Memo from Adam McQueen, President of the Probation Officers Professional Association of Indiana,
The widespread disruptions caused by the COVID-19 pandemic have forced Probation Departments across the State of Indiana to make compromises and sacrifices in order to protect the health of their staff members, as well as the general public. While the State has begun to ease its stance on public gatherings and travel, POPAI feels that it would be irresponsible to host any large gathering of people, where the potential for exposure would most certainly be elevated. For this reason, POPAI has regretfully decided to cancel its 2020 Annual Fall Conference, which was slated to be held September 9-11, 2020 in French Lick, Indiana.
At present, POPAI is discussing options it might pursue to provide continuing education hours to its membership, possibly in a virtual format. Additional information will be posted as soon as it is available. In the meantime, we encourage our members to take advantage of free or low cost webinars that are being offered online by a multitude of other agencies, such as NADCP and APPA.
Thank you for your continued support of our professional association. I look forward to the time when we can all join back together.
President, Probation Officers Professional Association of Indiana
We are now accepting Intent to Run Forms from POPAI Members ready to serve on the Board.
Up for election in 2020:
- District 2
- District 4
- District 6
- District 8
Intent to Run Form (docx)
The Intent to Run form must be sent to Michael by Sunday July 12, 2020 (postmarked, emailed, or faxed). We will post the election slate on the Election Page in August.
The election will be held during the POPAI Annual Meeting Thursday September 10, 2020.
Questions? Phone: Contact Michael (812) 948-5448 Ext. 409 or MCoriell@floydcounty.in.gov
POPAI Vision: To champion probation as a vital part of the criminal justice system.
POPAI Mission: To promote, support, and grow the profession of probation in Indiana by collaborating with criminal justice partners, advancing and protecting the interests of our membership, and providing education and professional development opportunities in the use of evidence-based community supervision practices.
In service of our above Vision and Mission statements POPAI is excited to announce our Mentor Program.
Each year new leaders are appointed or hired to serve their respective jurisdictions. POPAI recognizes our very vital role in welcoming these new leaders and acclimating them to the demanding roles they have accepted.
As our membership is made up of our most respected professionals, we are soliciting current Chiefs, Assistant Chiefs, and Probation Supervisors to act as mentors to incoming leadership.
If you are selected as a volunteer mentor you are committing to the following guidelines:
- Mentor must make initial contact with their assigned protégé within 15 days of assignment
- Regular, monthly contact with their protégé for a minimum of one (1) year (i.e. email, telephone, etc.)
- Hosting your protégé on-site within the first (6) months to observe you in the course of regular business
- Conducting a site visit to the protégé’s county within the first six (6) months to help them assess their highest priority needs
- Connecting them with other leaders as deemed appropriate
- Participating in program surveys as requested
We believe that new leaders will best be acclimated by entering into meaningful professional relationships with their peers and that a mentor is the perfect place to start growing their professional network.
If you are interested in serving as a mentor, download a Mentor Application.
The application will only serve as a resource in matching mentors with protégés. It will take into account your location, your areas of expertise and/or special interest, and your POPAI membership status.
on 7/8/2020 by POPAI Board
According to the POPAI Bylaws, Article XIV AMENDMENTS
These bylaws may be altered, amended or repealed by the membership if a quorum is present at any regular or special meeting. Any proposed alteration to the bylaws shall be submitted to the President of the Executive Board at least sixty (60) days prior to the annual business meeting. That proposed change shall be submitted to the membership thirty (30) days prior to the annual business meeting for action at the annual meeting.
The POPAI Executive Board is now submitting the proposed bylaw changes to the Association membership. The membership will be asked to vote on these bylaw revisions in September.
The proposed changes relate primarily to statement of purpose and mission, identification of the Fiscal Year (January – December), duties of board members, methods of voting, and the annual business meeting.
POPAI members may submit any feedback regarding these proposed bylaw changes to their District Reps or any member of the POPAI Board.
Proposed Bylaws are available in a PDF document.
The Indiana Lawyer on 06/24/2020 by David Stafford
Confusion over prolonged expungement wait times that Indiana’s longest-serving judge called “unjust” was settled Wednesday when the Indiana Supreme Court declared a new law that eliminated the confusion applies retroactively.
In a 4-1 ruling, the Indiana Supreme Court ordered the Elkhart Superior Court to grant the expungement that Naveed Gulzar has sought beginning in 2018. He had been convicted 13 years earlier of Class D felony theft, but because the conviction had been reduced to a misdemeanor in 2016, the court reasoned he would have wait for five years from the entry of the reduced conviction to qualify for an expungement.
The Indiana Court of Appeals in a 2-1 decision affirmed the trial court in a ruling that retiring Judge John Baker wrote in dissent was “unjust and ill-advised.”
While Gulzar lost his case in court, he won in the Indiana General Assembly this year.
Senate Enrolled Act 47 makes clear that in cases such as Gulzar’s, the date of the felony conviction controls expungement eligibility, not any subsequent reduction.
