The Right to Privately Speak With Defense Counsel

Court hearings via video conference have pros and cons, area lawyers say - masslive.com

In State v. Bragg, the WA Court of Appeals held that the trial court violated Mr. Bragg’s
right to confer with his attorney by requiring Bragg to participate in all nontrial
hearings via Webex while his counsel appeared in the courtroom.

BACKGROUND FACTS

Mr. Bragg allegedly fired a gun at sheriff’s deputies during a high-speed car chase. He was apprehended. The State charged him with three counts of Assault in the First Degree, Drive-By Shooting, Attempting to Elude, and Fiream Offenses. The trial court set Bragg’s bail at $750,000, which he was unable to pay.

Before trial, the court granted multiple continuances requested by Bragg and the State. For all pretrial proceedings, Bragg appeared on video via Webex from jail, while his counsel and the State appeared in person before the trial judge. Multiple times, Bragg expressed frustration with the pretrial proceedings and distrust of his counsel. At a hearing on December 29, 2021, defense counsel tried to withdraw due to allegedly irreconcilable conflicts. The court denied counsel’s motion to withdraw.

The four-day jury trial began January 3, 2021. Bragg appeared in person for trial. After the State rested, Bragg did not call any witnesses. The jury then found Bragg guilty of numerous counts. The court sentenced Bragg to 648 months of prison. Again, Bragg appeared at sentencing via Webex.

On appeal, Bragg argues that at least 8 court hearings were critical stage proceedings. Consequently, the court violated his Sixth Amendment rights because he was unable to privately consult with his attorney during those hearings.

COURT’S ANALYSIS & CONCLUSIONS

The Court of Appeals began by saying that a criminal defendant is entitled to the assistance of counsel at “critical stages” in the litigation. A “critical stage” is one “‘in which a defendant’s rights may be lost, defenses waived, privileges claimed or waived, or in which the outcome of the case is otherwise substantially affected.

Furthermore, the constitutional right to the assistance of counsel carries with it a reasonable time for consultation and preparation. This includes the opportunity for a private and continual discussions between the defendant and his attorney during the trial. The ability for attorneys and clients to consult privately need not be seamless, but it must be meaningful.

“Like the right to counsel in general, whether the court violated the defendant’s constitutional right to privately confer with his attorney is a very facts-specific inquiry.” ~WA Court of Appeals.

The Court of Appeals also pointed out that in February 2020, our governor declared a state of emergency due to the COVID-19 Pandemic. It discussed how the WA Supreme Court authorized criminal defendants to appear via video.

Nevertheless, the Court of appeals reminded all parties that the Supreme Court’s pivot to video court hearings was meant to be limited in its scope:

“However, the Supreme Court further made clear that for all hearings that involve a critical stage of the proceedings, courts shall provide a means for defendants and respondents to have the opportunity for private and continual discussion with their attorney.” ~WA Court of Appeals

In rendering its decision, the Court of Appeals reasoned the Supreme Court made it clear that for all hearings that involve a critical stage of the proceedings. Also, courts shall provide a means for defendants and respondents to have the opportunity for private and continual discussion with their attorney.

“Here, by way of summary, the trial court violated Bragg’s right to counsel by not providing guidance to Bragg and his counsel about how to confer privately during at least four nontrial critical stage proceedings and by placing an unreasonable expectation on Bragg to assert his rights. And the State fails to meet its burden to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that such errors were harmless. Thus, without making any comment on the weight of the evidence or the conduct of the trial, we are compelled to reverse and remand this matter for further proceedings.” ~WA Court of Appeals

With that, the Court of Appeals revesed Mr. Bragg’s convictions.

My opinion? The use of technology in the courtroom has resulted in numerous benefits to the litigants and the public. These technological benefits should only improve as our courts, judges and litigants become more familiar with the features of the existing technology.

Clearly, however, the over-use of technology may undermine a defendant’s right to legal representation.

