HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 11041997 - D1 1
D.1
THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
Adopted this Order on November 4, 1997, by the following vote:
AYES: Supervisors Rogers, Uilkema, Gerber, Canciamilla and DeSaulnier
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
SUBJECT: Office of the Public Defender - Departmental Performance Report
Charles James, County Public Defender, presented the Board with both oral and
written reports on departmental performance.
Mr. James answered questions from Board members and thanked them for the
opportunity to make his presentation.
The Board members discussed the report and then took the following action:
1. ACCEPTED the report from Charles James, County Public Defender, on
departmental performance.
I hereby certify that the foregoing is a true and
correct copy of an action taken and entered on
the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the
date shown.
ATTESTED: November 4 1997
Phil Batchelor, Clerk of the Board of
Supervisors and County Administrator
sti Wampler, Deputy Clerk
cc: County Administrator
County Public Defender
1997
PERFORMANCE REVIEW
OTTICT OF 7- ff PUB11C DEFENDER
COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA
MARTINEZ, CALIFORNIA
Table of Contents
Page
I. Overview...................................................................................................................... 1
A. Department Responsibilities.................................................................................... 1
B. Organizational Structure......................................................................................... 1
1. Geographical ....................................................................................................... 2
2. Case Type ........................................................................................................... 2
II. Resources....................................:.............................................................................. 3
A. Financial Resources ............................................................................................... 3
B. Personnel.Resources.............................................................................................. 4
C. Affirmative Action.................................................................................................... 5
D. Sick Leave.............................................................................................................. 5
E. Staff Development................................................................................................... 6
F. Automation.............................................................................................................. 6
III. Customer Services...................................................................................................... 7
A. Service Delivery System......................................................................................... 7
B. Client Profile ........................................................................................................... 7
IV. Annual Performance.................................................................................................. 9
PerformanceIndicators ............................................................................................... 9
V. Challenges and New Directions ............................................................................... 11
Challenges ....................................................................................:........................... 11
1. Office Space ...................................................................................................... 11
2. Continued Growth in the Protective Services Caseload and the Juvenile
CriminalCaseload.......................................................................................... 12
3. Death Penalty Caseload Growth ....................................................................... 12
4. Modern Computer and Communications Equipment ......................................... 13
Exhibit A Department Organization Chart
Exhibit B Attorney Staffing Chart (by branch and division)
i
PERFORMANCE REVIEW
OFFICE OF THE PUBLIC DEFENDER
August 7, 1997
I. Overview
A. Department Responsibilities
The Office of Public Defender provides legal representation for persons
accused of crimes in Municipal and Superior courts in Contra Costa County
when the accused is financially unable to retain private counsel. In fiscal
year 1995-96, the Department provided representation in over 21 ,000
criminal cases.
Competent legal representation for each indigent client in a case is a
mandated service for local government. The mandate is rooted (1) in the
United States Constitution's Sixth Amendment and (2) in Government Code
section 27706. Thus, any accused person who faces imprisonment for a
misdemeanor or felony charge, and who cannot afford to hire counsel, or
when state statutes or court order otherwise directs appointment, a person
is entitled to the services the Department provides.
B. Organizational Structure
The Department divides its legal work between a "main" office, the Alternate
Defender.Office (ADO) and the Special Defense Project Office (SDP). Both
the main office and the ADO provide the same types of services to clients
with similarly configured staffs. The SDP is a single-attorney position
operating in a home office to handle selected expensive, third-level conflict
cases. Administrative matters having to do with personnel, training,
recruitment and provision of fixed assets and supplies are handled within
the Department's main office. However, for ethical reasons mandated by
constitutional and statutory rules regarding the provision of conflict free
representation by attorneys, client representation by the ADO and SDP is
screened off by an ethical wall which prohibits and prevents professional
interaction between the staff of the main office and the staff of the ADO and
SDP. Approximately 17% of the Department's budget supports the services
provided by the ADO and SDP.
1
The attached organization and staffing charts (Exhibits A & B) set out the
Department's pertinent groupings of staff by geographical assignment and
by the type of cases handled.
1. Geographical
Two branches of the Department are located in Richmond and Concord
which house 40% and 25% of the Department's staff respectively. The
Department's Martinez branch is physically situated in the downtown justice
complex near the courthouses and the Main Detention Facility. The
Martinez branch is currently divided in three separate locations, and the
Richmond branch is divided in two separate locations. The ADO branch
office is located in a separate building at 1333 Pine Street in Martinez.
2. Case Type
A major division in the organization of the Department's work is based on
the severity of the charges against a client. Misdemeanor cases are
punishable by up to one year in the county jail. Our Department, in the past
fiscal year, provided representation in over 9,200 misdemeanor cases.
Felony cases are punishable by a possible commitment to state prison. In
the past fiscal year, the Department provided representation in over 5,100
felony cases. Finally, our juvenile division provided representation in more
than 4,500 cases involving both criminal allegations and allegations of child
abuse. This category continues to grow at a rate greater than other case
categories. Our Department also handles a growing number of civil and
criminal contempt cases upon appointment by the court.
II. Resources
A. Financial Resources
Virtually all the funding for the Department's services comes from the
General Fund. AB 90 (Juvenile Subvention Funding) accounted for
approximately $39,000 in the Department's budget.
2
The CAO approved Current Department Budget
proposed budget for the
Department for the fiscal
year 1997-98 is ADO+SDP $1,802,816
$10,915,766. Within the 19%
Department, the budget
allocated for the ADO
and SDP is $1,855,680
. (17% of the total) while Main Office $7,866,963
the main office is 81%
allocated $9,060,086
(83%).
The Department's budget is comprised primarily of salary costs for staff.
$8,748,061 (91%) of the budget is for salaries and benefits for the
Department's personnel; while only $921 ,718 (9 %) is budgeted for services
and supplies. Last year's budget allocated no funds for capital accounts, for
the second year in succession. Purchases of desks, chairs, etc., were
made from salary savings. We also continue to depend upon used, surplus
furniture more than any other county department, according to county staff.
