Harris County Jail. Mr. Patterson interviewed people as they were released from the facility and asked them to describe what it was like on the inside. The accounts of former inmates casts, shall we say, a different light on the facility than the assurances of Sheriff Adrian Garcia and County Attorney Vince Ryan.

Here's a taste of what Mr. Patterson discovered:

As for meals, "that whole food thing is hit or miss," said Shemika. "When they did feed you, it was a bologna sandwich — and I'm Muslim." Frank George Smith Jr. said he was there three and a half days and got just two sandwiches. No one was given anything to drink. There was only the fountain, which was suspended just above the toilet. The toilet was "like a fucking rain forest," Jarret said, "fungus and mold in there like this thick." People were lying on the floor around it; someone was always sitting on it. Jarret managed not to use the toilet for two and a half days — "man, you just take the stomach pains," he said — but he had to drink. "You practically got to put your face in shit to drink," he said. And Smith said, "you see that tan truck there? The water looked about like that."

What's even more appalling is that these folks were supposed to be presumed innocent when they were brought to the county jail. If this is how the Harris County Sheriff's Office treats people who haven't been convicted of anything - how much worse is the treatment of those who have been convicted?

Harris County to ship inmates to other Texas counties

The Houston Chronicle reported today that Harris County is on the verge of entering into an agreement with four other counties to house Harris County inmates who have been convicted and are waiting transfer to the Texas Department of Criminal Justice and inmates who were convicted of state jail felonies but sentenced to misdemeanor time.

The Harris County Jail complex was built to house 9,400 inmates - the current jail population is a staggering 11,251 (as of August 10, 2009).

Currently the county is paying Louisiana $38 per person/per day to house 1,046 inmates who are serving misdemeanor sentences on state jail convictions. That figure doesn not include transportation or medical care expenses.

The contracts with Bowie, Dickens, Jefferson and Newton Counties calls for a payment of between $42.25 and $45 per prisoner/per day, including transportation and medical care expenses. All in all Harris County plans on spending $16.5 million to house up to 2,100 inmates for up to six months as a way of alleviating overcrowding.

Harris County Commission Steve Radack said that the county should be able to find additional space in other counties at bargain prices as the crime rate drops. No word on whether he made the comment with a straight face. Let's see, crime rate falling, inmate population in Harris County rising... what's wrong with this picture?

Here's an idea, Steve, instead of shipping inmates all over East Texas, why not put pressure on the Harris County District Attorney's Office to issue personal bonds on Class B misdemeanor drug possession cases? Then the officers can issue a citation with a promise to appear. Let's issue personal bonds (cite and release) people charged with driving on a suspended license.

“I think we'll get it into compliance, whether by sending out inmates to other jurisdictions, or building a massive new jail. If we started tomorrow to design a new jail, by the time you got it designed and engineered, it'd take three years. So, frankly, you're going to have to do something in the interim anyway. If you look at cost of a new facility, the cost of labor to run it, many times it's going to be cheaper to go to someone else who needs the income because they have overbuilt the capacity of their jail, and they need the money. They need to pay their bonds, their debt, and they're out looking.” - Steve Radack, Harris County Commissioner, Precinct 3

That's it, Steve. Let's just follow the money.

Harris County trails only LA and NYC for largest daily jail population

A quarter of the Harris County budget goes to fund law enforcement, with over $750,000 spent every day on inmates at the Harris County Jail, according to a report in Forbes. Harris County has the third largest daily jail population - trailing only Los Angeles County and New York City.

Over a three-year stretch the number of inmates increased more than 21%.

"Many people are in jail because they are too poor to post bail. If you have a first-class pretrial program, a county is often in a better position because they can carefully analyze the individual, can figure out better what needs to be done." -- Donald Murray, senior legislative director, National Association of Counties

According to John Dyess, chief administrative officer for the Harris County Sheriff's Office, the county spends some $200 million a year for detention, money that could be spent in more productive ways.

"This really wasn't built for this. I don't know if we can build our way out of where we are today." - John Dyess

The Justice Policy Institute estimates that almost two-thirds of the nation's jail population are awaiting trial. And why are they waiting behind bars? Because almost four out of every five inmates made less than $2,000 a month prior to being arrested.

