[ad_1]<\/p>\n
(CNS) \u2013 The Board of Supervisors Tuesday will consider whether to order a report aimed at identifying solutions to the ongoing cascade of court dismissals in Riverside County, and whether to make a pointed request to the state\u2019s chief justice to meet with county officials to emphasize the deficit of judicial resources.<\/p>\n
\u201cMass case dismissals deny victims of crime their right to be heard, fail to hold the guilty accountable or exonerate the innocent, and potentially put the public at greater risk,\u201d according to a joint proposal by board Chairman Kevin Jeffries and Supervisor Karen Spiegel. \u201cThese dismissals are simply the latest evidence of a criminal justice system that has exceeded its capacity.\u201d<\/p>\n
Under Jeffries\u2019 and Spiegel\u2019s proposal, the Executive Office would be directed to join with the District Attorney\u2019s Office, the Office of the Public Defender, the Department of Probation, the Sheriff\u2019s Department and the Superior Court Executive Office to compose a report underscoring the shortcomings that have precipitated the avalanche of case dismissals and what near- and far-term measures might be applied to fix the conundrum.<\/p>\n
Jeffries and Spiegel are seeking unanimous consent to require the EO to gather the facts and report back in 45 days, as well as authorize Jeffries to send a letter requesting that the state\u2019s Supreme Court chief justice, Patricia Guerrero, visit the county as soon as possible to discuss options for resolving the crisis.<\/p>\n
Lastly, the two supervisors desire that the board co-sponsor legislation advanced by Sen. Richard Roth, D-Riverside, to increase the number of judicial positions under a revised assignment formula that captures the reality of the county\u2019s growth and public safety needs.<\/p>\n
Roth\u2019s proposal is Senate Bill 75, and it replicates measures that he\u2019s introduced in the past.<\/p>\n
\u201cAs often cited by local law enforcement professionals, our county remains one of the safest large counties in the state,\u201d according to the supervisors\u2019 proposal. \u201cDespite our efforts to date, more can be done.\u201d<\/p>\n
As of last week, 1,371 criminal cases had been booted by judges countywide since the second week of October, according to the District Attorney\u2019s Office.<\/p>\n
The lion\u2019s share of cases \u2014 67% \u2014 have been vacated by judges at the Larson Justice Center in Indio, with another 15% dismissed by judges at the Banning Justice Center, roughly 10% by judicial officers at the Southwest Justice Center in Murrieta, 7% by the bench at the Riverside Hall of Justice and a negligible 1% by judges at the Blythe Courthouse.<\/p>\n
Figures indicated that 93% of vacated cases have been misdemeanor filings. DUIs accounted for the highest number of dismissals at 36%, followed by domestic violence complaints at 26%. Assault filings made up about 5%, and sex crimes were near the bottom at 2%, according to data.<\/p>\n
The dismissal binge began on Oct. 10. Most of the cases were added to dockets during the public health lockdowns, when courts suspended many operations under emergency orders from the California Office of the Chief Justice.<\/p>\n
Judges have been generally citing lack of available courtroom space for trials as the main reason for the dismissals.<\/p>\n
A backlog of roughly 2,800 cases developed. The chief justice\u2019s orders expired on Oct. 7.<\/p>\n
Superior Court Presiding Judge John Monterosso released a statement on Oct. 25 acknowledging the court system was bearing a heavy load, traced to the lockdowns and consequent changes in court operations.<\/p>\n
\u201cThe genesis of the current set of circumstances is the chronic and generational lack of judges allocated to serve Riverside County,\u201d Monterosso said.<\/p>\n
He emphasized the county has 90 authorized and funded judicial positions, but a 2020 Judicial Needs Assessment Study noted that 115 judicial officers are needed to ensure efficient operations throughout the local court system and prevent logjams.<\/p>\n
\u201cWhile the law allows a court to continue a case beyond the statutory deadline for `good cause,\u2019 the decision on whether `good cause\u2019 exists is an individualized decision made by the trial judge based on the law and the facts of the case,\u201d Monterosso said.<\/p>\n
District Attorney Mike Hestrin questioned the legitimacy of basing dismissals on a deficit of judicial resources, given that \u201cthis has been the case as far back as anyone can remember.\u201d<\/p>\n
According to prosecutors, some of the dismissals are being appealed, while other cases are being re-filed in response to the judges\u2019 actions.<\/p>\n
The backlog is reminiscent of the cumulative impact of a buildup of unresolved criminal cases in 2007 that prompted the state to dispatch a \u201cjudicial strike team\u201d to the county to help sort through criminal cases clogging the court system.<\/p>\n
At the time, the Superior Court virtually halted civil jury trials for months while judges focused on reducing the strain on resources. An empty elementary school was even converted into a makeshift courthouse.<\/p>\n
Copyright 2023, City News Service, Inc.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n