All the classifications of staff within the office, with the exception of
management personnel,
are represented by Dept. Salaries vs. Other Expenses
various labor
organizations and
bargaining units.
Compensation levels for Services&
employees are set Supplies
through collective 90% Salaries
bargaining with the $921,718 90%
various bargaining units. $8,748,061
3
Of the moneys budgeted for
personnel, $6,823,488 Department Salaries
(78%), then is allocated to
pay the salaries and benefits Paralegals 8 $349,922
for approximately 72 Law Clks
attorneys who comprise the 4%
Department's professional $787,326 Clerical Attorneys
9% y
staff. The remaining 22% of 78%
the budget for salaries is Technical $68,233,486
divided among the clerical $787,325
support staff (9%),
paralegals and law clerks
(4%), and technical
employees (9%) such as investigators.
Total costs for indigent defense incurred by the county were controlled in the
fiscal year (1995-96), as in recent years, largely by the.creation of the
Alternate Defender Office within our Department.
B. Personnel Resources
In attached Exhibits A & B is a description of authorized staff by division and
function. As a result of the Three Strikes law, the Department has
experienced the need for increase in staffing over the last three years.
Some of this growth was economically achieved through the use of
temporary employees. Equity and productivity will require that long term
temporary employees be converted to permanent positions on a regular
basis.
C. Affirmative Action
The staff of the Department is diverse. The Department continues to strive
to increase staff diversity despite budgetary challenges which work counter
to greater work force diversification. The number of newly hired staff or
newly promoted staff has been so low that our efforts to increase
diversification have not been as productive as we would like.
Ethnically, staff of African-American descent constitutes 11% of the work
force (compared with parity of 7.6% in the county's population). The
percentages for Hispanics (3%) and Asians (5%) are regrettably below the
4
county's parity figures of 7.7% and 5.4% respectively. During the past year,
the diversity of the Department was enhanced slightly through the hiring of
one temporary attorney and one permanent investigator of Hispanic
heritage.
In terms of a gender breakdown, 61% of the Departmental staff is female,
including attorney staff that is 51% female and investigative staff that is 50%
female.
D. Sick Leave
The Department's employees utilize sick leave at an above average level in.
comparison with other county employees. For our department, the most
recent quarterly report shows an average of 71% use of accruals. This is a
17% improvement from last.year's usage rate, however. The level of sick
leave usage is due to the large proportion of female staff (approximately
61%) of childbearing age. Many employees have very low usage rate, but
the average is affected, in part, by the large percentage of women in our
department who by necessity have family sick leave and pregnancy
imperatives. We frankly do not have a solution to our usage rate, but
assure you we closely monitor the problem, including use of discipline and
counseling for serious abuses.
E. Staff Development
The attorney benefit package provides $500 per year for each attorney to
pursue staff development and training. Attorneys are encouraged to attend
C.E.B., C.P.D.A. and other professional association training seminars on
weekends. State Bar rules require mandatory Legal training, with which all
lawyers comply. In house, we have specialized training on matters of local
concern. All felony attorneys attend weekly staffing sessions on upcoming
cases where peer review assists each professional in judgments regarding
their cases. In my view, we have a well-trained, highly competent staff.
Several attorneys in our department, including myself are State Bar Certified
Specialists in Criminal Law. Last year, six members of our staff taught
evening classes part time in one or more local law schools and at U.C.
Berkeley.
5
D-1
F. Automation
The Department's work has undergone significant reorientation through the
increased use of computers. Five years ago, the calendaring functions
(periodic lists of scheduled court appearances, broken out by attorney and
court location) for the Department were tracked by physically logging in each
client's file and typing daily calendars. Now, by using the Law and Justice
Information System accessed through the county's mainframe computers,
this function is automated. Clerical personnel all have terminals at their
desks to input and retrieve the information needed for scheduling attorney
appearances.
Word processing — an integral part of any law office setting where
extensive typewritten briefs in cases must be prepared — is extensively
utilized in our clerical support system for attorneys. All briefs are prepared
for filing with the court, and a large proportion are drafted initially, on
computers shared by attorneys and legal research clerks in our branch
libraries. Databases containing copies of briefs indexed by subject are also
maintained so that work need not be replicated for each and every motion
filed.
The Department has been expanding its use of CD-ROM technology for
cheaper and more easily accessed legal research, traditionally available
only in hundreds of volumes of books housed in the Department's libraries
where the attorneys do legal research. Additionally, the Department
subscribes to commercial on-line database services, like Westlaw and
Lexis, but strives to use the cheaper CD-ROM technology where it can.
All attorney staff utilize the voice mail system provided and maintained
through the county's telecommunications department. Both management
and clerical employees utilize payroll and personnel tracking systems
provided to departments through the mainframe maintained by Data
Processing.. Finally, the Department has many staff members trained in
using both the Law and Justice System and the county's e-mail system, but
full utilization of these communication and information systems is severely
constrained by a lack of sufficient resources to acquire needed hardware.
This subject will be addressed below with regard to challenges facing the
Department.
6
III. Customer Services
A. Service.Delivery System '
All services provided by the Public Defender are mandated by Federal
Constitutional standards and state statutes. Our mandate is to provide
competent legal representation on appointed cases. Our delivery system is
vertical. in design, to maximize competency, client satisfaction and case
control. Each attorney is individually responsible for these assigned cases
from plea through sentencing. Certain appearances, particularly in
misdemeanor cases, are handled in grouped assignment calendars to
promote efficiency. Consistent with case law, the department assigns
attorneys to clients based on skill, experience and availability. Clients may
not change attorneys without court order, except in unusual circumstances.
B. Client Profile
The Office of Public Defender's clientele consists of persons who are
charged with crimes in the courts of Contra Costa County and who cannot
afford to retain private counsel. Every client is screened for financial
eligibility. Occasionally, a court will order our Department to provide
representation for a client when, for some reason, the person has been
initially denied eligibility by our Department.
