North Carolina AG’s office pushes for delay in key Racial Justice Act hearing

Johnston County prosecutor once compared Black defendants to wild dogs and hyenas, hunting their victims “like the predators of the African plain”

A hearing scheduled for later this month could clear a path for the 136 people on North Carolina’s death row to one day get resentenced to life without the possibility of parole — or bring them one step closer to the execution chamber.

Beginning Feb. 26, attorneys are scheduled to present evidence to a Johnston County Superior Court judge arguing that race significantly affected prosecutors’ actions during jury selection, not just in the underlying case of Hasson Bacote, but in capital cases throughout North Carolina. 

But if the state attorney general’s office gets its way, these findings will not be heard in court — at least not this month.

“Racial discrimination in jury selection is abhorrent in all respects and has no place in the criminal justice system,” reads a recent court filing signed by lawyers in the attorney general’s office, including the Attorney General himself, Josh Stein, a Democrat who is running for governor this year. “Nevertheless, like all claims, a claim of racial discrimination cannot be presumed based on the mere assertion of a defendant; it must be proved.”

According to a recent court filing, the evidence to be submitted by Bacote’s lawyers includes several findings:

• In 176 capital cases across North Carolina between 1985 and 2011, Black people were two and a half times more likely to be struck from jury pools than other jurors.
• Similarly, in seven Johnston County capital cases over that same timeframe, Black people were four times more likely to be struck from the jury pool than other jurors.
• In four capital cases in that timeframe tried by Gregory Butler, an assistant district attorney, Black people were 10 times more likely to be struck from a jury pool than other jurors. Butler also prosecuted Bacote, the defendant in the underlying case.

The attorney general’s office, however, called the evidence “insufficiently supported.” It took issue with a study conducted by law professors at Michigan State University, arguing that the state Supreme Court has already deemed that research irrelevant and misleading.

Last year, the state Supreme Court ruled that a study by the same MSU professors was “unreliable and fatally flawed” because it “assumed racial animus in cases in which defendants did not make any such claim, or in which the trial court or appellate courts did not make or sustain any such findings.”

In light of that opinion, the AG’s office asked the trial court judge to deny Bacote’s jury selection claims without holding a hearing. The judge denied the request.

The attorney general’s office is now seeking a second opinion. It has petitioned the state Supreme Court for guidance on how lower courts should use the MSU study in assessing claims of juror discrimination. This decision could drastically impact pending RJA claims, since they rely on the MSU study to support juror discrimination arguments.

Attorney Shelagh Rebecca Kenney, one of the attorneys representing Bacote, filed a motion last week criticizing the AG’s office for trying to derail the pending hearing: “The State appears motivated by its knowledge of the strength of Defendant’s evidence, its reluctance to face that evidence in open court, and its fear of losing.”

The Racial Justice Act’s lead case

Hasson Bacote, who is Black, was sentenced to death in Johnston County in 2009 for a crime he committed when he was 20 years old.

Ten white and two Black jurors convicted Bacote of killing Anthony Surles during a robbery. According to attorney Kenney’s motion, Bacote is one of 11 men sentenced to death in North Carolina after being convicted of first-degree murder solely under the theory of felony murder; that means the killing was not premeditated or deliberate, and instead happened during the commission of another violent felony.

All 11 of those men are people of color.

The core of Bacote’s case is the Racial Justice Act, a landmark law passed by Democrats in 2009, repealed by Republicans in 2013, and preserved by the Democratic-controlled state Supreme Court in 2020. The law gives people on North Carolina’s death row an opportunity to be resentenced to life in prison without parole if they can prove racial discrimination played a role in their death sentence.

The hearing would be the first since 2020, when the Supreme Court ruled that all claims brought under the RJA were still valid and could have their day in court.

Lawyers for the state started sharing discovery with Bacote’s team in 2022, after a Superior Court judge ordered them to turn over data on how prosecutors across North Carolina pick juries in capital cases. Over the past few years, the state has turned over 680,000 pages of discovery, which Kenney called in her motion “the most comprehensive discovery provided by the state on jury selection issues in North Carolina.”

Bacote’s is the RJA’s lead case, which means it will set the standard for how other cases are handled. How the Supreme Court handles the attorney general’s request — or a later appeal — will affect how judges deal with future Racial Justice Act claims.

Lawyers with the Attorney General’s office wrote to the state Supreme Court noting that if the hearing takes place on Feb. 26 as scheduled, it would “waste time and resources if it is later determined on subsequent appeal that the claims should have been dismissed at the pleadings stage.”