The majority of the Indiana Supreme Court agreed that the change in the law should apply retroactively to Gulzar’s case. While the legislation was not expressly retroactive, the majority read it as such in Naveed Gulzar v. State of Indiana, 19S-XP-673.
“Here, the amendment to the misdemeanor expungement statute is remedial — it cured a defect in the prior law,” Chief Justice Loretta Rush wrote for the majority joined by all justices except Geoffrey Slaughter. “And, given the broad goals behind Indiana’s expungement scheme, coupled with the urgency with which the legislature addressed this issue, we find that applying the remedial law retroactively to Gulzar effectuates its purpose.”
The change in law, the majority held, “cured a mischief that existed in the prior statute, namely, confusion on when the waiting period begins for certain ex-offenders seeking expungement. … In short, we find that the remedial amendment is aimed at making expungement immediately available for individuals who (1) successfully petition for conversion of a minor felony to a misdemeanor and (2) wait five years from their felony conviction date before seeking expungement. To effectuate that purpose, we apply the remedial law retroactively to Gulzar.”
Dissenting Justice Geoffrey Slaughter, however, took a hardline view that because the statute was not expressly retroactive, the court’s analysis required it to “speculate” about legislative motives. “The better interpretative approach looks not to what the legislature thought but to what it said,” Slaughter wrote, meaning that in this case, Gulzar’s case required a decision based on the language of the statute in place at the time his case arose.
He would thus affirm the COA majority that denied Gulzar’s expungement appeal that Baker criticized.
“Applying that statute, I would affirm the trial court’s denial of his petition for the same reasons Judge Crone recites in his thoughtful opinion,” Slaughter wrote.
The case attracted an amicus brief in support of Gulzar from the Indiana University Robert H. McKinney School of Law Civil Practice Clinic.
My Wabash Valley on 7/9/2020 by Nicole Krasean
TERRE HAUTE, Ind. (WTWO/WAWV) — The pandemic has taken a toll on day-to-day life for most people, including those in the recovery community.
From the loss of in-person recovery meetings, to unemployment and furloughs, to a general sense of disconnect, recovering addicts are faced with several COVID-19 related hurdles as they navigate through the process.
How the recovery community is challenged by the pandemic:
“It’s just kind of like they’re being set up for failure,” Deanna Griffin, a local peer recovery coach, said, “We’re doing all we can to stay connected the best way we can, but it’s definitely been difficult.
On the state level, unsettling statistics show how isolation and disconnect can affect those struggling with addiction.
“People staying home, it’s harder for people to access resources,” Doug Huntsinger, Governor Holcomb’s Executive Director for Drug Prevention, Treatment, & Enforcement, said. “Starting in January of this year, we began to see about a 35 percent increase in Naloxone administration by EMS.”
State data shows how prevalent the issue of opioids was even before the pandemic, with an average of 107 EMS incidents a year in Vigo County alone involving Naloxone administration, and 10 opioid-related deaths in the county in 2019.
In response to the ongoing issue, in May, Governor Holcomb announced nearly $1 million in funding for the distribution of 25,000 doses of Naloxone statewide. Loved ones of Hoosiers at-risk for overdose are encouraged to apply to receive the Naloxone, making it more accessible to the average citizen.
“Our hope is that the Naloxone will allow for people to have that second chance to get back into recovery, or maybe enter recovery for the first time,” Huntsinger said. Continue reading →
USA Today on 7/7/2020 by Kelly Tyko
As viral videos of shoppers’ tirades and confrontations over being asked to wear face coverings during the COVID-19 pandemic erupt, major retailers are urging governors to make it a requirement for everyone to wear a mask.
The Retail Industry Leaders Association, which represents Walmart, Target, Best Buy, Walgreens, Home Depot and other major chains, says different local mandates across the country have created confusion leading to conflicts between customers and store employees.
“Retailers are alarmed with the instances of hostility and violence front-line employees are experiencing by a vocal minority of customers who are under the misguided impression that wearing a mask is a violation of their civil liberties,” Brian Dodge, the retail association’s president, said in a letter to the National Governors Association.
Fewer than half of U.S. states require masks in public places, according to the retail group, and some cities and counties have issued their own mandates.
Retailers “respectfully ask that those governors that haven’t yet required masks in public to do so immediately,” Dodge said in his letter addressed to Maryland Gov. Larry Hogan and New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo.
The National Governors Association said Tuesday that its members are discussing the letter and others like it from different retail groups.
Dodge says the association recommends that retailers communicate safety policies with extensive signage at stores and not by physically confronting customers.
“Given the troubling incidents we have all seen on social media involving aggressive customers refusing to wear a mask, we strongly recommend store employees not be charged with primary enforcement of mask mandates and that retailers not be fined for a customer’s non-compliance,” Dodge said.
Over the weekend, the founder of an Arizona public relations firm recorded herself destroying a face mask display at a Scottsdale Target. Last month, a woman without a mask at a California Trader Joe’s called employees and shoppers “Democratic pigs” and screamed profanities.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommends people use face coverings over their mouth and nose in public settings and around people who don’t live with them to help reduce the spread of the virus.