Client financial eligibility must be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. No
rigid guidelines can be established as each case has its own degree of
complexity based on the nature of the charges, the possible defenses and a
range of other factors that are quite case specific. Those complexities
complicate the difficult task of determining what financial resources may be
currently available to the client, given the infinitely variable financial profile
for each client (family size, indebtedness, sources of income, etc.).
At the conclusion of the case, each client of the Department is subject to
referral by the court to the Office of Revenue Collection, a division of the
Administrator's Office. Each client's ability to pay over a period of time is
then assessed by the Office of Revenue Collection in conjunction with the
court's order that the county be reimbursed by the client for the costs of
Departmental services. Department staff play no role in making these
assessments or in the collection of reimbursement. Last year, state law was
changed to allow for a co-payment of $25 per case for those who are able to
afford this up-front payment. Los Angeles and Santa Barbara Counties
7
P.1
began this procedure. Our county, as well as most others statewide, are
studying the cost effectiveness of this method as opposed to the current
revenue collection procedure. Depending on the effectiveness of this
approach, we may take steps to institute this payment program in the
coming fiscal year.
IV. Annual Performance
Performance Indicators
Based on statistics collected by the County Administrator's Office for their
June 30, 1996 report on Community-Based Punishment Options, jail
populations have doubled
between Jul 1984 and Jul Felony Arrests-PD Felony Cases-
July y No. of Public Defenders
1995. Similarly, felony 12,000
arrests in Contra Costa
11,000
County have doubled for
the similar period from
6,000 per year to over 10,000
11 ,000 in 1995. As you Fe►onyArrests
would expect, felony
caseloads in Public 8,000
Defender offices have
nearly doubled during this
same period. In 1984, we 6,000
opened 2,212 felony cases, 6,000
and, in 1996, over 5,117. 5,117
By all measures, felony
caseloads have increased Po Felony Cases
nearly 100% in the last 4,000
twelve years. Attorney
staffing in our department 2,212
to handle this increased 2,000
caseload has not kept pace
with caseload growth. In Number ofMorneys 57
1984, our department had 40.5
40.5 attorneys. Today, the 0
comparable main branch of 1984-85 Fiscal Years Compared 1995-96
our department has 57
lawyers. We have had a 96.6% increase in felony cases and a 40.7%
increase in attorney staff. These figures dramatically evidence the
8
increased productivity of our staff over the last decade. I am proud of the
staff productivity that the above chart demonstrates.
.In criminal defense, caseload statistics cannot be the sole performance
criteria for our department. Our mandate provides that no.only must we be
cost effective, but that we also must provide a high quality, vigorous defense
for our clients. While measures of quality of defense are difficult to quantify,
and there are subjective elements to any criteria, the few indicators that are
available support the outstanding reputation of our department.
The gross indicators of quality, as exemplified by monetary judgments
against our department for negligent or deficient representation, are non-
existent. Reversals of convictions for incompetence of counsel are also
extremely rare, with only one or two cases in the last 5 years. This is a
reversal rate for harmful attorney error of less than one in every 100,000
cases.
More positive indicators might be the high acquittal rate our attorneys
achieve in cases that are tried.when compared to comparable jurisdictions.
The 1997 Judicial Council Report of Court Statistics released by the
Administrative Office of the Courts establishes.the relatively high success
rate our staff enjoys in cases tried. Since our department handles nearly
90% of the felony cases, the totals for our courts reflect, by and large, the
efforts of our staff.
In 1995-96, Contra Costa County tried 202 cases to jury. Of these, 31 cases
were acquitted or dismissed. Not only are the absolute number of cases
tried as.a percentage of total caseload very high, (Alameda, with over twice
the staff and double the caseload tried only 100 cases to jury), but also the
number of successful defense verdicts is very impressive for our County as
is demonstrated by the following chart, prepared from Judicial Council
numbers.
9
Number of Jury Trials vs. Acquittals/Dismissals
1995-1996
250
202
200 181
147
150 --
100
100 — 87
IML
50 31 L25
6 10 15
0
Alameda Contra San Fresno Sacramento
Costa Francisco
®Jury Trials Counties
■Acquittals/[Dismissals
In comparison to other offices of a similar size, our department tries a large
percentage of cases. In addition, our department is successful in a relatively
high percentage of cases in achieving dismissals or not guilty verdicts.
While jury composition and DA charging policies may contribute to our trial
success, it is my subjective judgment that our impressive numbers are a
result of the contributions of our support staff and the experience and quality
of our lawyers.
V. Challenges and New Directions
Challenges
1. Office Space
Again this year and each year since my first annual report in 1988, we
continue to strive to obtain adequate office space for our staff. I am happy
to report that our department.is about to commence the lease purchase for
the State Theater Project, which should for the first time since the creation
of our department in 1966, afford staff adequate centralized office space.
The completion of construction and the move itself, which maintaining our
operations at the high level of efficiency will pose new challenges in the
coming year.
10
2. Continued Growth in the Protective Services Caseload
and the Juvenile Criminal Caseload
Recent years have seen a growing concern for child abuse and children's
protective services issues. The County Counsel and the Public Defender
are the county law departments that are primarily responsible for this quasi-
civil law caseload that, by state statute, provides a right to counsel. As a
result of these justifiable societal concerns, the juvenile court caseload has
received more attention. Procedural safeguards and the rights of litigants
have been expanded. What had been a relatively small division within our
department has grown in the last few years with mandated services
increasing each year. Many of these reforms, for example, the requirement
that staff visit each client in their home placement before certain court
appearances, while helpful, have put additional burdens on staff. To
maintain cost effectiveness, our department employs paralegal and non-
professional assistance in this area when appropriate.
The overall growth of juvenile
crime and the treatment of certain Child Abuse Reports In Contra Costa Co.