Kenney, meanwhile, rebutted that claim. She argued the research referenced by the attorney general’s office dealt with a 2011 MSU study; that data was updated for Bacote’s case, using information gleaned from the hundreds of thousands of documents turned over by the state. That data, she continued, hasn’t ever been presented or considered by any court.

She also contested the relevance of the state Supreme Court ruling referenced by the state, since that ruling explicitly said it did not address the defendant’s RJA claim.

The MSU study is also not the only evidence Bacote’s lawyers plan to use to make their case. Included within those 680,000 documents were prosecutors’ handwritten notes, which Kenney wrote in the motion “reveal that race permeated the State’s approach to jury selection.”

Prosecutors’ notes from various trials show a preoccupation with prospective jurors’ race. In one Washington County case, for instance, a prosecutor wrote that they didn’t want a particular person on the jury out of concern she would be “sympathetic to plight” and that she “had a child by BM [Black Man].” In that same case, a prosecutor scribbled that they wanted one juror who seemed favorable to prosecution, noting she seemed like she would “bring her own rope.”

Race didn’t just figure into jury selection, but into the prosecutor’s racist views as well. Kenney’s motion includes a newspaper article from another of Butler’s capital cases where he compared the Black defendants to wild dogs and hyenas, hunting their victims “like the predators of the African plain.”

The Supreme Court could issue a ruling on the attorney general’s petition as early as the end of this week.

This article originally appeared in NC Newsline on February 7th, 2023. 

Please support the news you can use and visit The Brooks Blackboard's website for more news!   

Take a look at my brief bio about my writing life and on social media:

Facebook page: The Brooks Blackboard

Twitter: @_charlesbrooks

Alabama Department of Corrections seeking over $800 million

By: Ralph Chapoco

Three law enforcement agencies told Alabama legislators Monday they were seeking a total of over $1 billion in funding.

The Alabama Department of Corrections (DOC) is seeking over $800 million from the state. The Alabama Law Enforcement Agency (ALEA) is looking for $159 million. The Alabama Bureau of Pardons and Paroles is seeking slightly more than $100 million.

The Alabama Legislature will ultimately decide how much funding the agencies get, and most do not get their full request.

Sen. Greg Albritton, R-Atmore, the chair of the Senate Finance and Taxation General Fund Committee, noted those requests are higher than they were three years ago, when the agencies asked for roughly $635 million combined.

“I am not trying to cast stones,” Albritton said after the meeting. “I am only trying to do it as a means of education as to how much more money it is taking to do the same old thing.”

While ALEA had the largest increase in percentage terms, DOC made the biggest jump in terms of total dollars. The Legislature budgeted $661.7 million to DOC from the General Fund in 2023. Alabama Department of Corrections Commission John Hamm asked for almost $820 million from lawmakers for the coming fiscal cycle, $158 million higher (24%) than the current year’s budget of $661.7 million.

Bennet Wright, executive director of the Alabama Sentencing Commission, who addressed the joint committee prior to Hamm’s presentation to give members some context regarding the ADOC request, said increased capital costs, increased personnel costs and staffing shortages are  driving up the cost to continuously incarcerate people. Corrections held 20,403 people last November.

“There is a common myth that money travels with offenders in correctional systems, I hear it all the time,” Wright said. “We get 500 people out of prison, and we can save money on the prison system. That is just not true. Most of those costs are fixed costs.”

The DOC spent roughly $145 million in 2002 on personnel, about $240 million in 2012 and roughly $280 million in 2023. Despite that, the number of corrections security staff decreased, going from 3,000 in 2012 to about 1,800 in 2023.

“So, what are some of the things that the state has chosen to do, it has increased correctional officer pay, that has increased,” Wright said. “There has been increases in health insurance over the past 20 years, retirement contributions, et cetera. So, while the officers have gone down, the obligation of the department to pay personnel costs and benefits has increased.”

Vacancies in the department remain. The DOC said in its presentation that 858 of its 3,800 positions (30%), both administrative postings and corrections officers.

Medical costs to address the health care needs for people incarcerated continue to increase, going from $120 million in 2012 to $235 million in 2023.

“I would also point out to people, the state of Alabama was the first state that was taken into federal court on a lot of these issues,” Wright said. “That was 1975. Alabama has been in and out of federal court, whether it is litigation or receiverships oversight, we have new pieces of litigation for the past 50 years. And medical care has been an ongoing thread of a lot of the federal litigation involving our Department of Corrections.”

Hamm said DOC will rely on the construction of a $1 billion men’s prison in Elmore County to improve safety in the department. About 325 people died while incarcerated in Corrections in 2023.

“Every legislator on this dais has received emails about the conditions within our prisons, and the violence within our prisons,” said Rep. Rex Reynolds, R-Huntsville, who asked how a single-cell design could address the issues.

