Stuart Dunnings III
Ingham County Prosecutor
2000 Annual Report
INDEX
LETTER TO THE CITIZENS OF INGHAM COUNTY 2
ADMINISTRATION 3
BUDGET 4
CRIMINAL UNITS
! District Court Unit 5
! Circuit Court Unit 8
! Vertical Prosecution Unit 10
APPELLATE UNIT 12
FAMILY COURT/JUVENILE UNIT 16
FAMILY SUPPORT UNIT 24
DIVERSION PROGRAM 26
VICTIM/WITNESS PROGRAM 28
DOMESTIC VIOLENCE PREVENTION PROGRAM 31
2000 DEPARTMENTAL STAFF 33
2000 ORGANIZATIONAL CHART 37
LETTER TO THE CITIZENS OF INGHAM COUNTY
Dear Sir/Madam:
It is a great honor to have earned your trust for a second term as Ingham County Prosecutor.
As our community moves forward, the challenge for this office is two-fold; first, we must assure sanctions for the violent, dangerous offenders who are a threat to the immediate public safety. In addition, I believe that our office needs to focus on long-term crime prevention, efforts which involve school and youth professionals, and encourage positive trends in our community.
During the year 2000, our office received funds to begin additional enforcement of child support orders. Assistant Prosecutor Heather Adamo was appointed to the task of prosecuting felony non-support orders. While I don=t believe that imprisoning deadbeat parents will result in increased compliance, we have seen that the incentive of avoiding prosecution has resulted in increased support for children in our community.
In addition, the office received additional funding from the Board of Commissioners for a Family Court Clerk, to work on the backlog of juvenile delinquency cases. We believe that early intervention is necessary to keep youthful offenders from Agraduating@ to the adult system, and these additional resources will help the Prosecutor=s Office achieve this goal.
Construction of the Consolidated Courts Facility on Kalamazoo Street began this past year, and by July 2001 we hope to have a functioning, modern court facility, with improved services to the public and modern courtroom technology.
Each of the divisions of the Ingham County Prosecutor=s Office has contributed to this report, with information on service activities and accompanying statistics. As Prosecutor, I am grateful to have a professional, competent staff to serve the public, and like all of the Prosecutor=s activities this report makes use of their talents. Our hope is that this information will be a valuable resource. If there are additional questions or comments, please feel free to call my office at (517) 483-6272.
Very truly yours,
Stuart J. Dunnings III
ADMINISTRATION
The Administrative Division is composed of the Prosecutor, Chief Assistant, Administrator, Administrative Assistant, Executive Secretary, and Juvenile Justice/Community Outreach Coordinator. The administrative division provides supervision of the legal, professional and support staff. Administrative functions include: planning, personnel supervision, fiscal management and the development and implementation of departmental policies and procedures.
To facilitate the training of the legal staff, the third annual day long retreat was held for all Assistant Prosecuting Attorneys in June 2000. At this retreat, speakers discussed new changes in the laws and provided the Assistant Prosecutors with an opportunity for feedback on the practical aspects of the changes.
An integral part of the administration of the Prosecutor=s Office is the Chief Assistant. Kathaleen Rae Price was Stuart Dunnings III chief assistant from day one of his first administration. Late 1999 Kathy was diagnosed with breast cancer. Early January, 2000, Kathy was declared cancer free.
Late February, 2001, Kathy was diagnosed with terminal liver and brain cancer. Sadly, Kathy=s struggle to stay alive long enough to see the spring flowers ended on March 17, 2001. The conference room for the Prosecutor=s Office has been named the Kathaleen Rae Price Conference Room in her memory.
2000 BUDGET
| BUDGET |
ACTUAL |
|
Personnel |
$4,039,403 |
$4,031,618 |
Supplies |
$89,140 |
$84,040 |
Professional Services |
$101,944 |
$97,168 |
Transportation |
$84,259 |
$84,008 |
Other |
$365,512 |
$363,104 |
Library |
$40,890 |
$40,589 |
Capital Outlay |
$53,044 |
$47,833 |
| TOTAL |
$4,774,192 |
$4,748,360 |
DISTRICT COURT UNIT
Eight assistant prosecuting attorneys are assigned to the District Court Unit of the Ingham County Prosecutor=s Office. The District Court Unit handles cases assigned to the five judges of the 54-A District Court in Lansing, two judges of the 54-B District Court in East Lansing, and two judges of the 55th District Court in Mason. The Unit handles traffic offenses, misdemeanor crimes and felony crimes at the preliminary examination level.
One attorney assigned to the Unit is designated as the Unit Chief. The Unit Chief handles a caseload, performs office administrative duties and supervises the other attorneys in the Unit.
In addition to their caseload, the District Court attorneys are assigned daily on a rotating basis to review criminal complaints. The attorney will meet with a police detective or with a citizen to review a criminal complaint and make a decision as to what criminal charge is appropriate according to the law and the facts of the case. Screening is one of the most important functions of a prosecutor=s office; it requires an up-to-date knowledge of the criminal law and the analytical ability to apply the law to the particular facts of each case. Successful prosecution will not come about without an accurate and thorough screening process.