Juvenile offenses in the adult court r
have also added to the demands 25,000
19,320 20,382 r
of this mandate. For example, 20,000 17,230 18,200
r
many offenses are now tried by13,467 14,490
jury trial that were formerly 15'000
handled by court hearing, which 10,000
naturally provides great procedural 5,000
protection and lawyer time
commitment. In addition to the °
1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996
existing Juvenile Court judge, with ><
the assistance of two full-time Years
referee positions, a new judge will
be added this year.
3. Death Penalty Caseload Growth
Each year the legislature and the voters have increased the number of
offenses that are eligible for the death penalty. Our county district attorney
files virtually all cases eligible for the death penalty as a death penalty case.
The main PD office and the ADO currently have 14 open death penalty
cases, including six new ones this year. This is an all-time high for our
11
department. The available statistics and the anecdotal evidence suggest
that we have one of the highest.caseloads in this area in ratio of staff to total
cases as any department in the state. Most of these cases have two
attorneys assigned which is suggested/mandated by case law. Because of
the obvious differences between a death sentence and a jail term, the legal
and emotional demands on the lawyers and support staff is very high. The
careful review and scrutiny of appellate courts in this specialized caseload
adds to the burdens on trial counsel and support staff. Should current
trends continue, our department will be severely burdened in this area.
While our department is highly skilled in these cases, with some staff
members having tried over five cases to verdict, we face our most serious
challenge in providing services for this increasing caseload. Some of these
cases can be negotiated to an appropriate disposition short of death, for
example,. life without the possibility of parole or life terms, but the legal
issues and heightened public concern make this very difficult.
4. Modern Computer and Communications Equipment
Intraoffice communication (for better client services and more efficient
utilization of staff) is retarded by budgetary constraints on the purchase of
computer and communications hardware. Less than 30% of our attorney
staff can be linked for computer communication because of constraints on
the purchase of sufficient computer terminals and controllers to link those
terminals to the mainframe. We need to increase the number of personal
computers available to staff. Only 51% of our attorney staff have computers
available for use in their offices. Furthermore, networking personal
computers within and between our branch offices would increase the
efficiency of the Department in utilizing software and in producing legal
motions, documents, and other data available to all staff.
Charles James
Public Defender
CHJ:sdc
CAWINWORMPERSTERFORM.97 sdc
12
' "D•
Z
�
QcWi� UW
U0
O WujO (
� oa � Q
ti
co
V
- cc
o
Lw
Z {. 0 N 0 to I 0 1 I w I 4
W LL d a 3 r.�.m ITd I io I 1 0
(�) 2 Z U in
0 —
r- o ; 2 0 a� c o 1� TSI o�� I !I w
W W QQ c °' NOOQ °' � � � to n. I Q ;� I U
� , O = W rn � C) m 1� al I U > I I
.I LU U m Q 0 I 0 I c I J I
-----------------
0 0 .2!
y Z N
U o y
d, n C 0 tl n
U U
= X N U)
U W U I j QZ 1 m 1
O 0 I v)
N N
d N o I c'),Q a>
c
N U v Q coo m LL
C9 d i U
� � o
O
Z N T O N I Y I
_ _ W
7 c U � � 0)o �
U C. I N 1
U O '� a� y � � mN I USI
a c Q a 0 O O U 1 Co
Q 0 c d 1 J
G 0 U ----
0 > ` 1 0 1
tL T U al 1> dI
N coi a� c ao Iv Trl v Lc)
oco I 1
rnU � Od 0) h ani I UU I I
Q 0 I 0 I I J I
O --
W
LLW
O
V
y 1 0 I 1 1
CL
= a aci CID Iv TNI N E v I U rl a
D a y I0) C I U v I 1 r
I I I J I o
LL 0 fn 0 I 0 1 I I
W " coL o n
N c V m
Q UN LL ...
O V lz m
EXHIBIT A
7D. i
T o 0 0 �
CD m m m TAIL 'm
W r r F. U .� ..' U
V W ami .rn cn
(L U N .c c rnu' w
� 0 c Cc r- caci O O s — O c m g
Z � a`� x c E �c � �'_oo o os Qm a m � 'o o aa)i o
W Z = a� o c m -- EU cn = c`o 0 0 a CL
WD co � cooa) coa� � � � 0E as Q :° Q) a' 3o' z
� ZJZ mmUUUC9222 � � � (A � VZ >_ v'.� E ,�
J � Q J E a W Q m = 0
Q G > ZD cl i vi 4 E �a/� C9 c r m 5 o
TNco4L6COr- co0comTTTTT C1w ViW U ULw �
N
3
rn
rn o
T
ZUJ
N
LL. Z 0 ^ A a) C7 ZT O L C O 'p
Q Z C U a C C cc EY a) Cp �L .+ C C CU S
U WW2 ? mmm00ELL 2220iccc 0
coco
} J H F—
w 0QQ N M OTNCM4Cn (O
Z T 4 1 d) (O
0
Q 0)
Cp�'
w � i U
Z � �° U?
UQ vo� CD
WWQf� cc
LL 'nCD
o yCL> 'NcoC O O CYa� _mCD cu� ococ° mp a) 00cucocuCEo
mmmU0 0LL �a � � Y2 2CCn
rn
Q N
2 O � NM � tCi (O � U 0) m00cT0
W Z U r N CM 4 C t 7 (O I� 0 0 0 . T T T T r r T Z O 0 C F)
T T r r
Q. 0 Q 0
J0 0 0
LU = r► �.