According to Hamm, about 80% of the inmates are placed into dormitories, spaces with rows of bunk beds where inmates sleep. With the new prison, almost 80% of the population will be in cells.

“If I was a correctional officer in this room, with everybody here, it is going to be a little bit more difficult for me to control everyone in this room as opposed to everyone in their own cell and dealing with you all one at a time,” Hamm said.

ABPP requested slightly more than $100 million, an increase of about 14% from the $87.8 million in funding from the General Fund budget for the current year’s budget. About $52 million of that will go toward personnel costs, with another $20.6 million to fund benefits. The next highest item, utilities, fees and services, will be another $12 million.

“I will say this—the support staff, the officers, one thing I will say, these are some of the hardest working people you will ever know,” said Cam Ward, the director of ABPP. “If you have to go out to someone’s house, you know they violated their parole terms, and you have gone into their home, and they know you are coming, let’s just say it is not always the safest circumstances.”

Ward also addressed the number of people granted parole by the Board of Pardons and Paroles. According to the numbers he presented, the rates have fluctuated between 2% and 18%. The rates were lower in the beginning of 2023 at 2% in January and 5% in February. As of December 2023, it was 18%.

“When you only have two members, if it is a split, one to one vote, it is a denial,” he said.

Ward said target rates for parole are less important, the decision must be made with respect to the individuals.

“Realistically, the peak of the parole grant system was in 2016-2017,” Ward said. “Sometimes it got over 50%. I think realistically, you are probably talking about a number closer to 25%-30% considering the population that is inside DOC. However, I would caution anyone who talks about parole grant rates to not use an arbitrary spreadsheet or number system. I have seen too many articles talk about that. I think it is a mistake. I still think you still have to look at it as the individual, and realize the board still has that discretion as to who they grant or don’t grant.”

ALEA is asking for more money from the Legislature as well, about $44.7 million more (39%) than the $114.3 million the agency is slated to receive this year. That money will be spread across equipment and vehicles, as well as a new driver’s license office in Montgomery.

Rep. Brett Easterbrook, R-Fruitdale, said the request was “a little bit hard to understand for me.” He added he wasn’t opposed to the increase but requested a breakdown of the expenditures from the agency to better understand the reason for the increase.

This article originally appeared in The Alabama Reflector on February 15th, 2024.  

Please support the news you can use and visit The Brooks Blackboard's website for more news!   

Take a look at my brief bio about my writing life and on social media:

Facebook page: The Brooks Blackboard

Twitter: @_charlesbrooks

State spending to prosecute – and defend – gang members on the docket for Georgia General Assembly

Several state agencies are seeking millions more in state funds to handle the growing caseload resulting from the state’s recent crackdown on street gangs.

Republican Attorney General Chris Carr and the directors of the Georgia Bureau of Investigation and Georgia Public Defender Council presented budget requests to state lawmakers on Thursday that include creating a new street gang task force, hiring new street gang data analysts, and hiring more attorneys who specialize in felony organized crime cases.

With the passage of a new state law endorsed by Gov. Brian Kemp and the General Assembly, Carr’s office in July 2022, Georgia created its first statewide gang prosecution unit that has since led to the indictment of more than 100 people and two dozen convictions. The overall number of gang-related cases is more extensive across Georgia, with the GBI data confirming that in 2023 a total of 287 street gang investigations across 93 counties leading to 325 arrests on felony charges.

The Attorney General’s Gang Prosecution Unit based in Atlanta, with regional, satellite prosecutors and investigators in Albany and Augusta is seeking another $807,000 to expand with new units in Macon, Columbus and Savannah. Carr is also backing the GOP governor’s budget recommendation to use $1.6 million to boost AG’s attorney salaries as part of a multi-year recruitment and retention plan. 

It’s all part of a collaborative approach to targeting gangs that often spread violence in their communities, Carr said. 

“Any additional amount will help us and it looks like there’s always going to be a challenge. There is a gap between the public sector and the private sector, but there’s no doubt that it’s helpful,” he said. “What we’ve seen is there are issues and what we want to do is be regional in nature because we know that gangs don’t care where the city lines, where the state lines are from an efficiency standpoint.

 It is becoming increasingly common for people accused of being involved in criminal enterprises like street gangs to be prosecuted under the Georgia Racketeer Influenced & Corrupt Organizations Act,  which is modeled on the federal racketeering law intended to take down mob operations and other racketeering fronts.  Some detractors of the RICO-heavy approach say prosecutors and other law enforcement officials can unfairly ensnare people who are loosely affiliated with individuals connected to the group while still failing to address larger systematic problems.

