,.

,,
The. ' Purge Process

For Old Petty Offense W m t s in

the Hamilton Countv L e d Svstem

With Yiav Towcad

Saving T q e r
DoIhs and
Reducing J d
I
Owmwch'ng
By Charlie Winburn, M. ed and
Honorable Judge Nadine Allen

he Rapid Purge Process throughout this proposal shall mean: electronic deletion
prior to arrest or apprehenslon and before any costs are realized.

cewinbum@yahoo.com April 2008 5138867832

Page 1 of12
 The b i d Puxe procesS

WithA ViaY Towad Reducing Jail

Overcrowding and Sating TaxpayerDollars
"Becausethe E d ofJustice Do Not Require
Keeping the Case @en''

I. WHAT IS THE PROBLEM?

There are approximately 50,000 to 100,000 seven year old or
older Non Violent Petty Offense warrants which have not been
served or where people have failed to appear for court,
costing Taxpayers millions of dollars and contributing to Jail
Overcrowding. Cleveland & Columbus have instituted a
similar process for decades, to manage this problem and
financial boondoggle. There is no record that the
prosecutors have initiated the presentation to Judges
to delete old unserved warrants.

These cases are in police cruisers & computers; clogging the

courts and creating a.bottleneck in the legal system.

20 Hamilton County Municipal Court Judges and Magistrates

dismiss between 40-80 old cases per month, at trial. This
could amount annually to 480-960 jail beds at $362.00
minimum each (See footnote on page 4). These beds should
be occupied by dangerous criminals currently plaguing our
community.

April 2008

Paae 2 of 12
11.HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE: HOW WE
GOT HERE
These cases have lingered in the Legal System to no avail as a
result of the following, alleged2:
:: Offenders cannot be found
3 Offenders have become law-abiding citizens
a: Offenders have not been served
:: Offenders failed to appear for trial
x Offenders have not been apprehended for new crime, in the
past seven years

111.OUTCOMES NEEDED
c: To relieve prosecutors of the burden of unnecessary case
preparation and troublesome paper shuffling
:: To institute an annual Rapid Purge Process
:: To conduct a one-time electronic deletion of approximately
100,000 warrants at no cost (see page 5, Lifetime Taxpayer
Cost)
t: To reorganize the Criminal Justice System
4: To provide funding for Police raises and fringe benefits
* To save Taxpayers approximately $1.7 to 3.4 million over 10
years3
:s To create Jail beds annually

"Offender" is alleged and Is legally Innocent until proven guilty at trial under U.S.
constitution.
Based on 1year period (estimated costs). 480 cases annually Q9362.00 per
case = $173,760. 960 cases annually @ $362.00 per case = $347,520.

51388417Si7
Page 3 of 12
r: To preclude the prosecution of innocent citizens
-
:: To enable the Police Departments to focus time on d a n ~ u s
criminals
:: To re-file valid cases upon diligent preparation

April 2008
 PRO-FOR MA^
LIFETIME TAXPAYER SAVINGS (estimated)
Categories Case 1 Case 2 Case 3 Case 4 Case 5 Case 6
1. Police Arrest Arrest Arrest Arrest Arrest Arrest
Overtime Pay $100.00 $100.00 $100.00 $100.00 $100.00 $100.00
2. Jail 1 day= 3 days = 14 days= 21 days =
($65 per $65.00 $195.00 $910.00 $1,365.00
diem)
3. Cincinnati $100.00 $100.00
Public
Defender

hr)
4. Witness
Fees
5. Coroner $73.00 $73.00 $73.00
Laboratory perlhr. perlhr. perlhr.
drug drug drug report drug repott
report report report only only
only only only only
Approximate 362.00 $492.00 $622.00
Total Tax
Savings
10,000 $4 $6 $8 $12 $17
cases Million Million Million Million Million Million
25,000 $9 $12 $16 $19 $30 $42
cases Million Miillon Million Million Million Million
$18 $25 $31 $38 $60
cases Million Million Million Million Million Miillon
100,000 $36 $49 $62 $75 $120 $166
Million Million Million Million Million Million

'These are cost which may potentially arise.

-ec nOS 5138867837

Page 5 of 12
IS?WHAT IS THE SOLUTION?
W O R T A N T DECISIONS -NEED TO BE

I Lkdsion One

Decision One City of Cincinnati Prosecutor and all

"Go Get 'Em" prosecutors and Police Chiefs aggressively
track down seven year old petty offenders
and prosecute them to the fullest extend of
the law. This decision may cost the County
and City approximately $2-$5 million dollars,
to serve 50,000 to 100,000 outstanding
warrants, before offenders spend one day in
jail.
Advantages e Bring everyone to justice; no one gets
away with any crime
s Treat everyone the same
8 Police & Prosecutors maintain employment
e Police earn overtime pay
Disadvantages a, Fails to achieve goal of reducing violence
of Failure to and crime
Dismiss e If successful in arresting the offenders, 80-
85% of old cases end up dismissed at trial,
for lack of prosecution
e Allows cases to go past legal time frames
+ Memories continue to fade
e Witnesses cannot be found
s Evidence becomes damaged or missing
April 2008

Page 6 of 12
 --
/ .%necessary subpoenas
j :Police officers retire
I 1 o Incarceration of some innocent citizens;
/ Identity-theft victims, war veterans, and
I
I the mentally disabled
I
I 9 Increases Taxpayer's burden
/ 9 Increases poverty level and decrease
I jobless rate
e Increases crime rate
e Increase number of babies in foster-care
system
-