r U O 1- co r
e n * h rn rn rn
li vpvT
ui N c0 rn JO. 0
Uz Y \
o m o0'i co m
LL r—LL Lv E o n cu
L
` C cc cc Ci,L c c h Cil, N c co 2 Z
_ �. >
:7
co EJJJ
r- NM4tn (O 06 G
L L L
LQ 0000 000 < CL) o a' a)
O) C) WQ> OOW \ \ \ 1 C � OL'6
o aa)i
L p
V E c � V Y
cc L Ocucc
cu co -x o
O W ti N C �+ CD N 3 D) O C Ol __ N
UU mm (90m -j a- CD c�mUu. � � aco ^ O O E oY c
F— Y cn E ccC p
O r N M 4 ui CD 0
m J 2 Cl) m m
2 � NC7466I� w Q� TTTTTT
EXHIBIT B
a,
1997
PERFORMANCE REVIEW
OTTICE OF THE PUB11C DEFENDER
COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA
MARTINEZ, CALIFORNIA
.y
Table of Contents
Page
I. Overview....................................................................................................................... 1
A. Department Responsibilities................................................................................... 1
B. Organizational Structure......................................................................................... 1
1. Geographical ............................................ ........................................................ 2
2. Case Type ........................................................................................................... 2
II. Resources........................................:.........:...::...::...................................................... 3
A. Financial Resources ............................................................................................... 3
B. Personnel Resources.............................................................................................. 4
C. Affirmative Action.................................................................................................... 5
D. Sick Leave.............................................................................................................. 5
E. Staff Development................................................................................................... 6
F. Automation.............................................................................................................. 6
III. Customer Services...................................................................................................... 7
A. Service Delivery System ......................................................................................... 7
B. Client Profile ........................................................................................................... 7
IV. Annual Performance.................................................................................................. 9
PerformanceIndicators ............................................................................................... 9
V. Challenges and New Directions ............................................................................... 11
Challenges ................................................................................................................ 11
1. Office Space ...................................................................................................... 11
2. Continued Growth in the Protective Services Caseload and the Juvenile
CriminalCaseload.......................................................................................... 12
3. Death Penalty Caseload Growth ....................................................................... 12
4. Modern Computer and Communications Equipment ......................................... 13
Exhibit A Department Organization Chart
Exhibit B Attorney Staffing Chart (by branch and division)
i
' t
PERFORMANCE REVIEW
OFFICE OF THE PUBLIC DEFENDER
August 7, 1997
I. Overview
A. Department Responsibilities
The Office of Public Defender provides legal representation for persons
accused of crimes in Municipal and Superior courts in Contra Costa County
when the accused is financially unable to retain private counsel. In fiscal
year 1995-96, the Department provided representation in over 21 ,000
criminal cases.
Competent legal representation for each indigent client in a case is a
mandated service for local government. The mandate is rooted (1) in the
United States Constitution's Sixth Amendment and (2) in Government Code
section 27706. Thus, any accused person who faces imprisonment for a
misdemeanor or felony charge, and who cannot afford to hire counsel, or
when state statutes or court order otherwise directs appointment, a person
is entitled to the services the Department provides.
B. Organizational Structure
The Department divides its legal work between a "main" office, the Alternate
Defender.Office (ADO) and the Special Defense Project Office (SDP).--Both
the main office and the ADO provide the same types of services to clients
with similarly configured staffs. The SDP is a single-attorney position
operating in a home office to handle selected expensive, third-level conflict
cases. Administrative matters having to do with personnel, training,
recruitment and provision of fixed assets and supplies are handled within
the Department's main office. However, for ethical reasons mandated by
constitutional and statutory rules regarding the provision of conflict free
representation by attorneys, client representation by the ADO and SDP is
screened off by an ethical wall which prohibits and prevents professional
interaction between the staff of the main office and the staff of the ADO and
SDP. Approximately 17% of the Department's budget supports the services
provided by the ADO and SDP.
1
1 S
The attached organization and staffing charts (Exhibits A & B) set out the
Department's pertinent groupings of staff by geographical assignment and
by the type of cases handled. -_-
1. Geographical
Two branches of the Department are located in Richmond and Concord
which house 40% and 25% of the Department's staff respectively. The
Department's Martinez branch is physically situated in the downtown justice
complex near the courthouses and the Main Detention Facility. The
Martinez branch is currently divided in three separate locations, and the
Richmond branch is divided in two separate locations. The ADO branch
office is located in a separate building at 1333 Pine Street in Martinez.
2. Case Type
A major division in the organization of the Department's work is based on
the severity of the charges against a client. Misdemeanor cases are
punishable by up to one year in the county jail. Our Department, in the past
fiscal year, provided representation in over 9,200 misdemeanor cases.
Felony cases are punishable by a possible.commitment to state prison. In
the past fiscal year, the Department provided representation in over 5,100
felony cases. Finally, our juvenile division provided representation.in more
than 4,500 cases involving both criminal allegations and allegations of child
abuse. This category continues to grow at a rate greater than other case
categories. Our Department also handles a growing number of civil and
criminal contempt cases upon appointment by the court.
11. Resources
A. Financial Resources
Virtually all the funding for the Department's services comes from the
General Fund. AB 90 (Juvenile Subvention Funding) accounted for
approximately $39,000 in the Department's budget.
2
The CAO approved Current Department Budget
proposed budget for the
Department for the fiscal
year 1997-98 is ADO+SDP $1.802,816
$10,915,766. Within the 19%
Department, the budget
allocated for the ADO
and SDP is $1 ,855,680
(17% of the total) while Mair,office $7,866,963
the main office is 81% �
allocated $9,060,086
(83%).
The Department's budget is comprised primarily of salary costs for staff.
$8,748,061 (91%) of the budget is for salaries and benefits for the
Department's personnel; while only $921 ,718 (9 %) is budgeted for services
and supplies. Last year's.budget allocated no funds for capital accounts, for
the second year in succession. Purchases of desks, chairs, etc., were
made from salary savings. We also continue to depend upon used, surplus
furniture more than any other county department, according to county staff.
All the classifications of staff within the office, with the exception of
management personnel,
are represented by Dept. Salaries v& Other Expenses
various labor
organizations and
bargaining units.
Compensation levels for Services &
employees are set Supplies
through collective 10°'° salaries
bargaining with the $921'718 90%
$8,748.061
various bargaining units.