“Wearing a mask is not about fear, and it certainly should not reflect one’s politics,” Dodge wrote in the letter. “Wearing a mask is about respecting others and preventing the spread of a deadly disease. This should no longer be up for debate.”
The Crime Report on 07/02/2020 by Michael Gelb
There have been transformative changes in pretrial practices nationwide in the era of the coronavirus, according to a new, unpublished survey of several pretrial services agencies.
“You saw a lot of criminal justice stakeholders getting together on how best to handle this [the pandemic],” said Jim Sawyer, executive director of the National Association of Pretrial Services Agencies (NAPSA), which conducted the survey.
“Our survey shows that they got it right.”
Kristin Bechtel, director of Criminal Justice Research at Arnold Ventures, said the changes constitute “the most dramatic shift in pretrial practice I’ve ever seen.”
Chief among the changes were reductions in the pretrial jail population.
According to the survey made available to The Crime Report, there was, for example, a 65.17 percent increase in cite and release, a 67.98 percent increase in release on personal recognizance in nonviolent cases, and an 81.46 percent increase in releases from jail for persons awaiting trial.
Virtually all court hearings were postponed, and there was a 59.88 percent decrease in bail amounts.
Importantly, in most of the jurisdictions where these reforms were implemented, crime rates remained relatively stable.
Jurisdictions also took steps to reduce police contact with civilians. For example, there was a striking 84.57 percent decrease in custodial arrests.
Furthermore, policies that were suspended by half or more than half included criminal filings for specific charges (e.g., nonviolent charges), the issuing and executing of warrants for failure to pay fines and fees, and the issuing and executing of warrants for failure to appear.
There was also a reduction in the obstacles defendants face in getting released from jail. The survey found an 11.73 percent decrease in fine and fee amounts, and court collection of those fines and fees was delayed by 46.55 percent.
NAPSA heard from pretrial agencies since March that they were making changes in light of COVID-19. Seeking more than anecdotal information, NAPSA launched a survey to study those changes, said Sawyer.
The survey was conducted between April and June of this year and included 197 respondents in 40 states and Washington, D.C.
For certain or all pretrial condition violations, nearly half of jurisdictions surveyed have:
- reduced or suspended revoking or requesting revocation from the court, and
- reduced or suspended addressing technical violations.
At the same time, there was a spike in virtual practices among jurisdictions across the country. Most jurisdictions increased video-based court hearings, telephone check-ins, electronic monitoring, and virtual reporting (e.g., via email, video conferencing, and phone calls).
Meanwhile, most jurisdictions temporarily suspended in-person office check-ins and in-person field check-ins, where applicable.
These changes are surprising given the outdated manner in which the criminal justice system normally conducts business, the researchers noted.
Additionally, eight percent of jurisdictions surveyed increased their use of early discharge from pretrial supervision, while almost half of the jurisdictions do not allow for such discharge regardless of the pandemic.
Although COVID-19 resulted in many positive outcomes for persons awaiting trial, it substantially impeded the justice system’s rehabilitative efforts.
Almost half of the jurisdictions surveyed were forced to reduce or suspend drug and alcohol monitoring. And, over 75 percent of jurisdictions reduced or suspended drug and alcohol testing.
Rehabilitation aside, the findings from the NAPSA survey demonstrate that jurisdictions can release people from pretrial detention, reduce police contact with civilians, and modernize the way it conducts hearings and other meetings.
Importantly, jurisdictions can do so without increasing crime rates.
In fact, there is evidence to suggest that crime rates – specifically homicide rates – decreased during the pandemic.
Making Changes Permanent?
That crime rates remained the same, or even decreased, presents a strong case for making some of these changes permanent, researchers said.
When asked if these changes can indeed be made permanent, Sawyer told The Crime Report, “It is very possible that some of the quote unquote new practices, which are practices that we’ve put in our national [pretrial] release standards…will stick around—and rightly so.”
Sawyer added, “the continuing discussion we will have to have is what did you [the pretrial system] learn during a pandemic that you can put into practice post-pandemic? In other words, how can you get closer to our NAPSA standards of pretrial release?”
When asked how exactly to make the above changes permanent, Sawyer responded that NAPSA must “be the leaders.”
He continued: “We have our national conference in September…We will have discussions during our conference about this.”
A copy of the survey can be accessed here.
WBIW.com on 7/7/2020
Juvenile Referee Anah Hewetson Gouty
(BEDFORD) – The Lawrence County Commissioners gave their approval for Lawrence County to be a Juvenile Detention Alternatives Initiative (JDAI) county.
Juvenile Referee Anah Hewetson Gouty told the commissioners Tuesday morning that the county has received a grant for around $50,000 to participate in the initiative.
“The increased and unnecessary use of secure detention exposes troubled young people to an environment that more closely resembles adult prisons and jails than the kinds of community and family-based interventions proven to be most effective,” said Judge Gouty.
A recent literature review of youth corrections shows that detention has a profoundly negative impact on young people’s mental and physical well-being, their education, and their employment.
“Most importantly, there is credible and significant research that suggests that the experience of detention may make it more likely that youth will continue to engage in delinquent behavior, and that the detention experience may increase the odds that youth will recidivate, further compromising public safety,” Judge Gouty added.
