Transaction Search Form: please type in any of the fields below.
Date: November 22, 2024 Fri
Time: 11:50 am
Time: 11:50 am
Results for sheriffs
6 results foundAuthor: Bowen, Edward F. (Sheriff Principal) Title: The Independent Review of Sheriff and Jury Procedure Summary: The report presents the final report of an independent review of the procedures for sheriff and jury criminal court cases in Scotland. The main recommendations are: To only cite witnesses to give evidence in a case once it is known the case will proceed to trial - this will result in significant savings, both in reducing inconvenience to witnesses and in the cost of citing witnesses; To introduce a 'new compulsory business meeting' to bring together the Crown and defence to discuss cases at an early stage of proceedings- this will result in parties being better prepared for court appearances and produce a higher number of pleas of guilty at an early stage in proceedings; To enhance the current statutory provisions and require the Crown and defence at First Diet to be able to inform the court about their preparation of the case and allow the court to resolve any issues to be addressed at that stage- this will mean that First Diets should work as intended as a clearing house for cases going to trial; To allow a longer period between the indictment of the case and the first diet - this will allow for outstanding issues to be resolved before First Diet, thereby minimising the need for continued First Diets; To accommodate these procedural changes, it is proposed that the statutory time limits for commencing trials in sheriff and jury cases be extended for custody cases to 140 days, this is in line with the High Court time limit. The report also proposes that legal aid provision for sheriff and jury cases should be reviewed so that it supports early resolution of cases, as it does in the High Court and in summary justice. Alongside the recommendations for changes to procedure, the report also makes a number of practical recommendations. These include considering wider use of TV links between courts and prisons, greater use of standby arrangements for witnesses, continuity of sheriffs involved in individual cases and sheriffs taking a more rigorous approach to the issue of persons not attending for jury duty without excuse. Details: Edinburgh: The Independent Review of Sheriff and Jury Procedure, 2010. 145p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed November 29, 2010 at: http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2010/06/10093251/17 Year: 2010 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2010/06/10093251/17 Shelf Number: 120309 Keywords: Criminal Courts (Scotland)JuriesSheriffs |
Author: Cho, David Title: Restoring Public Confidence: Recommendations For Improving Oversight of the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department Summary: The Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department, one of the largest policing agencies in the nation, has been the subject of media and public criticism for decades. Despite numerous attempts at reform over the past twenty years, the Department continues to exhibit numerous problems, ranging from excessive use of force to personnel corruption. In 2011, the Board of Supervisors formed the Citizens' Commission on Jail Violence in hopes of creating a better Sheriff's Department. In its report, the Commission called for the creation of an Office of the Inspector General (OIG) - an agency that would attempt to remedy the deficiencies present in the Sheriff's three current oversight entities. Special Counsel, the Office of Ombudsman, and the Office of Independent Review handle current Sheriff's Department audits, complaints, and investigations, respectively. They operate largely independent of one another and lack the coordination necessary for effective oversight. Thus, our analysis offered a design for a consolidated Office of the Inspector General. We relied on expert interviews, comparisons of other oversight bodies, internal LA County documents, financial review of County and external budget documents, and previous findings and literature for the majority of our data and information. We used these data to identify a combination of common elements and functions shared by oversight bodies: agency independence, investigative authority allowing for initiation of case investigations and policy audits, jail monitoring, reviewing of complaints, quality assurance/risk management, and communication & public engagement. Identifying these key elements allowed us to analyze the design of an OIG by considering the presence or absence of these elements. This discussion led us to consider three policy options for potential OIG models: - An Expert-Informed model that was constructed by the common views and opinions of industry experts on what elements and functions constitute an "ideal" OIG. - A Client-Preference model that captures the County's current preferences and its preliminary ideas of the structure and function of the OIG. - And a Hybrid