During last year’s session, Georgia Republicans helped pass a highly-divisive bill that increased the severity of penalties for street gang-related crimes.

A 21% drop in Atlanta homicides in 2023 has been attributed  by the Atlanta Police Department and Mayor Andre Dickens to an increased focus on fighting guns and gangs, according to a recent Atlanta Journal-Constitution article.

Atlanta rapper Young Thug and members of his record label, Young Slime Life, are facing first degree murder and drug trafficking charges in Georgia’s most high-profile street gang RICO case to date. Meanwhile, former President Donald Trump headlined the 19 individuals indicted in August in Fulton County for allegedly participating in a racketeering conspiracy to overturn Georgia’s 2020 presidential election.

Due to handling dozens of gang and racketeering cases over the past year, the state’s public defender’s council is requesting $5.7 million to pay for attorneys with special training in gang and RICO cases.

The additional funding for RICO cases would allow the organization to provide legal representation to people who cannot afford an attorney while also meeting the growing trend of gang-related investigations, according to Omotayo Alli, executive director of the Georgia Public Defender Council.

In the past year, the public defender’s office has handled nearly 70 street gang crime cases, with the number of defendants indicted ranging from six to upwards of 50 under the same overarching charge. Currently, it would cost the public defenders office at least $255,000 to contract enough private attorneys to represent 34 defendants charged in a single RICO case, Alli said.

“It’s been a lot of indictments for gang RICO defendants,” she said at Thursday’s budget committee hearing inside the state Capitol. “We understand that but we have to be able to represent those who have been indicted and arrested.”

The council is also requesting that the upcoming year’s budget have another $937,000 allocated for RICO cases along with another $9.1 million for attorneys salaries as part of the overall agency recruitment and retention programs.

The public defender’s office has been able to increase the starting pay for its attorneys from $45,000 in 2020 to $72,000 this year by consolidating job positions. The budget salary request includes money to boost the starting pay to $83,000 for the upcoming year.

“The attrition rate that we had in the past was quite detrimental, because  we train and we lose them. It’s like wasting money,” Alli said. We’re doing better because you have been considerate of our request.”

The multi-million dollar budget request designated for street gang enforcement caught the attention of Atlanta Democratic Rep. Scott Holcomb on Thursday.

“It would be interesting to see over time if this an aberration or a new trend line on the number of resources that need to be devoted,” he said.

GBI Director Chris Hosey said Thursday that his agency supports the governor requesting nearly $6 million in next year’s budget be used to hire a 14-member GBI gang task force that would be based out of Columbus. The new Columbus gang unit would join other GBI gang units located in Atlanta and Macon to go along with regional gang unit specialists in other pockets of the state.

The increased focus on gangs is also supported by Kemp recommending that the GBI receive a total of  $395,000 over the next year to hire criminal intelligence analysts tasked with supporting a street gang database available to other law enforcement agencies throughout the state. 

“We have consulted on street gang cases more than 50 times with local partners,” Hosey said. “A lot of the cases we work there is another criminal element to it whether it be homicides, drugs, assaults, human trafficking so the importance of working that and addressing it is paramount to us.”

In addition to the tough-on-crime approach, Carr said research will continue on the most challenging task, which is identifying programs that best divert people from joining gangs. 

“How do you stop a young person from joining a gang where at best you end up in jail, at worst you end up dead,” Carr asked. “Who are the communities most often targeted by gangs?  Low income, racially diverse and immigrant populations.”

This article originally appeared in the Georgia Recorder on January 18th, 2024.  

Please support the news you can use and visit The Brooks Blackboard's website, for more news and share our posts! 

And read my brief bio about my writing life 

On social media, visit me on 

Facebook: The Brooks Blackboard 

Twitter: @_CharlesBrooks   

Civilian boards overseeing police in FL are in jeopardy and could be dissolved

MITCH PERRY  

There are 21 such agencies in Florida, with 10 formed after the death of George Floyd in 2020

In 21 jurisdictions across Florida, so-called citizen review boards were created as a way to hold police officers more accountable, with more than half of the boards established following the death of George Floyd in 2020.

But all of the boards would be dissolved if a proposal filed by Duval County House Republican Wyman Duggan (HB 601) gets approval in the current legislative session.

The local boards relate to the ability to investigate allegations of police misconduct, but Duggan says there are no “uniform standards” among the 21 different police oversight agencies across the state.

“There are no uniform standards as to the qualifications or expertise of anybody to be a member,” Duggan told the House Local Administration, Federal Affairs and Special Districts subcommittee on Friday. “There’s no uniform standards on how they choose which cases to investigate. There are no uniform standards by which that investigation is conducted. There are no uniform standards by which they reach their decisions, and there are no uniform standards as to the due process protections afforded to the officer who is subject of the misconduct review.”