Please contact my office if you, a friend or family member are charged with a crime. Hiring an effective and competent defense attorney is the first and best step toward justice.

Prosecution Is Not Required To Prove Nudity When Seeking Indecent Exposure Charges

What Is Indecent Exposure? | Britton & Time Solicitors

In State v. Thompson, the WA Court of Appeals held that Washington’s Indecent Exposure Statute does not require the prosecution to prove the defendant was actual nude. Furthermore, the statute is not unconstitutionally vague.

BACKGROUND FACTS

Three 12-year-old girls playing in an apartment complex playground saw Mr. Thompson “touching his privates while looking at them” from his own apartment. One of the girls vividly described Thompson’s erect—but clothed—penis, and all three described him masturbating or touching himself over his clothing.

The State charged Thompson with felony indecent exposure under RCW 9A.88.010. Thompson twice moved to dismiss the charges. He argued that nudity is a required element of the crime. The trial court eventually granted the motion. It found that the law was unconstitutionally vague as applied to Thompson, who would not have known that his actions were prohibited.

The State appealled the dismissal of Thompson’s charges.

COURT’S ANALYSIS & CONCLUSIONS

The WA Court of Appeals addressed whether the Indecent Exposure Statute was constitutionally vague.

“A statute can be challenged as being facially vague or vague as applied,” said the Court. Here, the Indecent Exposure statute in question states the following:

“A person is guilty of indecent exposure if he or she intentionally makes any open and obscene exposure of his or her person or the person of another knowing that such conduct is likely to cause reasonable affront or alarm. The act of breastfeeding or expressing breast milk is not indecent exposure.” ~RCW 9A.88.010(1)

The court reasoned that Thompson’s deconstruction of the phrase “open and obscene exposure of his or her person” fails for two reasons. First, the terms “nudity” or “nude” or “clothed” or “unclothed” do not appear anywhere in the statute. “If the legislature wanted to criminalize nudity, as Thompson claims, it certainly knew how,” said the Court.

Second, our courts consistently have defined the phrase “obscene exposure,” not by breaking down the definition into its constituent parts as Thompson does, but by interpreting the phrase as a whole. “In short, our courts have defined the phrase “obscene exposure,” not as nudity, but as a kind of wrongful exhibition,” said the Court.

The Court further reasoned that as a matter of law, Indecent Exposure requires, not only exhibition of the genitals, but obscenity, i.e., lascivious behavior judged as improper by society.

“It is the exhibition and the behavior which are the gravamen of the crime. There would be no basis to prosecute the athletic, artistic, humorous, or celebratory display of the body, which in most contexts “common decency” requires a person not to display, unless it would also be deemed lascivious (i.e., filled with sexual desire) and improper by the common person.” ~WA Court of Appeals

The Court of Appeals concluded that under Thompson’s logic, a barely veiled erect penis used in the most sexualized and unwelcome manner imaginable would not be considered obscene because the genitalia is at least not naked. “Our interpretation of the statute does not allow such absurd results,” said the Court.

With that, the WA Court of Appeals concluded that the trial court erred in dismissing Thompson’s charge at issue as unconstitutionally vague. It reversed and vacated Thompson’s Dismissal Order and remanded the matter for further proceedings.

Please contact my office if you, a friend or family member are charged with a crime. Hiring an effective and competent defense attorney is the first and best step toward justice.

America is Experiencing a Police Officer Shortage

Why is There a Shortage of Police Officers? | National Police Support Fund

Informative article from the Associated Press reports that America is in a police officer shortage. Many in law enforcement blame the coronavirus pandemic and criticism of police that boiled over with the murder of George Floyd by a police officer.

From Minnesota to Maine, Ohio to Texas, small towns unable to fill jobs are eliminating their police departments. They’re turning over police work to their county sheriff, a neighboring town or state police.

At least 521 U.S. towns and cities with populations of 1,000 to 200,000 disbanded policing between 1972 and 2017, according to a peer-reviewed 2022 paper by Rice University Professor of Economics Richard T. Boylan. Interestingly, crime rates were unchanged in towns that dropped their departments, the Rice University study found.