Between 1986 and 2005, the number of arrests for violent crimes increased 25% but the number of arrests for possession of illegal drugs increased 150%.

The numbers are appalling. The wholesale eviseration of the Eigth Amendement's prohibition against unreasonable bail is unconscionable. The only purpose of bail is to insure the accused's appearance in court. It is not meant to be a tool of punishment. We often forget that these men and women held in jail awaiting trial haven't been convicted of anything. They are innocent unless the state proves them guilty beyond all reasonable doubt.

Ex-judge named Harris County jail czarina

Interesting news that ex-State District Judge Caprice Cosper has been named to head a commission to figure out what to do about the overcrowded Harris County Jail. No one from the defense bar was named to the committee.

(Author's note: I made a mistake in the original post. I got Ms. Cosper and former judge Devon Anderson mixed up when I commented that Ms. Cosper was joined at the hip with Brock Thomas. I offer my sincere apologies for that mistake. In my defense, however, it can be hard keeping track of all the roadkill left after the Democrats' near sweep in the 2008 judicial contests in Harris County.)

Ms. Cosper had already returned to the public trough as executive assistant to County Commissioner Steve Radack. Old habits die hard.

As for the state of the Harris County Jail? As of this past Monday (July 13, 2009), of the 11,107 people housed in the jail, 6,064 were awaiting trial. That means that 55% of the people housed in the county jail are folks who either couldn't afford to post bond or who were being held without bond. That is absurd!

According to the Eighth Amendment, a court may not set an unreasonable bond. The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals has held that bail should not be punitive. Something's wrong when over half the jail population hasn't even been convicted of anything. So much for the presumption of innocence.

Feds concerned about healthcare and violence at the Harris County Jail

The Civil Rights Division of the Department of Justice didn't have much good to say about the Harris County Jail in their report issued on June 4, 2009. The county came under heavy criticism for the inadequate level of healthcare provided and for use of excessive force against detainees. The report noted that the Department had "serious concerns about the use of force at the jail."

The report pointed out the following deficiencies:

• The jail failed "to provide consistent and adequate care for detainees with serious chronic medical conditions."
• The jail provides inadequate housing for detainees with mental health issues as well as inadequate access to mental health care.
• The jail "lacks a minimally adequate system for deterring excessive use of force and an adequate plan for a large and sometimes violent detainee population
• The jail lacks "certain necessary structured maintenance, sanitation and fire safety programs."

Harris Co. jail report

Publish at Scribd or explore others: Law & Government Business & Law crime immigration

On the plus side, however, the Department was quite pleased that the county provided written policies and procedures.

Harris County Jail draws ire of the feds

So it's not enough that the Harris County Jail has failed four of the last six inspections conducted by the Texas State Commission on Jail Standards, now the Harris County Jail has drawn the ire of the U.S. Department of Justice.

According to the feds, poor health care standards and life-threatening conditions at the jail are violations of the inmates' constitutional rights.

“The (DOJ) found that the jail fails to provide detainees with adequate: (1) medical care; (2) mental health care; (3) protection from serious physical harm and (4) protection from life safety hazards.” -- Justice Department spokesman Alejandro Miyar

Now before we get our panties in a wad about "coddling criminals," let's not forget that every person brought before the court accused of a criminal act is innocent unless proven guilty beyond any reasonable doubt. As a result of Harris County's refusal to adopt personal bonds on minor criminal offenses and the county's reliance on its bond schedule, there are folks in the Harris County Jail who are, in the eyes of the law, wholly innocent yet having to endure potential life-threatening conditions while awaiting their day in court.

The solution is not, as Sheriff Adrian Garcia would lead us to believe, building new jail facilities. The solution is to release minor offenders on personal bonds with a promise to appear in court and to find a way to treat drug addicts without locking them up in the jail.

See also:

• Crowded house (The Defense Rests, 1/26/09)
• Harris County jail fails inspection (again) (The Defense Rests, 4/18/09)
• Harris County Sheriff wants a new jail (The Defense Rests, 5/7/09)