DISTRICT COURT REPORT
COURT ACTION TOTALS
JANUARY 1, 1998 TO DECEMBER 31, 2000
| ACTION |
2000 |
1999 |
1998 |
Pretrial - Pled guilty charge |
2795 |
1485 |
1338 |
Pretrial - Pled guilty lesser |
3440 |
1448 |
1389 |
Pretrial - Bench warrant |
1305 |
487 |
N/A |
Pretrial - Dismissed |
1816 |
803 |
786 |
Pretrial - Set for Trial |
2303 |
1028 |
1639 |
Pretrial - Adjourned |
1219 |
684 |
686 |
TOTAL PRETRIALS |
12878 |
5935 |
5841 |
Non-Jury Trial - Found Guilty |
29 |
39 |
49 |
Non-Jury Trial - Found Not Guilty |
3 |
8 |
17 |
Non-Jury Trial - Bench warrant |
44 |
52 |
N/A |
Non-Jury Trial - Dismissed |
107 |
135 |
219 |
Non-Jury Trial resulting in plea to chg |
102 |
121 |
121 |
Non-Jury Trial resulting in plea to lesser charge |
57 |
58 |
78 |
Non-Jury Trials adjourned |
55 |
57 |
66 |
TOTAL NON-JURY TRIALS |
397 |
470 |
550 |
Preliminary Examination - Bound Over on charge |
213 |
171 |
188 |
Preliminary Examination - Bound Over on Lesser |
8 |
7 |
16 |
| Preliminary Examination - Bound Over on Higher |
15 |
7 |
16 |
|
ACTION |
2000 |
1999 |
1998 |
Preliminary Examination - Waived |
897 |
744 |
913 |
Preliminary Examination - Pled to Misdemeanor |
458 |
490 |
501 |
Preliminary Examination - Bench warrant |
60 |
75 |
N/A |
Preliminary Examination - Dismissed |
212 |
206 |
193 |
Preliminary Examination - Dismissed/Reissued |
30 |
33 |
24 |
Preliminary Examination - Adjourned |
749 |
616 |
616 |
TOTAL PRELIMINARY EXAMINATION |
2642 |
2349 |
2467 |
Formal Hearing - Found Responsible |
108 |
118 |
52 |
Formal Hearing - Found Not Responsible |
N/A |
8 |
N/A |
Formal Hearing - Adjourned |
16 |
23 |
15 |
Formal Hearing - Dismissed |
18 |
17 |
10 |
TOTAL FORMAL HEARING |
142 |
166 |
77 |
Jury Trial - Guilty |
12 |
17 |
13 |
Jury Trial - Not Guilty |
4 |
13 |
8 |
Jury Trial - Bench warrant |
158 |
151 |
N/A |
Jury Trial - Dismissed |
298 |
401 |
472 |
Jury Trial - Pled Guilty Charge |
339 |
289 |
380 |
Jury Trial - Pled Guilty Lesser |
273 |
258 |
258 |
Jury Trial - Adjourned |
225 |
186 |
295 |
JURY TRIAL TOTAL |
1309 |
1315 |
1426 |
Motion - No Testimony |
13 |
26 |
17 |
Motion - Testimony |
121 |
58 |
71 |
Motion - Miscellaneous |
48 |
21 |
N/A |
MOTION TOTAL |
182 |
105 |
88 |
CIRCUIT COURT UNIT
The Ingham County Prosecutor=s Office is responsible for the prosecution of all felony and high court misdemeanor cases in the 30th Judicial Circuit for Ingham County. These are the most serious crimes, carrying prison penalties from two years to non-parole life offenses. This responsibility is handled by the five-person Circuit Court Unit.
By necessity this Unit is comprised of experienced attorneys who have shown the aptitude and proficiency to try these more difficult cases. The average courtroom experience level is well over 10 years.
At the circuit court level, the attorneys deal with all aspects of the criminal case once it has been bound-over to the circuit court. Duties include: review of police and other agency reports, review of evidence and scientific analyses performed on the evidence, document preparation and reviews, meeting with and interviewing victims and witnesses in preparation for trial, and legal research and brief-writing with regard to issues raised by the defense or inherent in the case. The Circuit Court Unit attorneys also engage in pretrial negotiations and litigate pretrial motions. They attend and handle all arraignments, pretrial hearings, pretrial motions, plea hearings, trials, sentence hearings, and many post-trial motions. In addition to representing the state in these criminal matters, the attorneys represent the Department of Corrections in probation violation hearings and the Secretary of State in driver=s license appeals.
As a result of the (unfunded) restructuring of the Michigan court system by the legislature, the criminal case load for the Ingham County Circuit Judges handling felony cases has increased dramatically. Consequently, those Circuit Unit attorneys assigned to specific judges are now required to prepare for a trial docket of five straight weeks versus the three week dockets previously required. The two unit chiefs Afloat@ between courtrooms to try cases and attempt to provide a Abreak@ for the docket attorneys in the middle of their dockets.