Overseeing the program in Lawrence County will be Judge Nathan Nikirk of the Lawrence Circuit Court, Judge Anah Hewetson Gouty, Lawrence County Chief Probation Officer Nedra Brock-Fleetwood, as well as the Assistant Chief Probation Officer, Scott Wedgewood, and Katie Messmann, who will serve as the JDAI Coordinator for Lawrence County.
For more than 20 years nationally in both urban and rural jurisdictions, the JDAI has demonstrated that moving low-risk youth from secure detention into community-based alternative programs is an excellent public policy.
JDAI is a project of the Annie E. Casey Foundation, focused on juvenile justice system improvement. In Indiana, JDAI is overseen by Indiana Criminal Justice Institute, Indiana Department of Correction, Indiana Supreme Court, Indiana Department of Child Services, Indiana FSSA: Division of Mental Health & Addiction and Indiana Department of Education.
Judge Gouty says the program:
- Improves public safety
- Reduces over-reliance on secure detention and out-of-home placements
- Enhances racial, ethnic and gender equity
- Saves taxpayer dollars
JDAI’s EIGHT Core Strategies
- Collaboration between key juvenile justice system stakeholders/agencies and non-system stakeholders, including youth and families, community members, faith-based organizations and others to plan and coordinate system improvement activities
- Use of accurate data to diagnose and understand the challenges and opportunities in the juvenile justice system; to drive policy and practice decisions; to regularly monitor changes and impact
- Reliance on objective admission criteria to guide detention decisions
- Utilize Alternatives to detention for youth who do not require secure detention to ensure minimization of the likelihood of re-offense and failure to appear pending disposition
- Efficiency in Case processing to reduce unnecessary delays and ensure that interventions are timely and appropriate
- Reduce the use of secure confinement for “special” Detention cases such as violation of probation, warrants, and youth awaiting placement
- Commit to reducing racial, ethnic and gender disparities by implementing practices and policies that eliminate institutional biases that differentially impact youth based on race, ethnicity, and gender
- Assess conditions of confinement using established methodology and ambitious standards
Indiana Public Media on 06/30/2020 by Lauren Chapman
The 2020 legislative session ended in March – but many of the major education and health care measures passed by the state legislature go into effect on Wednesday.
Hoosiers can no longer use their cell phones while driving unless they’re hands-free, starting Wednesday.
Indiana Department of Transportation spokesperson Scott Manning said drivers can still use their cell phones – but they must use hands-free technology, like Bluetooth or speakerphone.
The hands-free law does have one exception – you can hold your cell phone in your hand to call 911.
Hoosier 18-, 19- and 20-year-olds can no longer legally buy smoking or vaping products under state law, starting Wednesday. After federal law made that change nationwide, the new Indiana law focused on harsher penalties for retailers who sell to those under 21.
The measure also doubles the fines for retailers who sell to underage buyers, with penalties up to $2,000 if they’re caught doing it three or more times in one year. And it requires sellers to card anyone who looks younger than 27.
A 2020 measure tightens restrictions in Indiana’s panhandling law, barring most forms of financial solicitation within 50 feet of any “financial transaction,” which includes ATMs, banks, stores, and parking meters. That effectively bans panhandling in downtown Indianapolis and other large cities.
The ACLU of Indiana has challenged the law. And on Tuesday, June 30, a federal judge blocked it from taking effect.
Another new law bars health care providers from charging out-of-network rates at an in-network facility unless they give the patient a “good faith estimate” at least five days in advance of any non-emergency procedure.
That law, however, likely doesn’t apply to what’s known as self-funded insurance plans, in which employers take on the risk in coverage. About 43 percent of Hoosiers have such a plan.
Indiana Farm Bureau Health Plans
A new law opens the door to the Indiana Farm Bureau offering a group health plan, including sole proprietors. A few other state farm bureaus, including Tennessee, Kansas and Iowa, have created similar health plans for members.
READ MORE: Why A Farm Bureau Push For Health Plans Is Raising Concerns
This 2020 law builds on a 2016 anti-abortion statute that requires health care facilities to bury or cremate fetal remains. The new measure sets out procedures those facilities must follow.
It also allows – but does not require – women who have a medication-induced abortion at home to return any remains to the abortion provider.
Eye Exams Via Telemedicine
Hoosiers can now be prescribed eye glasses and contact lenses via telemedicine.
There are some conditions: The patient must be between 18 and 55 years old and must have had an in-person eye exam within two years of the telemedicine prescription.
Lead Line Replacement
A new law may help smaller utilities to replace lead pipes owned by their customers.
Many homeowners don’t have the money to replace the last section of lead pipe leading to their homes. If a utility only replaces the pipes they own, it can disturb the homeowner’s lead line and cause more contamination.
That’s why in 2017, the state passed a law allowing investor-owned utilities to replace customer-owned pipes and recover the cost through rates. This 2020 law expands that to municipally-regulated utilities.
School Lead Testing
A new law requires schools to test for lead in drinking water.