3
Of the moneys budgeted for
personnel, $6,823,488 Department Salaries
(78%), then is allocated to
pay the salaries and benefits Paralegals& $349,922
for approximately 72 Law Gks
attorneys who comprise the 4%
Department's professional $787,326 Gerical
9% Attorney s
staff. The remaining 22% of 78%
the budget for salaries is Tecgh�ical $68,233,486
0
divided among the clerical $787325
support staff (9%),
paralegals and law clerks
(4%), and technical
employees (9%) such as investigators.
Total costs for indigent defense incurred by the county were controlled in the
fiscal year (1995-96), as in recent years, largely by the creation of the
Alternate Defender Office within our Department.
B. Personnel Resources
In attached Exhibits A & B is a description of authorized staff by division and
function. As a result of the Three Strikes law, the Department has
experienced the need for increase in staffing over the last three years.
Some of this growth was economically achieved through the use of
temporary employees. Equity and productivity will require that long term
temporary employees be converted to permanent positions on a regular
basis.
C. Affirmative Action
The staff of the Department is diverse. The Department continues to strive
to increase staff diversity despite budgetary challenges which work counter
to greater work force diversification. The number of newly hired staff or
newly promoted staff has been so low that our efforts to increase
diversification have not been as productive as we would like.
Ethnically, staff of African-American descent constitutes 11% of the work
force (compared with parity of 7.6% in the county's population). The
percentages for Hispanics (3%) and Asians (5%) are regrettably below the
4
county's parity figures of 7.7% and 5.4% respectively. During the past year,
the diversity of the Department was enhanced slightly through the hiring of
one temporary attorney and one permanent investigator of Hispanic
heritage.
In terms of a gender breakdown, 61% of the Departmental staff is female,
including attorney staff that is 51% female and investigative staff that is.50%
female.
D. Sick Leave
The Department's employees utilize sick leave at an above average level in
comparison with other county employees. -For our department, the most
recent quarterly report shows an average of 71% use of accruals. This is a
17% improvement from last year's usage rate, however. The level of sick
leave usage is due to the large proportion of female staff (approximately
61 %) of childbearing age. Many employees have very low usage rate, but
the average is affected, in part, by the large percentage of women in our
department who by necessity have family sick leave and pregnancy
imperatives. We frankly do not have a solution to our usage rate, but
assure you we closely monitor the problem., including use of discipline and
counseling for serious abuses.
E. Staff Development
The attorney benefit package provides $500 per year for each attorney to
pursue staff development and training. Attorneys are encouraged to attend
C.E.B., C.P.D.A. and other professional association training seminars on
weekends. State Bar rules require mandatory legal training, with which all
lawyers comply. In house, we have specialized training on matters of local
concern. All felony attorneys attend weekly staffing sessions on upcoming
cases where peer review assists each professional in judgments regarding
their cases. In my view, we have a well-trained, highly competent staff.
Several attorneys in our department, including myself are State Bar Certified
Specialists in Criminal Law. Last year, six members of our staff taught
evening classes part time in one or more local law schools and at U.C.
Berkeley.
5
F. Automation
The Department's work has undergone significant reorientation through the
increased use of computers. Five years ago, the calendaring functions
(periodic lists of scheduled court appearances, broken out by attorney and--
court location) for the Department were tracked by physically logging in each
client's file and typing daily calendars. Now, by using the Law and Justice
Information System accessed through the county's mainframe computers,
this function is automated. Clerical personnel-all have terminals at their
desks to input and retrieve the information needed for scheduling attorney
appearances. --
Word processing — an integral part of any law office setting where
extensive typewritten briefs in cases must be prepared-- is extensively
utilized in our clerical support system for attorneys. All briefs are-prepared
for filing with the court, and a large proportion are drafted initially, on
computers shared by attorneys and legal research clerks in our branch
libraries. Databases containing copies of briefs indexed by subject are also
maintained so that work need not be replicated for each and every motion
filed.
The Department has been expanding its use of CD-ROM technology for
cheaper and more easily accessed legal research, traditionally available
only in hundreds of volumes of books housed in the Department's libraries
where the attorneys do legal research. Additionally, the Department
subscribes to commercial on-line database services, like Westlaw and
Lexis, but strives to use the cheaper CD-ROM technology where it can.
All attorney staff utilize the voice mail system provided and maintained
through the county's telecommunications department. Both management
and clerical employees utilize payroll and personnel tracking systems
provided to departments through the mainframe maintained by Data
Processing. Finally, the Department has many staff members trained in
using both the Law and Justice System and the county's e-mail system; but
full utilization of these communication and information systems is severely
constrained by a lack of sufficient resources to acquire needed hardware.
This subject will be addressed below with regard to challenges facing the
Department.
6
III. Customer Services
A. Service Delivery System - -
All services provided by the Public Defender are mandated by Federal
Constitutional standards and state statutes. Our mandate is to provide
competent legal representation on appointed cases. Our delivery system is
vertical in design, to maximize competency, client satisfaction and case
control. Each attorney is individually responsible for these assigned cases
from plea through sentencing. Certain appearances, particularly in
misdemeanor cases, are handled in grouped assignment calendars to
promote efficiency. Consistent with case law, the department assigns
attorneys to clients based on skill, experience and availability. Clients may
not change attorneys without court order, except in unusual circumstances.
B. Client Profile
The Office of Public Defender's clientele consists of persons who are
charged with crimes in the courts of Contra Costa County and who cannot
afford to retain private counsel. Every client is screened for financial
eligibility. Occasionally, a court will order our Department to provide
representation for a client when, for some-reason,-the-person has been
initially denied eligibility by our Department.
Client financial eligibility must be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. No
rigid guidelines can be established as each case has its own degree of
complexity based on the nature of the charges, the possible defenses and a
range of other factors that are quite case specific. Those complexities
complicate the difficult task of determining what financial resources may be
currently available to the client, given the infinitely variable financial profile
for each client (family size, indebtedness, sources of income, etc.).