1997 THROUGH 2000
CIRCUIT COURT TRIALS
| TRIALS |
JURY |
NON-JURY |
GUILTY |
NOT GUILTY |
HUNG |
|
1997 |
96 |
91 |
5 |
56 |
21 |
11 |
1998 |
71 |
69 |
10 |
49 |
14 |
7 |
1999 |
73 |
68 |
5 |
57 |
12 |
4 |
2000 |
62 |
57 |
3 |
39 |
13 |
5 |
VERTICAL PROSECUTION UNIT
MAJOR CRIME UNIT
The Major Crime Unit was instituted within the Prosecutor=s Office during 1998. It was intended that the Unit be a Aclearing house@ and coordinator for prosecutions involving drug crimes, gang-related criminal activity and other cases assigned for special handling. The effort has been successful.
The attorneys receiving assignments through this Unit are to handle their cases from start to finish; that is, by authorizing charges, conducting pre-trial conferences, preliminary examinations, motions and discovery, through to disposition by way of trial or plea negotiation. This constant personal attention given to the prosecution of these cases results in the title of Avertical@ prosecution. The method ensures consistency in the case, and fosters better communication between the police agencies, crime victims, and the assistant prosecutors. During the past year, more than 200 criminal cases have been handled by the three attorneys assigned to the Unit.
Since the Unit is Amulti-tasked@, criminal intelligence gathered by police specialty units is now increasingly directed toward other applications. This year, for example, investigations conducted by the Tri-County Metro Narcotics Unit were coordinated with a homicide task force, resulting in two suspects being charged in an unsolved 1999 East Lansing homicide. In another, intelligence gathered by the Tri-County Metro Unit was instrumental in the prosecution of a Home Invasion ring pursued by the Mason Police Department and the Ingham County Sheriff. And, intelligence gathered by officers assigned to the Agang Unit@ of the Lansing Police Department was important in a homicide investigation conducted by the Lansing Township Police Department. As of this writing, four individuals have been charged in that April, 2000 double homicide. The Aclearing house@ potential of the Major Crime Unit is becoming realized.
In addition, the Unit has managed the civil forfeitures generated by the Tri-County Metro Narcotics Unit, the Lansing Police Department Special Operations Section, and other police agencies having jurisdiction within Ingham County. During the year 2000, more than 150 such claims involving cash and personal property valued at approximately $700,000.00 were processed. The largest single claim, $188,000.00, was successfully forfeited.
The Unit aggressively utilized the AProsecutor=s Investigative Subpoena@ during the year. Police agencies were assisted in six unsolved homicides through the use of subpoena power. Charges have been brought in two of these matters, with murder charges now pending against six individuals. Fraud, Controlled Substance Act violations, and prostitution charges have also been investigated.
The Major Crime Unit is a valuable resource both within the Prosecutor=s Office and to the police agencies within Ingham County.
APPELLATE UNIT
The Appeals Unit is staffed by two attorneys and a clerical/legal assistant. The Unit=s duties include:
1. Respond to motions and briefs filed on behalf of convicts.
2. File appeals in certain cases in which a trial judge makes a ruling adverse to the prosecution.
3. Conduct legal research projects at the request of the Chief Assistant or the Prosecuting Attorney.
4. Provide legal advice to trial court APAs and law enforcement agencies.
5. Review new state and federal appellate decisions and distribute training bulletins to the APAs and law enforcement agencies.
In addition, the Unit Chief handles the following tasks:
6. Review Parole Board decisions to release inmates from prison.
7. Coordinate the law student internship and externship programs. This includes recruiting, interviewing, selecting, training, supervising, and evaluating the students.
8. Respond to Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests.
9. Review requests for, process, and issue investigative subpoenas for local police departments.
10. Assist the Prosecuting Attorney with policy development.
11. Handle forfeiture cases for police departments other than the Tri-County Metro Narcotics Squad.
During 2000, 111 new files were opened. This constitutes an increase of 32% over 1999, and 13% over 1998. The Unit filed 77 briefs, applications, and/or answers. This amounts to an increase in output of 140% over 1999 and 67% over 1998. The number of hearings remained relatively stable. These statistics suggest that the Appeals Unit faced an increased workload during 2000. We expect this trend to continue.
During 2000, appellate courts decided 53 cases in which the Appeals Unit filed a brief or answer. We only lost three (3) of them. This yielded a 94% success rate. In two of these cases, this office appealed decisions to dismiss or to suppress evidence. We failed to convince the appellate courts that the lower court clearly erred. The remaining loss involved a reversal of a probate court mental commitment order in a case in which the evidence was admittedly weak.
This Unit=s most notable accomplishment during 2000 was the reduction of the case backlog. At the beginning of the year, briefs or answers were overdue in 15 cases. These cases have been processed. The Unit wishes to thank APA Michael Cheltenham, APA David Hartwig, and two law students (Colleen Joliqueor and Michelle Williams) for writing briefs in several of the overdue cases. On December 31, seven (7) briefs or answers were due. We anticipate that they will be processed in a timely manner.