Kids who get exposed to lead can have trouble learning, behavioral issues, and poor kidney function. The bill would require all schools that haven’t tested for lead at least once since 2016 to do so within the next two years.
Right now, schools aren’t required to participate in the statewide testing program through the Indiana Finance Authority. More than half of the schools that did participate in 2017 and 2018 had at least one fixture above the federal limit.
Governor’s Workforce Cabinet Expands
The new law aims to align Indiana’s workforce policies from preschool all the way to career preparation by adding more members to the Governor’s Workforce Cabinet.
The bill would increase the minimum membership of the cabinet from 23 to 32 people by adding representatives from schools, colleges, state political caucuses and business organizations. It also requires the governor to appoint a representative from a technology company to the cabinet.
The new law aims to help local governments cut costs by allowing them to fix or reconstruct a drain in a state wetland without a permit from the Indiana Department of Environmental Management.
It can cost counties thousands of taxpayer dollars just to determine if a drain is in a wetland or if they need a permit — much more than the cost of repairing the drain itself.
But environmentalists raised concerns over the law as it moved through the legislature. They argued that fixes like cleaning or clearing obstructions from a drain are already exempt — this law would allow more invasive work in wetlands.
Minimum Age For Marriage
Previous law said minors under 18 years old must get parental consent to get married, while girls as young as 15 could wed if they were pregnant. Now, parental consent and pregnancy are not factors.
Instead, minors older than 15 must prove to a court that they’re mature and self-sufficient to get married.
More than 500 Hoosier minors have gotten married in the last five years, the vast majority of them girls.
Child Sex Crimes
Previously, Indiana law said child sex crimes must be prosecuted before the victim turns 31 years old. The new law slightly extends that. It says if new evidence – DNA, an audio or video recording, or a confession – is discovered after the victim turns 31, the crime can be prosecuted within five years of that evidence coming out.
Employee Microchipping Ban
A new law bans companies from mandatory microchipping of employees. Although it seems like science fiction, the practice is growing more common in Europe and Asia.
In other countries, implanted RFID microchips are sometimes used for accessing workplace amenities like parking garages, vending machines and even computers. And although the new law doesn’t make it illegal for Hoosiers to be voluntary microchipped, it would make it illegal to require one for work.
Indiana Public Broadcasting’s Brandon Smith contributed to this story.
Indiana Public Media on 06/29/2020 by Rebecca Green
The image of 12 people packed shoulder-to-shoulder in a jury box is a powerful one. Enshrined in the Constitution, and in countless hours on television.
But now? Court officials around the country are weighing their options while dealing with the looming threat of COVID-19.
In Indiana, jury trials are scheduled to resume on July 1, and what that will look like is still unknown.
In May, Allen Superior Judge Fran Gull unveiled the criminal division’s plan for resumption of jury trials. All plans must be submitted to the Indiana Supreme Court for approval.
Allen County’s plans include using a lot of space in what is one of the largest county courthouses in the country, with multiple courtrooms used for potential jurors.
The cavernous main courtrooms provide plenty of room for social distancing, but even with that, there will be little room for observers, including family members, and the media.
“This has been a process of some depth…we’ve tried very hard to protect the safety of the public. “The only people who aren’t voluntary participants in this are jurors,” Gull said.
What to do with jurors is becoming quite an issue.
While Allen County’s courtrooms allow plenty of room for spreading people out, most of Indiana’s counties have much smaller courthouses, packed to the gills during normal times.
James Maguire is one of the staff attorneys for the statewide task force to help craft reopening strategies.
“How the courts are going to provide for the safety of the jurors, of the litigants, of the attorneys, of the court staff, all those have to be addressed,” he said.
Without a unified court system statewide, no standards for size and operations, it has been a difficult discussion.
“Each of the 92 counties have to set up their own rules, procedures and the counties are different,” Maguire said.
Some counties are taking different approaches to how to handle personal protective equipment such as masks. In some instances counties are finding the supplies for their courthouses.
And in other cases, the court staff are having to go out and find their own, Maguire said.
Allen County will allow potential jurors over the age of 75 to opt out of jury selection. Other accommodations are available to those between the ages of 60 and 74.
Removing whole segments of the population from jury duty does not fit with the idea of the jury as a cross section of the community, says Jim Abbs.
Abbs is the Chief Public Defender in Noble County and president of the Indiana Association of Chief Public Defenders.
He is worried about finding jurors, difficult during normal times, and protecting the rights of defendants who wait their day in court, in front of a jury.
“I think you’ll see that problem in the larger counties also. People are just not going to want to participate in it, and take that health risk chance to sit on a jury,” said Abbs. “It’s hard enough to get individuals in their normal daily lives to take off work, interrupt their schedule. Now you’ve added a health risk. It’s going to be very difficult to find individuals who want to participate in the jury process.”
Social distancing and masks also make it difficult for trial work. How do you read body language and non-verbal communication when half of one’s face is covered?
“To have a client in a mask, being separated from their attorney, isn’t really how we’d want to present the individual. And is it truly an accurate portrayal of the individual,” Abbs said.