At the conclusion of the case, each client of the Department is subject to
referral by the court to the Office of Revenue Collection, a division of the
Administrator's Office. Each client's ability to pay over a period of time is
then assessed by the Office of Revenue Collection in conjunction with the
court's order that the county be reimbursed by the client for the costs of
Departmental services. Department staff play no role in making these
assessments or in the collection of reimbursement. Last year, state law was
changed to allow for a co-payment of $25 per case for those who are able to
afford this up-front payment. Los Angeles and Santa Barbara Counties
7
began this procedure. Our county, as well as most others statewide, are
studying the cost effectiveness of this method as opposed to the current
revenue collection procedure. Depending on-the effectiveness. of this
approach, we may take steps to institute this payment program in the
coming fiscal year.
IV. Annual Performance
Performance Indicators
Based on statistics collected by the County Administrator's Office for their
June 30, 1996 report on Community-Based Punishment Options, jail
populations have doubled
Felony Arrests-PD Felony Cases-
between July 1984 and July
No. of Public Defenders
1995. Similarly, felony 12,000
arrests in Contra Costa 11,000
County have doubled for
i
the similar period from
6,000 per year to over 10,000
11 ,000 in 1995. As you Felony Arrests
would expect, felony
caseloads in Public 8,000
Defender offices have
nearly doubled during this 6,000
same period. In 1984, we
opened 2,212 felony cases, 6,000
and, in 1996, over 5,117. 5,117
By all measures, felony
caseloads have increased PD Felony cases
nearly 100% in the last 4,000
twelve years. Attorney
staffing in our department L2.21 j
to handle this increased 2,000
caseload has not kept pace j
with caseload growth. In Number of Attorneys 1
1984, our department had 40.5 57
40.5 attorneys. Today, the o
comparable main branch of 1984-85 Fiscal Years Compared 1995-%
our department has 57
lawyers. We have had a 96.6% increase in felony cases and a 40.7%
increase in attorney staff. These figures dramatically evidence the
8
increased productivity of our staff over the last decade. I am proud of the
staff productivity that the above chart demonstrates.
In criminal defense, caseload statistics cannot be the sole performance
criteria for our department. Our mandate provides that no only must we be
cost effective, but that we also must provide a high quality, vigorous defense
for our clients. While measures of quality of defense are difficult to quantify,
and there are subjective elements to any criteria, the few indicators that are
available support the outstanding reputation-of our department.
The gross indicators of quality, as exemplified by monetary judgments
against our department for negligent or deficient representation, are non-
existent. Reversals of convictions for incompetence of counsel are also
extremely rare, with only one or two cases in the last 5 years. This is a
reversal rate for harmful attorney error of less than one in every 100,000
cases.
More positive indicators might be the high acquittal rate our attorneys
achieve in cases that are tried when compared to comparable jurisdictions.
The 1997 Judicial Council Report of Court Statistics released by the
Administrative Office of the Courts establishes the relatively high success
rate our staff enjoys in cases tried. Since our department handles nearly
90% of the felony cases, the totals for our courts reflect, by and large, the
efforts of our staff.
In 1995-96, Contra Costa County tried 202 cases to jury. Of these, 31 cases
were acquitted or dismissed. Not only are the absolute number of cases
tried as a percentage of total caseload very high, (Alameda, with over twice
the staff and double the caseload tried only 100 cases to jury), but also the
number of successful defense verdicts is very impressive for our County as
is demonstrated by the following chart, prepared from Judicial Council
numbers.
9
Number of Jury Trials vs. AcquittaWDismissais
1995-1996
250
202
200 181
150 147
100
100 87
50 -1 6 L31 10 L 15 L25
0 -11
Alameda Contra San Fresno Sacramento
Costa Francisco
®Jur Trials Counties
MAcquittals/Dismissals I
J
In comparison to other offices of a similar size, our department tries a large
percentage of cases. In addition, our department is successful in a relatively
high percentage of cases in achieving dismissals or not guilty verdicts.
While jury composition and DA charging policies may contribute to our trial
success, it is my subjective judgment that our impressive numbers are a
result of the contributions of our support staff and the experience and quality
of our lawyers.
V. Challenges and New Directions
Challenges
I Office Space
Again this year and each year since my first annual report in 1988, we
continue to strive to obtain adequate office space for our staff. I am happy
to report that our department is about to commence the lease purchase for
the State Theater Project, which should for the first time since the creation
of our department in 1966, afford staff adequate centralized office space.
The completion of construction and the move itself, which maintaining our
operations at the high level of efficiency will pose new challenges in the
coming year.
10
2. Continued Growth in the Protective Services Caseload
and the Juvenile Criminal Caseload
Recent years have seen a growing concern for child abuse and children's
protective services issues. The County Counsel and the Public Defender
are the county.law departments that are primarily responsible for this quasi-
civil law caseload that, by state statute, provides a right to counsel. As a
result of these justifiable societal concerns, the juvenile court caseload has
received more attention. Procedural safeguards-and the rights of litigants
have been expanded. What had been a relatively small division within our
department has grown in the last few years with mandated services
increasing each year. Many of these reforms, for example, the requirement
that staff visit each client in their home placement before certain court
appearances, while helpful, have put additional burdens on staff. To
maintain cost effectiveness, our department employs paralegal and non-
professional assistance in this area when appropriate.
The overall growth of juvenile
crime and the treatment of certain child Abuse Reports In contra costa co.
Juvenile offenses in the adult court
have also added to the demands 25,000
19,320 20,382
of this mandate. For example, 20,000 17,230 1$200
many offenses are now tried by 13,467 14,490
jury trial that were formerly 15'000
handled by court hearing, which >= 10,000
naturally provides great procedural 5,000
protection and lawyer time
commitment. In addition to the °
1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996
existing Juvenile Court judge, with
the assistance of two full-time Years
referee positions, a new judge will ........... ..
be added this year.