The Unit Chief reviews all incoming motions, applications, and briefs to determine whether a response is necessary, and what level of priority the case should receive. Criteria include the severity of the crime, the public interest in the case, and the merits of the legal arguments raised. This process enables the Unit to concentrate on the most important cases.
During 2000, the Unit Chief responded to 161 FOIA requests and issued four (4) investigative subpoenas. He also handled at least six (6) forfeiture cases and six (6) criminal fireworks cases. In addition, the Unit Chief filed a civil action against a high-volume fireworks merchant under the Michigan Consumer Protection Act. This case resulted in a consent decree which severely restricts the merchant=s future fireworks-related activities.
The Unit Chief also supervised nine (9) law students during 2000--two (2) work-study interns, two (2) PAAM interns, and five (5) externs (who Awork@ to earn graduation credits). They handled misdemeanor prosecution, involuntary mental health commitments, legal research projects, and/or appeal briefs. The Unit Chief has assembled an orientation packet to acquaint law students with office policies and procedures.
During April and November, APA Linda Maloney distributed two Case Law Updates which summarized recent important appellate court decisions. In addition, the Unit Chief circulated a training bulletin regarding a federal court ruling regarding the constitutionality of Michigan=s anti-stalking statute.
The Appeals Unit has become involved in an on-going in-service training program with the Lansing Police Department (LPD). During March and April, APA Maloney provided a legal update for LPD officers. In addition, the Unit has agreed to provide a monthly legal update which will be videotaped and shown to LPD personnel. The first taping occurred In December. This program will enable LPD staff to submit legal/procedural questions for the Unit Chief or another APA to answer. It also gives the Prosecutor=s staff an opportunity to offer practical advice to police officers, and thereby improve their effectiveness.
On July 1, APA Eric Matteo transferred into the Appeals Unit to replace Linda Maloney, who was re-assigned to the District Court Unit. Ms. Maloney served in the Appeals Unit for three (3) years.
The Unit Chief will no longer handle forfeiture cases because the Major Crimes Unit has assumed control over them. The Appeals Unit=s legal assistant will coordinate all forfeiture files.
During December, the Unit Chief was assigned to lead a committee that will develop a mission statement for the Prosecuting Attorney=s office. Representatives from several of the other units will serve on this committee.
Appelllate Unit Goals for 2001
1. Develop a procedure to review parole board decisions.
2. Develop a mission statement for the Prosecuting Attorney=s office.
3. Develop a revised policy manual which will include guidelines and standards for, inter alia, issuing criminal charges and plea bargaining.
APPELLATE DIVISION
ANNUAL TOTALS COMPARISON SHEET
YEARS 2000, 1999, and 1998
| 2000 |
1999 |
1998 |
|
Total New Files Opened |
111 |
84 |
98 |
Total Hearings & Arguments |
38 |
45 |
34 |
Total Briefs Filed |
37 |
23 |
32 |
Total Motions & Answers |
40 |
9 |
14 |
Total Appeals Decided |
103 |
114 |
119 |
Percent of Appeals Won |
94% |
99% |
96% |
FAMILY DIVISION - 2000
Juvenile/Neglect Unit
The Family Division of the 30th Circuit Court began its second full year of operation in January, 2000. The court remains located in three different temporary locations - the Washington Annex (Judges Baird and Manderfield}, the Grady Porter Building (Judges Garcia and Economy) and much of the family court staff including all juvenile court workers and referees, and Town Center which houses the court clerk=s staff, jury clerk and the Personal Protection Order office. Everyone is looking forward to the opening of the new county courts building and the consolidation of some of these offices in July, 2001. Throughout the year this division and court staff worked in the spirit of good, open communication and cooperation to handle issues such as scheduling, transition to new computer systems, files gone astray and a myriad other issues. The Family Division Judges asked the Ingham County Prosecutor=s Family Court Unit Chief to attend their monthly meetings in order to facilitate problem-solving.
Assistant prosecuting attorneys in the division handle:
(1) juvenile delinquency matters, including authorizing criminal charges and cases of youthful offenders subject to possible adult sentencing;
(2) child protective proceedings (neglect and abuse), including termination of parental rights cases and all appeals of such cases;
(3) Personal Protection Order contempt hearings;
(4) all paternity, UIFSA and family support act cases; and
(5) mental health involuntary commitment proceedings both here at St. Lawrence Hospital and on a rotating schedule with other counties at the Kalamazoo Regional Psychiatric Facility, as well as appeals of commitment cases.
This year saw a major increase in active neglect and abuse cases in Ingham County, an anticipated effect of major legislation effective April, 1998, as well as increased Family Independence Agency staff. The legislation (known as the ABinsfield legislation@ after the former Lt. Governor who headed a state-wide task force on protection of children) mandates the filing of a petition where one child in a family has been seriously injured or sexually assaulted; where the parent(s) have previously been involved in a neglect case and their rights have been terminated or they have released their rights to other children, and mandates that the court consider terminating the rights of such parents at a the initial hearing. Other statutory changes have facilitated better protection of children in the county. These include the ability of the family court to order a non-parent partner/abuser out of the home or to order the non-parent member of the household to attend counseling, parenting classes, substance abuse assessment or any other program that would help the family.