model, which we propose that seeks to moderate the extremes of the previous two models. In evaluating these options, we considered the degree of oversight provided, political feasibility, and ease of implementation. Based on our analysis, we provided two recommendations for the design of an LA County Office of the Inspector General: - Short-term Recommendation: Due to the difficulties associated with pursuing statutory authority1 at the current time and because of the deficiencies in oversight present in the client's current preferences, we recommend that LA County pursue the Hybrid model. This model provides a fairly high level of oversight (even with the lack of statutory authority) and faces no significant barriers to implementation. - Long-term Recommendation: The County should adopt the Expert-Informed model by pursuing an amendment to the California Constitution in order to establish an OIG that has statutory authority and can compel the Sheriff to action. In addition, we evaluated the funding and staffing needs for the Hybrid model based on the assumption that the County must at least maintain the current staffing levels for the current three oversight bodies. At a minimum, the OIG will need to be staffed by twenty-five individuals led by an Inspector General. Their combined salaries, pension, and benefits, would cost the County approximately $3.5 million per year. Approximately another $1.1 million would be needed for annual operation costs for a total OIG budget of approximately $4.8 million per year. Los Angeles County has a unique opportunity to improve oversight of the Sheriff's Department. Various County stakeholders need to ensure that the Office of the Inspector General takes a leading role in this task. By identifying, correcting, and preventing issues, the OIG will begin to restore public trust in the Sheriff's Department. Details: Los Angeles: Meyer and Renee Luskin School of Public Affairs, University of California, Los Angeles, 2015. 59p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed July 23, 2015 at: http://luskin.ucla.edu/sites/default/files/13%20-%20County%20Sheriff.pdf Year: 2015 Country: United States URL: http://luskin.ucla.edu/sites/default/files/13%20-%20County%20Sheriff.pdf Shelf Number: 136140 Keywords: OmbudsmanPublic ConfidencePublic OpinionSheriffs |
Author: Mitchell, Nicholas E. Title: 2015 Annual Report Summary: The OIM is charged with monitoring the disciplinary systems in the Denver Police and Denver Sheriff Departments ("DPD" and "DSD," respectively), making policy recommendations to those departments, and conducting outreach to communities throughout Denver. The OIM is led by Independent Monitor Nicholas E. Mitchell, and advised by a seven member Citizen Oversight Board. The 2015 Annual Report includes information about complaints received, closed and monitored by the OIM in 2015. It also includes the OIM's assessment of several recent changes to DPD's policies, practices or training, including its policies on body worn cameras, shooting into moving vehicles, early intervention, and racial profiling. "The DPD made significant strides in 2015 by revising important policies to bring them in line with national best practices," said Independent Monitor Mitchell. The 2015 Annual Report also presents two subjects about which the OIM believes there are opportunities for improvement. Electronic databases, including the National Crime Information Center and the Colorado Crime Information Center ("NCIC/CCIC"), are important tools that DPD officers use every day solve crimes, apprehend fugitives, recover stolen property, and otherwise keep Denver's residents safe. By-and-large, DPD officers faithfully adhere to the requirement that the NCIC/CCIC databases must only be used for law enforcement purposes. Yet, when officers do misuse NCIC/CCIC for non law enforcement purposes, they are generally issued reprimands rather than stronger discipline. "These databases contain vast amounts of personal information about the American public, including community members in Denver," said Mr. Mitchell. "When they are misused, reprimands are not commensurate with the seriousness of that violation, and may not be strong enough to deter future abuse." The Annual Report recommends that the penalties for misuse of NCIC/CCIC should be strengthened within the disciplinary matrix that is maintained by the Executive Director of Safety. The Report also highlights the current gap in DPD policy and training on what kinds of force are permissible or effective to remove potential contraband from the mouth of an arrestee who is attempting to swallow it. The Report recommends that the DPD clarify its use of force policy, and specifically prohibit the use of strikes to remove potential contraband from the mouth of a person being placed under arrest. Details: Denver: Office of the Independent Monitor, 2016. 144p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 18, 2016 at: https://www.denvergov.org/content/dam/denvergov/Portals/374/documents/2015%20Annual%20Report%20Final.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: https://www.denvergov.org/content/dam/denvergov/Portals/374/documents/2015%20Annual%20Report%20Final.pdf Shelf Number: 138333 Keywords: Complaints Against PolicePolice AccountabilityPolice DisciplinePolice Policies and PracticesPolice TechnologyPolice Use of ForceSheriffs |