And Duggan dismissed claims that removing these oversight agencies will allow law enforcement officers to escape scrutiny or accountability if they are accused of misconduct.

Numerous entities — police departments, sheriff’s offices, state attorneys, the attorney general’s office, the FBI and the Department of Justice — can and do conduct such investigations. 

A recent report by the LeRoy Collins Institute looked at the impact that such oversight review agencies have on Black and white arrest rates in Florida. The report found that cities with such agencies have seen a reduction in total Black arrest rates per 100,000 compared to cities that do not have such agencies. They also found that cities with citizen review boards experience about a 15% reduction in the total Black arrest rates compared to cities not adopting such agencies.

Tennessee passed legislation last year removing the police oversight boards that had existed in Memphis and Nashville, replacing them with review committees that have no power to investigate police misconduct allegations.

At the House committee meetings, several members of the public said that the Legislature would be making a terrible decision if they removed citizen advisory boards.

“Accountability, transparency and having citizens involvement is essential to the trust of the community,” said Susan Khoury, a candidate running for sheriff in Miami-Dade County.

In 2022, a federal jury awarded Khoury $520,000 in damages for physical and mental harm after she claims she was wrongly institutionalized for a psychological examination under the Baker Act, a state law that allows for involuntary emergency mental health services.

Khoury said that there was no civilian oversight group in Miami when the incident happened, and she said she wished there had been. “I’m letting you know that it is important as a committee that you don’t overreach, and allow the communities have a say so.”

Ursula Price is the executive director of the Miami-Dade County Independent Civilian Panel. She moved to South Florida last year to take that position after heading the New Orleans Independent Police Monitor’s Office. She said that the committee needed to understand the limitations of what civilian review boards can actually do.

“There is no way for any oversight agency to reinvestigate some officer to discipline him, to do anything but open up a public discussion about the incident that occurred,” she said, adding that there was nothing punitive about the police oversight process.

“In fact, it benefits officers a great deal,” Price added. “Officers come to me to be whistleblowers to talk about issues of race and gender discrimination inside the police department and to offer suggestions for how to improve policing.”

The bill is strongly supported by law enforcement in Florida.

“The fact that everybody’s thinking that law enforcement officers are not being investigated? That’s incorrect,” said Lisa Henning, a lobbyist with the Florida Fraternal Order of Police. “Every single one of these IA [internal affairs] investigations when closed are available to the public with a public records request.”

The committee approved the proposal mostly along party lines, with one exception: South Florida Democratic Rep. Mike Gottlieb, a criminal defense attorney, joined the Republicans in supporting the bill.

The Senate companion bill (SB 576)  is being sponsored by Hernando County Republican Blaise Ingoglia. It will receive its first hearing in the Senate Criminal Justice Committee on Monday.

This article originally appeared in Florida Phoenix on January 19th 2024.  

Please support the news you can use and visit The Brooks Blackboard's website for more news!   Take a look at my brief bio about my writing life and on social media:

Facebook page: The Brooks Blackboard

Twitter: @_charlesbrooks

'Wrong Side of History': NYC Mayor Adams Vetoes Solitary Confinement Ban

By Olivia Rosane   

"With this veto, the mayor has condemned New Yorkers to suffer in solitary confinement and isolation, and he did so after the cameras were turned off and backs were turned," the bill's sponsor said.

New York City Mayor Eric Adams vetoed a New York City Council bill on Friday that would have banned the practice of solitary confinement in city jails.

Also on Friday, Adams vetoed another bill that would have increased transparency and oversight of the New York Police Department (NYPD). However, both bills passed the council with more votes than is required to override a veto.

"To recap: Police transparency is good. Solitary confinement is bad. And Mayor Adams is committed to manufacturing controversy where there is none," Brooklyn Borough President Antonio Reynoso wrote on social media in response to the news. "The Mayor shouldn't be spending time sowing dissent on veto-proof bills that will pass regardless of his actions today."

"Solitary confinement is torture. It often results in lasting psychological damage, and undermines public safety both inside and outside New York City's jails."

Solitary confinement is an increasingly controversial practice that has been recognized as torture by the United Nations and human rights groups if it lasts for more than 15 days in a row, according to the New York Civil Liberties Union. Its use at New York's Rikers Island has been linked to at least two recent deaths: Layleen Polanco Xtravaganza, who died after having a seizure while in solitary in 2019 and Kalief Browder, who took his own life after being placed in solitary confinement for two years.