Assistant Prosecutors assigned to the Family Court Unit consider neglect/abuse cases their top priority and they work hard with caseworkers, GALS, CASA volunteers and medical/psychological experts to facilitate outcomes that are in the best interests of children of Ingham County. In addition to trials, dispositions and review hearings, Assistant Prosecutors also appear at inquiries, at show cause/ contempt hearings, mediation, and other types of proceedings ancillary to the central neglect/ abuse case.
This office remains committed to better coordination between law enforcement, Family Independence Agency staff and prosecution staff in investigating child abuse and neglect, including child sexual abuse. This includes working closely to coordinate within the Prosecutor=s office where there may be a pending criminal case, a neglect/abuse case and a paternity/support case all involving the same family members and the same criminal incidents.
The Ingham County Child Death Review Team began operations this past year. The Team looks at the death of every child in the county, regardless of whether the death was by violent means, with an eye at better cooperation, an analysis of Awhat went wrong@ and looks at prevention. A number of Prosecutor=s staff are involved with the Team.
Youth violence continues to be a chief concern of the Prosecutor=s Family Court Unit. A significant number of youthful offenders were charged and/or sentenced as adults this past year. The Prosecutor=s Office has made a concerted effort to hold young offenders accountable to the community. The City of Lansing Teen Court began its first sessions in September, 2000. Family division staff participated in the all aspects of the program. Parents, teachers and court staff involved report seeing an real impact made by the court, not just on the teens charged (ages 13 - 18) but on the teens serving as jurors. The court, prosecution staff and the Lansing Police Department also began a grant-funded AJuvenile Intervention Program@ in calendar 2000. The program is aimed at juvenile offenders ages 10 to 13 who have committed fairly serious crimes. It follows a comprehensive study of youthful offenders and recidivism over the past 10 years in the city of Lansing. The goal is to focus special attention on this group, which the study showed were most vulnerable to continue to commit increasingly serious crimes It is hoped that the early invention can prevent the criminal activity.
The lack of effective, affordable mental health evaluation and treatment for young people remains a major concern and frustration for Family Court prosecutors and the community at large. Respite care facilities are limited and the county youth detention center does not have the space to house young people for whom there are Asafety@ not criminal concerns yet keep them close to family, school and the community.
The court, local school districts, charter and private schools and academies and this office worked under the newly-formulated county ASchool Safety Response Guide@ for the first time this past year. Implementation is not complete but much-improved communication and cooperation between law enforcement, schools and the prosecutor=s office was an important outcome of the operations under the guide. In addition, this office has continued its emphasis on impacting truancy at all levels by prosecuting parents, teens and pursuing educational neglect cases where appropriate. Although the program to focus on elementary school absences began and continues in the Lansing School District in 1999, the court now has cases from many other county school districts. School attendance officers have learned that they have the full cooperation and attention of this office in dealing with truancy.
In July, 2000, legislation took effect which expanded the authority of prosecuting attorneys to conduct contempt hearings for civil Personal Protection Orders violations. {Note: While the legal acronym APPO@ is the correct usage, these are also called Arestraining orders@ at times.} In addition to conducting hearings where a custodial arrest has been made, prosecution staff now conduct hearings begun by a petition and order to show cause, if so requested by the petitioner. Not surprisingly, the division=s case load of PPO hearings increased substantially in the second half of the year.
Attorneys in the family division continue to serve on numerous committees in the community, for example, the Child Death Review Team, the M Team (elder abuse), the Youth Violence Coalition, the Friend of the Court Citizens Advisory Committee, the Capital Area Family Violence Coordinating Council, the county Human Resources Committee just to name a few. Assistant Prosecutors were also involved in training and cross-training efforts throughout the year with CASA volunteers, C.A.R.E., the Listening Ear, local law enforcement, Family Independence Agency staff , M.C.O.L.E.S and the Prosecuting Attorneys Association of Michigan (PAAM).