Author: Rojek, Jeff Title: South Carolina Law Enforcement Training Survey: A National and State Analysis Summary: he present study examines the current state of law enforcement recruit training for municipal and sheriff's departments in South Carolina by addressing three questions. First, how does the state mandated training of South Carolina compare to the standards of other states? Second, what agencies within the state of South Carolina provide additional training for recruits before they enter the field, and what is the nature of this training? Third, what agencies within the state of South Carolina place their recruits through a field training program, and what are the characteristics of these programs? The data for answering these questions were captured through two collection mechanisms, both of which took place in December 2006. Data for the comparison of state mandated training were gathered with a survey of the Peace Officer Standards and Training (POST) commissions or equivalent entity in each state. The data on the training efforts of South Carolina agencies were collected by surveying a sample 65 agencies, which represents 27.7% of municipal and county departments in the state. The overall sample was derived from a two stage sampling process. The first stage involved selecting a sample of 20 agencies from agencies in the state that had 75 or more officers/deputies. The second sample of 45 agencies was randomly drawn from the remaining agencies in the state with less than 75 commissioned officers or deputies. A total of 47 agencies responded to the two waves of surveys, representing a 72.3% response rate. There were 33 municipal agencies (70.2%) among these responding agencies and 14 sheriff's departments (29.8%). The current survey of law enforcement training standards across the country and among a sample of South Carolina law enforcement agencies clearly shows that the State of South Carolina has fallen far behind national norms in its commitment to basic law enforcement training. South Carolina's 349 hours of basic academy training, which equates to a mere nine weeks, was more than 40 percent below the national and southern region medians from 2006. In 1972, South Carolina ranked 14th in the nation in its number of state-mandated basic training hours. In 2006, our state ranked second only to Louisiana in requiring the fewest number of basic training hours for law enforcement certification. The problem is not only with the lack of total hours, however. South Carolina also has not kept pace with national standards with respect to basic academy course content. In South Carolina, for example, law enforcement recruits receive no dedicated training in community policing, problem-solving, or even first aid. By way of comparison, a 2002 Bureau of Justice Statistics survey of the nation's law enforcement academies reported that 90 percent of the responding academies provided training in community policing, 64 percent in problem-solving, and 99 percent in basic first aid and CPR. Nor are most agencies themselves making up for these curriculum deficiencies. Only 36 percent of the South Carolina agencies surveyed reported that they provide any post-academy basic training to new recruits. The results from the field training portion of the survey depict a wide gulf between large and small agencies in South Carolina regarding field training practices. The median number of field training hours (475 hours) among South Carolina agencies with 100 or more officers is only slightly less than the required number of field training hours in the Austin (TX) Police Department, which has the lowest number of required hours among six agencies used as a benchmark for comparative purposes in the present analysis. However, the median number of required field training hours among smaller South Carolina agencies drops off precipitously and stands at only 60 hours for agencies with 20 or fewer officers. In many of these small agencies, new officers receive an inadequate nine weeks of basic training at the South Carolina Criminal Justice Academy and then are handed the keys to a patrol car and told to report for duty. They receive no on-the-job field training at all. To be sure, this lack of field training in small agencies is a problem in other states as well, but it is exacerbated in South Carolina because of the insufficient training received by recruit officers at the basic academy. New law enforcement officers and the citizens of South Carolina are being ill-served by the lack of resources and attention given to basic law enforcement training in our state. Improving South Carolina's deficiencies in basic law enforcement training will require, at a minimum, a thorough review and overhaul