Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Pretrial Detention Em topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
PDSC reports steady caseload, urges review of electronic-monitoring eligibility rules
Summary
Acting executive director John Morrison reported stable caseload numbers for May and raised concerns that electronic-monitoring eligibility denials often cite prior warrants; the board asked management to convene stakeholders to review eligibility criteria and possible program expansion.
Acting Executive Director John Morrison told the Guam Public Defender Service Corporation board on June 24 that case openings and closures for May were roughly balanced and that a review of electronic-monitoring (EM) eligibility rules is warranted.
"You can see the numbers for you. I think the most significant one is probably cases opened and closed for the month of May. You can see we're at 88 cases open for that month. Just about the same amount closed, 83," Morrison said while presenting monthly statistics.
Morrison said EM denials in recent reports often cited a prior warrant within the last three years: 12 of 15 defendants flagged as denied or ineligible were so because of that standard. "So the numbers that I got here were the reports, 12 out of 15, the denial of eligibility was just based on having a prior warrant within the last 3 years," he said, and he argued that a blanket three-year-warrant rule "may not necessarily in and of itself be grounds for denial." The board agreed to ask management to convene judges, probation, the attorney general’s office and the Department of Corrections to reassess EM guidelines.
Morrison and trustees noted the EM program’s budgeting assumptions: management had factored capacity of about 100 EM placements for the current fiscal year and for the next fiscal year. Morrison and others emphasized EM’s cost savings versus detention and suggested reexamining long-term placements to see whether continued monitoring remained necessary.
Morrison also reviewed practices for filing pretrial-release or bail motions: attorneys typically argue for release at the magistrate hearing and investigators immediately work to identify addresses, third-party custodians and other information to support release. Available figures showed roughly half of pretrial motions for release were being granted in the sample presented (the staff counted 41 motions filed with 19 denied in one set of numbers cited at the meeting).
The board’s Adult Public Defender office reported consistent activity: the APD managing attorney said May filings numbered 50 cases; of 23 bail motions filed, two were denied. The managing attorney supported the planned working meeting to review EM eligibility and operations.
Board members discussed involving the director of the Department of Corrections to explore post-judgment sentencing options that could include EM.
No change to EM policy was adopted at the meeting; trustees asked staff to convene a stakeholder working group and to return with recommended adjustments.