FAMILY DIVISION -- COURT REPORT
2000
| NEGLECT | Action |
Total |
| Pretrial - Adjourned |
67 |
|
| Pretrial - Dismissed |
36 |
|
| Pretrial - Pleas |
242 |
|
| Pretrial - Set for Trial |
214 |
|
| TOTAL PRETRIALS |
559 |
|
| Motion - No Testimony |
90 |
|
| Motion - Testimony |
176 |
|
| TOTAL MOTIONS |
266 |
|
| Dispositions - Contested |
92 |
|
| Dispositions - Not Contested |
273 |
|
| TOTAL DISPOSITIONS |
365 |
|
| Preliminary Hearings |
7 |
|
| TOTAL PRELIMINARY HEARINGS |
7 |
|
| Jury Trial - Adjourned |
23 |
|
| Jury Trial - Dismissed |
3 |
|
| Jury Trial - Jurisdiction |
1 |
|
| Jury Trial - Pleas |
33 |
|
| TOTAL JURY TRIALS |
60 |
|
| Non-Jury - Adjourned |
37 |
|
| Non-Jury - Dismissed |
6 |
|
| Non-Jury - Jurisdiction |
53 |
|
| Non-Jury - No Jurisdiction |
2 |
|
| Non-Jury - Pleas |
38 |
|
| TOTAL NON-JURY |
136 |
|
| Post-Disposition - Contested |
31 |
|
| Post-Disposition - Not Contested |
299 |
|
| TOTAL POST-DISPOSITION |
330 |
|
| PERMANENT WARDSHIP HEARING |
||
| PW - Adjourned |
20 |
|
| PW - Petition Dismissed |
2 |
|
| PW - Rights Relinquished |
50 |
|
| PW - Rights Terminated |
139 |
|
| PW - Rights Not Terminated |
5 |
|
| TOTAL PERMANENT WARDSHIP |
216 |
| DELINQUENCY |
ACTION |
TOTAL |
| Pretrial - Adjourned |
82 |
|
| Pretrial - Dismissed |
34 |
|
| Pretrial - Pleas |
304 |
|
| Pretrial - Trial |
83 |
|
| PRETRIAL TOTAL |
503 |
|
| Motion - No Testimony |
13 |
|
| Motion - Testimony |
33 |
|
| MOTION TOTAL |
46 |
|
| Disposition - Contested |
86 |
|
| Disposition - Not Contested |
180 |
|
| DISPOSITION TOTAL |
266 |
|
| Jury Trial - Adjourned |
29 |
|
| Jury Trial - Dismissal |
7 |
|
| Jury Trial - Guilty |
3 |
|
| Jury Trial - Not Guilty |
0 |
|
| Jury Trial - Pleas |
33 |
|
| JURY TRIAL TOTAL |
72 |
|
| Non-Jury - Adjourned |
14 |
|
| Non-Jury - Dismissal |
6 |
|
| Non-Jury - Guilty |
12 |
|
| Non-Jury - Not Guilty |
1 |
|
| Non-Jury - Pleas |
24 |
|
| NON-JURY TOTAL |
57 |
|
| Adult Designation - Denied |
5 |
|
| AD - Granted |
33 |
|
| AD - Preliminary Exam/Bound Over |
11 |
|
| AD - Preliminary Exam/Dismissed |
1 |
|
| AD - Sentencing |
15 |
|
| ADULT DESIGNATION TOTAL |
65 |
|
| Post-Disposition - Contested |
24 |
|
| PD - Not Contested |
290 |
|
| POST DISPOSITION TOTAL |
314 |
|
| Waiver Hearing - Ph.I Bnd. |
4 |
|
| WH - Ph.II Deny |
0 |
|
| WH - Ph. II Grant |
2 |
|
| WAIVER HEARING TOTAL |
6 |
|
| Probation Violation - Adjourned |
2 |
|
| Probation Violation - Dismissal |
1 |
|
| PV - Pleas |
65 |
|
| PV - Proven |
27 |
|
| PROBATION VIOLATION TOTAL |
95 |
|
| MENTAL HEARINGS | ACTION |
TOTAL |
| Commitment Hearing - Adjourned |
8 |
|
| CH - Deferred |
188 |
|
| CH - Dismissal |
16 |
|
| CH - No Pretrial |
1 |
|
| CH - Pretrial |
352 |
|
| COMMITMENT HEARING TOTAL |
565 |
|
| Motion Hearing/Other |
3 |
|
| MOTION TOTAL |
3 |
|
| GRAND TOTAL - NEGLECT, DELINQUENCY, MENTALS |
3,931 |
FAMILY SUPPORT UNIT
The Family Support Unit is currently staffed by 3 attorneys, 3 support investigators, 4 support clerks and 2 investigators. This unit is directed by statute to handle all litigation on any referrals from the Michigan Family Independence agency dealing with cases which fall under the Paternity Act; the Family Support Act and the Uniform Interstate Family Support Act (UIFSA). The purpose in filing these cases is to establish paternity and or child support in each case and to direct reimbursement back to the State of Michigan when appropriate so that the financial burden of supporting the child does not continue to fall directly onto the taxpayers.
Ordinarily the Family Support Unit is responsible only for the establishment of Orders of Filiation or Child Support and the Friend of the Court has the statutory duty to enforce those orders. This year, in an effort to assist the Friend of the Court in their efforts to collect child support, specifically in cases involving serious arrearage, the Family Support Unit was directed by the Prosecutor to begin issuing criminal warrants for the arrest of payers for their egregious failure to pay their child support.
Beginning in August of 2000, 19 warrants were issued pursuant to a long standing felony statute that carries a maximum incarceration in prison of 3 years. 15 of those defendants have been arrested and are in various stages of the criminal justice system and 2 defendants have been sentenced as of Dec. 18, 2000.
Total collections attributed directly to the criminal non-support warrant program:
Payments by suspects after arrest: $64,555.30
Payments by suspects after aware of pending warrant: $18,588.65
Total collections as of December 18, 2000 $83,143.95
In addition to these collections, Friend of the Court has reported a ripple effect wherein their overall collections appear to be somewhat higher since this program got underway. However, there is no way to empirically measure how much of this is attributable to publicity about the felony warrant program.