of the state Law Enforcement Training Council certification standards and the basic Criminal Justice Academy curriculum. These efforts to bring South Carolina's law enforcement training standards up to national norms should result in a substantially longer basic academy, adding critical subject areas, and mandating field training for all new officers. Based on the results from this study, the following policy recommendations are offered: - The Law Enforcement Training Council, with appropriate funding, should immediately undertake a comprehensive review and comparison of the South Carolina basic training standards to those in other states and among the nation's leading law enforcement agencies. - Following this review, the Training Council should commission a new draft curriculum that would bring South Carolina to the forefront of national standards in basic law enforcement training. - While the new curriculum is being prepared, discussion must begin in the South Carolina legislature and among the state's policy-makers on how best to fund a modern law enforcement training system that can meet the demands of 21st century policing in South Carolina. - Policy-makers should consider all available options, including legislation that would permit regional and stand-alone academies for those political subdivisions willing to pay for them. - At the same time, lawmakers should pass legislation that would mandate the training hours reflected in the new basic law enforcement curriculum drafted by the Training Council and that would require a reasonable number of field training hours for all new officers. As South Carolina positions itself for economic growth and development in the 21st century, it must not give short-shrift to its public safety needs. Chief among those are the need to train its law enforcement personnel in accordance with best practices. The current state of basic law enforcement training in South Carolina, however, is far below national norms and is in need of reform. Details: Columbia, SC: University of South Carolina, Department of Criminology & Criminal Justice, 2007. 46p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed June 26, 2017 at: https://artsandsciences.sc.edu/crju/sites/sc.edu.crju/files/attachments/trainingreport.pdf Year: 2007 Country: United States URL: https://artsandsciences.sc.edu/crju/sites/sc.edu.crju/files/attachments/trainingreport.pdf Shelf Number: 146387 Keywords: Academy TrainingLaw Enforcement TrainingRecruit TrainingSheriffs |
Author: San Francisco. Office of the Controller. City Services Auditor Title: County Jail Needs Assessment: Hall of Justice Replacement Jail Summary: The San Francisco Sheriff's Department ("Sheriff's Department") manages six jails in San Francisco and San Mateo County. Two of the jails, County Jail #3 and County Jail #4, are located in the Hall of Justice alongside the Superior Court, Police Headquarters, the District Attorney's Office, and other City agencies. Opened in 1961, the Hall of Justice has since been found to be susceptible to severe structural damage in the event of an earthquake. The City and County of San Francisco ("City") has determined that these inadequacies cannot be remedied outside of a significant capital improvement effort. In addition, the antiquated design and space constraints of County Jail #3 and County Jail #4 create safety concerns and limit the Sheriff's Department's ability to offer in-custody programs to inmates. As a result of these existing needs, the City plans to replace County Jails #3 and #4 with a new facility ("Replacement Jail"). As part of the planning process for the Replacement Jail, the Sheriff's Department and the Jail Planning Working Group asked the San Francisco Controller's Office to complete a needs assessment of facility characteristics that would best meet incarceration needs. For this analysis, the Controller's Office interviewed 25 key stakeholders, reviewed documentation provided by the Sheriff's Department, and analyzed data on demographic and criminal justice trends in the San Francisco jail population and the City and County of San Francisco. This report forecasts future jail bed needs, discusses salient jail design features, and documents elements of the jail system such as current facilities, program offerings, and characteristics of the inmate population. Key Findings The Controller's Office forecasts the need for a 481-688 bed Replacement Jail in 2019. The projection is based on forecasts by two external consultants and internal data on the impacts of state realignment. A podular jail design similar to County Jail #5 has many advantages over the current linear design of County Jails #3 and #4 including improved visual supervision, increased program space, and shared areas connected to the pods (e.g. exercise area, day room, exam area, etc.) to minimize the need for inmate escort throughout the jail. The Sheriff's Department offers robust offender programming throughout the jail system, including the newly opened re-entry pod which provides intensive services to