So far remote hearings are working well for managing some of the day-to-day business of the courts, from arraignments to bond hearings.
And some civil court work has moved online, or has been delayed. For example, Allen County’s Superior Court Civil Division has continued all jury trials until September to allow the criminal division to catch up.
Some of these changes, and the move away from in-person hearings, will probably be with us for a while, after the threat of the pandemic has passed, Maguire said.
Whether the new measures will work in both protecting public health and criminal justice is unknown.
But all agree there are many headaches ahead as they iron it out.
United States Courts on 6/2020 by Haci Duru, Lori Brusman Lovins, Brian Lovins
The authors examine the relationship between supervision intensity and probation outcomes (i.e., increase in supervision level and rearrest) among low-risk individuals. Results show that individuals placed on the low-risk caseload were less likely to have probation revoked than low-risk probationers placed on regular caseloads. There was no significant relationship between low-intensity supervision and rearrest.
News and Tribune on 6/24/2020 by Aprile Rickert
CLARK COUNTY — A Clark County board voted Tuesday to modify an in-patient addiction program for inmates to an outpatient-only program — a change some say is needed to protect against COVID-19 and others say will dampen the program’s effects.
The Clark County Community Corrections board — which has representatives from multiple county departments and community programs — met Tuesday via ZOOM and approved to transition the Mental Health Addiction Treatment and Supervision Program (MAST) to an intensive, post-incarceration, outpatient program.
Clark County Circuit Court No. 4 Judge Vicki Carmichael made the motion to move the program out of the jail for now and look at getting it back in within the next year and a half depending on the pandemic.
The program has been in place for several years for men within the jail, and opened up for women less than a year ago. It has served as an in-patient treatment program for people with addiction issues, and many are mandated there by a judge in lieu of prison time or longer jail time.
The MAST program, and all programs that have people coming from outside to lead them, have been suspended in the Clark County jail since Feb. 28, to help mitigate the spread of COVID-19 within the facility.
Clark County Sheriff’s Office Chief Deputy Scottie Maples said the jail has continued to have programming led internally, but can’t afford to put the inmates at risk with outside contractors coming in until things change with the coronavirus.
“The jail is in no position right now or in the near future to introduce the MAST program back into our facility,” he said during the meeting, adding that the jail will likely be among the last of the government agencies to loosen up COVID-19 restrictions.
“I know we’re being overly cautious but we have to.”
Maples added that as soon as it is safe to do so and based on guidance from health officials, “we fully anticipate to go back to as many programs as we can,” he said.
Clark County Circuit No. 1 Judge Andrew Adams, one of two dissenting votes during the meeting, said he thinks the program will lose some of its effectiveness if it leaves the jail and goes to an outpatient-only model.
He said that’s partly because people will have less incentive to show up for appointments if they’re already out of jail, and partly because it will limit options for people with low or no income or health insurance to get in-patient treatment.
“I just think we’re rushing the transition,” he said before the board voted. “I think we worked too hard for too many years to get a program in the jail.”
Adams said he refers people to the be evaluated for the program three to four times a week, including defendants who request it themselves. At times he said it may take several weeks to get in based on space, but said that they’ve worked to expedite the process once a spot has opened up.
He estimated that about 50 to 60 people pass through the program each year.
He added that changes to the program will also affect participants in the Veterans Court of Southern Indiana and the Clark County Addiction Treatment and Support program. The latter was started by Adams last year as a way to help people with lower level crimes and addiction or mental health issues break the cycle of incarceration.
The program’s first phase requires participants be in a 90-day in-patient program before transitioning to other phases, which the MAST program was able to provide.
“Now it’s going to be left to us to try to … get them insurance, get them qualified and go from there,” he said. “I’m very disappointed, but it’s out of my control.”
A request for information from the county stipulating exactly how the program will work and when it will transition was not immediately available.
The National Judicial Opioid Task Force (NJOTF)
The National Judicial Opioid Task Force (NJOTF) has created excellent tools to assist courts in addressing the addictions crisis. Many of these tools are “deliverables” or “bench-cards” for a judge to quickly reference, e.g. a Substance Use Disorder Dictionary for State Courts and a guide to treating pregnant women with opioid use disorder. The NJOTF’s Final Report and Recommendations will be presented in Washington D.C. on November 20 at the National Press Club.
Registration is open for APPA’s 45th Annual Training Institute – Value and Vision: A Virtual Experience
Date(s): August 24 — 28, 2020
Website: coming soon!
student rate: $99
early, non-member rate: $230
late, non-member rate: $290
early bird discount available through 7/30/20.
APPA Individual Member discount available, just sign-in.
APPA Agency Member discount available, just sign-in.
Tentative Agenda and Session List
The Indiana Lawyer on 6/24/2020 by Olivia Covington
Indiana Court of Appeals Judge John G. Baker is retiring as the state’s longest-serving judge, capping a judicial career that began with his appointment to a new court in Monroe County. (Photo courtesy of Zionsville Monthly)
It wasn’t quite the retirement he expected.