3. Death Penalty Caseload Growth
Each year the legislature and the voters have increased the number of
offenses that are eligible for the death penalty. Our county district attorney
files virtually all cases eligible for the death penalty as a death penalty case.
The main PD office and the ADO currently have 14 open death penalty
cases, including six new ones this year. This is an all-time high for our
11
department. The available statistics and the anecdotal evidence suggest
that we have one of the highest.caseloads in this area in ratio of staff to total
cases as any department in the state. Most of these cases have two
attorneys assigned which is suggested/mandated by case law. Because of
the obvious differences between a death sentence and a jail term, the legal
and emotional demands on the lawyers and support staff is very high. The
careful review and scrutiny of appellate-courts.in this specialized. caseload .-
adds to the burdens on trial counsel and support staff.. Should current
trends continue, our department will be severely-burdened in this area.
While our department is highly skilled in these cases, with some staff
members having tried over five cases to verdict, we face our most serious
challenge in providing services for this increasing caseload. Some of these
cases can be negotiated to an appropriate disposition short of death, for
example, life without the possibility of parole or life terms, but the legal
issues and heightened public concern make this very difficult.
4. Modern Computer and Communications Equipment
Intraoffice communication (for better client services and more efficient
utilization of staff) is retarded by budgetary constraints on the purchase of
computer and communications hardware. Less than 30% of our attorney
staff can be linked for computer communication because of constraints on
the purchase of sufficient computer terminals and controllers to link those
terminals to the mainframe. We need to increase the number of personal
computers available to staff. Only 51% of our attorney staff have computers
available for use in their offices. Furthermore, networking personal
computers within and between our branch offices would increase the
efficiency of the Department in utilizing software and in producing legal
motions, documents, and other data available to all staff.
Charles James
Public Defender
CHJ:sdc
C:\WINWORD\PERS\PERFORM.97 sdc
12
W F- p
Z Q In U VUZ a
V � WCO U)
y D a Q 0
W
U cr
0
� �---1 I----1 0
Z IWCc► p p I p I o I . Y I
O Q W W d \ .� a �^ o.d I�^a _ I_ m �. I y - 1 ... _ o
U Z vi CL
in 0 a� c o Iv �I _fir- LLJ
� � LL QQ � � NOQ pli I� N I Ua W I 3 1
N N I I
iW U m Q p I p 1 c I J I
Q I — I
-----------------
Z N
CL
O p U N
N
- Cl) (0
N `
•N
(U in
U
= w cn i
U I N I rn
z cu
Op I of I
NI N �I
O 1 N
Q c Cl) .� 0 o I 1 7
N U Q m m
Z LLCD
U
I= d O o
O rn -� Q
N O N Y
Tca
c O U C � I O I
U o 7n c C j C o'o co N I U I
I I
c > U ca I cm I
LU
� � U
p p > (n I O I I I
d o � T � v I�� 1 O I y I
N U Sa II c a0 Ip >,nl ` U U)
S
c N a� Ip I d o 1 I
NUC I U �j 1 I
Q p I p 1 I J I
W L-,--J --1
O
ZLU
LL
W
O
V
(n 1 1 c I I I I
-C CO
ai 1� Z,N1 m` E C 1 U -1 y
p 1L y I0) I U .2 1 coo I o
p I I tr I
U. - p J 4)
O .- c C
cr onW E
cn "
E
Q m LL
WO vim
EXHIBIT A
'/
LO
T O O 00 to E E
CA \ O CA CAr �I LO F• co «�
. V T r U •~ V
LL
w N t .LM cn
m 0 rn '"
HLLQ C cu C T c O s •0 w
c a
ZW a) YcE .d -o .c)� 0a) 0of Q a CL 3:
— a) N O c cC () u) = w N
� a cc � L O o a) co m .5 E V O E c° a0 Q N U) 0) 0) N z
w JZ mmUUUC� 2 = 2 � � 2cA � V Z w E E co
� wQg E a wQ ori
Qp > ZC � cNiri4 0 E d (� c � cwrn
T (V c74tA (OI� OO � Tr- TrT CL cu (n w
NZ \ rn
rn 0
r� T
V
W _
LL Z :-. T a) CT O O C o 0
LL
n c
Q � Qw a`) O c� E c c '� 0 cc° .ac .. � � L
agw aoi oE � wo � � Ec`aooLi0M0
U � w2z = mmm00E: LL02220crcncoU)
J H �-
w 0006TN (hv (ncn
Z U � Y TN M � LO01l- w CArTTTTrr
o
Q \
w .. U
W �v W —
c T ' O co c
Q 6 c O a) E y L (D 0
j SLLJ H o ° 3 c o ate) c �' a' ami c
O a) a) o o cv c- - o •c •— o Ea) '(o w y v
U v ` a mmmUUUUl,LC9C9C� � Y � � � co
N Q a� C%4 � �
J _ OTNc64N (flI� U rnOOOce)
W D U T N (•7 (n (O I� CO O) r T T T T r r T C N O N
O Q T T T T
'00 —JO O o
w = +�
= U O I- co Il-
f--- r a coCD 0) CD
LL \ \ O Oca t p � r
O N p 0 O J 0 0
U ca) O) O T N
�-
LL c4 o E L E o a, •o
Q c �` c m E a) c a (o CII c comIx � Z
N w � aL C — O »N >
•J U � � (n � _ �J J J
T (V c'MITLncD f� 066
a�
LO 0
0000 000 • * T O T p > U
(D0Z0
c=v () � 'Q
O cc o a) Y ca
a� C/)Z a Tm asY 'a " ` C C L N` O 0)
L) w y N o >, aa) j - X , O c - -
_U � ommUUm -j2m �m0LLL22aio E c
c �c 3
v) E (a
cu
OrN64ui O
2 � Nc) 4LntD1� 00 0) M ::] 3: (nmm
F.XHTRTT R