OLYMPIA COMMUNITY COURT

Presented by: Development: Diane Whaley, Public Defense Coordinator/Community Court LeadProcess: Rocio Ferguson, Chief ProsecutorJudges View: The Honorable Scott Ahlf

October 2017

How is community court different from the traditional court?

• Courtesy of • The Olympian

Photographer, Steve Bloom

Traditional Court Community Court

Adversarial vs Collaborative

Directive vs Supportive

Punitive vs Restorative

Treating the symptoms vs Solving the problems

Created a core group to brainstorm ideas

Identified our needs and solutions

• The types of cases coming through–low level offenses

• The issues associated with these cases–housing, employment, basic

needs, education, transportation, drugs and alcohol, mental health, family support, licensing, etc.

• Who the local providers were– asked around– internet search

• Which providers were willing to show up on site to link and appear in court– phone meetings– on and off-site in person meetings– provided written materials-brochures are key, used materials from other courts, created a website

• The need for an MOU

– individualized, keep a calendar

• The space to place providers to link with defendants

– from hallway to provider building

• How to function without a budget

– started with basic providers and expanded

– sought out technical assistance from the Center for Court Innovation via a Technical Assistance Grant

• How to expand with a budget

– obtained a Department of Justice Grant from the Center for Court Innovation for $200,000

– mental health and drug and alcohol services were imperative

– ways to obtain future funding

• How to collect data

– excel spreadsheet

links

graduates

• What day to conduct court

– Wednesday mornings right after arraignments

• The space to conduct court

– atmosphere is key

– courtroom 2

• How to find common ground with case resolution

– deferred sentences and infractions

• When to meet to discuss defendants

– once a week for one hour

– who should be present: the Judge, court clerk, prosecutor, defense attorney, public defense coordinator, probation, case manager, jail representative, police when available, open door for providers

• Our goals– case counting, reduce recidivism, change lives, etc.

• Ways to educate ourselves and grow– visited other courts-Seattle, Spokane/

New York, New Jersey

– watched videos from other community courts– read materials from the Center for Court Innovation and mentor

community courts –Dallas, Orange County, etc– phone meetings with mentor community courts– monthly meetings with the Center for Court Innovation – joined court builders email: court-builders@courtinnovation.org

AN: 1 Year

• January 6th, 2016

• 4 Providers-Basic Needs, Employment, Housing, and Education and began expanding

• Provided lunches

• Worked on process of the flow of the case, communicating links, supervision, etc.

• Ribbon Cutting -January 4th, 2017• 8+ providers• Case Manager• Providers in the courtroom• Graduation trees• Weekly inspirational quotes• Creative conditions and sanctions• Women’s and Men’s group• Community court closet and hygiene dresser• Garden-community service, feeds defendants, donation to local food

banks• Community outreach

“Those closest to the problem are closest to the solution.”

G. Martin (March 25th, 2017) “Justice Springs Eternal” The New York Times

QUESTIONS?

Diane Whaley- Public Defense Coordinator, Community Court Lead360-753-8057

dwhaley@ci.olympia.wa.us

PROCESS

DETERMINE ELIGIBILITY

A. Must be charged with a crime in Olympia Municipal Court

B. Non-violent offenses- focus on offenses generally caused by need for social services.

• Urinating in Public

• Theft

• Trespass

• Pedestrian Interference

• Use Drug Paraphernalia

• Disorderly Conduct

• DWLS 3

• Etc

DETERMINE ELIGIBILITY

DETERMINE ELIGIBILITY

• Prosecutor considers type of offense, criminal history, facts in the report, and any other information bearing on suitability.

• Eligibility for CC is conveyed to PD;

• PD consults with client regarding CC at arraignment;

• Generally, opt in decision is made at arraignment;

COMPLETE RISK/NEEDS ASSESSMENT ON DAY 1 AT ARRAIGNMENT

= RECOMMENDATION

PROBATION

RISK/NEEDS ASSESSMENT

• Assessment by probation provides a recommendations based on needs and includes a risk score.

• Risk score determines level of intervention and the period of jurisdiction.

• The needs assessment determines most of the conditions.

NEGOTIATE TERMS

• Defense, prosecution, and defendant work together on an agreed proposal to present to court.

PROVIDER RECOMMENDATIONS

LINK WITH PROVIDERS ON-SITE

•Sidewalk-Housing Link•SeaMar-Mental Health Link/Mental Health Evaluations•Northwest Resources ii-Drug and Alcohol Link/Drug and Alcohol Evaluations•SeaMar-Basic Needs Link-Sign up for Health Care/Medical or Dental Appointments•South Puget Sound Community College-Education Link•Pacific Mountain Workforce Council (Worksource/ Rescare)-Employment Link/Create a Resume•Intercity Transit (Village Vans)-Transportation/Employment Link

WHO ARE THE PROVIDERS?

• Defendant appears in court to enter disposition; deferred sentence or infraction• Courtroom setting different• More informal process; first name basis- open conversation

APPEAR IN COURT

INDIVIDUALIZED CONDITIONS

• Obtain GED

• Treatment

• Letter of Insight/Apology

• Submit applications for employment

• Work Crew

• Obtain license

• Community Service

• Daily contact with Case Manager

INDIVIDUALIZED CONDITIONS

• New programs:

• Community Garden

• Weekly group sessions (women/men)

• - Meditation

• - Healthy relationships

• - Creative writing

• - Emotional pain/processing

SANCTIONS

• Immediate sanctions, tailored to the nature of the violation (i.e. if abstain violation – AA/NA)

• Prior violations?

• Self report v. deception

• Consider mental illness concerns

• Consider severity of addiction

SANCTIONS

• Letter• AA/NA• Email Case manager• Extend jurisdiction/set out graduation date• Work crew• Attend weekly group sessions• Report abstain violation to Tx; comply with modified tx

plan

VIEW FROM THE BENCH

WHY COMMUNITY COURT?

• The traditional approach is not working• Treat the problems, not the symptoms• Get to know the individual, not the criminal• Stop the Revolving Door

What are the benefits of a community court?

Reduce incarceration rates

Lower the crime rate

Intervene before the low level offender becomes a felon

Foster productive citizens

Create a safer community

PEOPLE CAN AND DO CHANGE

• LICENSED

• WORKING

• EDUCATED

• CLEAN AND SOBER

• PRODUCTIVE

QUESTIONS?