1 -on Two
Decision Two: Activate Rapid Purge Process by electronically
Dismiss Old deleting old warrants. Encourage Prosecutors
Warrants to recommend to Hamilton County Municipal
Court Judges to delete approximately 50,000
to 100,000 old warrants, except for:
4: Domestic Violence/ Violations of TPO
(Temporary Protection Order)
:: Menacing by Stalking
a: Assault on Police Officers
' o Sexual Offenses
a vehicular Homicide
::Assault
9 Driving Under the Influence
o Aggravated Menacing (gun play)
a Child Endangering
Advantages o Save mlllions of Taxpayer dollars in County

51388678W
Page 7 of 12
 -- .
and City I
i 3 Eliminate racial disparities .,-Hem
I rc Reduce "Racial Profiling"
e Improves Police Community Relations
e Eliminate multiple and expensive re-
arrests and continuances on same petty
offense
e Decrease crime
4 Decrease high poverty level
t Better use of police time to focus on
dangerous criminals
c Free up Jail Space for violent criminals
e Prohibit early release of criminals
e Unclog cases throughout the Legal System
Disadvantages + It may appear that some offenders will
"get away with crime," rather than
considering them innocent until proven
gum'
t Prosecutors and Judges may seem "soft on
crimeff, rather than practical, and pro-
taxpayer

V. OHIO LAW SUPPORTS PURGE OF OLD

WARRANTS
Ohio Revised Code 2935.10 (9 states "Where the offense charged is
a misdemeanor and the warrant or summons issued is not served.
within two years of the date of issue a judge or magistrate may
order such warrants or summons withdrawn and the case closed,

April 2008
 WHEN I T DOES NOT APPEAR THAT THE ENDS OF JUSTICE
REQUIRE KEEPING THE CASE OPEN."

And, under Criminal Rule 4, '...any unserved warrant shall be

dismissed at the request o f the prosecutor", a t any time.

On August 15, 2006, Jim Petro, Attorney General of the State

of Ohio, issued a legal opinion that supports deletion of
Petty Offenses.

Hamilton County Sheriff, Simon Leis indicated his support of the

deletion of 'dead warrants", as a jail reduction solution.

For several years, Hamilton County Municipal Court Judge

Nadine Allen has advanced this cause and is an advocate of
my proposal.

VI. WHO HAS THE LEGAL AUTHORITY

TO PURGE THESE WARRANTS?
 :: County & City Prosecutors

VII. CRITICISMS OF THOSE WHO

OPPOSE DELETION OF SEVEN YEAR
OLD WARRANTS
I Issue 1: The Soft on Crime Issue

Those who fear the "soft on crime" label should be concerned about
how and why old cases result in dismissal and failure to diligently
prosecute within legal time frames. They should be tough on
crime; and go get the offenders. These critics should be informed
that some alleged offenders may be innocent.

Issue 2: Purging these wses would

encourage offenders to "wait it out",
avoid prosecution and "get away" with
crime.

I f this is true why not track down these offenders right now and
prosecute them to the fullest extent of the law. Why allow seven
years to pass without any aggressive pursuit of these offenders?
Whether "sof&"or "touah" on crime, these cases
J ! he Tax !
exDense.

April 2008

Page 10 of 12
 Iswe 3: Keeping thusands of petty
offenses in the Legal System is a
I crime fighting tool.

I f this is a crime fighting "tool" then go after all 50,000 to 100,000

now, and prevent these offenders from committing crime another
day. Bring these offenders to justice now.

I f police officers did not have to spend their time tracking down
petty offenders, they could spend more time tracking down violent
criminals. Further, as these cases age and linger in the system, the
chances of solving them continuously diminish.

VIII. CONSEQUENCES OF KEEPING

THESE ''DEAD'' WARRANTS INTHE
IEGAL SYSTEM
This increases costs to Taxpayers at an estimated minimum of
$362.00 per case. These expenses are incurred whether dismissed
at trial, or continued multiple times. And these expenses may be
incurred each time the case is continued, even when it results in
dismissal at trial, for lack of prosecution.
1. Cost of jail space at $65 per diem in Hamilton
County Justice Center;
2. Increased police overtime;
3. The Cincinnati Public Defender Contract at
$45.00/per hour;
4. Witness Fees;

rn
Page 11 of 12
 5. The Coroner's Laboratory Reports on Alcohol Drug
cases; and, m w - e Tz.k.,--hd .-P-

6. Unnecessary incarceration often resulting in the loss

of employment and increased poverty.

IX. BENEFITS OF THE WINBURN

ANNUAL RAPID PURGE PROCESS
;: Save Millions of County and City Taxpayer Dollars.
4; Enable police to focus on dangerous criminals
4; Create jail space for dangerous criminals
4: Decrease crime and poverty rates
:: Re-file valid cases: upon securing offender, police ofTicers,
victims, witnesses and evidence:
1) No one escapes crime
2) Victims are restored
:: Eliminate racial disparities
:: Reduce racial profiling
:; Improve Police Community Relations
4: Financially support more
police initiatives, raises
and fringe benefits
4: Enable Police to spend
quality time with their
families
:: Reduce police exposure
to high risk pursuits
:: Improve Prosecutors
productivity

April 2008

-
Page 12 of 12