At the heart of the problem is the exodus from law enforcement. Officer resignations were up 47% last year compared to 2019 — the year before the pandemic and Floyd’s killing — and retirements are up 19%. That’s all according to a survey of nearly 200 police agencies by the Police Executive Research Forum, a Washington, DC.-based think tank.

Though the survey represents only agencies affiliated with PERF, a fraction of the more than 18,000 law enforcement agencies nationwide and is not representative of all departments, it’s one of the few efforts to examine police hiring and retention and compare it with the time before Floyd’s killing.

Compounding the exodus of veteran officers, young people are increasingly unwilling to go through the months of training necessary to become a police officer, said Chuck Wexler, executive director of the Police Executive Research Forum.

“Fewer people are applying to be police officers, and more officers are retiring or resigning at a tremendous rate . . . There’s a shortage of police officers across the country.” ~Chuck Wexler, executive director of the Police Executive Research Forum.

Agencies of all sizes are struggling to fill open positions. But the problem is especially dire in smaller communities that can’t match the pay and incentives offered by bigger places.

Please contact my office if you, a friend or family member are charged with a crime. Hiring an effective and competent defense attorney is the first and best step toward justice.

Are Rimfire Rifles Bannable Assault Weapons?

 

Rimfire Rifles | Rossi USA

In AGO 2023 No. 4 (October 2, 2023), the WA Attorney General (AGO) discussed whether Washington’s new statute resricting the manufacture, import, distribution, and sale of assault weapons applies to rim fire semiautomatic firearms.

In short, the answer is “It depends.” Rimfire rifles are not excluded from every definition of “assault weapon.”  A rimfire rifle that is semiautomatic is an “assault weapon” if it is either (1) a specific firearm listed in RCW 9.41.010(2)(a)(i), (2) has an overall length of less than 30 inches per RCW 9.41.010(2)(a)(ii), or (3) is a conversion kit, part, or combination of parts, from which an assault weapon can be assembled.

BACKGROUND

In 2023, the legislature enacted SHB 1240, which amends RCW 9.41 to restrict the manufacture, import, distribution, sale, and offer of sale of “any assault weapon.”  Firearms, including rifles, are commonly designed for rim fire or center fire ammunition. A bullet with a rim fire cartridge is one for which “its primer, the explosive, is around the rim of the cartridge.” State v. Hammock, 154 Wn. App. 630, 633, 226 P.3d 154 (2010).

WHAT IS A “RIM FIRE RIFLE?”

A rimfire rifle is designed to use rim fire cartridges. In contrast, the primer of a center fire cartridge is at the center of the base. Consequently, center fire rifles are designed specifically to use center fire cartridges.

centerfire and rimfire cartridges

ANALYSIS & CONCLUSIONS

The AGO looked to the statutory definition of “assault weapon” in RCW 9.41.010(2).  That definition is, in relevant part, as follows:

  1. Any of the following specific firearms [listed within this subsection] regardless of which company produced and manufactured the firearm [; or]
  2. A semiautomatic rifle that has an overall length of less than 30 inches;
  3. A conversion kit, part, or combination of parts, from which an assault weapon can be assembled or . . . converted . . . if those parts are in the possession or under the control of the same person; or
  4. A semiautomatic, center fire rifle that has the capacity to accept a detachable magazine and has one or more [specifically listed features]; [or]
  5.  A semiautomatic, center fire rifle that has a fixed magazine with the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds;

In it’s opinion, the AGO said a rimfire firearm is one designed to use a particular type of cartridge. It explained that some rim fire semiautomatic rifles fall under the definition of “assault weapons.” That section defines “assault weapon” to include any of the 62 specific firearms listed in subsection (2)(a)(i), “some of which we understand come in rim fire models.”