With COVID-19 forcing most of the population to work from home, Court of Appeals Judge John Baker quietly visited the Indiana Statehouse in early June to pack up his chambers. He’s been working from his Bloomington home, and even though he won’t officially retire until July 31, he decided to close out his Indianapolis office early, without the usual pomp and circumstance of a sendoff.
It was a bittersweet day, Baker admitted, as he packed away 30-plus years of memories. The longest-serving judge in Indiana, including 10 years on the Monroe County bench, he plans to spend his days in Bloomington enjoying time with his wife while also working as a senior judge.
Baker has been “practicing” retirement in recent months, spending certain days working at home in the morning before heading to a restaurant and a movie in the afternoon.
“I wanted to work from home,” Baker said with a laugh, “but I didn’t mean for everyone else in the world to have to do it.”
The bulk of his career has been spent in a black robe, starting as a pro tem in the Bloomington City Court before becoming the first judge of the then-newly created Monroe County Court. Eventually he would help lead the effort to create a unified court system in Monroe County, which he says is now the paradigm for other courts to emulate.
The retiring judge is proud of the work he’s accomplished on the bench, both at the trial and appellate levels. One of his proudest achievements, he said, was his partnership with former Chief Justice Randall Shepard to create the Indiana Graduate Program for Judges.
Having been in the judiciary for four decades, Baker also had ample opportunity to work with the other two branches of Hoosier government. Both the Indiana House and Senate held ceremonies in his honor during the 2020 legislative session.
His impact on the bar is also not soon to be forgotten, as multiple candidates vying to be his successor have spoken highly of his body of work and engagement with lawyers.
As the Judicial Nominating Commission prepares to name his successor, Baker hopes whoever replaces him will bring to the bench a sense of industry, intellectual integrity, common sense and the ability to listen.
“And based on the people I’ve seen on that list,” he said of his potential successors, “they’re not going to miss me long.”
Baker recently spoke with IL over the phone for a look back at his long judicial career.
Q: Given how involved you were with the Monroe County courts, why did you decide to pursue the Court of Appeals?
A: During that time I was serving as president of the Indiana Judges Association, and that was before we had a really active lobbying process, which meant that I had to spend a great deal of time with the General Assembly. So what happened was, as I was patrolling the halls of the Statehouse, one of the judges on the Court of Appeals suggested that with Robert Neal’s retirement approaching in the next year, maybe I should give it some thought. I’d been labeled a Democrat for 13 years at that point, and nobody in the Democratic Party had been appointed. But then a man named Evan Bayh won the governor’s race in 1988, and those same fellas were a little bit more aggressive, so I gave it some thought. I was flattered and I thought it was interesting work, but I wasn’t sure if I was cut out for it. But I put my name in, and guess what? I got it.
You’re the most prolific judge in the history of Indiana’s appellate courts. How did you manage the workload?
Much of that was brought about because I’ve been there a long time – I was an appellate judge for 34 years. I’ve had wonderful law clerks since Day 1, and they have been some of the smartest lawyers I’ve ever worked with. I know some people can muse about cases, but I’m not that gifted. I’ve always had to do the best I could with what I thought was the right thing to do. After reading and hearing arguments and doing my own independent study, I would just do it and move on. I recall that in one year I would do more cases in a month than my colleagues on the Supreme Court did in a year. But they had to spend all their time managing the court system and attorney and judicial discipline rules. We didn’t have to do that.
I sought appointment to the Supreme Court twice and was a finalist in 1991. I sought it, but I didn’t get it — my point is that Providence was looking out for me, because I ended up where I needed to be. I enjoyed the volume of the work and its diversity. My colleagues on the Supreme Court spend a lot of time deciding what not to decide, but one thing the Court of Appeals does is, we don’t get to pick our inventory. Our process is, you don’t pick the cases you want to write on — you get randomly assigned to be the majority writer unless two other people don’t agree with you. I liked it and I still like it.
Given the pandemic, will you return to your chambers or finish your term at home?
I’m going to finish it out at home, in order to make it work because of the pandemic. I would’ve stayed until the last day — we had planned a nice retirement ceremony on July 30, but of course that’s all been continued indefinitely. When I retire, then somebody will move into my office. Mine is the nicest one to move her into, and the rookie — my replacement — will go into another office. All of that requires room changes, so I thought I’d help my colleagues by getting out of the way.
What’s been the hardest part of your job, and the best part?
The hardest part when I was a trial judge was sentencing, because often, because of the way the law was written, when you had to send someone to prison, it was just an acknowledgement of a failure on the part of society and other institutions that this person has to be warehoused. I struggled mightily in family law cases about custody. Finally, one of my colleagues said, “Baker, just settle down. If they’re silly enough to let you do it, just do the best you can. But if they’re good parents, it won’t matter.”
There is some isolation as an appellate judge, more than as a trial judge. When I was in junior high, I read a short story, “The Man Without A Country.” When I got to the Court of Appeals, I was a man without a country. I was living in Bloomington and working in Indianapolis … . That took some adjustment, but I adjusted.