Implementing the criminal non-support felony warrant program has taken from 20% to 40% of the weekly working hours normally spent by the attorneys and investigators pursuing the establishment of child support and paternity orders. Much of their time was spent training, interfacing with other departments, developing documentation and fielding unique legal issues that always arise when utilizing a new remedy.
FAMILY SUPPORT UNIT
SUPPORT ORDERS ESTABLISHED 2000
| PATERNITY |
SUPPORT |
UIFSA INITIATING |
UIFSA RESPONDING |
TOTALS |
|
1998 |
430 |
919 |
21 |
30 |
1499 |
1999 |
404 |
983 |
36 |
49 |
1472 |
2000 |
384 |
964 |
45 |
38 |
1431 |
PROSECUTOR=S DIVERSION PROGRAM
What is the Prosecutor=s Diversion Program? It is a deferred prosecution program which has operated within the Prosecuting Attorney=s office since 1975. Diversion is a voluntary program which channels first-time non-violent offenders in programs such as community service, drug and alcohol treatment, high school completion or individual counseling.
The Diversion program accepts only first time property and marijuana possession offenders who must past strict requirement and be willing to participate in six month to one years probation term instead of going to court. This program does not accept offenders having committed violent, sex or weapon related crimes.
Offenders who participate in the program are required to meet regularly with a caseworker, remain out of trouble with the criminal justice system, secure employment, pay restitution to the victim and participate in any drug, alcohol, mental health, or vocational programs required. They must also volunteer from 40-80 hours of their time to assist a non-profit agency within the community.
Who benefits from the Diversion Program?
1. The victims benefit from Diversion because offenders in the program are required to make prompt and complete restitution to the victims for damages done.
2. The offenders benefit from Diversion because they do not have criminal convictions. They receive needed services for alcohol, drug, mental, emotional or family problems. They are referred to educational and vocational programs.
3. The Courts and the Prosecutor benefit from Diversion because they are saved the expense and time that would have been spent on the cases. This savings permits the Prosecutor and courts to devote their time and efforts in prosecuting the dangerous and habitual criminals.
4. The community benefits from Diversion tax dollars are saved by diverting offenders rather than prosecuting them. Diversion participants compensate the community by participating in supervised work on behalf of non-profit agencies.
The Diversion Program is an effective alternative to traditional prosecution for some first time offenders. It provides the early intervention and intensive supervision which may prevent individuals from becoming career criminals.
The Diversion Program collected in excess of $80,000 in Service and Application fees. Victims of crimes were reimbursed $26,500 through the collection of restitution.
This year 525 of the 599 cases referred to Diversion were misdemeanors. This resulted in a reduced amount of service fees collected by this program.
DIVERSION PROGRAM
STATISTICS
| 1997 |
1998 |
1999 |
2000 |
|
CASES REFERRED |
785 |
652 |
599 |
857 |
CASES ACCEPTED |
416 |
350 |
328 |
387 |
SATISFACTORY COMPLETIONS |
274 |
270 |
279 |
299 |
REVOCATIONS |
50 |
36 |
47 |
36 |
TOTAL TERMINATIONS |
324 |
306 |
326 |
335 |
% OF SATISFACTORY COMPLETIONS |
85 |
88 |
85 |
89 |
SERVICE FEE |
$73,655 |
$87,174 |
$79,233 |
$73,525 |
APPLICATION FEE |
$5,940 |
$7,415 |
$6,084 |
$6,750 |
VICTIM/WITNESS UNIT
The Ingham County Prosecutor=s Office began it=s Victim/Witness Unit in 1978. In 1985, the Michigan Crime Victims Rights Act was enacted for all felony cases. Since then the program has grown to include a coordinator and five full time positions devoted to assisting the victims of Ingham County. In 1988, the Act expanded to include misdemeanors. In 1994, the Unit began handling victim rights for juvenile crimes and, in 1998, it expanded once again to encompass a domestic violence unit, providing volunteers to attend court proceedings with victims as well as attempting to reduce family violence in the Ingham County area by providing direct services to the victims.
The Unit focuses not only on assisting victim and witnesses throughout the criminal justice system, but also on improving procedures and providing services at key points throughout the duration of a case to ensure witness cooperation and assistance to the prosecutors.
Several services are provided by the Victim/Witness Unit. One such service is a tape recording made daily for circuit, family and district courts, which allows subpoenaed witnesses to telephone the office to determine if their service is needed for court the following day. Another service is placing witnesses such as doctors, nurses, and others who request it, on one-half hour call the day they are to testify to allow them to decrease the time spent waiting to testify. This Aon call@ service also reduces costs to the county as expert witness fees are cut down by shortening the billable time for the professionals.
The Unit also provides several courtesy services for victim=s and witnesses. Upon request, we will make contact with an employer to verify testimony in court and encourage an employer to grant time off work to testify. Also, whenever possible, a victim/witness assistant will meet with witnesses either at the office or court to escort them into the courtroom. Also, a private room will be provided to allow the victim privacy as well as safety. Finally, when needed, our program offers emergency child care and transportation based upon need and personnel resources available through our office.