“Thus, if any of the specific firearms listed in subsection (2)(a)(i) is designed for rimfire ammunition, or if a rim fire rifle has an overall length of less than 30 inches, it is an assault weapon and subject to the restriction in SHB 1240, section 3 (codified as RCW 9.41.390). Other categories of assault weapons defined in the bill, namely in subsections (4) and (5), specifically cover only “center fire” models, so those categories would not include rim fire models.” ~WA Attorney General

Please contact my office if you, a friend or family member are charged with a Firearm Offense or any other crime. Hiring an effective and competent defense attorney is the first and best step toward justice.

WA Attorney General Advises Pawn Shops on Handling Assault Rifles

How does a person buy a gun from a shop? | WFXL

Much confusion has arisen in the wake of WA State’s recent ban on assault rifles. Some thorny legal issues surrounding the changing role of pawn shops and their handling of assault rifles are especially interesting. For instance, if a pawnbroker receives an assault weapon, does the law permit the pawnbroker to return the firearm to the owner on repayment of the loan? And if the owner of a pawned assault weapon defaults on the loan, does the law allow the pawnbroker to sell the firearm?

In AGO 2023 No. 5 (October 5, 2023), the WA Attorney General answered these questions.

FACTUAL BACKGROUND

 SHB 1240 was signed into law by the governor on April 25, 2023, and became effective immediately. Its stated purpose is to limit the prospective sale of assault weapons, while allowing existing legal owners to retain the assault weapons they currently own. To that end, section 3 of the bill enacts the following prohibition: “No person in this state may manufacture, import, distribute, sell, or offer for sale any assault weapon, except as authorized in this section.” A violation of section 3 is a gross misdemeanor.

Pawnbrokers engage in the business of loaning money on the security of pledges of personal property. The term of a pawnbroker loan is ninety days. The customer may redeem their pledged property at any time during the loan period upon repayment of the loan principal, interest, and associated fees. After the term of the loan, unredeemed property on unpaid loans becomes the property of the pawnbroker.

1. If a pawnbroker receives an assault weapon, does the law permit the pawnbroker to return the firearm to the owner on repayment of the loan?

Yes. The Attorney General opined that the legislature’s express intent in enacting SHB 1240 was to allow existing legal owners to retain the assault weapons they currently own. Within the term of a pawnbroker loan, the pledgor retains ownership of the pledged article and retains the right to redeem the pledge at any time.

“The legislature’s stated intent in enacting SHB 1240 confirms this reading. The stated purpose of SHB 1240 is ‘to limit the prospective sale of assault weapons, while allowing existing legal owners to retain the assault weapons they currently own.’ Laws of 2023, ch. 162, § 1. This enacted statement is included within the plain reading of the statute. See G-P Gypsum Corp., 169 Wn.2d at 310. As RCW 19.60.061 makes clear, the pledgor remains the ‘existing legal owner’ of the assault weapon during the loan period, and thus, consistent with the legislature’s explicit intent, remains entitled to retain the assault weapons they currently own.” ~WA Attorney General.

In other words, a pawnbroker who receives an assault weapon as security for a loan may lawfully return the weapon upon repayment of the loan. Returning the assault rifle to the owner  is not an unlawful “delivery.” It is merely a return of property of which the pawnbroker was a bailee.

2. If the owner of a pawned assault weapon defaults on the loan, does the law allow the pawnbroker to sell the firearm?

No. Pawnbrokers are now prohibited from selling assault weapons they receive as security to a loan. Instead, pawnbrokers may sell assault weapons to the armed forces or to a state law enforcement agency for use by that agency or its employees for law enforcement purposes.

Please contact my office if you, a friend or family member are charged with a Firearm Offense or any other crime. Hiring an effective and competent defense attorney is the first and best step toward justice.

Local Veteran Defense Attorney on Whatcom County’s Need for a New Jail

Haunting photos capture crumbling remains and execution chamber at prison  used to film The Green Mile - World News - Mirror Online

Excellent editorial by Stark Follis, the Director of the Whatcom County Public Defender’s Office, on why Whatcom County needs a new jail.