state realignment inmates. The Sheriff's Department plans to continue the use of programs in the Replacement Jail, and therefore, the new jail will need to be constructed with more space than is currently available in County Jails #3 and #4. The Sheriff's Department should continue to increase outcome measurement and strategic planning for its system of programs. The design of County Jails #3 and #4 does not allow special populations such as gang dropouts and civil commitments to be housed efficiently. For example, "Sexually Violent Predators" (SVP) are civil commitments that must be housed separately from the general population. On January 29, 2013, four SVPs were housed in a 28-bed unit, leaving 24 empty beds that could only be occupied by other SVPs. The Sheriff's Department should consider jail design strategies that will mitigate these issues and increase housing flexibility. The San Francisco Sheriff's Department ("Sheriff's Department") manages six jails in San Francisco and San Mateo County. Two of the jails, County Jail #3 and County Jail #4, are Type II1 facilities located in the Hall of Justice alongside the Superior Court, Police Headquarters, the District Attorney's Office, and other City agencies. Opened in 1961, the Hall of Justice has since been found to be susceptible to severe structural damage in the event of an earthquake. The City and County of San Francisco ("City") has determined that these inadequacies cannot be remedied outside of a significant capital improvement effort. In addition, the antiquated design and space constraints of County Jail #3 and County Jail #4 create safety concerns and limit the Sheriff's Department's ability to offer in-custody programs to inmates. As a result of these existing needs, the City plans to replace County Jails #3 and #4. The Hall of Justice Replacement Jail ("Replacement Jail") has been part of the City and County of San Francisco's 10 Year Capital Plan since the beginning of the Capital Planning Program in FY2006-2007. The City has determined that the Replacement Jail facility should be constructed adjacent to existing Superior Court facilities at the Hall of Justice for safety, security and cost reasons. This would allow inmates in the Replacement Jail to be transported to court appearances in a timely fashion through secure elevators and corridors. The Sheriff's Department found in a 2011 estimate that the Department would need to spend at least $6 million in one-time costs and more than $11 million in ongoing annual costs to transport inmates to court if the Hall of Justice Replacement Jail was constructed near other San Francisco county jails in San Mateo County, California. As part of the planning process for the Replacement Jail, the Sheriff's Department and the Jail Planning Working Group asked the San Francisco Controller's Office to complete a needs assessment of facility characteristics that would best meet incarceration needs. For this analysis, the Controller's Office interviewed 25 stakeholders including, but not limited to, representatives from the Sheriff's Department, the Superior Court of California, Adult Probation, Jail Health Services, and Five Keys Charter School. The Controller's Office also reviewed documentation provided by the Sheriff's Department and other stakeholders, and analyzed data on demographic and criminal justice trends in the San Francisco jail population and the City and County of San Francisco. This report documents elements of the jail system including current facilities, programs, classification system, staffing, and inmate population, as well as needs for a Replacement Jail. Details: San Francisco: Office of the Controller, 2013. 44p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed October 5, 2017 at: http://sfpublicworks.org/sites/default/files/10.2013%20Jail%20Needs%20Assessment_Controller.pdf Year: 2013 Country: United States URL: http://sfpublicworks.org/sites/default/files/10.2013%20Jail%20Needs%20Assessment_Controller.pdf Shelf Number: 147590 Keywords: Jail AdministrationJailsSheriffs |
Author: Matrix Consulting Group Title: Report on the Staffing Study: Hennepin County, Minnesota Summary: The Matrix Consulting Group was retained by Hennepin County to conduct a Staffing Study of the Sheriff's Office. This final report presents the results of the study. This study, which began in the summer of 2015, was primarily designed to provide an assessment of the staffing needs of the Sheriff's Office. However, the operations management issues were also evaluated where they have the potential to impact staffing and the efficiency and effectiveness of operations and services. Details: Mountain View, CA: Matrix, 2015. 158p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 11, 2018 at: https://www.matrixcg.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/HCSO-Final-Report-11-23-15.pdf Year: 2015 Country: United States URL: https://www.matrixcg.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/HCSO-Final-Report-11-23-15.pdf Shelf Number: 149789 Keywords: Sheriff OfficersSheriffs |