"Solitary confinement is inhumane, and its presence in our city is indefensible," Public Advocate Jumaane Williams, who sponsored the legislation, said ahead of its passage last month. "Committing an infraction in jail can cause you to lose privileges, not basic human rights. People in solitary are isolated, denied human contact and connection, denied support, and come out of these deplorable conditions worse than when they went in—and some don't come out at all."

The bill, 549A, would have required that everyone in jail in New York City be allowed to gather with other inmates for at least 14 hours every day, except during emergency lock-ins or to deescalate conflict, ABC News reported. In those cases, inmates could only be confined for up to four hours.

Adams announced the veto by press release, and not during an earlier press conference when he announced his veto of the police transparency measure, as New York Magazine reported.

"Our administration does not support solitary confinement in our jails, and New York City has not used the practice for years. In fact, we have achieved significant reductions in key indicators of violence in our correction system without solitary confinement," Adams said in a statement. "But despite the misleading nickname, had [the bill] taken effect, the Department of Correction would no longer be able to protect people in custody, or the union workers charged with their safety, from violent individuals. I implore the City Council to work with our administration and follow the federal monitor's guidance to abandon this misguided bill."

Williams criticized the mayor's decision.

"With this veto, the mayor has condemned New Yorkers to suffer in solitary confinement and isolation, and he did so after the cameras were turned off and backs were turned. It's cowardly, weak, shameful, and entirely expected from this version of this mayor," Williams said in a statement.

"I don't think there's a single person in the city outside the mayor's office who thinks the status quo on Rikers right now is good and effective," Williams continued. "The ongoing use of solitary confinement and isolation in New York City—no matter what the administration calls it—is indefensible, and vetoing the ban is inexcusable."

Other city council members and rights groups spoke out against the mayor's action.

Speaker Adrienne Adams and Criminal Justice Chair Sandy Nurse promised to "take the steps to enact this law over the Mayor's veto." The measure passed 39-7, and an override requires 34 votes.

"The Council passed Intro. 549-A to ban solitary confinement with more than a veto-proof majority because it is imperative to make the city's jails safer for those who are detained and staff alike," Adams and Nurse said. "We cannot allow the human rights and safety crisis on Rikers to continue by maintaining the status quo of failed policies and practices."

The #HALTsolitary Campaign thanked Adams and Nurse for promising to override the mayor's veto.

"He's on the wrong side of history, human rights, and public safety," the group, which is led by impacted New Yorkers, posted on social media.

The NYCL also encouraged the city council to pass the legislation.

"Solitary confinement is torture," the group wrote on social media. "It often results in lasting psychological damage, and undermines public safety both inside and outside New York City's jails."

Council members and rights groups also criticized Adams' veto of the NYPD transparency measure—5862A or the "How Many Stops Act,"—which passed by a 35-9 margin.

"The Mayor's veto betrays his stated goal of public safety and harms the Black and Latino communities that bear the brunt of these stops."

This bill would have mandated that New York police officers report on civilian stops and searchers and give more detailed information about vehicle stops and searchers, ABC News explained.

In justifying his veto, Adams said that while the legislation "has good intentions behind it, the bill is misguided and compromises our public safety."

"Our administration supports efforts to make law enforcement more transparent, more just, and more accountable, but this bill will handcuff our police by drowning officers in unnecessary paperwork that will saddle taxpayers with tens of millions of dollars in additional NYPD overtime each year, while simultaneously taking officers away from policing our streets and engaging with the community," he said.

In response, Council Speaker Adams said the council was "prepared to override this veto," issuing a joint statement with Public Safety Chair Yusef Salaam.

"The false narrative that we cannot have transparency is bad for our city, and belies the fact that accountability is vital to improving public safety by increasing trust," Adams and Salaam said. "The Mayor's veto betrays his stated goal of public safety and harms the Black and Latino communities that bear the brunt of these stops."

The NYCLU wrote on social media: "The mayor's veto leaves another stain on an administration that has been winding back checks on hyper-aggressive, biased, and unaccountable policing. We are confident the city council will heed the call of impacted New Yorkers and advocates and override the Mayor's veto."

This article originally appeared in Common Dreams on January 20th 2024.  

Read the post below related to criminal justice

Civilian boards overseeing police in FL are in jeopardy and could be dissolved, Florida Phoenix

State spending to prosecute – and defend – gang members on the docket for Georgia General Assem, Georgia Recorder

Cash bail policies are under fresh scrutiny, Stateline

Please support the news you can use and visit The Brooks Blackboard's website for more news!   Take a look at my brief bio about my writing life and on social media:

Facebook page: The Brooks Blackboard

Twitter: @_charlesbrooks

He’s on Louisiana’s death row, his attorneys say, for a crime that didn’t happen

A Netflix documentary calls into question the methods of forensic examiners in the case

BY: GREG LAROSE

“Definitely, the system in Louisiana is broken.”