“I have worked as a criminal defense attorney in Northwest Washington for 37 years. I do not support mass incarceration nor do I support an ever-increasing criminal justice burden to the county as numbers continue to increase. I do support a new jail and I trust the decision makers in place to build a jail that addresses the foregoing concerns, taking positive steps to address the root causes of criminal behavior and make a facility that treats those incarcerated in a humane manner.” ~Stark Follis, the Director of the Whatcom County Public Defender’s Office

For starters, Whatcom County voters will be asked to approve funding for the planning and construction of a new jail.  This will appear on the General Election Ballot in November. Twice before, voters have rejected the funding for a new jail, but never has the plan had the widespread support of cities and towns, including the elected officials representing them.

Follis says that opponents of new jail construction are generally concerned with playing into the idea of supporting mass incarceration. “U.S. incarceration rates are higher than anywhere in the world and the state of Washington and Whatcom County are no exception.”

In his editorial, Follis laments that many of those that we have incarcerated, and continue to incarcerate, do not belong there. Low-level offenses and crimes of poverty and homelessness are symptomatic of our society’s ills. However, there are people within the jail who represent a danger to the community. They must be either treated or helped or must be segregated from society. The fact is that only a small number will be segregated from society for lengthy periods and mostly on only the most serious of offenses. Most will be released and we need a jail facility that will allow us to address particular issues to lessen the safety concern upon release.

The difficulty comes when those presenting a substantial threat to community safety and security do so because of behavioral health issues. There has been a dramatic rise in the number of people arrested with severe mental health problems. Drug use and addiction is more rampant today than ever. Scores of people in our community are unhoused and living a lifestyle that could not have been imagined to us years ago, but is now commonplace.

“Insufficient resources are available to those with mental health disorders. Those deemed not competent to stand trial face long waits for treatment at state hospitals and many of those face a lockdown existence in the current jail that allows them out of a cell for one hour a day.” ~Stark Follis, the Director of the Whatcom County Public Defender’s Office

Follis also says that deprivation of human contact has long been recognized as inhumane, and in some cases has been found to be unconstitutional as it violates the Eighth Amendment prohibition of Cruel and Unusual Punishment. The current jail leaves jail administrators with few options around this practice based on the configuration of the jail and staffing shortages that result.

Further, there are no facilities within the current jail to treat those with mental health disorders. There is a jail medical facility that is small and inadequate for sufficient treatment including counseling, medication or even diagnosis. When those come into the jail with mental health disorders, it is common for them to deteriorate while in there — the exact opposite of what we need to try to accomplish to make society safe.

There are no facilities for treatment of those with substance abuse disorders. While the current jail is mandated to provide medical assistance to those withdrawing from addiction, there is no ability to provide ongoing counseling or treatment such as opiate blockers or even things as basic as NA/AA programs.

“In general, conditions in the jail are poor for those who find themselves incarcerated. We need a jail, but we need a jail that does not just punish people by throwing away the key. We do not need a jail that treats people in a cruel and unusual manner. We need a jail that will triage those that come in and will divert them to the services they need.” ~Stark Follis, the Director of the Whatcom County Public Defender’s Office

My opinion? This was an excellent and informative critique by Starck Follis. I agree with every word he said.  Clearly, the Whatcom County Jail is no place to wait out a pending criminal charge. Please review my Legal Guide “Making Bail” and contact my office if you, a friend or family member are incarcerated. Hiring an effective and competent defense attorney is the first and best step toward justice.

Washington State Prison System Sued for Using Unreliable Drug Tests On Prison Mail

Ventura County jail mailroom workers keep drugs and other items at bay

The WA Department of Corrections (DOC) is facing a lawsuit over its use of inaccurate drug field tests to throw incarcerated people in solitary confinement.