What I like about the appellate process is working with other people, hearing their views on an issue, trying to be a good listener and, when appropriate, trying to convince them to see a different point of view. I’ve also enjoyed working with the brilliant, wonderful law clerks I’ve had over the years. And I enjoyed being a representative for the court and working with the legislative branch and the executive branch.
You’ve developed a reputation for engaging with the bar. Why has that been important to you?
Lawyers are problem-solvers, and I was just in a position to solve some problems that would not otherwise be solved. I always felt like lawyers were my teammates, and I enjoyed lawyers. I always felt that I could relate and help them understand the court system better and try to enlist their help in making changes. I don’t know that it goes beyond that — I just always thought that it was part of my job to enrich the bar and help the bench.
Route Fifty on 6/23/2020 by Bill Lucia
A new report says the CARES Act has offered an important boost to low-income families. But aid will dry up as the year goes on.
Cash payments and the expanded unemployment benefits many Americans qualify for under the coronavirus relief package that Congress passed this spring will help to prevent a sharp rise in poverty rates that would have otherwise occurred, new research suggests.
But the report, from the Center on Poverty and Social Policy at Columbia University, also highlights pitfalls with the household aid provided by the roughly $2 trillion legislation, known as the CARES Act. For one, much of the aid the law extends to households is concentrated in the first half of 2020. And unless lawmakers take further action, many Americans will see much of the extra income support the federal government has extended dry up after July.
Barring a swift economic recovery, the researchers caution that additional federal relief will be crucial to help keep low-income families from falling into poverty.
The virus and measures to control it have dragged the nation into a recession. Even though most states have relaxed forced business closures and stay-at-home orders, segments of the economy still aren’t up to full speed and millions of Americans remain unemployed.
Covid-19 cases and hospitalizations are also rising in some states, which could inhibit people from ramping up their economic activity even if restrictions aren’t reinstated.
The Columbia report looks at two types of “income transfer” programs included in the CARES Act.
One is the recovery rebate, or stimulus check, that the federal government distributed to families and individuals. The maximum amount a single adult could receive under this program was $1,200, with the sum tapering off for those earning over $75,000 a year.
The other form of assistance that the researchers examined was a set of beefed up unemployment benefits.
These included adding 13 weeks to the usual time limit for collecting benefits, which is generally 26 weeks, as well as expanding unemployment insurance to workers it normally does not cover, like those who are self-employed and independent contractors. Through the end of July, the law also added a $600 per week payment as a supplement to standard unemployment benefits.
Basing their estimates on what’s known as the “supplemental poverty measure,” the researchers projected that the annual poverty rate with the nearly 20% unemployment rate seen in April would’ve hit around 16.3% without the CARES Act, up from 12.5% before the crisis.
Under the CARES Act, they estimate that in a “medium access” scenario—where 70% of those who are eligible receive stimulus checks and 60% of those who are recently jobless receive the unemployment benefits they are entitled to—the poverty rate is held to about 12.7%.
The report also includes a “high access” scenario where the poverty rate is even lower, at 11.3% and a “low access” scenario where the poverty rate is 13.8%.
While the researchers describe the household income measures in the CARES Act as “appropriately timed,” they also note that families will see the level of assistance that they are receiving drop in the wake of the one-time stimulus check payment and after the $600 unemployment bonus expires in July.
They point out that even though the infusions of extra cash for households will push some above the poverty line on an annual basis, struggling families could easily end up scraping by on extremely tight monthly incomes as the year wears on.
In addition to this issue, the report points to an estimated 30 million or so people left out from the CARES Act assistance, including young adults in college and high school claimed as dependents for tax purposes, older and elderly adult dependents and immigrants.
People can also hit roadblocks actually getting aid they are eligible for, the report notes, due to issues like complicated unemployment insurance application processes, and outdated technology and overwhelmed staff at state agencies that oversee the program.
In terms of how the federal government could provide additional income support if the economy remains anemic in the coming months, the report suggests additional payments like the stimulus checks, extending the $600 unemployment bonus, or raising and expanding the benefits available through the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, also known as food stamps.
The cost of the stimulus payments and expanded unemployment benefits is already sizable, about $460 billion to $500 billion in federal spending in the medium and high access scenarios in the report. In fiscal year 2019, net federal spending was $4.4 trillion in total.
A full copy of the report is available here.
MGIA Indiana Chapter
2020 State Training
August 18 & 19, 2020
Hosted by Indiana Chapter of MGIA
Embassy Suites by Hilton South Bend at Notre Dame
1140 E. Angela Blvd., South Bend, Indiana 46617
16 hours of ILEA Certified Training
Lunch is on your own. Refreshments will be on-site.
Registration: Starts at 7:00am on 8/18/2020
Class starts on both days at 8:00am & ends at 5:00pm
Lunch is from 12:00pm – 1:00pm
TUESDAY – AUGUST 18, 2020
Kurt Bensheimer (Deputy Chief – Indiana Dept. of Corrections)
Topics: Folk Nation Gangs
WEDNESDAY – AUGUST 19, 2020
Jason Wilke (Captain – Wisconsin Dept. of Corrections – Retired)
Topics: People Nation Gangs
Download information and registration form from the MGIA Website