That’s the frank assessment of Matilda Carbia with the Mwalimu Center for Justice, one of the organizations representing Jimmie “Chris” Duncan. He’s among more than 50 people incarcerated on death row for whom Gov. John Bel Edwards has used his clemency power to push for state parole board reviews in order to switch their execution sentences to life in prison. 

Critics of the death penalty point out 11 people facing the electric chair or lethal injection have been exonerated or had their convictions reversed in Louisiana since it reinstated capital punishment in 1976. Over that same period, 28 people have been executed. 

High fees, long waits cast shadow over new criminal expungement laws

A clear record helps people seeking employment, housing and education.

More states are making it easier for residents to clear or seal their criminal records.

The effort has drawn bipartisan support, as lawmakers across the political spectrum say it will help people find jobs and housing, in turn boosting local economies and reducing reliance on social services.

“Folks that get out of jail or prison with criminal records, it’s like getting out with the handcuffs still on,” Keith Wallington, the director of advocacy with the Justice Policy Institute, a nonprofit criminal justice research and advocacy group, told Stateline.

But the shift has created some new concerns. The surge in applications after lawmakers eased rules created a major backlog in several states. Some residents struggle to pay the required fees. And some prosecutors and legislators worry that people who commit additional crimes after their records are expunged may not be held fully accountable.

At least four states — Louisiana, Maryland, Minnesota and New York — passed legislation this year that would make clearing or sealing one’s criminal record easier. Michigan and Ohio also had similar laws go into effect this year.

Expungement removes arrests and convictions from a criminal record as if they never existed, while record sealing hides records from the public but allows access by court officials and some law enforcement agencies. Almost every state has some form of expungement or record sealing policy. Though they can vary widely, most policies require individuals to be crime-free for a set amount of time, usually tied to how serious their conviction was.

Folks that get out of jail or prison with criminal records, it’s like getting out with the handcuffs still on.

– Keith Wallington, director of advocacy with the Justice Policy Institute

Over the past five years, more states have moved to offer automatic expungement or sealing, which generally uses a computer system to wipe or shield people’s criminal records when they become eligible. At least 26 states and the District of Columbia have an automatic system already in place or in the works.

“More lawmakers recognize the barriers that come with having a criminal record,” said Lauren Krisai, deputy director of the Justice Action Network, a bipartisan criminal justice advocacy group. “They recognize that this is actually bad for employers. It’s bad for employment. It’s bad for the workforce and the economy.”

Some state Republicans have “abandoned this mentality of tough on crime,” according to Nino Marchese, the director of criminal justice and civil justice at the American Legislative Exchange Council, a conservative nonprofit membership organization that drafts model legislation. Marchese said state legislators in the group are increasingly inclined toward evidence-based policymaking, which typically involves analyzing research and data, to draft criminal justice policies.

But some residents haven’t been able to get their records expunged because of the fees and large backlogs.

Backlogs and accessibility

In 2021, Oregon passed a law eliminating fees and expanding expungement eligibility to include non-conviction records, such as arrests, dismissals and acquittals. The law also removed filing fees and adjusted waiting periods for specific offenses. The surge in applications created a backlog of approximately 15,000 cases in Multnomah County, which includes Portland, and a 16-month waiting period for application reviews, the Willamette Week reported.

In Utah, expungement costs quadrupled in July after the legislature failed to pass a bill to extend its pilot program, which previously lowered fees to $65. The pilot had waived court filing fees and the fee for obtaining a certificate from the Utah Bureau of Criminal Identification, the agency tasked with handling expungement applications. Now, applicants must pay at least $280, which includes the $65 application fee, a $65 certificate fee and a $150 court filing fee per case.

Meanwhile, the state also is facing a backlog of automatic expungements and of petition-based applications, which are expected to take several months, according to Nicole Borgeson, the assistant director of the Utah Bureau of Criminal Identification.

A staffing shortage and an influx of applications just before the pilot program shut down contributed to the state’s backlog, she said in an interview. The bureau hired new employees in August who are undergoing training, and aims to review applications within 30 days, she said.

“It’s very important to us to make sure that we’re doing these in a timely manner — not only for us, but also for the applicants,” Borgeson said. “We know that this can be an impact on their lives and livelihoods. … We are concerned about that. We are trying to get caught up.”

Republican state Rep. Jim Dunnigan, who designed the pilot program, introduced legislation earlier this year to continue offering reduced fees, but withdrew his bill after receiving pushback from other lawmakers. Dunnigan said that some legislators who opposed the bill believe people seeking expungements should pay their own filing fees because they made the decision to commit a crime. Now, Dunnigan is negotiating with concerned colleagues before the state’s upcoming legislative session.