The class-action lawsuit, filed by Columbia Legal Services alleges that the DOC uses unreliable field kits to test mail for drugs. From there, the DOC uses the unverified results to put inmates in solitary confinement, move them to higher security prisons, and strip them of visitation rights and other privileges. This violates inmates’ Due Process rights and protections against cruel punishment under the state constitution, the suit argues.

According to the lawsuit, one of the plaintiffs spent four months in solitary confinement after greeting cards shipped directly to him from a card company tested positive for drugs. The results were later invalidated by a lab. Another plaintiff, Gregory Hyde, was kept in solitary confinement—meaning he was in a cell for 23 hours a day—for nearly five months. This happened because some books of crossword and sudoku puzzles that his father mailed him tested positive for “spice,” a popular drug in prisons.

“I think DOC is using its power to punish people who can’t fight back . . . My elderly father just wanted to send me some puzzle books. Now they’re saying he’s a drug dealer. Now my father is too far away to see because I got transferred to a different facility. My father is impoverished and on a fixed income. I think it’s an abuse of power.” ~Gregory Hyde, DOC inmate, in a press release.

The lawsuit comes roughly two years after a Massachusetts judge ordered that state prison system to stop using similar field tests, finding that they were “highly unreliable” and “only marginally better than a coin-flip.” That suit followed claims by over a dozen Massachusetts attorneys who said they were falsely accused of sending drugs to their incarcerated clients.

Reason reported in 2021 on how these cheap field tests, which use instant color reactions to indicate the presence of compounds found in certain drugs, are used extensively in prison systems across the country to punish inmates, despite clear warnings from the manufacturers that the results should be confirmed by outside labs.

The problem is that the compounds these kits test for are not exclusive to illicit drugs and are in fact found in dozens of legal substances. Police also use these tests during traffic stops, and over the years, officers have arrested and jailed innocent people after drug field kits returned presumptive positive results when tested on bird poopdonut glazecotton candy, and sand from inside a stress ball. A 2017 investigation by a Georgia news station found that one brand of test kit produced 145 false positives in the state in one year.

In criminal cases, the results of drug field tests are always verified by an outside lab. However, incarcerated people have far fewer rights in administrative disciplinary hearings, and they don’t have the right to demand that “presumptive positive” tests be sent out for confirmation.

The lawsuit says the DOC agreed to change its policies after receiving Columbia Legal Service’s threat of litigation. However, Columbia Legal Services says the changes weren’t adequate to protect incarcerated people’s rights.

“DOC’s repeated and prolonged use of solitary confinement before and after any infraction hearings is inhumane . . . Prolonged solitary confinement is internationally recognized as a form of torture. DOC must be required to stop its use of these cheap tests to unfairly punish people, especially with its barbaric use of solitary confinement.” ~Alison Bilow, an attorney for Columbia Legal Services

Clearly, prison is a terrible outcome to be avoided at all costs. Please contact my office if you, a friend or family member are charged with a crime. Hiring an effective and competent defense attorney is the first and best step toward justice.

New Study Recommends Police Pursuits be Limited to Violent Crimes

New study recommends police pursuits be limited to violent crimes | KOMO

According to a new study, police pursuits should be rare and limited to violent criminals who pose an imminent threat.

The research by the Police Executive Research Forum (PERF), a think tank on law enforcement standards, references Washington state and the pursuit law changes adopted here as part of its research. In its report, “Vehicular Pursuits: A Guide for Law Enforcement Executives on Managing the Associated Risks,” PERF recommends that a pursuit should only be initiated under two conditions: (1) If a violent crime has already occurred and (2) if there is an immediate risk that the suspect will commit another violent crime.

According to PERF, pursuits pose dangers to officers, unsuspecting bystanders, suspects, and the community at large. The latest national data on police vehicle pursuits revealed that for every 100 pursuits, there were two severe injuries and 10 minor injuries. Of these serious injuries, suspects accounted for 76%, non-involved persons accounted for 21%, and law enforcement officers made up 3%.