The Unit provides transportation and lodging accommodations for out-of-state witnesses. Special arrangements are made for food, lodging and transportation to and from court while staying in Lansing or Mason.
The Unit also may assist eligible victims in seeking compensation for injuries, counseling or loss of wages suffered as a result of criminal acts through the Crime Victim Services Commission and/or the Crime Victim Foundation.
Members of the Unit work closely with Senator VanRegenmorter=s office and the Prosecuting Attorney Association of Michigan (PAAM) in order to keep abreast of new legislature as it pertains to victim rights by attending bi-monthly Forum meetings with advocates from around the State.
The goal of the Victim/Witness Unit is to provide rights to all victims who may request them and to ensure that the victim=s experience within the judicial system is as comfortable as possible.
For the year 2000, the Victim Rights Unit initiated 3,672 new cases. This is an increase of 3.3% from 1999. On November 29, 1999, Ingham County implemented a new software program, Courtview 2000. This presented a challenge to the Victim Witness Unit in that there were a number of programs unavailable to run the reports needed to generate letters, reports and victim rights implementation. Despite this fact, the Unit was able to initiate new victim rights cases while maintaining a working caseload of over 200 cases per advocate. Also, in September we lost two employees, due to retirement, and worked short handed for approximately 4 months. The goal for 2001 is to provide more information to the community while continuing contact with the victims of Ingham County.
INGHAM COUNTY VICTIM/WITNESS PROGRAM
1997 - 2000 STATISTICS
New cases in which a victim was eligible to exercise their rights as a crime victim.
| 1997 |
1998 |
1999 |
2000 |
|
JANUARY - MARCH |
||||
| Felony |
671 |
492 |
464 |
459 |
Misdemeanor |
440 |
406 |
335 |
348 |
Juvenile |
265 |
211 |
118 |
117 |
| APRIL - JUNE |
||||
| Felony |
602 |
406 |
518 |
395 |
Misdemeanor |
396 |
474 |
347 |
186 |
Juvenile |
258 |
175 |
259 |
341 |
| JULY - SEPTEMBER |
||||
| Felony |
576 |
429 |
349 |
412 |
Misdemeanor |
455 |
459 |
353 |
253 |
Juvenile |
230 |
323 |
182 |
362 |
| OCTOBER - DECEMBER |
||||
| Felony |
463 |
462 |
236 |
325 |
Misdemeanor |
364 |
310 |
271 |
309 |
Juvenile |
165 |
249 |
123 |
165 |
TOTALS: |
4885 |
4396 |
3555 |
3672 |
INGHAM COUNTY PROSECUTOR'S OFFICE
DOMESTIC VIOLENCE PREVENTION PROGRAM
The mission of the Domestic Violence Prevention Program is to reduce family violence in the Ingham County area by providing direct services to the victims of crime. Our goals include: enhancing the awareness of domestic violence and crime victim's rights under the law, and improving the safety of survivors of domestic violence.
The Domestic Violence Prevention Program will assist the victims of crime throughout the criminal justice process by providing the victim with criminal justice advocacy, emotional support, information, referrals to community resources and safety planning.
We participate in the safety planning with victims, including providing information on Personal Protection Order's, (PPO's) local domestic violence shelters and the Capitol Area Response Effort (C.A.R.E.) program. We send subpoenas to victims of misdemeanor domestics for pretrial in 54A District Court, assess victim needs for housing, financial, emotional, legal and medical needs and provide information and referrals for services.
We strive to educate victims on the dynamics of domestic violence and the criminal justice system as well as educate them on their rights, including ways that they can participate in prosecution and federal victim compensation. We assist in providing information and filing for compensation and obtaining necessary documentation for those applications.
We assist victims in filing for show cause hearings, appealing decisions and pursuing other remedial avenues available to them under the law. We will connect them to other criminal justice professionals for further assistance including, court probation departments, law enforcement supervisors, prosecuting attorneys and other victim witness staff members.
The Program served 859 victims of domestic assault and battery, 15 victims of assault and battery and 2 adult sexual assault victims in 2000. We provided 496 of them with court support or in-person assessment and referral. Our program handled 653 telephone calls for assistance and 226 calls for crisis situations. The program recruited, trained and utilized 12 volunteers and interns who put in 1,759 hours of service.
The mission of the Domestic Violence Prevention Program is to reduce family violence in the Ingham County area by providing direct services to the victims of crime. Our goals include: enhancing the awareness of domestic violence and crime victim's rights under the law, and improving the safety of survivors of domestic violence.
The Domestic Violence Prevention Program will assist the victims of crime throughout the criminal justice process by providing the victim with criminal justice advocacy, emotional support, information, referrals to community resources, and safety planning.
2000 DEPARTMENTAL STAFF
As of January 1, 2001
| Susan Hoffman Adams |
Assistant Prosecuting Attorney |
Family Support Unit |
Carey Amato |
Victim Witness Assistant |
Victim Witness Program |
Ronald Auble |
Investigator |
Family Support Unit |
Sally Auer |
Warrant Clerk |
Screening |
Trixie Brown |