“We’re still working on it, and I don’t know where we’re going to end up. We’ve tried to come to a compromise — probably a little farther than some legislators want to go. It’s not as far as I want to go,” Dunnigan told Stateline. “I’m hopeful, I think we’ll see something that will pass.”

Many Utahns with records can’t afford the increase in fees, according to Noella Sudbury, founder and CEO of Rasa Legal Public Benefit Corporation, also known as Rasa, a company that aims to make expungement more accessible by offering low-cost legal services.

“A just society is one in which access to justice is available to not just those who have money, but to all members of the society,” Sudbury wrote in an email to Stateline.

The New Jersey State Police, facing a backlog of approximately 46,000 expungement applications, has fallen up to two years behind in processing, according to a class-action lawsuit filed by the New Jersey Office of the Public Defender against the state police in October.

The lawsuit alleges that this delay has led to the illegal disclosure of sealed criminal histories to potential employers, landlords and others conducting background checks. Residents have suffered job losses, housing denials and missed professional opportunities because of the state police’s failure to adhere to judges’ orders, the lawsuit alleges.

“Every day that passes is a day that these people who are entitled to the relief and the benefit of their expungement order can’t actually benefit from the expungement statute that was passed to help them,” Michael Noveck, assistant deputy public defender with the New Jersey Office of the Public Defender, said in an interview.

Spokespeople from the state police and the New Jersey Office of the Attorney General, which oversees the state police, declined to comment on pending litigation. New Jersey’s expungement statute does not specify a time frame for the state police to process expungement orders.

In 2019, the state police received $15 million to improve and modernize its expungement processing systems, but it is unclear whether it has made changes to handle the increase in expungement orders. The state police also declined to answer questions about the funding and any upgrades to its systems.

To address processing delays, the legislature should amend the statute to include a specific time frame, such as 60 or 90 days, during which the New Jersey State Police must process granted expungement orders, said Meredith Schalick, the director of the Expungement Law Project at Rutgers Law School, which has helped hundreds of people since 2018 get criminal expungements.

Broadening eligibility

Some critics argue that broadening eligibility for expungements or the sealing of criminal records will put the public at risk by cloaking violent crimes.

In Wisconsin, a bipartisan bill failed earlier this year because of objections from Republican senators. Despite being introduced multiple times over the past few years and successfully passing the Assembly, the bill has consistently faltered in the Senate.

During a public hearing on the bill in April, Republican state Sen. Andre Jacque suggested the bill’s proposed one-year waiting period was too short compared with neighboring states such as Illinois, Iowa, Michigan and Minnesota, whose waiting periods range from two to eight years. “It’s a pretty stark difference,” he said. Jacque also expressed concerns about overloading the court system and withholding criminal records from employers.

Wisconsin is the only state where past and closed cases are ineligible for expungement, according to the Wisconsin Policy Forum, a nonpartisan policy research organization.

Wisconsinites must apply for expungement at the time of their sentencing. Wisconsin also is among a few states that restrict expungement eligibility solely to young offenders, with the state’s age cap set at 25.

The bill would eliminate the age cap and shift the expungement application process to after the sentence has been served.

“I’m optimistic that this is the session that we finally get it across the goal line … and make some forward progress that’s hugely needed in Wisconsin,” state Rep. Evan Goyke, a Democrat and former public defender, told Stateline.

Prosecutors in Maryland worry that under the state’s new law, they may not be able to consider the past crimes of someone who commits another crime after having their record expunged, Baltimore County State’s Attorney Scott Shellenberger said. The REDEEM Act, which went into effect in October, halves the waiting period for filing a petition to expunge criminal records for certain offenses.

Someone who gets their record expunged can legally say they have no criminal record, which can complicate decision-making for prosecutors and court officials alike, said Shellenberger, a Democrat.

“We make our current decisions based upon what your background is,” Shellenberger said in an interview. “If we don’t know the truth about your background, then it’s hard to make a reasoned decision.”

In response to these concerns, the law’s lead author and sponsor, state Sen. Jeff Waldstreicher, a Democrat, said that if someone were to reoffend after having their record expunged, they still face criminal penalties.

“They will still be held accountable for their criminal offense and it’s important that we continue to hold them accountable,” Waldstreicher said in an interview.

Editor’s note: This story has been updated to clarify Utah’s expungement costs and process. 

This article originally appeared in the Stateline.org on November 28th, 2023.  

Please support and visit The Brooks Blackboard's website for more news stories, and this link for my brief bio.

On social media, visit me on 

Facebook: The Brooks Blackboard 

Twitter: @_CharlesBrooks