The report showed statistics from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, revealing that in 2020, the number of fatal crashes related to police pursuits reached a peak of 455. This was the highest number since 2007 when the fatalities stood at 372. Several police departments have reported a significant increase in the number of individuals attempting to evade law enforcement during traffic stops.

The report is broken up into six sections:

  • Agency philosophy and policy standards
  • Initiating and discontinuing the pursuit – the role of a supervisor
  • Pursuit interventions/alternatives and technology for managing pursuits
  • Post-pursuit reporting
  • Vehicle pursuit training
  • Community engagement.

Under Washington law, police are allowed to chase suspects involved in violent offenses, sex offenses, vehicular assaults and domestic violence assaults. There is also a provision that would require officers engaging in pursuit to have emergency vehicle operator training and be certified in at least one pursuit intervention option, such as spike strips.

The study recommends that chasing a suspect should only be allowed if they are both a violent criminal and pose an imminent threat. Washington allows pursuits in some non-violent situations, such as DUI or to catch an escapee.

The PERF study also advises that pursuits should not be a routine part of law enforcement work. Researchers said the safety of fleeing suspects, their passengers, pursuing officers and community members is too important to risk on a regular basis.

Please contact my office if you, a friend or family member are charged with a crime. Hiring an effective and competent defense attorney is the first and best step toward justice.

AI Facial Recognition Tech Leads to Mistaken Identity Arrests

Facial recognition fails on race, government study says - BBC News

Interesting article by Sudhin Thanawala and the Associated Press describes lawsuits filed on the misuse of facial recognition technology by law enforcement. The lawsuits come as Facial Recognition Technology and its potential risks are under scrutiny. Experts warn about Artificial Intelligence (AI’s) tendency toward errors and bias.

Numerous black plaintiffs claim they were misidentified by facial recognition technology and then wrongly arrested. Three of those lawsuits, including one by a woman who was eight months pregnant and accused of a carjacking, are against Detroit police.

The lawsuits accuse law enforcement of false arrest, malicious prosecution and negligence. They also allege Detroit police engaged “in a pattern of racial discrimination of (Woodruff) and other Black citizens by using facial recognition technology practices proven to misidentify Black citizens at a higher rate than others in violation of the equal protection guaranteed by” Michigan’s 1976 civil rights act.

WHAT IS FACIAL RECOGNITION TECHNOLOGY?

The technology allows law enforcement agencies to feed images from video surveillance into software that can search government databases or social media for a possible match. Critics say it results in a higher rate of misidentification of people of color than of white people. Supporters say it has been vital in catching drug dealers, solving killings and missing persons cases and identifying and rescuing human trafficking victims. They also contend the vast majority of images that are scoured are criminal mugshots, not driver’s license photos or random pictures of individuals.

Still, some states and cities have limited its use.

“The use of this technology by law enforcement, even if standards and protocols are in place, has grave civil liberty and privacy concerns . . . And that’s to say nothing about the reliability of the technology itself.” ~Sam Starks, a senior attorney with The Cochran Firm in Atlanta.

FALSE ARRESTS BASED ON INACCURATE IDENTIFICATIONS FROM AI CAN SUPPORT A DEFENSE OF MISTAKEN IDENTITY

My opinion? AI should be abandoned if the technology incorrectly identifies perpetrators. As a matter of law, the prosecution must prove the identity of the perpetrator of an alleged crime.

According to the jury instructions on Mistaken Identity, in determining the weight to be given to eyewitness identification testimony, jurors may consider other factors that bear on the accuracy of the identification. These may include:

  • The witness’s capacity for observation, recall and identification;
  • The opportunity of the witness to observe the alleged criminal act and the perpetrator of that act;
  • The emotional state of the witness at the time of the observation;
  • The witness’s ability, following the observation, to provide a description of the perpetrator of the act;
  • The witness’s familiarity or lack of familiarity with people of the perceived race or ethnicity of the perpetrator of the act;
  • The period of time between the alleged criminal act and the witness’s identification;
  • The extent to which any outside influences or circumstances may have affected the witness’s impressions or recollection; and
  • Any other factor relevant to this question.

But what happens when the “eyewitness identifier” is, in fact, AI technology?

At trial, the defense should procure an expert witness who’d testify on the inaccuracies of AI technology. That’s an appropriate route to challenging the credibility of this “witness.”

Please review my Search & Seizure Legal Guide and contact my office if you, a friend or family member are charged with a crime involving AI. Hiring an effective and competent defense attorney is the first and best step toward justice.

Let’s Not Forget – There’s Actually Less Crime

What the public thinks – and data shows – about violent crime in U.S. | Pew Research Center

Excellent article in USA Today from Adam Gelb, the President and CEO of the Council on Criminal Justice. According to crime and justice trends, there is positive news in the realm of crime and punishment.

VIOLENT CRIME

Even after three years of increases, the rate of reported violent crime in America is half what it was at its peak in 1991, while burglaries and other property crimes are 63% lower than its peak in 1980. And the most recent data shows murder and other trend lines bending back down.

ARRESTS & INCARCERATIONS

In the mid-1990s, police arrested more than 15 million people a year. By 2019, arrests had dropped by a third, to about 10 million, and they fell even further during the pandemic. The U.S. incarceration rate remains among the highest in the world, but it, too, has declined, falling from its peak of more than 1 in every 100 adults in 2008 to 1 in 147 in 2021, a decline of a third. That translates to about a half million fewer people behind bars on any given day.

RECIDIVISM

Recidivism is the rate at which people on parole are sent back to prison for committing new crimes or violating the rules of their release. According to Gelb, that has dropped as well. The three-year prison return rate – the most commonly used measure – fell from 50% among people released from state prisons in 2005 to 39% among those released in 2012. And in juvenile justice, the number of youth removed from their homes for delinquency has plummeted by two-thirds, from more than 100,000 in 2000 to fewer than 37,000 in 2019.

RACIAL DISPARITIES

While troubling racial disparities in imprisonment persist, we’ve also seen some progress here. From 2000 to 2020, the disparity between Black and white adults in state prisons fell by 40%, from 8-to-1 to 5-to-1, and for drug offenses, it shrank by 75%. Black women remain nearly twice as likely to be held in prison as white women. However, they were over five times more likely at the turn of the century.

Taken together, the overall “footprint” of the justice system has shrunk substantially. In 2008, The Pew Charitable Trusts found that a whopping 1 out of every 31 American adults was in prison or jail or on probation or parole. According to new data from the Justice Department, that rate of correctional control had dropped to 1 in 48 by the end of 2021, a decline of a third.

Crime remains a serious and urgent concern. During the early days of the pandemic, as protests against police killings spread and gun sales spiked, homicide and other violent crimes rose. But as troubling as these recent increases are, it’s important to recognize that they occurred in the wake of significant improvements in safety.

STUDY THE GOOD NEWS AS WELL AS THE BAD ON CRIMINAL JUSTICE.

Gelb emphasizes that despite positive gains, the shrinking criminal justice footprint is rarely acknowledged or discussed. This leaves everyday Americans to conclude that nothing is improving.

“That’s understandable, but we ignore progress at our peril,” writes Gelb. Furthermore, pessimism leads to defeatist attitudes and clouds sober analysis of what is and isn’t working. It chases away elected officials, candidates and philanthropists who don’t want to hitch their wagons to perpetually losing causes. It burns out talented leaders and staff. And it feeds a cycle of cynicism that sows deeper and deeper distrust of the criminal justice system, of American institutions and of democracy itself.

“It’s crucial to face our ugly history. Justice demands that we identify and fix our problems. But to accelerate America’s march toward a safer and more just society, we also must recognize, examine and learn from what’s gone right.” ~Adam Gelb, the President and CEO of the Council on Criminal Justice. 

Please contact my office if you, a friend or family member are charged with a crime. Hiring an effective and competent defense attorney is the first and best step toward justice.